If you feel that I have reverted an edit or issued a warning in error, please Click Here and let me know. I am human, and I do make mistakes. Please don't interpret an error on my part as a personal attack on you. It's not, I promise. I ask you to simply bring it to my attention; I am always open to civil discussion. To keep discussions coherent, I will usually answer in the talk page where the first message was placed. If I left you a message on another talk page, please answer there: I will have it on my watch list. Thank you.
I can easily imagine that you've been told this many times - but just for the record: If you ever feel like doing something new and different on wiki, and all that's stopping you is having a nom for RfA, I'd be honored to put you up for the extra work. — Ched : ? 01:40, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the !vote of confidence, preparations are secretly underway for my second attempt, I'll poke ya when I'm ready. Mlpearc (open channel) 02:14, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
I saw that you are one of the top editors for Star Trek: The Original Series. Popular Science has resurrected an article they published in 1967 that includes production details for Star Trek that are not currently in this Wikipedia article. Might be worth extracting whatever can be worthwhile from there. The second and third paragraphs definitely look useful.--220.127.116.11 (talk) 23:23, 27 February 2015 (UTC)