If you wish to contact me, the quickest and easiest way is to use This Talk Page. Please use my email link only as a last resort .

Archive 1 March 3, 2006 - May 4, 2006

Archive 2 May 5, 2006 - May 25, 2006

Archive 3 May 26, 2006 - August3, 2006

Archive 4 August 5, 2006 - August 25, 2006

Archive 5 August 25, 2006 - September 27, 2006

Archive 6 October 3 2006 - Oct 29 2006

Archive 7 October 30, 2006 - November 29, 2006

Hello, sorry about making an article that's been flagged for deletion ( Centre-Circle ) - What is the quickest way to delete it, do I just go and delete all the text and stuff? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stucco (talk • contribs)

Basically, because they weren't blatant enough that I felt comfortable deleting huge tracts of Wikipedia without further input. I wanted there to be a discussion first, to have some kind of consensus that backs up that the amount of modification from the original source was insufficient. In some cases, the structure was identical, but in others it was changed: often, the wording was completely distinct... and there wasn't that much info in each article, which makes it a bit trickier -- there's not all that much to say in general, so having a similar structure may not be a real problem. Mangojuice^talk 23:07, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. What a mess.Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 00:57, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

a

Sorry about the a, I accidentally pressed that key. Kidding. I was having fun, but how did you know it was me?

What's a "difs" link?Xizes 01:39, 2 November 2006 (UTC). OH! THAT's how you know that i sent the "a", right. Please reply. PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HAVE MERCY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Okay. Just reply. thanks. that's all. bye. have a nice day. Xizes 01:39, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

oh. OH GOD, I'm LATE. GOTTA GO. BYE.Xizes 01:42, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In August, I applied to become an admin at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/TruthbringerToronto, and you opposed my candidacy. It's November now. Would you support me if I ran again? --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 02:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. You make some good points. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 03:09, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I hope I helped you.Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 03:13, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Link to other end of the conversation.Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 03:16, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support in my RfA, which passed with a final tally of (56/0/2). It was great to see so much kind support from such competent editors and administrators as commented on my RfA. I know I have much reading to do before I'll feel comfortable enough to use some of the more powerful admin tools, so I'll get right to it. Again, thanks; └ OzLawyer / talk ┐ 13:18, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I'm new to this. I have learned more about wiki procedures now through this second experience of editing. I am still unsure if this is where I come to ask questions etc. I understand that the memory work article is off the list now since there was some concern of copyright violations. I am quite methodical in referencing since I really do what readers to be able to follow the logic of an article back to their original sources as much as possible. Every phrase and idea we use in academia has a history. I have registered with a few customized search engines like swicki and googles new service to keep track of relevant pages on memory work. I plan on starting a blog as well specifically for these concepts in contemporary social theory that have complex often contentious histories. Thanks for all your hard work. It sounds like it is a work of passion. --oceanflynn 18:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)moved to bottom.Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 18:44, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

....for adding the stub. I kinda spaced because I'm pretty tired right now. Anyway, thanks for fixing it. Kouhei07 03:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome, but I don't think it was me. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 04:29, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...for you show of support on my recent RfA. If you ever need my help for an adminstrative purpose or just to take a look at an article, do not hesitate to drop me a line. BTW, what do people in Tampa put on hot dogs? Looking into regional hot dog variations is a little hobby of mine. Cheers. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 14:36, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.

I saw your vote to delete my article regarding Nelson - Marek yacht designers. Please reconsider your position in light of two things: (1) further editing to the article with more substantial references, and (2) the proposal and suggested criteria for deletion are based on the criteria for a "corporation"; however, Nelson - Marek was a design team and should be evaluated on their notability as contrubutors to yachting and yacht design, not their standing as a corporation. I would say that ten years on the America's Cup design team is notable. Note that the search results you cite are for "Merek" rather than "Marek", the former is the correct spelling, although the latter is frequently misused and is how I began the article (my error).

Thanks!

Kevin Murray 01:26, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. I have struck WP:CORP in my !vote. My decision still hinges on Google hits, regardless of which guideline we use. Sorry, I will stick with DELETE for now. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 01:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My Google seach [1] shows 1000 hits

Hi, thanks for your note. I'm afraid 1000 google hits would not suffice to establish notability. WHen I enclose in brackets, I come up with 10,000 hits, of which 452 are unique. Those beyond 452 are repeats. 452 UNIQUE google hits for "Nelson Marek" Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 01:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is notable? Is it in relation to the world at large, or to the art or industry. The most famous yachting design team of the last century is Sparkman & Stephens. Using a search in double quotes for this name I get 776 Google hits 776 Google on Sparkman & Stephens. So with Nelson Marek getting roughly 58% of those hits might we consider them notable using this criterion? How about Frank Lloyd Wright = 809 Google hits, is he a notable design influence? I have found the web notoriously shallow on history.

Does Wikipedia have to follow the web, or can we offer a superior knowledge base? Ironically, my interest in writing this article was to compile the little information that I have been able to find into one place. As a sailor, racer, and boat owner, I know that Nelson Marek means something because the name is used so often in reference to their work, which is everywhere, but there is not much written on the men themselves -- odd I think. I love Wikipedia and want it to be the best. I think my article strengthens our project. But I understand that there are a plethora of junky meaningless articles of inappropriate promotion and spam out there, and those of you who are vigilant should be applauded. On the other hand, please help me to improve this article rather than pull it out.

Thanks.

Kevin Murray 03:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Belatedly added link to my reply. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 16:56, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, NOBODY'S ever done with userpage vandalism... ;) -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 01:26, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, yes, but my signature now directs to my talk page. The vandals have to be extra determined to make it to my user page. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 16:54, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for the advice. I can now create captions AND THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT. MWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! AstroBoy 00:16, 7 November 2006 (UTC) this user has blown up your head with too much information... not[reply]

How do you be come an ad mi ni st ra tor?

For got to sign. AstroBoy 01:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AstroBoy 01:43, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dlohcierekim, and thanks for your participation at the recent RfA, which did not succeed. For those of you who expressed their support, your kind words and your trust are sincerely appreciated. For those who were opposed --especially those who offered their constructive criticism-- please accept this message as assurance that equally sincere efforts, aimed at enhancing the quality and accuracy of representations within the Wikipedia, will continue. Striving for improved collaboration and consensus will also continue, with all of your insights in mind, while applying NPOV ideals as fairly and reasonably as possible. Ombudsman 05:38, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What does adminship mean to you? :-) --HappyCamper 00:52, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Was tempted to quote Churchill. "Blood, toil, tears, and sweat." Actually, it sounds like a hard but satisfying job where one must do the necessary despite the objections or consternation of those that do not see the need. At it's best, it is also a role of leadership, coaching and example setting. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 00:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If someone had that perspective on adminiship, what might other Wikipedians do to encourage them to self nominate? :-) --HappyCamper 16:57, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. My personal opinion is that self noms sometimes don't do well. There is almost astated distaste and and application of a more gruelling reveiw. My advice would be to gain the trust of other users, submit to an editor review, and wait for someone else to nominate. One could also ask admins one trusts for an honest appraisal and coaching, with the understanding that the admin would nominate when the potential nom was ready. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 23:56, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

01011001 01101111 01110101 00100111 01110110 01100101 00100000 01101000 01100101 01101100 01110000 01100101 01100100 00100000 01101101 01100101 00100000 01100001 00100000 01101100 01101111 01110100 00100001 01001010 01110101 01110011 01110100 00100000 01110111 01100001 01101110 01110100 01100101 01100100 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100001 01101110 01101011 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01100110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01100111 01101001 01110110 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01101101 01100101 00100000 01100001 01100100 01110110 01101001 01100011 01100101 00100000 01101111 01101110 00100000 01010111 01101001 01101011 01101001 01110000 01100101 01100100 01101001 01100001 00101110 AstroBoy 03:12, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have you ever been to the southern hemisphere, click here to reply.AstroBoy 01:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC) Deadline for entries is December 15th[reply]

Hi Dlohcierekim, I am very thankful to you for supporting and comments on my succesful RfA. Shyam ^(T/C) 06:20, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome, i'll make sure to go over that article you posted. =) Saintseiya 14:53, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 14:56, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you be more specific at Talk:Hercules Linton about what needs cleanup? RJFJR 04:42, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The wording still seems awkward and not well organized. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 14:17, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dlohcierekim. Thanks for taking care of that vanity/NN article creator. I must've logged out just before he decided to create an account and make an article based on a NN person who I removed from his/her high school's article. For context, you can see my contributions today - the high school revert followed by the message on an anon's talk page. Anyway, thank you very much! :) Srose (talk) 23:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 08:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA passed with a tally of 71/1/0. Thank you very much for your support. I hope that my performance as an admin will not disappoint you. Please let me know if you see me doing anything inappropriate. -- Donald Albury 02:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw that shortly after he'd done it. I decided to let it slide on this occasion. Keeping an eye on him, though... Thanks again, Gwernol 21:57, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A few seconds after I try my first edit, I recieved a welcome message from you. I have frequently edited on another wiki (wikiHow.com) and am pretty familiar with the wiki process. It may take some time to get used to wikipedia's format. If I have any questions, I'll be sure to ask you. Thanks for the helpful links and welcome message. --Thorne Enterprises 00:04, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure If I used this Talk page right, but sorry about that. I redid it because I didn't think It worked, But I will stop now. Sorry, I'm just starting to get the hang of this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sotheboysays (talk • contribs) moved to bottom of page. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 04:04, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It won't interfere with it per se, but may go some way towards it being worth keeping. •Elomis• 03:29, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As you may have seen, the AFD was withdrawn.

I have a ton more content to add, but ran into the problem od the text and images getting misaligned. Is that what you are editing?

The image thumbnail code you added helped me to format the other images - I'm grateful for that

I will be posting 6 more pieces of art and descriptions as you finish wiht your editing of the article.

Thanks, jim —Preceding unsigned comment added by James.lebinski (talk • contribs)

You are welcome. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 15:21, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey - the gallery is great - and your layout is a real improvement.

I'll add images there until I add the corresponfing text. I plan to discuss the techniques and materials for each in detail so that should fill the space.--James.lebinski 15:41, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and you are welcome. Nice job on the rewrite Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 15:58, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for advising some editor requesting an RfA to set their preferences to "Prompt when entering a blank edit summary." I just changed my preferences to the "don't look quite so incompetent on edit summaries" button which I didn't know existed. KP Botany 19:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. I remember how wonderful it was when I found about that-- by reading an RfA. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 19:39, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not all of them - see the last enteries on today's page. I'm following [2] to the letter, cutting and pasting as provided, but it doesn't seem to be consistent :( Any suggestions???? If it were a consistent error I could deal with it, but??? HELP!SkierRMH 21:49, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I went quickly and looked at the page; somehow an additional {{}} is getting put in the first line and this:

[[:{{subst:KranX Productions}}]] ([[Special:EditPage/{{subst:KranX Productions}}|edit]] | [[Talk:{{subst:KranX Productions}}|talk]] | [[Special:PageHistory/{{subst:KranX Productions}}|history]] | [[Special:ProtectPage/{{subst:KranX Productions}}|protect]] | [[Special:DeletePage/{{subst:KranX Productions}}|delete]] | [{{fullurl:Special:WhatLinksHere/{{subst:KranX Productions}}|limit=999}} links] | [{{fullurl:{{subst:KranX Productions}}|action=watch}} watch] | logs | views)

or (with spaces to show the actual line)

{ { la | subst : xxx } } } }

was inserted after it - that's what was giving all of the machine code!

Still don't know why it's doing that?!SkierRMH 21:49, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I ran into a similar problem. Now I do the following:

• Place the {{{subst:afd}}} template on the article and save.
• Copy the page name
• Follow the "this pages entry link"
• paste the page name between the ==='s and [['s so that it reads ===[[page name]]===
• write my deletion ratioanle
• save
• follow the "wikipedia articles for deletion link" follow the "current discussions link" click on the "whatever the date is" link.
• click edit and paste in "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/page name" between the open/close brackets so it reads {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/page name}} and save.

It sounds complex reading it, but it's simpler than the other way and works more consistently. I guess the "subst" template thing does not always substitute. Hope that helps. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 22:01, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Muchas gracias - it appears that there's a glitch in the [3] process - I'll post it in the discussion page there. I was trying to use the shortcuts... alas, more cut and paste... :)SkierRMH 22:07, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. Good luck. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 22:11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good job! How did you do that? Where did you find the saving information??? Why couldn't I find it???? Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 21:25, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the kind words. Once I couldn't find anything on the school's full name I used "Zaheer and Hyderabad" for my search, which got me on my way. I've worked hard to pull of AfD saves many times before, but I don't think I've ever been able to craft such a complete article AND get so many folks to reverse their vote ever before. Alansohn 22:40, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Thanks for sending me a notice about my feeble attempts to create a wikipedia page for the Blue Letter Bible.

I am one of the founders of the BLB website www.blb.org.

I have started going through the material at WP:WEB, which has been provided as part of the "deleted" blurb on my new entry.

Should I just bag the whole thing? Is my attempt to explain about the BLB inappropriate?

I don't want to strive to edit the article if my motivation is inappropriate - to let people know about the website. I had noticed that a lot of pages on wikipedia were pointing to our website...

PS, I enabled email to my email at frankr@earthlink.net.

Is my user page set up OK? I am a beginner!

I was trying to step up a 'stub page' for the BLB, and then give it over to our 'historian' to improve. Now I'm embarassed!!

I would appreciate any guidance you could give me, including "give it up!" if that is best!

Many thanks,

--Frank Rabinovitch 00:07, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blue letter bible advice, prod, notablity and style

Hi, thanks for asking my advice. As I see it, the article has three problems-- notability, style and conflict of interest.

Alas, I fear the subject does not meet WP:WEB. A quick check for notability is the "Google Test," where you look for unique Google hits. I get 9 UNIQUE Google hits out of 398,000. (The others are just repeats. Mostly from blueletterbible.org) None of the ones I saw hinted at notability. I also searched for news articles through Google and Factiva and found no independent reviews.

The style for an encyclopedia article requires it to make concice, declarative statements in concise paragraphs. (No rhetorical questions.) Simply state what or who the subject is and what they have, did, or do that makes them encyclopedic. Don't say, "Subject is notable because it is/had/did/does x,y, and z. Just say the subject is/has/did/does x, y, and z." If there is sufficient material, state it all in a nutshell in the opening paragraph and then fill in more detail in subsequent paragraphs.

As you are connected with the subject, this raises the question of conflict of interest. Because a lot of people create articles as promotional vehicles, conflict of interest articles are viewed askance by the community. This is not insurmountable, but you need to be very careful to maintain a neutral point of view in any article in which you are personally connected to the subject.

In short, I fear the subject is not sufficiently notable for an encyclopedia article. You may want to follow the advice below anyway. If on the other hand, you feel the article is beyond salvage, do nothing and an admin will be along to delete it.

Rewrite the thing to conform to the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Reread WP:WEB to see if it can be found to meet notability. Incorporate any facts that support that claim in the text. Just work them in, don't say, "Is notable because . . . ." Those three words actually work against your cause. We read them all the time.

If the subject does meet notability, state your case on the talk page and remove the prod sticker. Maybe caption your notes on the talk page, "De prodded". That will help people better understand what is happening. If you do de-prod, it will probably go to WP:AFD for a discussion of the article's merits and demerits. Don't take anything there personally. AfD discussions are sometimes upsetting to newcomers.

AfD is a 5 day debate with three possible outcomes-- unless the outcome is "delete," the article stays.

Hope this helps.[

Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 16:05, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thanks very much for your advice on Blue Letter Bible.

I will follow it. I will try to be neutral, and I'll start small to see if I can get it to survive! I didn't talk about the non-commercial CD. We've distributed over 70,000 at no cost to students in many countries. Maybe that could be a focus point.

I had a question: I didn't understand the part about what you said here:

A quick check for notability is the "Google Test," where you look for unique Google hits. I get 9 UNIQUE Google hits out of 398,000. (The others are just repeats. Mostly from blueletterbible.org)

Can you show me how to find what you mean by only 9? For instance, when I ask Altavista to find me links to our website, I get either 118,000 or 42,200 or 6210. I'm sorry, I have no idea where the variation comes from, or which number is correct! Same thing with Google: 293,000 or 5,570. Strange!

I think the 'higher' numbers above are bogus: A search for link:xyz.com does what we think it does. But a search for link: xyz.com (with the space added) does a search for pages containing 'xyz.com' and the word 'link'. PS I hope this is a proper way to edit your page. If not, my apologies, and please advise. Thank you.--Frank Rabinovitch 03:06, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

For us, that seems like a lot. In 1996 we started giving away free search tools for people to incorporate onto their church websites, so that's where they started, anyway.

Can you please help me understand what you mean about most of the 398,000 being from blueletterbible.org. Below, I've tried to make a Google search that excludes links from within the site, and I get 38,900. I don't know why all these numbers are at such variance! Mostly, these would be Bible links. If you have a website that talks about a Bible verse, you can link the verse to our website, or study tools, in a variety of ways.

I found a few reviews, such as 1, 2, 3. I'll try to find more. There are hundreds of pages linking to our website (along with 100s of others, with just a brief blurb, not a review, such as 4. Should they be included?

Many thanks for your advice! PS this editing software is really cool!

--Frank Rabinovitch 18:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A very good question, and one that comes up often. I only use google for a start because it sopts showing repeats of the same hits or repeats to multiple pages or references to the same site. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 13:52, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. I have re-written the Blue Letter Bible article and have removed the prod sticker, and have edited the talk page. In another 10 years, I'll be an old pro! [Right now I'm just old :) ] I have a bit more work to do in adding citations to support the prod removal, which I'm working on right now. Many thanks for your advice, just wanted to let you know. Frank --Frank Rabinovitch 02:32, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your encouragement. I badly needed it. I have added a "reviews" section and a "content distribution" section to address WP:WEB issues - I hope they are not too cluttered!

I have a question: Should I go around to various Wikipedia articles that talk about the BLB and link to my article example, or is that putting the cart before the horse? Thanks! --Frank Rabinovitch 07:49, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. Here are a few I was thinking of linking to the BLB article. (By the way, one reason I was motivated was that I saw warning tags on articles that they didn't have enough links to them, and that they needed to add links from other articles, so I was trying to be proactive. I wasn't going to add external links)

• Study Bible Link to BLB added by RockofVictory on March 7 2006. Add link to article?
• Moreh Link to BLB added by Wetman May 5 2004. Add link to article?
• Talk:Creation_according_to_Genesis#Preserving_the_BlueLetterBible_links_for_discussion Added by Rednblu Nov 8 2004. Discussion of translations on the BLB, in the talk page of this controversial article. I would like to link this talk to the BLB article, so people can decide if they feel the BLB is POV because of its affiliation with Calvary Chapel.

--Frank Rabinovitch 17:58, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My gut reaction is don't do it. I will have to seek advice about this. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 19:50, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are just internal links. I don't think the article reads POV. You should ask others though. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 20:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome when I joined. I noticed the page on Bobby Czyz cuts off in the middle of a sentence. Is there a place I can report those sorts of things? Or am I supposed to revert it myself? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kirs10 (talk • contribs) Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 13:41, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I fixed it. Please feel free to revert or report vandalism whenever you find it. You can let me know, or if you know the user id of the vandal, you can report the vandal at WP:AIV. Or you can revert the vandalism and report the vandal. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 13:41, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I quite agree with your concerns. I, too, want to weed out only the genuinely deserving articles. The debate has been getting unnecessarily nasty, mainly in the cases involving "media personalities".

The links I cited in the article are good, bona fide ones corresponding to the paper magazines. Their links can be directly traced back to the publishers' main sites. I actually found them by typing out "maxim" and "cosmo" in my browser. I suspect the reason why there are no Ghits for Sara in Maxim or cosmo, although I managed to pull the King magazine article, is that she is not referenced in those search databases, and not necessarily that she did not appear in said publication. Ohconfucius 01:44, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The page called "Clyde Kilgough" should say "Clyde Kilough". Can you delete the stub for now? Dr d12 01:55, 18 November 2006 (UTC)Dr_d12[reply]

Would you just like to move it to the correct spelling or have it deleted?

If delete, I don't have access to the delete button, but if you place {{db-owner}} or {{db-test}} on the top of the page, as admin will be along to delete it. put in the edit summary that the article isn't ready or that you wish to fix it and recreate it later. Hope that helps.

Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 13:41, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[Unique statement of excitement]! [Your username name, not subst:ed properly], [statement of gratitude] for [your specific vote] in [link to request for adminship], which passed with a final tally of [final tally][percent in parentheses (optional)]. I plan to [statement of intentions regarding admin tools] and [statement acknowledging oppose votes as helpful]. If you [type of desire for help] or want to provide any [type of feedback], feel free to [link to talk page or e-mail]. [Statement of gratitude, again (optional)] [signature of new admin]

Because people often complain that RfA thank-you messages are impersonal, I thought I'd give you the opportunity to create your own. -- tariqabjotu 05:53, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you see the userpage? Can I tag that {{{db-attack}}} or would it be different for a user page? Or is it just a joke?? Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 14:32, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think you have already tagged it, but I am afraid I don't really know, since I don't know the limits of what is allowed on a userpage. Frankly, I am not even sure about the attack tag on the article as he seems to be attacking himself!! But anyway it should be speedy deleted (and has been 3 times already!) --Slp1 14:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To state the facts I was not poking fun at myself the original page was created from my udername but it has been edited by cyber-bullies who have posted pervereted fictional statements about me and I like to know if its possible to figure the IP address it came from who edited it last.

Thanks. Yeah, I oldly tagged it. I'm not sure about how to speedy user pages. I did not know if he's a serious user having fun at his own expense or a clever vandal working the system. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 14:57, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To state the facts I was not poking fun at myself the original page was created from my udername but it has been edited by cyber-bullies who have posted pervereted fictional statements about me and I like to know if its possible to figure the IP address it came from who edited it last.

Thank You

A week ago I nominated myself, hoping to be able to help Wikipedia as an administrator as much as a WikiGnome. I am very glad many others shared my thoughts, including you. Thank you for your trust! Be sure I will use these tools to protect and prevent and not to harass or punish. Should you feel I am overreacting, pat me so that I can correct myself. Thanks again! ReyBrujo 19:31, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess we disagree, then, Mike, because I am pretty sure that, even given all the stuff you and the others have pointed to, he didn't stray too far over the bounds of the permissible, if at all. Thanks for the kind words tho. - crz crztalk 22:48, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be passing OK anyway. 17-4 at this point. That's what I love about Wikipedia-- important decisons are made by consensus. Consensus, and AfD RfA in particular, may not be perfect, but it works better than a lot of other decison making processes.

I do have the greatest admiration for you, and it pains me to be in disagreement. Just because we disagree does not mean we have to be disagreeable. Highest regards. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 23:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tried to upload a picture, but all that shows is a grey box with the written title. Can you help? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skodoway (talk • contribs) Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 12:46, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has already fixed it. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 12:49, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. If that is felt to be a low number, and to outweigh my other contributions to wiki, then so be it. Thank you. --Anthony.bradbury 02:05, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yah, it's a number that does not really signify with me. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim

It seems, sadly, to signify with some people taking part in the discussion.--Anthony.bradbury 02:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

you marked my article about "Tillmann Uhrmacher" for speedy deletion.

I am very blu about this, because this is the official press text about Tillmann. I´m a good friend of him and it is my work to release this press text for him. So there is no copyright infringement. We know that the same text is at the "MySpace" Side, but this is normal for a press text.

Greetings from germany, Olli

Hi, I note you comments but am a little confused and could use some guidance if you have a moment to spare. Would you be able to explain to me the difference between my entry and this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earstroke

Should my entry be a stub? I'm unsure, although there seems to be more relevant content in my entry than the one above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Verian (talk • contribs) Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 19:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there; I am coming to your talkpage because I am quite certain that this question is wholly inapproriate for my RfA page. Indeed, it may be out of order here as well, which will reinforce your opinion on the merits of my application. I have a question, which I would be most grateful for an answer to in order better to make my next RfA application, which on the vote it appears clear will be necessary. Given that at your initial vote you were aware that I had spent relatively little time in WP:NAMESPACE, and had not really contributed to Wiki talk, could you please tell me what you discovered to make you change your mind? I ask, not in a combative or argumentative sense, but only so that I can correct the failing which you have detected ready for next time. If this question is not, at this time, in order please say so.--Anthony.bradbury 17:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK thank you. Already have vast CSD experience and a lot of PROD, but not a lot in AfD. I will address it. See you next time.--Anthony.bradbury 14:20, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to express my appreciation of the time you spent considering my successful RfA. Thankyou Gnangarra 13:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Hi. To my shock, this already went to a 2nd AfD. Just thought you'd like to know. If you choose to vote, as always vote however you like. --Oakshade 05:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Morning,

looks like Gladys is headed for the slautherhouse again. Care to weigh in on the AFD with any advice?--James.lebinski 16:30, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello: my picture was deleted. "Image:HaydockTitle.JPEG. Tried to find it on the "Deletion Log" for a reason, but am not sure what to enter for "Title" No matter what I enter there is no record. Can you find out the reason for deletion? It is the title page to a book that is 200 years old. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skodoway (talk • contribs)

Oh, the humanity! I had my doubts about accepting a nomination for a second RfA, but even I couldn't have predicted the stir it caused as it drifted to the ground in flames! Still, it was as educational as ever. Thanks for your input; it will be on my mind as I continue to edit Wikipedia, and perhaps I will have earned your support if another nomination comes around. Kafziel Talk 14:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for voting in my RfA, I passed. I appreciate your input. Please keep an eye on me(if you want) to see if a screw up. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your vote of support and advice, which I will follow closely if selected (unlikely this time round). I fixed those links, too. Biruitorul 18:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dlohcierekim, while reverting vandalism on Pine View School, you marked it for cleanup. I was just curious as to whether you had any suggestions for how it might be cleaned up. Thanks! --Starwiz 23:54, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, since I think the tag is ugly, I'm going to get rid of it. If anything comes to you, let me know! --Starwiz 00:03, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]