This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Igorberger (talk | contribs) at 11:12, 28 January 2008 (→about Us: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 11:12, 28 January 2008 by Igorberger (talk | contribs) (→about Us: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) | This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
<div class="metadata divbox divbox-red" title="If you talk here, I'll reply here. If I talk there, please reply there. Comments by unregistered editors will be removed. " >
If you talk here, I'll reply here. If I talk there, please reply there. Comments by unregistered editors will be removed. For privacy concerns this page is not archived, but the edit history remains intact.Romanov remains
Thanks for reverting Finnegan's editorializing regarding Anna Anderson. I've tracked down the initial Russian news report I think he was quoting from and have cited it and incorporated some of his original edit into the final version. The problem I had with his additions was that he didn't cite them properly and then he tacked on his own interpretation of the results. I think the info should stand now as it is. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 15:53, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
My RFA
|
Thanks! | |
| ], thank you for showing your support in my RFA which passed with 38 support, 0 oppose, and 0 neutral! I also want to give special thanks to my Admin Coach and nominator, Useight for all of his help and support. I promise that I'll give my best effort as an admin, and I hope that your confidence in me proves to be justified. If I can ever be of any help, please let me know. In the mean time, I have some cleaning to do. Have a great day! Jauerback/dude. 20:21, 26 January 2008 (UTC) |
a thank you note
|
Thanks for participating in my RfA! | |
| Although it failed 43/27/0, I'm happy because the outcome has been very helpful in many meaningful ways. Your support and remarks contributed so much to this. If you followed my RfA you know what happened. Most of the editors who posted opposing opinions have never edited with me. Some articles I edit deal with controversial topics and with respect to a very few of these, editors who didn't know much about me had some worries about confrontational editing and civility. Since I support their high standards I can easily (and will gladly) address this. The support and ecouragement to run again soon has been outstanding, thanks again. Cheers! Gwen Gale (talk) 05:28, 26 January 2008 (UTC) |
My Rfa
My effort to regain adminship was unsuccessful, But I wanted to thank you for taking some time out of your day to voice your opinion.--MONGO 19:26, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Igor
Pointing your attention to this continuation. As you will see I had blocked him as he had been warned before by Mattinbgn for similar disruptive edits (he had quickly moved all messages to his archives- after requesting an unblock (since declined)). Obviously he is gaming the system and trying to make your reversions seem your error/fault.--VS 08:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
about Us
Veritus I looked at you editing and you are WP:NPV editor. And I was not tryig to use as . I was just trying to bring new notabiliry to the article and brought it to the talk page. Later I realized the reference from the video has already been incorporated in the article so there is no need to discuss it again.
I looked at the editing you deal with and I can undestand why you would think I was trying to use the article talk page as a forum, but I was not. Next time WP:AGF. Regards, Igor Berger (talk) 11:12, 28 January 2008 (UTC)