User talk:DJ Clayworth

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

All New: 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Orphaned: 500 1001 1501

Old talk moved to:


The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIV (December 2008)[edit]

The December 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:38, 10 January 2009 (UTC) why the ****** did you delet my page —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abcdefghijklmnop0000000 (talkcontribs) 20:27, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXV (January 2009)[edit]

The January 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:33, 10 February 2009 (UTC)


Barnstar of Diligence.png The Barnstar of Diligence
You deserve this for making me chuckle each time you responded with your precision-guided wit at Talk:Amen.
DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 05:11, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Tim Cotterill[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

Tim Cotterill, an article that you have contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Esasus (talk) 00:01, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVI (February 2009)[edit]

The February 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:01, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election[edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 13 March!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:35, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Rules for reciting Amen in Judaism[edit]

I have transwikied the unique information from this article to Berakhah. This makes the article Rules for reciting Amen in Judaism an orphan with no rationale (that i can think of) for its ongoing existence. As you are its author, please nominate it for Speedy Deletion. Hanina (talk) 20:57, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

It may as well be a redirect. As a redirect it's doing no harm. I'll make Amen point to Berakhah. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:19, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election[edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. We will be selecting coordinators from a pool of eighteen to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on Saturday, 28 March! Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:39, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Mis-translation Holy Spirit[edit]

Would you please take a look on the Holy Spirit talk page and give me an answer. I seem to remember you were familar with this stuff. Please reply Kazuba (talk) 00:47, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for answering my question. I'll guess I'll have to trust your answer because I cannot read ancient Greek. ( A lazy boundary) Got another question though that has been gnawing on me for some time. You can put the answer on my talk page if you feel like answering. For as long as I can remember I have heard all these arguments dealing with the resurrection of Jesus, but no one ever says anything about Jesus flying away, the ascension. Why doesn't the ascension count? I have to say watching someone fly away is very unusual and instead of this incident being recorded in all the gospels it only appears in one. Is it because the listener of the story has already accepted flying around as perfectly normal(Jesus flying around with Satan during the temptations to all those different high places.) Or is it because no one cares where Jesus finally ends up because the reality of the resurrection is the only thing that REALLY COUNTS. Please reply.Kazuba (talk) 23:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the immediate reply. I guess I agree with you. But I still find the ascension very odd, especially since it only occurs in Luke which supposedly is a later Gopsel. (and no one debates about it as being a historical event.) The other Gospels just leave you hanging in space as to what did Jesus do for the rest of his life. Perhaps that is why the story of the ascension is there at all. To tie up loose ends. But it certainly takes Luke's version of the Jesus story out of history and places it deeply into a developing theological mythology. Luke seems to have a special thing for angels and the realm of God existing in the sky. It is interesting that my grand child said my deceased wife was looking down from a cloud and she has not had any religious education at all. Perhaps it is due to the feeling of wonder one gets when looking up into the "heavens", especially on a clear night. Thanks again. Kazuba (talk) 17:51, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Madras Bulls[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Madras Bulls. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Corpx (talk) 22:53, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVII (March 2009)[edit]

The March 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:22, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Reference desk crowd control[edit]

Thanks for breaking up a potential riot. Phil_burnstein (talk) 14:28, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. It's easy to get sucked into something like that. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:11, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVIII (April 2009)[edit]

The April 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:52, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Anchor Bible[edit]

DJ -- thanks for your note. After looking it up it appears that I confused the Anchor Bible commentaries with the Anchor Bible. While the commentaries are well done (and do contain full translations), the Anchor Bible is something incomplete. I own some of the commentaries but not the "Anchor Bible" that the original editor had in mind. Good catch. EGMichaels (talk) 13:57, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I made that mistake myself at first. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:24, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Just wanted to say, it's a pleasure working with you. The give and take makes the article (and us) better. Thanks.EGMichaels (talk) 21:42, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. The pleasure is equally mine. DJ Clayworth (talk) 03:10, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Holy Spirit[edit]

We would be grateful if you would discuss wholesale removals of well-referenced sections from articles before doing so, please. That article is in the middle of a rewrite, and being actively discussed. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:12, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Even if you can re-write it, I don't think it would be a bad idea to have an entry on gender of the Holy Spirit or religious views on the Holy Spirit. The first one is about a modern theological debate, while the second one is a useful article on comparative religion. ADM (talk) 14:24, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Taking this conversation to Talk:Holy Spirit. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:32, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


Thank you for your message and your opinion regarding the name. Please provide me with the information explaining what kind of evidence is required to demonstrate that the usage of the word is wide enough to be changed on Wikipedia. What exactly do you mean by "when this change occurs" and who has the competence to state this? Is the usage of the word by newspapers like Canadian Globe and Mail as well as several governmental institutions (UK and USA governments in particular) enough of a prove that the change is occurring? Check out the CIA world factbook website Andriy155 (talk) 22:16, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Reply to this at User talk:Andriy155. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:19, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Redcastle United[edit]

Here i go again. My page have been deleted for an A7. Texas android mentioned this with jargon that makes no sense to me. I hope you can tell me in plain english what am i missing that will not result in a deletion. I have this page connected to the league page (i.e Inishowen Football League) which always had a space for my club Redcastle united. Only one club Clonmany Shamrocks have a article filled in and to be honest i cannot see anything in there that would prevent it from being deleted that i did not have in mine. So please take a look at my article before being so quick in deleting something. As i said plain english we dont all have degrees in rocket science.

Reply at User talk:Redcastle01. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:59, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Redcastle United[edit]

In response to your message i find it funny that the club i mentioned earlier Clonmany Shamrocks have achieved no more than Redcastle United. We play in the same division and just this weekend we won the league ahead of that team. And Clonmany have won nothing of notability so for them to have a page allowed on here makes no sense if my ametuer team has won more than them in the last 4 years. There is a link to the league page under the Wiki page Inishowen football league that will provide proof that Redcastle have won something this week but having to win something to get information of a particular amateur club on here is a silly policy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redcastle01 (talkcontribs) 18:13, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Reply at User talk:Redcastle01. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:59, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Jesse Lee (singer)[edit]

Wow, you're quick. The article wasn't even a couple minutes old when you listed it at afd. Anyway, I voiced my opinion at the deletion discussion. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many ottersOne batOne hammer) 17:21, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

  • By the way, it's probably not a good idea to AFD something that's only a minute old, either. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many ottersOne batOne hammer) 17:30, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
    Apparently "DJ Clayworth" enjoys deleting other people's contributions for some reason. He even makes up his own rules and pretends they are in the official WP guidelines. He tried to tell me that there is a "mainstream media attention" requirement. (See Talk: Patentlyo (blog)). He also accused me of sock-puppetry. This guy is a real piece of work.--Patent Lawyer 001 (talk) 22:52, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


I submit that it was very unprofessional for you to go to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of LSAT Instruction Providers and recommend deletion of my article based on your personal bias against me after your attempt to delete my other contribution Patentlyo (blog). Clearly you have contributed a lot to WP, but you can also let others contribute. And following me around WP with a vendetta is childish and unprofessional. But frankly, I'm not surprised.--Patent Lawyer 001 (talk) 22:35, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Sikh Extremism and the terrorist apologists[edit]

Hi, I have been trying to improve the article on Sikh Extremism, unfortunately I have come across some very poor editing and even heavy deletions from certain people who wish not to have this article on Wikipedia!! I don't know if you remember, me Satanoid, I lost my password, so log in as Morbid Fairy. I have had a campaign have me banned the sikh-extremist fringe because of exposure i.e from those who wish to have the article removed. The two users watering down the article are mainly Sineed and to some extent Sikh-History (who has already had one warning recently).

The same old excuses are being used, i.e all the media such as the New York Times or the BBC or CNN is biased against terrorists, and after the recent murder attacks reported in the Austrian Times in Vienna, some seem to want to brush this under the carpet (fast). I hope you can help on this article as you kindly did so before, thank you Morbid Fairy (talk) 16:45, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear Morbid Fairy aka Satanoid see here , you have been previously reprimanded for this type of behaviour under the Satanoid account and on your WPOuting violation here. People are assuming Good Faith on your new account so I suggest you do the same. Your behaviour towards Sineed is very bad--Sikh-history (talk) 19:28, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XXXIX (May 2009)[edit]

The May 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:34, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Can you protect Alec Williams[edit]

This has been recreated four or five3 times enough is enough. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 14:48, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

It's all one user. I'll give him one more warning and then block him. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:49, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Burks Falls[edit]

DJ Clayworth, regarding what you said about the Statscan pages, you are wrong. I am not making assumptions about other ethnicities, because Statscan differentiates between white, aboriginal, and other (visible minorities). —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:24, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

My mistake, I found the ethnicity info, so I've reverted my removal. However you might like to think of other ways of portraying that information. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:32, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

RuneScape Fansites[edit]

I'd like to request an edit of the Wikipedia page of the game RuneScape ( I've realized that only three fansites are listed at the bottom of the page, however being a fansite staff myself, I am positive that 4 more should be mentioned. Mainly because those 7 are the longest existing fansites for RuneScape - there are even yearly inter-site wars that are being held, called "Multi Site Steel War". These fansites would be the following:

- RuneScape Bits & Bytes - <- especially famous for it's calculators

- RuneVillage - <- where I'm staff at... used to be in the top 3, famous for its community, but had a crash 2 years ago. Soon to have a large website update.

- Rune Crypt -

- Sal's Realm of RuneScape -

Also, you you might want to add that since JaGeX got a new CEO (Source:, they've started cooperating with users, clans and fansites more. They did contact us too (at to ask for suggestions and did also provide us with interesting unpublished material, which is somehow a proof I guess? Lastely, they've created a RuneScape fansite on facebook, and gave us major fansites permission to announce our events and share our pictures on that page, which you will find here:


EthemD (talk) 11 June 2009 (UTC)

This is a discussion to have at Talk:RuneScape. I suggest putting your comments on that page. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:54, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Voltron game page deleted[edit]

Hi DJ Clayworth.. I wanted to know why you deleted the page I created on the Voltron game.. It mentioned "notability" but that seems a subjective term. I tried to conform to the Wikipedia guidelines and format as much as possible. Please help explain to me how to view / continue creating this page again. Pazzmanmusic (talk) 15:22, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Reply at User talk:Pazzmanmusic. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:24, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. If I am able to provide notable, verifiable, information will that validate the page, and allow for its existance? I do not have a source handy now, but think I have seen one. Will I be able to retrieve the work I did on the page in the future so I can complete it with the guidelines you wrote about? Pazzmanmusic (talk) 16:52, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Reply at User talk:Pazzmanmusic. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:01, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Karl Wilkes[edit]

I didn't notice that you had turned the other article into a redirect. For a second there, I thought I was in re-direct hell. ;) My apologies. -t'shael mindmeld 14:09, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Fixed it. It happens to us all. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:11, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I Heart Cash: School Edition[edit]

Why was my page deleted? It's a role playing game, and there's actually other games on wikipedia, but why aren't they deleted, and mine is?

All those games are online games, like mine. Can you please put my page back? --Mysteryboy123 (talk) 18:30, 17 June 2009 (UTC)Mysterboy123

Reply at User talk:Mysteryboy123. DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:32, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

D-Day (disambiguation)[edit]

So I guess that one item was all that was wrong with it?

I knew I should have handled Roommates (2006 film) better. I figured why redirect, but then in this case I had to.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 19:32, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh, now I see. There were two films. The 2006 one looks like it hardly deserves an article. If not for the infobox, it wouldn't even be worth keeping.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 19:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello DJ Clayworth[edit]

Dear DJ, may I ask you why you exchanged the name of the original inventor of the Capri pants with a fictitious name? You seem to be a very serious editor, therefore I don't understand that you called one of the most respected European designers "homosexual designer". Please let me know and thanks (for your information I am an European history professor)--RoboRay (talk) 00:05, 23 June 2009 (UTC) [correction: should read "an European history professor"]--RoboRay (talk) 01:09, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, a mistake in the editing process there. (And I didn't call anyone 'homosexual', I undid that change). Thanks for fixing. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:54, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Girl scout council of the nation's capital[edit]

Dude, I was trying to stubbify it. Bearian (talk) 15:42, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Dude, it was a copyright infringement. Copyright infringements should be deleted if at all possible to remove them from the edit history. I would have no objection if you were to create a stub. Note however that the article name should have "Washington DC" rather than "the nation's capital" in the title, to pacify those pesky people who live in other nations. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:44, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


I just made a redirect for BLANKING IN PROGRESS to User:Samuel Blanning/Blanking. I just think that should be a blue link, since a lot of people usually try to link to it (it's kind of a meme on 4chan and Encyclopedia Dramatica). --Sushi654 (talk) 18:08, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Internet memes don't always make good articles. In any case, if this is a tool for assisting with Wikipedia editing it belongs in Wikipedia space, not the article space. I would suggest discussion before creating it anyway. DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:16, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

You Deleted My Page[edit]

You shouldn't have deleted my page. It's valid and not a hoax. Please put the content back. You could have contacted me before destroying my information. unsigned contribution by User:WebFGuy

The subject of your page got precisely two Google hits. Please don't waste our time. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Taiwan / Republic of China[edit]

Please note that the convention for the usage of the common term "Taiwan" and the formal term "Republic of China" is to use "Republic of China" in the context of state functions such as politics, military, government, etc.. When referring to the cultural region, territory, island and/or location in a non-state, non-government context, the more common name "Taiwan" is used. Marc87 appears to be attempting to push a POV by attempting to eliminate usages of the term "Taiwan" in its common and conventional usage as by most English speakers familiar with the area. Readin (talk) 22:51, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I disagree with your reading of the naming convention. Full reply at User talk:Readin. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:18, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
How about we all talk in one place? Please see Talk:Taiwan_Major_League#Taiwan_vs._ROC. Readin (talk) 15:33, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Sounds good. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:36, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Hardy Boys[edit]

Do not delete the end of the lead again. Per WP:LEAD, all content of the article must be summarized in the lead. This is not one editor's opinion; it is information cited to multiple sources. Please read WP:FA and WP:RS. Ricardiana (talk) 17:43, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Actually I removed what appeared to be vandalism back to a version before the article was made main. Sorry if I took more stuff away than was necessary. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:43, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


I would still salt the article. He waits weeks or even months between posting it again. A 55-hour block probably won't stop him. Oops - missed the part about expanding it to one year. That might do the trick, but I'd still salt. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 14:35, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I dislike salting. If for some reason this journal of his ever becomes genuinely noteworthy someone will wonder why we did it. However if it's created again I will absolutely salt it, as well as blocking the creator in perpetuity. It's not like an article titled in all-caps is going to get past the RC patrol. Let me know if you see it again. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:57, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

turtles all the way down[edit]

I generally agree with your removal of "less notable" references from this article. However I am wondering if you'd mind if I restored the reference to

I know it's frivolous, but when this was posted a month ago I thought it was a great addition and it really brightened my day. I think it would be a shame not to include it.
Thanks. Agradman talk/contribs 18:08, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Cute is only funny once, but an encyclopedia article is forever. DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Hardy Boys[edit]

I responded on the article's talk page --AW (talk) 17:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Lewishnl (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)[edit]

You blocked him for a month yesterday for spamming, etc. I just re-set the block for a month due to playing whack-a-mole with his socks (see his talk or mine). just a heads up, totally agree with the original block. StarM 15:55, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Princess Tiana tomfoolery[edit]

What do you suggest we do about this persistent editor who keeps insisting on changing the Princess Tiana article? I've tried reporting them for edit warring, vandalism, and trying to get the article protected--all to no avail. I'm at a loss how to get this person to stop. Cactusjump (talk) 21:12, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

It's been a day since he/she edited the article, so I would say leave it for now. He/she has probably gone away. If it starts again let me know, and I'll put a temporary block on the IP. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:47, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Had a look at the talk page, and I think the thing here is not to feed the trolls. Arguing is only going to make matters worse. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:01, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Good point. Will do. Cactusjump (talk) 16:25, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XL (June 2009)[edit]

The June 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:54, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Deletion link.[edit]

I am so having a brain fart and for the life of my I have forgotten how to create a link for the deletion. Brothejr (talk) 16:01, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

A link for the debate would suffice. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:03, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh, ok. There was not so much a debate as a user decided to create the sub page after the original section was closed and collapsed. The user hoped that they could continue on the debate in the sub page. While the original section had been closed. There was no agreement or discussion to make the sub page, and evidence shows that the Birther discussion was continue on in the sub page. That was why I put up the speedy deletion template. This is backed up by the history of the main talk page. Brothejr (talk) 16:08, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
If there wasn't a formal decision to delete then let's leave it. We'll put a stop to fruitless argument and then the page can stand as a record of what was said. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:13, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
That's fine. Brothejr (talk) 16:15, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Funny, right after I removed the CSD temp off the page and the notification off the user's talk page, the deleted all the content and now it's going to be speedily be closed for having nothing on it! Brothejr (talk) 16:22, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Let someone else deal with it if they want. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:23, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Very true, though it now looks like the user has now re-inserted their argument back into the main talk page. It seems as if they had deleted everyone's comments, boiled down what they were arguing, and then reposed it back on the main page for a new re-hashing of the argument. Brothejr (talk) 16:26, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, Ive undone this and I will find out if there is an explanation. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:33, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm going to stand back and let the bally-ho play out. It looks like you've got things under control. Brothejr (talk) 16:36, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Brothejr, check the info please. I read WP:AATP about how to archive it, and it said "Using a subpage is the most popular method for archiving a talk page"... that's what I went ahead and did. I didn't know it was "improper"... --Barwick (talk) 16:28, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
The Early Life/Birth Place page was archived as a "drop down, click to open" box (not sure what it is called), in its entirety, when the items under discussion were never addressed. It was archived because some folks who didn't like Barack Obama came on with their "you leftist loons" rants, and it turned into just that, a rant. I subpage archived it (thinking that was the proper way to do it, but apparently wasn't), so I deleted the subpage content, and someone else had already moved it to the main "Archive 1" page.
At that point, I then went on to pull out all the facts of the discussion from both sides so they can be debated. --Barwick (talk) 16:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
The whole debate, including the part you posted, was clearly going nowhere. Please let sleeping dogs lie. Wikipedia is not an investigative journalist, hoping to uncover hidden facts. We report what is written. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:42, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
It's been written, that's the thing. That's what the facts of the discussion were presented for, none of those facts have been disputed. --Barwick (talk) 16:46, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
The discussion was futile, and irrelevant to improving the article. You attempted to restart it. Please don't. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:47, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
How is it futile? Saying "it's futile" doesn't make it futile. If you (or someone else) can show me where those facts have been disproven, then fine, but nobody has done that. --Barwick (talk) 16:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
It is futile because it in no way contributes to the improving of Wikipedia. The whole "where was he born" debate is clearly settled in the minds of 99% of people, and debating the merits of the issue is not Wikipedia's business. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:55, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
It IS? Really? I was unaware that it was settled in the minds of 99% of the people. Please cite your Reliable Source for that information :) Seriously, 400,000 people have signed a petition, out of the unknown number who even know of that petition, that is probably a fairly high ratio of petition signers to petition viewers. --Barwick (talk) 17:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
You can look up the sources as well as I can. Please stop this now. I have better things to be doing. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:17, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Same.Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 18:00, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
They seemed to have ignored what you said and re-introduced the thread again. I have manually archived it again. Brothejr (talk) 09:58, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if this comes across as an angry pissed off person, but it seems like admins are crossing the line and not playing by Wikipedia's own rules: This topic was "archived" because it became a forum. I took MY own time to clean it up so it can be discussed, and now you are trying to sweep it under the rug. That is not going to happen. In the talk section I have *clearly* and *concisely* (as concise as possible with everything involved here) presented the facts of both sides of this case. These facts have NOT been disproven beyond any reasonable doubt. Until someone shows me where these facts are incorrect, and DISCUSSES it, not just pulling the Stasi Secret Police method of hushing it away somewhere by saying "I'm archiving this"... I've said it multiple times, I AM PLAYING BY WIKIPEDIA'S RULES, and yet you seem unwilling to discuss this on the TALK page, per Wikipedia guidelines. You claim it has been discussed and is moot, I have just shown that these facts have NOT been disproven, and that they are legitimate concerns from an average, unbiased person. Calling everyone involved a "conspiracy theorist" or "kook" or whatever else is doing nobody any good. --Barwick (talk) 15:08, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I've started a new AN/I section/case: [1] over this as it does not seem to be resolved. Brothejr (talk) 16:53, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Let me be clear about this. Wikipedia is not here to debate the truth of Barack Obama's birth location. The fact that you don't consider the case proved is irrelevant. For the overwhelming majority of people the cases is closed and that is what Wikipedia reports. Your posting was a clear attempt to reopen the debate about Obama's birth, and that is not the purpose of Wikipedia. That and anything else not related to improving the article will be removed. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:32, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
How has it been resolved? Honestly? You are allowed to make that claim without backing it up? Again, 400,000 signatures of a petition (with a wild guess of 2 million people who even know the petition exists) shows there's more than a significant number of people out there who aren't convinced. You show me a non-biased survey that shows the vast majority of people believe 100% that Barack Obama II was born in that hospital in Hawaii, and I'll drop it. An example of such a survey would ask non-biased questions, such as "Do you believe President Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961? Yes absolutely, I'm fairly convinced, There's some reasonable doubt, Not at all" --Barwick (talk) 18:43, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
It is completely clear that consensus opinion in the world is that Obama was born where he said he was. 100 million people voted for him. Your 'petition' could be one guy with an internet bot (or one guy with no qualms about lying to make his point). Please do not make further posts on this page. DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:28, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Got it, so, again, you're able to go on there and state your POV, but I'm not able to respond, gotcha. --Barwick (talk) 02:01, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Reply at User talk:Barwick. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:46, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Good attempt at sweeping that one under the rug. Way to follow your own principles of reliable sources (*cough* hypocrite *cough*). Do is make you feel uncomfortable by calling you out when you require one standard from me, but you yourself don't even attempt to live by that same standard? I'll leave you be to reflect on the way you've approached this situation, and probably many more like it, to see if there's any way you can change your actions in the future, it might serve you well in the real world. --Barwick (talk) 13:25, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

RE: Invest in Knowledge[edit]

I resubmitted the page removing all mention of company name, or links to Kirtas or any of it's websites. Invest in Knowledge is a patented process, and although it was invented by Kirtas. I made no mention of Kirtas. What do I have to do?? I am looking for some guidance.VeryBigKahunaIII (talk) 17:31, 16 July 2009 (UTC) VeryBigKahunaIII

Answer at User talk:VeryBigKahunaIII. DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:51, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLI (July 2009)[edit]

The July 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:19, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


From The Wikihunter: I thought it would be clever to start up an interesting game on Wikipedia called Wikihunting. I think that if given the chance, I could place enough codes on pages for the game to become more noticable in society. These are harmless 10 character combinations located at the bottom of particular articles. They do not in any way try to harm or affect the article, this is why they are placed at the bottom. When the person who finds them tells me on e-mail that they found them, I would remove them from the article straight away. Then the players name would be put in a Hall of Fame and so a massive wiki competition begins. I think this would be a good game which will not only entertain the people who compete, but will increase and promote the use of Wikipedia. Please consider not terminating what could be an interesting stage of the life of Wikipedia. Get back to me. (The Wikihunter (talk) 08:27, 18 August 2009 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Wikihunter (talkcontribs) 08:21, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Reply at User talk:The Wikihunter. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:36, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Murder of James Bulger/3RR given[edit]

I gave user User: an official 3RR. Is there anything that can be done about this ? Seb az86556 (talk) 15:55, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

He's been told the facts, he's been warned. If he edits the article again today he'll be blocked. If the keeps editing the article after that we'll maybe give him a reference to the OED and if that doesn't work we'll assume he's a vandal. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:29, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

kindly read[edit]

a One-stop for healthcare. You name it and it has it – largest number of Genuine Medical Doctors with verified credentials, Health insurance, Health Products, Medical Equipments, Books, CDs, Upload and maintain your health records and much more - an all-new world, which follows the religion of health. TopDoctorsOnline bridges the gap between the various facets of the medical fraternity. This portal brings the advice of top medical experts to you at the click of a button.

TopDoctorsOnline.Com provides users with comprehensive profiles of General Practitioners, Specialist Doctors, Clinics, Hospitals, Pathological Labs, and Chemists. Users can search & can get online consultation of doctors residing at any corner of the country with specific expertise and experience, or Hospitals / clinics that are better equipped to provide treatments for certain ailments. Likewise they can find pathological labs having various diagnostic facilities nearest to their home and area-wise 24x7 chemists that can deliver medicines at doorstep even at midnight!

Importantly, you can not only check out a doctor's clinic timings, visiting/consultation charges, and facilities available like vaccination, but also the detailed profile that includes other useful information that may help you form an opinion and conclude. Reports can be shared with the concerned health care providers instantly for immediate medication purposes. Get Health News, updates and highlights from the medical world. Connect and interact with medical groups, maintain and manage patient information records and participate in special medical cases, participate in webinars/ webcasts, online training & much more…….

Title of website:

Welcome to TopDoctorsOnline.Com - The Next Generation World of Healthcare. Stay connected to the medical fraternity 24x7x365days.

My Note:

executives of TopDoctorsOnline.Com are requested to submit article to as they want

Dear Administrator @ WikiPedia,

i had just written as i think for this portal. I signed up this website as a user and got very good response to a problem from a live doctor online which I could not get from any doctor in my town. It is a boon for a country like India where more than 90% of specialist doctors live in major metro cities but 70% population belongs to rural areas where quality medical advice is not available.

I am really impressed with this concept and idea. I got benefited from yhis and thus want to share the same with the world so that others can also be benefited.

Thanks & regards, Arpit

Reply at User talk: Arpitdubey. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:06, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

RCC or CC[edit]

You took part in Talk:Catholic Church/Archive 3#REQUESTED MOVE to Catholic Church there is a new requested move see Talk:Catholic Church#Requested Move --PBS (talk) 08:35, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Erin angel promo2.jpg[edit]

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Erin angel promo2.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. (talk) 02:49, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Actually the image is not being used under a fair use claim. It's being used with the permission of the copyright owner. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:25, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia has different language versions[edit]

centre is the correct British spelling of center. Is this the British language wikipedia? Didn't think so. The might is not right on this one. "centre" is not a word in the English language. As it has been demonstrated already, all English dictionary's simply forward somebody to the word "center" when they search for the word "centre". It's British slang, it's *not* a word in the English language anymore than "wassawp!" is a word in the English language. Whether the word and usage of centre is popular or not doesn't change the fact that it's not technically a valid word. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:32, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

If you read the policy, you will find that it is English language Wikipedia practice to use either American or non-American English spelling and usage. Specifically on articles focussed on Britain (such as Murder of James Bulger) British spelling is preferred. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:35, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Lock the talk page, please...[edit]

...on account of this. Not going away that easily, 'mfraid. :) Thanks. Vicenarian (Said · Done) 19:41, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Done. DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:56, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. Vicenarian (Said · Done) 19:57, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Can you please address why my in-progress article on the company Gamer's University was deleted? I stated very clearly in the talk (as the automatic warning message directed) that the article was in-progress as I was still learning how to use Wikipedia's posting features. I do not appreciate that my efforts to explain my actions were completely ignored and that the article was removed based on the Notibility requirement before I even had an opportunity to render it complete. Please restore it lest I am forced to recreate it. Endymian (talk) 16:07, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Reply at User talk:Endymian. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:52, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[edit]

Can you show who created that page? It has been spammed many times before. A salt may be needed. Triplestop x3 22:29, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

That would be User:Wikiwiki1228. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:06, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

A polite notice[edit]

Hey DJ Clayworth. Just a notice about CSD, in particular CSD G1 (nonsense). You recently deleted the article Lewis Pritchard, stating that you were deleting it under CSD G1 in the deletion summary. However, patent nonsense really refers (on Wikipedia), to either a random jumble of letters, or a random jumble of words (e.g. "btrfgb ebrefdb rgvr" or "lol yes hah hah YAYAY! Got win lol wuh"). In this case, the article was neither, and it was understandable. I didn't get a chance to read the whole article before you deleted it, but the start at least read like a blatant hoax (or vandalism). Thus you should have used CSD G3 instead (note that if an article is vandalism, then G1 does not apply). Anyway, just something for the future, don't take it the wrong way, I'm not saying "you did something wrong", rather "in future, you could do this differently". Best, - Kingpin13 (talk) 14:23, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:26, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

not sure how to message people, but this is how i was told

The Deadly Wolves, is about me, because its MY band Conner L. Hemming (talk) 16:35, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Which is merely one of the reasons you shouldn't write about it. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:48, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Whats wrong[edit]

I have no understand what is so upseting you know. Please be specifically that justify the serious threat. Please each plan in easy the thing upset people. I really cannot manage. Nothing bad is being intentent by stuff action.

stilltim (talk) 22:14, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Reply at User talk:Stilltim. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:14, 4 September 2009 (UTC)


Nicely done. The V-Man (Said · Done) 14:28, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Not sure grammaticism is always the best response, but since he went on about 'ignorance' I couldn't resist. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:30, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Necessary and appropriate for the situation, I believe.  Works for me The V-Man (Said · Done) 14:33, 4 September 2009 (UTC)


Greetings DJ Clayworth. Sorry to bring up User:Stilltim again, but I would like to ask a favour. The user in recent history has placed office seals as the main pic in infoboxs of politicians, when a pic of the subject is not available, which isn't ok per WP:MOSFLAG. I informed him of this on his talk page, and asked him to remember this in future, but it doesn't seem to have affected his editing behaviour. I was thinking maybe a note from an admin might get the message across much better. If you could do that, thank you very much. Otumba (talk) 13:21, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll have a word. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:39, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
The note you references seem to clear rejection to only flags and nothing else something. I'll stop put them useful if there is some action if much such reference, but thought rejection and thought you meant only to flags. But I have useful approval of use in appropriate seals, and such an a approval in the base line. Seem soon the approval was made OK from, a recent change from the past? See common WP Commons I think. Be assured I will follow any stated ruler. stilltim (talk) 14:32, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Reply at User talk:Stilltim. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:33, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but your reference does not include anything but flags. Please indicate what would prohibit other anything but only flags, anything arms which are actually approval in Commons for relevant. stilltim (talk) 14:50, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
If you read what I wrote, I said "sorry I was wrong". The prohibition only applies to biographical articles. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:57, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

(I am Otumba, I changed my username) Thank you, DJ, for talking with stilltim. To clarify, I was referring to biographical articles as my concern, and I am sorry I was rather ambiguous. I have no concern with using the seal at the various Delaware assembly articles that have been created. On a final point, in reference to "And now I look at it, your use of the seal in biographical articles was a while ago", it was here: [2] that prompted me to contact you since this add occurred after I initially stated my concern with stilltim. HonouraryMix (talk) 11:35, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I am really sorry for contacting you again about this user. I'm going to admit, this guy is really starting to annoy me now. He's adding spaces at the top of articles, he's still adding seals to biographical articles, and he's even created a category called "People raised by Delaware", as if a state could raise someone. I am really tired so maybe I'm overreacting, but I'm really afraid I'm going to get into an edit war if I keep up with reverting some of his odd edits. Is there anything else that you can do as admin? HonouraryMix (talk) 19:26, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
I'll look at this edits again, but it won't be for a few hours. DJ Clayworth (talk) 20:13, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. HonouraryMix (talk) 22:42, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election[edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September!
Many thanks,  Roger Davies talk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Still time and Delaware articles[edit]

You may want to check out this discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Governors from Delaware. User:Stilltim has created a duplicate of List of Governors of Delaware, even after his recent warnings against mass moves or major changes without consensus or explanation. His improvements are actually quite good, but instead of using the existing article he creating an entirely separate one. I've merged his changes into the original article.DCmacnut<> 14:10, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Christian Universalism[edit]

Greetings. Re your edit here, would you object to restoring the 3 Old Testament references just for a bit of balance? Please let me know what you think. Best,--Arxiloxos (talk) 14:48, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Ideally I would rather not see the biblical quotes at all. The troubles are that a) Biblical quotes can be interpreted in a number of ways, and non-universalists interpret those verses differently b) these things can end up sounding like an argument - Universalists say they are right because of these quotes, but non-Universalists say they are wrong because of these quote, but then Universalists reply ah, but... c) it is not Wikipedia's job to argue why people believe what they believe - it's too close to proselytization for my mind. I would rather see time devoted to a clearer explanation of Universalist beliefs.
Having said all that I have no particular objection to the OT quotes going back. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:07, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I agree with you. One could conclude that there is a bit of OR and SYNTH in that article, despite all the footnotes. It's an interesting subject, though. I will restore a few OT cites to that section (because it's my impression that the OT sources tend to be an important part of Christian Universalist thinking), but if you think that the whole section should be replaced with something more rigorously sourced, I certainly wouldn't disagree. Best,--Arxiloxos (talk) 23:11, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

United Kingdom Football[edit]

You deleted my amendment of adding Tottenham Hotspur to the list of worldwide football renowed football teams. On what basis? If Chelsea are listed then Tottenham have very right to stand along side them. Tottenham have won more trophies, both domestically and in Europe than Chelsea, have a higher all time average attendance, have spent more continuous seasons in the top division and are currently listed in both Forbes and Deloitte & touche lists of top 20 worldwide football teams. Please do not delete again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rbs7878 (talkcontribs) 21:40, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

As I explained, such lists grow indefinitely. You want Spurs included: someone else thinks Newcastle should be in; if Newcastle are in then Ipswich should be in, then Cambridge United and so on until the list is hundreds long. Actually I've now taken the whole list out. Every major club is already mentioned in the section. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:42, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Deep Fried Oreo[edit]

Thank you for deleting Deep Fried Oreo. I discovered that the information I intended to include in that article already existed in the main Oreo article (although had I not found this information, I would have been quite annoyed that you deleted it within 1 minute of me making it giving me no chance to fill it out into a proper article)

Googlemeister (talk) 21:21, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the once-over. I understand your deletion of my article. I'll try again later....after we make gold records!! Does Indie Gold count? Cause we've sold over 100 albums ;) Ha ha! Cheers!

Bunnymurder (talk) 14:10, 11 September 2009 (UTC)Bunnymurder

No problem. Another 999,900 albums sold and you'll definitely deserve a Wikipedia article! DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:12, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Jim Hawkins[edit]

Can I ask how you became aware of the article? Was it when I requested semi-protection. I did not ask for the article to be protected because it was wrong, because it clearly was wrong. What was needed was some breathing space free of IP vandals so that established editors could sort the article out. My request has had the desired effect. Semi-protection is due to end at 22:14 BST tonight, so we'll see if the IPs come back and start vandalising again. If they do, Tedder is ameniable to putting a long-term semi-protection back on the article. Mjroots (talk) 11:49, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I spotted it on the request page for Admin intervention. I was surprised because I assumed it was about the Treasure island character, and I thought it an odd target for vandalism. I would suggest not putting it on long-term protection if we can avoid it. Frankly I think the main reason it's being vandalised is because Mr Hawkins keeps talking about it. If he stopped, it would probably die away. Anyway, I'm going to keep it on my watch list, which I gather other people are too. Most vandals go away when they find that their edits never actually show up on the page. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:57, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLII (August 2009)[edit]

The August 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:37, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Evony[edit]

Thanks, what are some forums(the URLS if you please, not the definition lol :P) Thanks again?

Tim Tebow ROCKS!!!!!! (talk) 16:15, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I have no idea. Try Google. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:16, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

thanks for the article. Tim Tebow ROCKS!!!!!! (talk) 19:35, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Honesty box[edit]

Amusingly this article says that most adults have never heard of the honesty box facebook app while most kids have. I will endeavour to add a ref'd piece about this to Facebook before attempting to re-create the disambiguation page. Thanks, SqueakBox talk 17:20, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Sure. However don't move a long-standing article about a well-known concept to insert an article about a recently-created Facebook app. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:24, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Long standing article? Its just a stub. Though until the facebook app is deserving of its own stub no reason to move it. Thanks, SqueakBox talk 21:04, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Structural guides deleted[edit]

DJ Clayworth.

We make structural guides to films that are well regarded and utilized quite a bit, an example: I'm assuming if Inglourious Basterds is highly coded film, then the wiki environment is the best place for our work, no? I think belongs on the page, perhaps an interpretive section. Can you recommend where it belongs if not See Also? We are not vandals I assure you. A slimmer version (minus our humorous header) can be found at —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:16, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Firstly you should not insert external links in the main body of the article, which you did. Secondly, you should not be promoting anything you are personally associated with, which it seems you are, even by providing links to it. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:22, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Placement I do understand, my apologies, but in terms of the links, I am not promoting the sale of anything (our work is open source research), and I see no policy written regarding the placement of valuable information as links. I have just read the List of Policies and see nothing regarding this. Also, since Inglourious Basterds is no doubt a puzzle, as Tarantino hints, then its solution is necessary for the users, no? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:50, 16 September 2009 (UTC) After reviewing this section of Wiki rules "What generally should be linked" it is fairly clear this information is very relevant to the article since it is information that provides a deeper understanding of the terms, characters and meanings in the film. Do you agree? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:01, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

You are not allowed to promote anything, whether it is for sale or not. There are very strict limits on what can be linked in the external links. I don't believe your links count. If you wish you may discuss this on the talk page of the article. However I would say that Wikipedians generally dislike external links unless extremely relevant. DJ Clayworth (talk) 12:54, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I see nothing regarding the rules of linking that structure the characteristic of the linking act, can you point this out to me? We are deeply linked by Wikipedia for a game we built for the show Jericho, so I do not agree with you that external links are disliked since we have no less than four links that lead from the Jericho game that we did not place there, the editors of that page sought us out to link. The link for Inglourious Basterds itself is highly relevant considering the film is designed like a narrative puzzle. Tarantino hints at this. He even goads the audience with the film's last line. If you are denying this link the potential for informing others, is there a committee I may discuss this with?[edit]

In general it isn't a great idea to block an IP address indefinitely although this one seems to be pretty static. Maybe reduce to 6 months rather than indefinite? JoshuaZ (talk) 21:44, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll look at that. DJ Clayworth (talk) 12:54, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Proposed merge[edit]

Please do weigh in at Talk:Plot_device#Proposed_merger_from_Literary_technique if you wish. I'd very much appreciate your guidance. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:26, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Military history coordinator elections: voting has started![edit]

Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September!
For the coordinators,  Roger Davies talk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion - Discworld Stamps[edit]

With regard to your proposed deletion of the Discworld Stamps entry, aside from the rebuttal and justification already posted by Bernard Pearson, I would like to raise the following points against your claim that they are "non-notable", as they are facts that the careful research you will presumably have done before recommending the article deletion seems to have missed.

  • Over two million of the stamps have been sold in the little over 5 years that they have been produced, making them one of the (if not the) most successful cinderella stamp ranges ever produced.
  • They have a global collector-base, as evidenced by the input and discussion from over 1000 registered contributors on the stamp fan forum in over half a million postings.
  • Each of the stamp designs are produced in collaboration with and with the direct personal final approval of Sir Terry Pratchett himself. Indeed many of the ideas and inspirations come directly from him, aside from their inclusion in several of his recent books.
  • The stamps have been been included by invitation into the National United Kingdom Stamp Collection, as held at the British Library. So in effect Queen Elizabeth II is a Discworld stamp collector and flatalist.
  • They have been featured in mainstream stamp magazines such as Stanley Gibbons and Stamp Magazine. The professionally produced artwork and designs have been recognised as on a par with those provided by (and indeed arguably superior to in many cases) those of worldwide Philatelic Bureau.
  • They are a popular item for commercial and auction sale at every Discworld Convention plus on other sites like eBay, and have raised significant figures in such sales, for both good causes and secondary sellers.

I am sure there will be other inputs from our fellow Discworld fans whose tastes in these items are more in line with my own than yours. DarrenHill (talk) 05:56, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. I'm sure the article will survive the deletion nomination then. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:03, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

If you are such a fan, why didn't you edit the page to reflect your idea of the truth, instead of just calling for a deletion? For all your supposed knowledge of this subject, you seem very naive. Advertising? I saw nothing relating to this, and think Darren has put a very good case for you to stick to one of the other subjects you deem yourself an authority on. (talk) 12:20, 21 September 2009 (UTC)Simon Evans (Australia)

I suggest reading what I wrote at on the deletion nomination. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:05, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

As the person who originally requested the removal of the article, could you please state your current viewpoint in light of all the discussions and provided evidence on the deletion review for the article? There are various snippets in various different pages on here, and it would probably be easier for everyone if you can state your final position on that page. Thanks. DarrenHill (talk) 00:27, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Second Coming[edit]

Second coming is not a historical event but rather this: "Doctrinal topics or canonical religious ideas (as distinguished from specific events) capitalized by some religious adherents are given in lower case in Wikipedia, such as virgin birth, original sin, or transubstantiation." Your change concerns a religious idea. R/T-รัก-ไทย (talk) 16:28, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

I didn't say "historical events" I said "spiritual events" and I quote from WP:MOS: "Spiritual or religious events are likewise capitalized only when they are terms referring to specific incidents or periods (the Great Flood)". DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:13, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, The section you refer to listed past spiritual events. I tend to agree with you about Second Coming. I edited the MOS to include future events. Let's see if the other editors will let it stand. On this issue, we are on the same page. Some would like to use lower case for any religious term or event. R/T-รัก-ไทย (talk) 02:30, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

I did indeed revert the MOS addition, but not because I believe the Second Coming should be lowercase. It is a particular doctrinal idea of a specific event, therefore it should be capitalized as a proper noun. I made the reversion, though, because of the phrasing of the addition characterized it as a "future" event, which is a matter of faith, and therefore it's not NPOV to categorically call it a future event. Also, I didn't like the way it broke the symetry between the specific, proper noun examples given (the Great Flood and the Isrealite Exodus) and their common counterparts. oknazevad (talk) 06:42, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure what that's about. The MOS doesn't distinguish between 'past' and 'future' events like this: it just refers to "spiritual events". DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:16, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Delaware items[edit]

Regarding displaying arms/notes if portraits as not available...I will follow your direction if I see an official policy instead of a simple opinion. If the arms display and note joining it are there, I see my method being helpful in understanding the situation and not simply an omission...but I can easily be overseeing something important. If that exists it should be written, but I cannot find it. I want to be a cooperative, a team player, but make sure the team has it right. And I do want to be a member of the team and not one of the odd balls. Thanks for working with me. stilltim (talk) 09:52, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

If you think the policy should be changed, the place to suggest it is on the talk page of the relevant policy. DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:17, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Argopecten Purpuratus should perhaps be Argopecten purpuratus[edit]

Thank you for renaming the article from its all caps origin. However, as noted on the talk page for the former article (Talk:ARGOPECTEN PURPURATUS) the conventions is Genus species for binonmial names. Examples include those mentioned on that other talk page. Hence I think the species name in the article should start with a lower case p not a P. (talk) 18:09, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Done. DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:12, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. Thanks also for moving the article's talk page. (talk) 18:13, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
You're welcome. DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:17, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for interrupting, but I ask for punishment for my conduct of 3RRs and attack against Paul Siebert[edit]

I did not know the 3RRs until later informed. Yet, I will take full responsibilities of my conduct. I learned that you are an admin, so that I strongly ask for a punishment for violation of 3RRs. Page:

As for the attack against user Paul Siebert, frankly speaking, I knew I was using bad languages( that means, I was fully aware of attacking ) though I deleted these words later. But imo he was quite annoying in that case regarding his tactics. Anyway I indeed attacked him over the dispute. Here, I strongly ask for punishment also for this conduct. Page:

The user Paul Siebert is generous in that he himself would not launch a report against my violation of 3RRs and attack. But, it is my concrete principle that when one does sth wrong, then he receives a punishment, so I hope in this case you can help me with it.

Lastly, sorry for troubling you here, but as of this moment it is a bit confusing to me to go through all the official formats to make a formal request for punishment. To timely tackle with the current issue, I forward my proposal here.

Thank you.

Vulturedroid (talk) 07:07, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Single Payer[edit]

Please seem my comment here at User talk: I have not been paying attention to that article for a little while, but the endless edit warring by this IP address in an effort to include certain content has gone on long enough. If the problem crops again, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 05:29, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

afd notification[edit]

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Same-sex marriage and procreation (2nd nomination). Thanks. Drmies (talk) 18:11, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

MILHIST admins[edit]

Hi. Since you're an admin and a member of the Military History WikiProject, feel free to list yourself here. Cheers, –Juliancolton | Talk 17:01, 26 September 2009 (UTC)


Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MooniesBorock (talk) 07:36, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Largest village in England[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

I have nominated Largest village in England, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Largest village in England (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Computerjoe's talk 21:50, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Turas faith[edit]

Please do not delete my article. I assure you it will be noteworthy when I have finished editing it! Edward1967 (talk) 20:44, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, I'll give it a little more time. Make sure you have read Wikipedia:Notability. DJ Clayworth (talk) 20:46, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

DJ, Which edition of my article are you concerned about? I have supplied citations for both additions. Please advise. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ejhalvo11 (talkcontribs) 22:24, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I assume you mean Arthur Van Haren, Jr.. If so then the article is OK at the moment, with a couple of reservations. The reference you cite in the introduction does not actually talk about Van Haren at all - you should probably replace it with one of the others.
Am I right in thinking that you are the grandson of the subject? If so then please make sure you read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You should not be writing about people you are related to. I've also noticed that every reference which refers to Van Haren as Hispanic is either written by you or a direct quote from you. The list of Hispanic war aces which you cite does not mention him either- is this perhaps because he did not think of himself as Hispanic? DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:12, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Lady Lashes[edit]

Thanks for protecting the page. I have a question though ... the same user also created the same content at User:LadyLashes. I initially added a speedy tag, but then reverted to the original version of the page (a suckpuppet notice). Should the history showing the spammed material about the band also be deleted, or should it be okay just being reverted back to the notice? --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 17:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

There is no need to start deleting things from history. That's a complicated process requiring higher level privileges than admin, and generally only done for legal reasons. Some spam buried in an articles history won't help the spammer. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:23, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


Hi DJ,

Twenty-eight, strangely enough. I go based on Google hits. If I can find at least one "x-headed" hit that uses the term strictly as one term and in an intelligible sentence, then I figure it's worth having as a redirect on Wikipedia. That's true of all whole numbers right up until twenty-eight, although I may do some 'big-name' numbers like 100 and 1000 if they fit the critera.

Happy editing,

Neelix (talk) 19:54, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

OK. No problem. DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

"vision thing"[edit]

Hi. "Vision thing" is meant to be a distinct article from Vision thing.--Louiedog (talk) 17:19, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I know it's meant to be. I'm doubtful that it's a noteworthy enough saying to deserve an article on its own. It's also named wrong - it shouldn't have double quotes in the title. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:21, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Of course, notability is it's own issue. But if it's not standard to have the quotes in the title (I was not aware), I'll have to do some article moving.--Louiedog (talk) 17:23, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
OK. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:25, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Done.--Louiedog (talk) 17:26, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

National Health Insurance[edit]

You deleted text which said that NHI usually is instituted as a program of healthcare reform. You did this with an edit summary saying "it's not reform if its been in place for fifty years, which it has in some cases". I have tried several times to reinstate the text because the reason you gave was not valid but you keep reverting it. When British NHI began with a reform in 1911 and another in 1948. All the other European countries have had similar reforms at various periods and similarly places as far afield as Australia, Singapore and New Zealand. Canadian reforms began also as a process of health care reform, but incrementally as a process of change province by province. But it is true that NHI is usually instigated as a process of health care reform. I fail to see why you think that because those reforms happened a long time ago, they did not happen as a process of reform.

Please explain your thinking. --Hauskalainen (talk) 20:30, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Reply at Talk:National health insurance. DJ Clayworth (talk) 20:34, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIII (September 2009)[edit]

The September 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:38, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Star Trek Page[edit]

I have rolled back your removal of the template tag. We have not finalized the changes or the discussion and you simply deleted the tag. Please do not misinterpret the meaning of that tag; it can mean that parts can me merged as well. Please see the talk page for more discussion that I left regarding this rollback. I am assuming good faith on your part, so I provided a very long detail as to why the tag should be left and how we should go about those changes. --Lightbound talk 02:29, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

See Talk:Star Trek DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:24, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Your reply[edit]

In case you were looking for it, your reply was removed by the questioner, which is probably for the best. While I could never bring myself to tell someone to seek help in a church, I wanted you to know that I thought your answer was helpful, thoughtful, and carefully phrased while still getting the point across. I was a little afraid that someone was going to drag it onto the talkpage or something and perhaps cause unneeded embarrassment or hard feelings, but was unable to do anything myself at the time. Well done. Matt Deres (talk) 21:19, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:KingAlfredStatueWantage.jpg[edit]

File:KingAlfredStatueWantage.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:King Alfred Statue Wantage.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:King Alfred Statue Wantage.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:45, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


Sir, I award you a

Working Man's Barnstar.png The Working Man's Barnstar
I, User:TParis00ap award you this barnstar for speedy deleting db-attack articles quicker than I can tag them.TParis00ap (talk) 17:19, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. Thank you. I'd like to thank my agent... DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:21, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for getting that username vio there :). You managed just before I got to UAA :). But BTW, I think you forgot to type in {{usernamehardblocked}} as the block reason (not that the user really needs it in this case). But I think there are some scripts which do that kind of thing for you..? You might want to take a look? - Kingpin13 (talk) 16:06, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see you posted on the user's talkpage instead, n/m :). Keep it up - Kingpin13 (talk) 16:07, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Battle of Kamdesh[edit]

My edit was referenced, how is your edit a more accurate version since it is not even referenced? The result here on Wikipedia should be fair and neutral...not just from the US military POV, they won tacticaly yes...and i put that in the result section, but the Taliban still control much of Kamdesh and the police force of Kamdesh is almost non-existent after the attack. Plus the US will withdraw in a few days...who do you think will be controling the district after that? Thus this is a strategic Taliban victory. This had been a rerun of the Battle of Wanat and there editors put the result as Coalition tactical victory, Taliban strategic victory. You should check the talk page of the Battle of Wanat on this issue. Also until you provide a reference that specificly says that the Coalition is in control of the Kamdesh mountain range, and not just the towns and villages, my REFERENCED edit also stays. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:04, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Reply at Talk:Battle of Kamdesh DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:21, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

re delay changes[edit]

hi dj,

i have posted a response on the DeLay Talk page which i hope you'll read.

thanks, Beansandveggies (talk) 10:08, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Jawesome block length[edit]

That's the shortest block he's gotten yet -- before I saw that you had blocked, I was going to escalate to 1 week. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:14, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't let me stop you. I just gave him that as an automatic for 3RR. DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Ok, thanks -- will do.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:36, 14 October 2009 (UTC)


I'm puzzled as to why you felt it necessary to restore the information about the program's establishment to the short lead section of TennCare. The information is repeated at the beginning of the following section, which is entitled "History."

Note that the subject article was much longer until a few days ago, when most of the content was deleted -- for being unsourced and because some of it appeared to be colored by strong POV regarding the current program. The fact that earlier today I restored some deleted content about the program's early history does not mean that the early history of the program is the whole story to be covered by the article. --Orlady (talk) 16:12, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, feel free to take it out again. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:25, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Byford Dolphin[edit]

I though I should inform you, out of courtesy, that I've mentioned you at AN, but merely as one of the several editors who (like myself) has removed an unsourced, speculative paragraph from Byford Dolphin. --RexxS (talk) 21:43, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Cryostorm (band)[edit]

Hiya, just need information on the previous pages on Cryostorm band page and about it's deletion. I actually know the band members and thought I'd help them out creating their page. I will properly read the guidelines to prevent it from being deleted, although I would like a bit of help since I'm new to this.

  • 16:23, 3 November 2008 DJ Clayworth (talk | contribs) deleted "Cryostorm" ‎ (A7 (group): Doesn't indicate importance or significance of a group/band/company/etc.)
  • 00:21, 28 April 2008 NawlinWiki (talk | contribs) deleted "Cryostorm" ‎ (A7 (group): Group/band/club/company/etc; doesn't indicate importance/significance)

Gavrielo (talk) 03:42, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Reply at User talk:Gavrielo. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:07, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
  • AurangzebMarwat (talk) 16:35, 30 October 2009 (UTC) Please we need your kind attention. PakhtunZalmay is ruining article Mullazai,he wipes out all the precious work done by residents and historians. PakhtunZalmay is not resident of Mullazai,even he never paste his comments in disccsn for talk.Furthermore he tried to ruin work for several time from following ips.,,,

Mullazai article needs to be locked as work done by me. Thanks AurangzebMarwat (talk)

Happy to help, but please go to Talk:Mullazai to explain what the problem is. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:30, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


Uh, yeah, you wish. I'm gonna keep doing this because it is not vandalism. XxTimberlakexx (talk) 21:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

But you can't block me because these are not disruptive edits. Anyway, I gotta go. See ya!

XxTimberlakexx (talk) 21:20, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

And the point of your doing this would be? DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:36, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Standing Rules of the United States Senate[edit]

These articles will become the framework for context and explanation of the rules. See Standing Rules of the United States Senate, Rule I, Rule II, etc. Neutralitytalk 21:19, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Reply at User talk:Neutrality. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:20, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

The endless C. S. Lewis sideshow[edit]

I have no problem with the current wording, and until recently refrained from putting in any oar. But the "consensus" was achieved only by shouting down the opposition, so it's not a stable solution and will invite drive-by shootings indefinitely. That's why I think it might work better to avoid pinning any national labels on him (an Irish writer, a British writer, whatever). Although, given the sort of logic displayed in the discussion, a solution that is both reasonable and stable may be too much to hope for. Elphion (talk) 19:55, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

The trouble with this solution is that approached from the other side, when someone asks "why isn't Lewis' nationality given" (which all other articles have), and points out that Lewis was British at birth and for the whole of his life, our only possible answer is to say "we took that information out to avoid offending a few people". That's not a good answer for an encyclopedia. The current wording is without question factual and correct.
As for you other point, in a contentious Wikipedia article, there is no such thing as a 'stable solution'. Every solution, no matter how balanced, will be questioned and probably attacked by someone. And the definition of 'contentious article' is "any article edited by more than one person". DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:39, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Fair enough. But then the response will be: why are any number of people (like Laurencedunne's examples) identified in WP as "Scottish", "Welsh", or even "Irish", even though their adult and professional lives were spent elsewhere; while Lewis remains "British"? That's a fair point, and I don't have a good answer (beyond what I already wrote). Are there guidelines that apply? Elphion (talk) 23:49, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
No, I'm afraid their aren't. In most cases those identified as Irish were either associated with the ROI when it was created, or were early enough (Oscar Wilde) that it was never an issue. However the truth is that Wikipedia is schizophrenic to the point of hipocracy on these matters. It really depends on who is editing the article. DJ Clayworth (talk) 01:34, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Mike DeNiro[edit]

Hello. I'm just drawing your attention to the discussion at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Miscellaneous#Incorrect Info for Mike DeNiro. Best wishes, --Richardrj talk email 20:32, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Byford Dolphin[edit]

Please review the source provided before blanking out a full paragraph. Do you have any experience at all with dispensations, it is common knowledge & practice within the oil industry.Mark.T2009 17:52, 7 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark.T2009 (talkcontribs)

There was no reference in the paragraph you added. And please sign your posts on talk pages. You have been told that at least four times. DJ Clayworth (talk) 23:16, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
I have tried numerous times to persuade Mark.T2009 (talk · contribs) to add citations to reliable sources when he introduces text that may be controversial. He has now edit-warred for the second time in two weeks to place that unsourced paragraph in the article. I tried asking at WP:RSN about the reliability of the sources, with no result. I also tried a report over the last edit war at WP:AN3, but it was ignored. Can you give me any advice about the next steps to take? I can see the possibility of a WP:RfC/U or a report to WP:AN, but am unsure about whether anything will help to get him to understand what is required. Thanks --RexxS (talk) 01:42, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Test your World War I knowledge with the Henry Allingham International Contest![edit]

Henry Allingham in 1916.jpg

As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.

If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:35, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIV (October 2009)[edit]

The October 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:35, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

About EditiX page[edit]


My EditiX article page has been deleted why ??? There're some serious reference on it ?? Is it possible to restore it or asking for changing some parts of the article before ?.

Thank you.

Here a set of references writing about EditiX

Article of the university of Minho with Editix reference :

Article of the university of EDINBURGH with EditiX reference about TEI :

Mac article with Editix reference :

XSLT article with EditiX link in the Tools part :

Trainings :

Education portal with EditiX :

Local Wiki with EditiX reference :

Blog post :

Books :

XML: Visual QuickStart Guide :

Eclipse Book :

Java 5 French Book :

Java 6 French Book :

Ruby Book : —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:51, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

There is an article about this editor at Editix xml editor. It is currently being considered for deletion. You can express your opinion about it at the deletion discussion page (follow the links at the top of the page). Anyonecan express an opinion, and the decision will be taken by consensus of contributing Wikipedia editors. See [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion] for more information.
References to demonstrate the notability of the software should be added to the article, not here. However note that blogs are not usually consideredreliable sources. DJ Clayworth (talk)
Sorry to butt in, but the Afd was closed on 29 August as "redirect to List of XML editors". Today the redirect was undone by (talk · contribs). I've reverted that, but the redirect page probably needs protecting (as was suggested at the AfD). --RexxS (talk) 20:59, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


Very well; I was just trying to be a bit more careful as I've been told that some of my speedys were inappropriate. Thanks for notifying me-- fetchcomms 23:26, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I know, it can be a balancing act, and not everyone thinks the same, so you can't please everyone all the time. Don't worry, you are doing a good job. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:58, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Please re-delete this[edit]

I am not certain how this happened, but I was CSD tagging Why psp go is so cool, but it appears you were deleting it at the same time I was tagging it. Not only is it still online, but I somehow became tagged as its creator, which I am not. Can you please re-delete it? Thank you. Warrah (talk) 18:46, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Elvis Costello[edit]

Bloody hell, he's Norwegian after all ??! Seriously, a good point, well made. Maybe someone will stop arguing the toss for the sake of it, and either find a reference or finally give it a miss.

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:29, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

It's amazing how effective writing in all caps is. I intend to do it all the time from now on. </sarcasm>. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:37, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Article you deleted has been recreated - please review :)[edit]

Hi. The article T party which you deleted at 19:03GMT, 30th November 2009, has been recreated. I have no idea what the original text was, but could you please review it to ensure it isn't the same as the version you removed under CSD A7? Thanks Thor Malmjursson (talk) 19:08, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

The worst I could do is redelete it, but since it's now an AFD candidate that's not permitted. We'll let the AFD run it's course. Maybe there is something to it after all. DJ Clayworth (talk) 23:27, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Murder of James Bulger[edit]

The information i added to the Wikipedia page was accurate, factual and provable. Please do not revert edits like this, as it makes Wikipedia less useful. Deleting information simply because of your personal prefernce is not in the spirit of Wikipedia.

I have reverted your edit. Tramlink 16:51, 10 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tramlink (talkcontribs)

This is best discussed at Talk:Murder of James Bulger. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:59, 10 December 2009 (UTC)


Hi DJ,

What do you think of creating a disambiguation page at Insensibility (disambiguation)? It could include "Insensibility", Apathy, Unconsciousness, and Stupidity; all of these concepts may be referred to by the term 'insensibility'.

Neelix (talk) 16:54, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't think Apathy is applicable; otherwise do whatever you feel like. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:59, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi DJ,
Wiktionary provides "apathetic" as a synonym for "insensible", as does What is your objection to including Apathy on the disambiguation page?
Neelix (talk) 14:31, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
OK, I'll accept that. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:48, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Infinear deletion[edit]

  1. I modeled my article Infinear after this How did this article be classified as generic knowledge and Infinear become a plug?
  2. How does an article which lists ALL commercial products in an area (without stating the benefits of one) become an ad? When verizon ads trash at&t, there is no knowledge being added to the reader's mind. I listed EVERY product in that area. The reader is aware of the entire area from the article.
  3. How do I rephrase my article to make it compliant? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanjkris (talkcontribs) 18:28, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Your article was deleted for being an advertisement, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Advertising. Specific indications that the article was advertising include:
  • Addressing the reader directly:"You register your phone..."; "You can listen to unread emails...".
  • Instructing the reader what to do:"Add your personal preferences to this phone".
  • Providing contact numbers.
  • Listing only advantages of the system and no disadvantages.
Please make sure you have read Wikipedia:Neutral point of view thoroughly. Writing such a promotional article as your very first contribution to Wikipedia indicates that you may be connected with the product. If this is the case a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest arises, and you should refrain from writing about the product at all. At the very least, if you came to Wikipedia specifically to write about this product, then please don't. At least get the feel for Wikipedia by editing some other unrelated articles first. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:58, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

The Bordeaux Diligence[edit]

Greetings, DJC, and chapeau for your brilliant response on the Humanities Ref Desk. Shortlisted for the "Gee-I-wish-I'd-written-that!" award. A most welcome contribution to the RD endeavor! -- Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 08:09, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Please repost St. Pituas[edit]

That was not FICTION!!!

Will you please repost it because he was named a saint in 1990! unsigned comment by User:Riadse87.

Your article was barely coherent, completely unreferenced, and contained many highly unlikely claims. Saint Pituas gets no reliable Google hits. If you honestly believe that what you wrote about Saint Pituas was real, please post a link to a reliable source supporting this. Otherwise please don't waste our time. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:34, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XIV (November 2009)[edit]

The November 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 08:45, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Jingle Bell Rock[edit]

Yes, the new lyrics for Jingle Bell Rock that I added may have been copyright, so by all means, delete those. However the lyrics on there originally were not added by me.Dragoneye776 (talk) 16:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem. You're not being accused of anything, I'm just letting you know why the lyrics were removed. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:07, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Manchester United[edit]

Slow response admitedly, but re your comments added on the reference desk for the football club names question : just thought you might be interested in my comment after yours, namely that "Manchester United" are no longer "Manchester United Football Club" - the FC was legally dropped when the Glazers took over... It's been removed from the club logo/crest, which now only reads "Manchester United"... I think as far as official sources are concerned they trade now as "Manchester United Plc t/a Manchester United"... Just thought you might be interested... Gazhiley (talk) 12:34, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVI (December 2009)[edit]

The December 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:00, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

List of chelsea lately episodes[edit]

I have create a page for episodes of chelsea lately.Now I need help improving so can you help me and and send this measseage to other users.PAGE:List of Chelsea Lately episodes.--Anesleyp (talk) 03:22, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Misty of IHOP[edit]

Smerdis already restored it to a sandbox, and the author seems to be okay with that. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:43, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I've suggested that the author puts it back in the mainspace as soon as possible. It needs work, true, but there are many worse articles and the sooner it's in the main space the more people can collaborate on improving it. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:47, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I surely would not object to the article's restoration. The historic version has been moved to User:Travisharger/Misty Edwards; since restoring and moving it I removed all of the warning templates and commented out the categories; all that could be undone. I also closed the pending AfD as moot, since in the state I saw it, the article had already been deleted by Orangemike. That too could be undone. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 17:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)


Thank you for your message concerning my edit to the article on Christianity. You claimed that the "vast majority" of Christians believe that Jesus is God incarnate and that therefore this statement should be placed in a paragraph describing all Christians in general, rather than the following paragraph, which discusses differences between Christians. I do not know where you are getting your statistics from, but I believe you are mistaken. According to a 2002 survey published by the Barna Group (, only 79% of Christians in the United States believe God is one being in three separate and equal persons—God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son and the Holy Spirit. According to the 2001 US Census, section 79 (, 159,506,000 adults identify themselves as Christians. This would mean that, circa 2001-2002, 33,496,000 American Christians (21% of 159,506,000) were nontrinitarian. Now I realize that we are not exactly talking about the Trinity here, but by and large most nontrinitarians do NOT believe Jesus is God incarnate, the only significant exception being Oneness Pentecostals, and they are a small group indeed. So, by attributing the belief in Jesus as God incarnate to Christians in general, you are not only marginalizing about 1/5 of the Christian population, but also entire denominations. --Donbodo (talk) 22:55, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I've copied this, and replied, at Talk:Christianity. DJ Clayworth (talk) 23:27, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Message to DJClayworth, re The Russian, C.B.Lilly. I AM signing all my edits by typing four tildes like I was told. Perhaps once in a while I might forget, but I am sure I have been doing it most, if not all of the time. Please explain exactly what you mean, or where I have gone wrong. Thank You. I shall sign this off the same way I have been doing. The Russian. C.B.Lilly 03:23, 11 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Christopher1968 (talkcontribs)

OK, it looks as if the signature isn't having the desired effect. Policy says that your signature should include a link to your userpage, which yours doesn't. That's why User:SineBot flags your edits as unsigned. Signatures which don't include your real username as a link are misleading for readers. Please have a look at the questions on User talk:SineBot. DJ Clayworth (talk) 03:41, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

So let me guess....hmmm....Wikipedia lets the stick wielders like yourself...with a star beside there decide what gets put up on here and what gets deleted. Like I said. When I made the was true... as I am a relative of that person...but like you need to know that. So where was the vandilism??? This happens all the time on here from what I am reading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:43, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I will reply to this message at User talk: Clayworth (talk) 20:09, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs[edit]

Information.svg Hello DJ Clayworth! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 5 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 2,652 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

  1. David Auburn - Find sources: "David Auburn" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · wikipedia library
  2. Michael Green (humorist) - Find sources: "Michael Green (humorist)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · wikipedia library
  3. John Heilpern - Find sources: "John Heilpern" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · wikipedia library
  4. József Beck - Find sources: "József Beck" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · wikipedia library
  5. David Andrés Álvarez-Velázquez - Find sources: "David Andrés Álvarez-Velázquez" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · wikipedia library

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 05:48, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Tombrady00 (talk · contribs)[edit]

I noticed that you just blocked this account for 72 hours. Perhaps an indefinite block is in order? He's done zero productive edits and see his deleted contributions for other "articles" that he created. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 19:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I won't object if you think he deserves a longer block. DJ Clayworth (talk) 20:07, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Requesting your opinion[edit]

Hi. I've started a discussion here. (Actually, it's a restart of a prior discussion that went cold; you can just scroll directly down to the first post I made today in that section if you want.) Can you offer your thoughts? I think it's very important. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 01:58, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for help while authoring article[edit]

Thanks for the help in avoiding 'advertising' look of Mormon Channel article. I think I've cleared away content duplicative of the station's website. It was put in during the authoring process, being a totally new article. Drop me a line on the talk page for the article if you have more suggestions so the article is in the end more neutral. JamesAnderson2 (talk) 18:33, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'll try to look later. DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:34, 27 January 2010 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, DJ Clayworth. You have new messages at Neptunerover's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.


Just to let you know, you used rollback to revert a good-faith edit at Genericized trademark. --NerdyScienceDude :) (✉ click here to talk to me) 01:26, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

It may have been good faith, but it was also a straightforward mistake by the editor. I fixed it in the most expedient way possible. DJ Clayworth (talk) 01:31, 29 January 2010 (UTC)


Just wanted you to know that your work on the Amen page is appreciated. Thanks! Guedalia D'Montenegro (talk) 04:30, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

I hope my latest addition to the talk page wasn't too distracting. I am sorry for re-hashing old arguments or perhaps opening another avenue for this tired old "debate." Guedalia D'Montenegro (talk) 07:56, 4 February 2010 (UTC)


What you are doing on your user page is what i was doing before you lost your mind and deleted it

the user page is to show who you are and what you do

i have a series of competitions so i showed every20:05, 29 January 2010 (UTC)ACE$MAKER (talk)one

Reply at User talk:ACE$MAKER. DJ Clayworth (talk) 20:34, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Reverts to my edits of Plot Device[edit]

Would you mind explaining the reverts you made to my edits of Plot device? I thought I wrote reasonable descriptions for my edits, but you have reverted them with no comment.

Also, it seems to me that the article fairly heavily relies on the Nick Lowe article. It even refers to two phrases coined by Nick Lowe, but these are not in common usage. Who is Nick Lowe to be the sole spokesman for plot device? (talk) 21:17, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

I just noticed your response to me, so never mind that first comment. (talk) 21:19, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010)[edit]

The January 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:22, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

WTF - deletion of Oweekeno-Kitasoo-Nuxalk Tribal Council[edit]

The Oweekeno-Kitasoo-Nuxalk Tribal Council is a major tribal council in British Columbia; that seems to have been a redirect ,but to what your edit note in the deletion log didn't say; it could have been a lazy/irresponsible redirect to one of the constituent bands, perhaps, made by User:Esemono, who was doing all kinds of useless things with BC First Nations articles. This shouldn't have been deleted; you should either have raised it at WP:Canada or {{NorthAmNative}} if there was a problem with the redirect; see Category:First Nations tribal councils in British Columbia, which is now missing one of the items that should be there....Skookum1 (talk) 00:28, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

It seems it has been restored as I wrote that, by the bluelink above; but for good measure here's an official citation of its notability - its Indian and Northern Affairs Canada listing.Skookum1 (talk) 01:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Heinrich Gratz,[edit]

I notice that you deleted Heinrich Gratz, under WP:CSD#R3 although the redir was more than a year old and another editor had declined the speedy. See User talk:Basilicofresco DES (talk) 00:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

In fact you seem to have deleted quite a number of pages tagged WP:CSD#R3 by User:Basilicofresco and declined by User:Nancy. DES (talk) 00:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I just saw that. DJ, if you wished to delete the still tagged pages then that was your judgement call but to delete pages which I had already declined a speedy on was rather bad form wouldn't you say? Nancy talk 15:58, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Old comma redirects[edit]

I have read the discussion at User talk:Nancy#Declining redirects. I do not agree with the proposed deal, and plan to continue declining and removing the db tags from such redirects. It is my view that the speedy criteria ought to be interpreted utterly strictly. Moreover the main reason behind the "recently" part of WP:CSD#R3 is that there may be external sites linking to any long existent redirect. These redirs do no harm, there is no urgency to dealing with them. A single mass RfD discussion could establish consensus, or lack of it, for these deletions. Until such a discussion is held, i will ask you not to delete such redirects, and User:Basilicofresco not to tag them. DES (talk) 14:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi, DES. Do you have a suggestion as to how these article make Wikipedia better? DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:02, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
I didn't say that they do. But it is at least possible that their undiscussed deletion makes Wikipedia worse, if an outside link is using them. At any rate I think this is a case where Process is important applies. If you really think that this sort of thing should be speedy deleted, propose a change at WT:CSD. IAR is for actions that have consensus. Given that two editors have objected to these deletions i don't think these actions do. DES (talk) 17:11, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
That's a valid view. What I suggest you do is try to establish a consensus as to whether this is acceptable. Wikipedia talk:Speedy deletion may be appropriate, or possibly Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). I'll agree to hold off deletions for a few days if you like while that happens. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough. While it could technically be argued that the burden is on a person wanting to change policy, it is also true that the value of these pages is at best limited. I will take the initiative to raise this at WT:CSD, it can be publicized at the pump if that seems needed. DES (talk) 17:34, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
If you write something, I'll contribute also and we'll see what people say. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
I wrote something anyway, at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Redirects with trailing commas. Please feel free to contribute. DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:02, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
I have done so. I also created WT:CSD#Implausible but old redirects pointing to the VPP discussion. DES (talk) 20:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Deleted Sources[edit]

DJ, just wanted to alert you that an editor has deleted some of the sources you've posted. I've found at least one: [3]. For some reason the editor was under the impression that you were a paid advertiser. In any case, it may have been a good faith edit on his part, and I'm researching other deletions he's made in recent months. I also let him know that I've found a peer review from the Society of Biblical Literature and I understand it's been approved by the American Board of Catholic Bishops. Again, a simple mistake on his part, but you may need to research if he's deleted any other references you've made to this or other books.EGMichaels (talk) 18:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Kavale Mutt[edit]

Can you please (help me)move this Page to more appropriate name - Shri Gaudapadacharya Mutt. Reason Shri Gaudapadacharya Mutt is the Official name of the Monastery since it was founded in 7th Century AD. Kavale is the place where the Gaudapadacharya Mutt now exists ever since it was moved and reconstructed in this place in about 1630 AD, so it is known among disciples as Kavale mutt. Thanks --Ashok Prabhu (talk) 06:00, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem. I'll do it right now. DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:53, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you so much, that was a great help. --Ashok Prabhu (talk) 02:59, 21 February 2010 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, DJ Clayworth. You have new messages at RandomStringOfCharacters's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.


Thanks for the heads up. I am aware of the 3RR rule and hope I didn't break it. I did ask him to provide sources for the changes he was making, but sadly without much success. TheRetroGuy (talk) 15:02, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Agtred. I've just reverted back to your edit (before I picked up your message), but will leave the article alone now. Cheers TheRetroGuy (talk) 15:11, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Actually, it looks like you beat me to it so forget what I said about reverting back to your previous edit. I'm afraid this 3RR stuff can be a bit of a minefield - particularly as I did try to engage him in conversation to find out why he was making the changes. Life would be so much simpler if people just explained what they were doing. Cheers. TheRetroGuy (talk) 15:17, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Agreed. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:19, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Just an update on this. I've inserted a hidden note into the article which should hopefully prevent any future confusion on this issue. Hope that is all right. Cheers TheRetroGuy (talk) 09:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Need another set of eyes[edit]

DJ, could you take a look at the Genesis creation myth article? This thing's a mess, and there's this editor with some need to get rid of anything pertaining to creation ex nihilo. Even if you don't believe the text, that IS what most sources think the text is talking about.EGMichaels (talk) 12:38, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Polygamy in Christianity[edit]


I reverted to remove what I had removed before, namely "Never more than a minority view at any period in Christian history, it"

The article should be NPOV. My removal was not intended to indicate that Polygamy was predominant, but only because the the article already says that few Christian sects find it acceptable, and, because saying that it is a minority view makes it sounds like a matter of opinion or something. It was, and is a chosen lifestyle. It might be correct to say that it has not been, and is not widely practiced, which is something altogether different.

We are not making judgements about the topic, we are only trying to write accurately about the topic. The sentence that remains saying that it is not widely accepted says that well already.

Atom (talk) 14:46, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Please take this to Talk:Polygamy in Christianity. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:48, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open![edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 8 March 2010! More information on coordinatorship may be found on the coordinator academy course and in the responsibilities section on the coordinator page.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:20, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)[edit]

The February 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:15, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Barack Obama religion conspiracy theories[edit]

I responded to your message on Talk: Barack Obama religion conspiracy theories. Thanks for sharing your concerns; I've added a link to an academic study by the University of Georgia which measured the theories' prevalence in the United States. Stonemason89 (talk) 20:40, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Nike, Inc.[edit]

Hi, you semi-protected this article back in October 2008 with the summary "protection while we sort out a good version". I don't see anything on the article's talk page to hint that the article will be unstable if and when it were unprotected. Could you look into unprotecting this? Thanks, ThemFromSpace 08:42, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

NWW list[edit]

Thank you for helping out and fighting the recent vandalism on the Nurse with Wound list page. Very much appreciated! Mark in wiki (talk) 18:24, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Ruffed lemur[edit]

Ruffed lemur is the featured article on the main page. Is that not supposed to be protected? Woogee (talk) 19:28, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

No. Quite the reverse in fact. We make a point of not protecting the main article so as to emphasize the fact that Wikipedia is open to everybody. In fact if I had realized it I would not have even semiprotected it. I'm going to undo it now. DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:31, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
That's what I was trying to say.  :) Woogee (talk) 19:34, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
I see. In that case "yes", and I've just unprotected it. There was a bout of vandalism on it earlier, and while I've range-blocked the perpetrator he might find a way back. Watching would be good. DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:36, 16 March 2010 (UTC)


Could you please clarify of why you deleted my article "Matthews Asia Funds". I'm not a representative of the company like you think I am. Thanks! South Bay (talk) 05:06, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

This is true. However after you created the article it was extensively edited by User:Matthewsmkting. Your version also included some statements that are not appropriate for an encyclopedia. If you like I can restore your version for you to continue working on. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Coordinator elections have opened![edit]

Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinator elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:40, 18 March 2010 (UTC)


I've responded to you on my talk page. --Hnsampat (talk) 04:41, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Kindly check my message at discussion page of Shri Gaudapadacharya Mutt page for you. Thanks for all your help. --Ashok Prabhu (Talk) 16:44, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. I very much like the way this article has progressed from a short, sketchy beginning to become a well-written, comprehensive, informative article. This is exactly the way Wikipedia should work. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:53, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

You are being discussed at ANI[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Sex segregation text deletions. Thank you. Gavia immer (talk) 01:13, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Controversial command decisions, World War II[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Controversial command decisions, World War II. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Controversial command decisions, World War II. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:07, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Broadway Video Page Inaccuracies[edit]

At Broadway Video we have been trying to update this page of inaccuracies however our changes are consistently undone. Please refer to for accurate information. Many of the titles listed on this site were not or are no longer distributed by Broadway Video. Additionally, the history of our company, job titles, current editors and even our department names are incorrect. I highly suggest that those who insist on reverting this page back to its false form refer to the changes made by BVIntern in the last few weeks. Those changes are accurate.

If you insist that we cannot change it ourselves then perhaps you should. Bvintern (talk) 21:47, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)[edit]

The March 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

it's problem[edit]

Hello.   Yes, I noticed that.   Regarding that article.   (And then in my talk page history).   You thought at it first that it was "vandalism" or something, but minutes later realized that it really wasn't.   I guess maybe on first glance, you saw it that way.   But no, I do NOT ever put vandalism onto articles.   (And I always remove it when I see it done on articles.) But I understand.  It's cool.   By the way, I'm a little curious.   What made you realize that you were initially wrong?   What made you see, in that case, that it was not vandalism at all?   How did you realize it a little later?   Just curious... Sweetpoet (talk) 09:20, 15 April 2010 (UTC)


Hello DJ Clayworth, Can you please provide some tips and tricks to improve the page Shri Gaudapadacharya Mutt?. I thought you are the best expert I can check with to give me a direction. I tried to put together a info box by copying it from some other page, I think it can be improved further. I will wait to hear from you. --Ashok Prabhu (Talk) 11:36, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


Can you help me edit this page: to follow the same format as the distributors page, It is a lot of work and I would appreciate your help.

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)[edit]

The April 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:16, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Single Payer and the UK[edit]

I have added to the discussion on the | single payer page about the UK and how I do not find it to be accurate to label the UK as a single payer system. Please join back in on the discussion so we can discuss this further. Thanks! DanielZimmerman (talk) 15:37, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)[edit]

The May 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:01, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Ten Cate Palmeras[edit]

Good morning, I'm very sure that Ten Cate was not Panathinaikos Manager since 8th of December 2009 and his Palmeras is wrong.

Regards Telismad 14/06/2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Telismad (talkcontribs) 09:10, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Deleted Page[edit]

Hi DJ,

My name is Noah and I am with the band The New Up. I'm not sure since I'm new to Wikipedia and it's all a little confusing to me, but I believe you deleted the page that I had started for The New Up. Apparently article A7 was invoked as the reason, which states that there was no valid reason why the page should be included in the encyclopedia (I'm sure you probably already know that).

I am a total newby to wikipedia and was not aware that our page would be deleted for this or any other reason other than inaccurate or malicious content. I put that page up as a placeholder until I could find time to complete it not knowing that people trolled wikipedia looking for content that they felt was insignificant so they could delete it. Had I been aware of this, I would have completed the page much sooner so that it would reflect why The New Up is worthy of a wikipedia page and would not have been deleted.

That being said, I'm not sure how the decision is made as to what is significant and to whom. The New Up has been a fixture on the San Francisco music scene since 2005 and has played with bands the likes of John Langford from the legendary band The Mekons, Burning Brides, Umphrees McGee and more. They have headlined sold out shows in San Francisco at venues like The Independent and Bottom of the Hill, have toured the United States three times and have countless regional tours under their belt. They've released 2 full length albums and 2 ep's, have been featured on MTV countless times and had a recent CMJ top 200 release. They are about to release their third EP and their fifth body of work, their music is about to be made available in retail stores all over the US and Europe and they will be touring the US in the late summer and the EU in the late fall in support of the new release. They just released their second award winning video (find out more at, they recently won MTV's Best Bay Area Breakout band for 2010 and their unique sound has contributed to the San Francisco rock sound that the West Coast and the rest of the country has come to know.

In short, I would argue that The New Up does have a significant place in the history of the San Francisco music scene and is worthy of a wikipedia page. Perhaps you would agree knowing all of this but did not like the fact that the placeholder page I left up was so incomplete. Either way, I would respectfully request that if there is a way to undelete our page so I can finish it that you do that; or allow me to put up a replacement page that has complete information on The New Up that is satisfactory for you and wikipedia.

Thank you for taking the time to consider my email and I look forward to your response.


Noah Reid The New Up Thepoah (talk) 04:38, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010)[edit]

The Bugle.png

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LII (June 2010)
Front page
Project news
Project news

Catch up with our project's activities over the last month, including the new Recruitment working group and Strategy think tank


Milhist's newest featured and A-Class content


June's contest results plus the latest awards to our members


LeonidasSpartan shares his thoughts on how, as individual editors, we can deal with frustration and disappointment in our group endeavour

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:55, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIII (July 2010)[edit]

The Bugle.png

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LIII (July 2010)
Front page
Project news
Project news

New parameter for military conflict infobox introduced;
Preliminary information on the September coordinator elections


Milhist's newest featured and A-Class content


July's contest results, the latest awards to our members, plus an interview with Parsecboy


Opportunities for new military history articles

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:20, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Moonie (Unification Church)[edit]

Hi. Cirt and I has just started a discussion on the talk page about removing some of the extra examples and trivia from the page. Please join in if you care to. Thanks. Kitfoxxe (talk) 23:04, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIV (August 2010)[edit]

The Bugle.png

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LIV (August 2010)
Front page
Project news
Project news

The return of reviewer awards, task force discussions, and more information on the upcoming coordinator election


A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles, including a new featured sound


Our newest A-class medal recipients and this August's top contestants


In the first of a two-part series, Moonriddengirl discusses the problems caused by copyright violations

To change your delivery options for this newsletter please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:09, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

The Milhist election has started![edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,  Roger Davies talk 21:32, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LV (September 2010)[edit]

The Bugle.png

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LV (September 2010)
Front page
Project news
Project news

The results of September's coordinator elections, plus ongoing project discussions and proposals


A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles


Our newest A-class medal recipients, this September's top contestants, plus the reviewers' Roll of Honour (Apr-Sep 2010)


In the final part of our series on copyright, Moonriddengirl describes how to deal with copyright infringements on Wikipedia

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:15, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVI, October 2010[edit]

The Bugle.png
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:23, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVII, November 2010[edit]

The Bugle.png
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:16, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Biased editing of Technological Utopianism by Loremaster.[edit]

Due to your past contribution to Technological utopianism, you may currently want to help editing the Technological utopianism article because currently only one editor is contributing to the article. The Singularitarianism Article could also benefit from your help.

I feel Loremaster is editing Singularitarianism and Technological utopianism in a biased manner in accordance with his Save The Earth propaganda. Loremasters's ideology seems to verge towards Neo-Luddism. Here are the damming facts Loremaster has stated in discussion:

Loremaster says he is:

"...critical of techno-utopianism in all its forms."

Loremaster wants people to:

"...stop indulging in techno-utopian fantasies... that we can all focus on energies on saving the planet."

Loremaster sees his editing as a 'fight' and he states:

"Although I am convinced that the world is in fact heading toward an ecological catastrophe, I think it can be averted and my optimism makes me want to fight to do do just that." (talk) 11:50, 18 December 2010 (UTC)JB

  1. LOL
  2. Despite the fact that I openly admit to being a technorealist who is critical of techno-utopianism in all its forms, I have let never this point of view influence any of my edits or reverts of the Technological utopianism or Singularitarianism articles. On the contrary, I am the person most responsible for expanding the former article with content some would argue is “pro-techno-utopian” (i.e. passages from James Hughes' book Citizen Cyborg).
  3. I find it disgusting that would take comments I made out of context to falsely make it seem I see my editing of any article as part of my fight for the environment.
  4. In light of this outrageous act of bad faith, I will do everything in my power to get this jerk banned from Wikipedia.

--Loremaster (talk) 00:34, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVIII, December 2010[edit]

The Bugle.png

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here. BrownBot (talk) 20:37, 18 January 2011 (UTC)


Hi! I saw you were involved with a previous nomination for deletion of List of suicides in fiction, and felt you should be informed of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of suicides in fiction (3rd nomination). Thanks!--Yaksar (let's chat) 17:33, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Janos Boros for deletion[edit]

The article Janos Boros is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Janos Boros until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Iaaasi (talk) 12:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Volume LVIX, January 2011[edit]

The Bugle.png
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 15:33, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LX, February 2011[edit]

The Bugle.png
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:34, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011[edit]

The Bugle.png
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 01:35, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011[edit]

The Bugle.png
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:14, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011[edit]

The Bugle.png
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:24, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Suspension of admin privileges due to inactivity[edit]

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative privileges of users who have been inactive for one year, meaning administrators who have made neither any edits nor any logged actions in over one year. As a result of this discussion, your administrative privileges have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these privileges reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. RL0919 (talk) 20:19, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011[edit]

The Bugle.png
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 22:48, 16 July 2011 (UTC)


Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:The_Teaching_of_the_rapture_and_User:Vbsouthern. Thank you.ROBERTMFROMLI | TK/CN 08:23, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011[edit]

The Bugle.png
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 21:52, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011[edit]

The Bugle.png

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 17:45, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVII, September 2011[edit]

The Bugle.png

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 02:01, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVIII, October 2011[edit]

The Bugle.png

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 08:00, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIX, November 2011[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Military Historian of the Year[edit]

Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:54, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.

The Bugle: Issue LXX, January 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:52, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXI, February 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:41, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Recreated Two Loons for Tea[edit]

Hi, I recreated Two Loons For Tea that you deleted back in 2007 (?) for lack of notability. Since then, the band has gotten more critical recognition, and been nominated for "Best pop album of the year" as noted (and referenced) in the article. I provided a number of other relevant references. I hope this will be sufficient for notability. If not, please advise.


--Crandmck (talk) 00:44, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I have added you to Missing Wikipedians[edit]

Just to let you know (I am supposed to - this is what it says). Ottawahitech (talk) 00:03, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Military history coordinator election[edit]

The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the projectwhat coordinators do) 08:51, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Notice of change[edit]

Hello. You are receiving this message because of a recent change to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that if you are inactive for a continuous three year period, you will be unable to request return of the administrative user right. This includes inactive time prior to your desysopping if you were desysopped for inactivity and inactive time prior to the change in policy. Inactivity is defined as the absence of edits or logged actions. Until such time as you have been inactive for three years, you may request return of the tools at the bureaucrats' noticeboard. After you have been inactive for three years, you may seek return of the tools only through WP:RFA. Thank you. MBisanz talk 00:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

tom hanks picture[edit]

Hi, could you upload a new picture of Tom Hanks, the title one is kind of crappy. (talk) 16:28, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of LUDOGRAPHY[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article LUDOGRAPHY has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

"Ludography" is a neologism. Wikipedia is not a place to promote neologisms. This redirect attempts to legitimize the neologism by making it turn up on search engines.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Tarcil (talk) 04:46, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Gazeebow Unit speedy deletion - it lives![edit]

I would like to point out that the page I created, Gazeebow Unit, that someone deleted speedily, has been re-created by someone else and still exists. I guess it was notable after all. Hyacinth45 (talk) 12:41, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm glad they eventually got enough attention to become notable. DJ Clayworth (talk) 03:16, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Just wanted to show you something[edit]

Hi DJClayworth

I'm sorry to disturb, just wanted to show you my comment to you, that i posted on this site:

(regarding cellphones continuing to transmit even after turned off)

And I would like to know your opinion on those articles. I could not reply to your comment there because I have no reputation

Thanks and again sorry to send this thru here — Preceding unsigned comment added by Majemm (talkcontribs) 00:39, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election[edit]

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill [talk] 17:41, 16 September 2013 (UTC)


Winston Churchill, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Dana boomer (talk) 01:09, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election[edit]

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Your opinion is needed[edit]

Hi. Can you offer your opinion in this consensus discussion? I know you did this last month, but it wasn't a formal consensus discussion, but now it is. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 00:31, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history Wikiproject's Historian and Newcomer of the Year Awards are now open![edit]

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Voting for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year now open![edit]

Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators, TomStar81

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)