Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 00:38, 5 March 2009

This user is a cricket pundit for the Times of India, the world's largest distribution daily English language newspaper. Details/disclaimer

This user is a cricket pundit for the Mint Wall Street Journal - [ http://www.livemint.com/articles/2008/12/05231402/A-captain8217s-legacy.html]

User:Blnguyen/UB

You are welcome to leave me a message or request admin action.

Blnguyen (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) has been an administrator since 29 May 2006 and an arbitrator since January 1, 2007.

FOR ANONS, I WILL DEFINITELY REPLY HERE. FOR EVERYBODY ELSE, THIS MAY BE HERE OR AT YOUR TALK PAGE. IF IT IS A MULTI-PARTY DISCUSSION, THEN DEFINITELY HERE

Archives

Requests

Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park - Genghiskhanviet (talk · contribs)
Economy of the Republic of Vietnam - Genghiskhanviet (talk · contribs)
Michigan State University Group - Kevin Forsyth (talk · contribs)
Nguyen Tri Phuong - Magnifier (talk · contribs)
Phan Thanh Gian - Magnifier (talk · contribs)
Vietnam War - Wandalstouring (talk · contribs)
Cyril de Zoysa - Pectore (talk · contribs)
User:Garden/WikiCup

Checkuser and sockpuppetry

File:Blnguyen banana.JPG

Deposit banana here to rouse the checkuser attendant!

Straw poll for selecting photos of cyclists at the 2009 Tour Down Under

Photos were taken at the team parade at the start of the 2009 Tour Down Under, January 18, 2008.

They were all very gentlemanly. Very dignified and genial. So were the crowd. Apart from the middle-aged man who stood net to the YellowMonkey and intentionally jabbed him in the ribs for about an hour. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 04:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The crowd favourites, judged by the decibel level of the applause, were in no particular order, Armstrong, Hincapie, Pereiro, Greipel, Voigt, O'Grady, Michael Rogers, McEwen, Baden Cooke, Bobridge (local boy). YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 04:59, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Voting section

Simply vote and comment as follows below the individual sections.

Comment (numbering pictures from 1, 2, 3 etc, left to right) and ~~~~

Poll: Allan Davis

versus File:Daviswins.jpg

No. 3 Might want to crop the bottom a little to reduce the prominence of blown whites. Durova^Charge! 07:09, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Number 2 -- Samir 07:10, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. per Durova Pdfpdf (talk) 09:12, 20 January 2009 (UTC) Close second place to #2. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:12, 20 January 2009 (UTC) Third place to #5 Pdfpdf (talk) 13:57, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. No way 3. What the hell is so funny? 1 is a frontal so it edges out 2. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 22:56, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 - 1 has some minor obscuring w/ the microphone. Cirt (talk) 02:48, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Bastique ^demandez 03:11, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 —Sandahl (talk) 23:00, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Sarvagnya 21:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
5 - hoooray! Privatemusings (talk) 00:21, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 for main pic, 5 is a great action shot for a captioned photo. Daniel (talk) 07:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
5, 1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Khoikhoi 04:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 for an infobox - everyone looks better happy. - Bilby (talk) 07:02, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 as first choice, 2 as second choice. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:33, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
5 Is good action shot PurpleView (talk) 07:14, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 and 5 -- Y not? 03:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3! vi5in^[talk] 23:43, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Andre Greipel

versus

No. 4 best view of the face. Durova^Charge! 07:15, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. better pose & expression. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:15, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Per Pdfpdf.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 22:59, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. per Brewcrewer (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 02:52, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 Bastique ^demandez 03:11, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Tinu Cherian - 06:35, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3--nicer pose.—Sandahl (talk) 23:02, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Number 3 -- Samir 07:40, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Looks more NPOV. Sarvagnya 21:03, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 - though I'm amused to see 'NPOV' abused in this context! ;-) Privatemusings (talk) 00:22, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Daniel (talk) 07:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 makes him looked the coolest. Khoikhoi 04:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3, for the coolness factor. - Bilby (talk) 07:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
First choice 3, second choice 4. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:35, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 Good Photo PurpleView (talk) 07:19, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Y not? 03:20, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 --vi5in^[talk] 23:46, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Cameron Meyer

(no previous picture)

No. 2 tossup; not crazy about either. Durova^Charge! 16:12, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Not crazy about either but have a strong aversion to semi-constipated looks. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 23:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 - 2 is the better of these. Cirt (talk) 02:58, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
0. Pdfpdf (talk) 16:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 --—Sandahl (talk) 23:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No preference. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Lesser of two evils. Sarvagnya 21:04, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 - but it's close. Privatemusings (talk) 00:22, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Daniel (talk) 07:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1, but cut off the bottom part. Khoikhoi 04:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 06:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1, with tighter cropping. - Bilby (talk) 07:20, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:35, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2, but it would need cropping. --vi5in^[talk] 23:47, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Christian Knees

versus

No. 2, better view of the face. Suggest cropping the sunlight out of the bottom and doing an auto levels. Durova^Charge! 21:10, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Looks weird in the other one.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 23:12, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 - Better expression. Cirt (talk) 03:00, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 1 per above. Durova^Charge!
1 —Sandahl (talk) 02:05, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Superior image quality. Sarvagnya 21:05, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. —97198 (talk) 07:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Privatemusings (talk) 00:23, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Daniel (talk) 07:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Pdfpdf (talk) 13:50, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3, except consider cutting off the bottom half of his body. Khoikhoi 04:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 06:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 - Bilby (talk) 07:21, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3-- Y not? 03:20, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 --vi5in^[talk] 23:48, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Daniele Nardello

versus

2. or 4. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:17, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Neither of 1 or 2; he's better looking than both pics. How about this one?--brew crewer (yada, yada) 23:19, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "this one" now appearing as #4.
2 is the best. Cirt (talk) 03:02, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 2 better facial expression. Durova^Charge! 04:52, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 —Sandahl (talk) 02:09, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Closer shot of face. Sarvagnya 21:06, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. —97198 (talk) 07:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 Privatemusings (talk) 00:23, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 Daniel (talk) 07:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4, absolutely. Khoikhoi 04:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 -- Samir 06:17, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:39, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 vi5in^[talk] 23:49, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: David Loosli

versus

2 - Best expression of the three. Cirt (talk) 03:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toss up between 2 and 3. The latter is a better pic but he looks better in the former. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:30, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 3 best view of the eyes. Durova^Charge! 05:29, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
0. Pdfpdf (talk) 16:21, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 —Sandahl (talk) 15:30, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Lesser of three evils. Sarvagnya 21:07, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Daniel (talk) 07:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 w/ some lighting fixes. Khoikhoi 04:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 06:16, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 --vi5in^[talk] 23:50, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Davide Malacarne

(no previous picture)

2. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:19, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 - Best framing of the bunch. Cirt (talk) 03:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. don't like the smile in 2. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 4 eyes open, less harsh profile than 1 or 2. Durova^Charge! 05:30, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Number 4 is best.—Sandahl (talk) 21:28, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Less grainy. Sarvagnya 21:08, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Daniel (talk) 07:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Khoikhoi 07:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 -- Samir 06:16, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
First choice 2, second choice 4, third choice 1. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:39, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 vi5in^[talk] 23:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Davide Vigano

versus

4 - Best full expression and view of face. Cirt (talk) 03:10, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 per above.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:33, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 4 per above. Durova^Charge! 05:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 —Sandahl (talk) 05:05, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
5. Clearer, sharper and frontal enough. Sarvagnya 21:10, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
5. Daniel (talk) 07:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
5 is the best. Khoikhoi 07:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
5 -- Samir 06:16, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 vi5in^[talk] 23:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Dries Devenyns

(no previous picture)

3 - I like the expression the best on this one. Cirt (talk) 03:11, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 per above.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:34, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 3 best lighting and best view of face. Durova^Charge! 05:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 best expression and lighting.—Sandahl (talk) 05:08, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Sarvagnya 21:10, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Daniel (talk) 07:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Pdfpdf (talk) 14:12, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

3. 2 makes him look like Golum. Khoikhoi 07:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

3 -- Samir 06:15, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Francesco Chicchi

versus

1 - Best framing, centering, and expression. Cirt (talk) 03:12, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 per above.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:36, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 1 Only one where his face is visible and not scowling. Durova^Charge! 05:33, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 best of the lot.—Sandahl (talk) 05:09, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. But dim the lights a bit. Sarvagnya 21:11, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Daniel (talk) 07:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
6 or 1? Pdfpdf (talk) 14:16, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
6. Khoikhoi 07:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 06:14, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Francesco Reda

(no previous picture)

2 - Face is less scrunchy in this one. Cirt (talk) 03:13, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 per above.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:36, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 2 per above. Durova^Charge! 05:34, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 —Sandahl (talk) 05:10, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Sarvagnya 21:12, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Daniel (talk) 07:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
0. Pdfpdf (talk) 14:17, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Khoikhoi 07:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 06:13, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Francis van Londersele

2 - But might want to crop to just the head/shoulders, the hand is a bit bright/blurry. Cirt (talk) 03:14, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 per above.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:37, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 1 Less open expression, but better lighting and focus. Durova^Charge! 05:35, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Durova.—Sandahl (talk) 05:11, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Lesser of two evils. Sarvagnya 21:13, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1, I guess. Khoikhoi 07:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 06:13, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Frank Hoj

versus

2 - Looks confident in this one. Cirt (talk) 03:14, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Frontal.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:38, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 2 per above. Durova^Charge! 05:36, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 —Sandahl (talk) 05:33, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Khoikhoi 07:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 06:13, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Frederick Willems

1. Although 3 is a better pic, he looks better in 1. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 2 the only one with tolerably even lighting. Durova^Charge! 05:37, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 because of best lighting.—Sandahl (talk) 05:34, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 is the lesser of 3 evils. Khoikhoi 07:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 06:13, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:38, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: George Hincapie

versus

4. Although there's a hint of a smile in 3, 4 is brighter. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:41, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 3 more dynamic composition, better facial expression. Durova^Charge! 05:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 brighter —Sandahl (talk) 02:12, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 for the profile pic, but you might consider including the last one in the article as well. Khoikhoi 07:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 -- Samir 06:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
First choice 5, second choice 4. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:37, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Y not? 03:21, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Gert Steegmans

versus

2. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:21, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. frontal.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:50, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 1 best view of face. Durova^Charge! 05:40, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 best angle on face.—Sandahl (talk) 05:35, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Khoikhoi 07:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 sorry dude -- Samir 06:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:36, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Luis Leon Sanchez

2 and 3 were the same - 2 replaced with new photo.

3 is wee clearer then 2. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 06:01, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Maciej Bodnar

1 Bastique ^demandez
1. The other at Traffic Cops.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:05, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 06:00, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Y not? 03:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Mario Aerts

2. (However, the lass in #1 has a nice smile ... ) Pdfpdf (talk) 09:34, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Bastique ^demandez
1. Hello! Are you guys blind? Did you not notice the person behind him?--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Pardon? What did you think "(However, the lass in #1 has a nice smile ... )" was about? Pdfpdf (talk) 14:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Didn't notice. Musta been distracted by sumtin :D --brew crewer (yada, yada) 17:44, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 —Sandahl (talk) 01:51, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. —97198 (talk) 07:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4, easy -- Samir 06:00, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Mark Renshaw

2 better lighting, pose Bastique ^demandez
2 per above. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:12, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2—Sandahl (talk) 01:23, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:59, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Markus Eichler

2 better quality Bastique ^demandez
2. The other pic might be placed here.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:14, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 —Sandahl (talk) 01:52, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:59, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Martin Elmiger

2 Bastique ^demandez
2 notwithstanding the microphone, it's clearer. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:19, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 —Sandahl (talk) 01:53, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:59, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Martin Muller

2 Both are good but the lighting is better in 2 than 1 Bastique ^demandez
2. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:20, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 it's a bit brighter.—Sandahl (talk) 01:54, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:58, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Mathew Hayman

versus

3 Best expression Bastique ^demandez 03:25, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. I actually suspect his expression doesn't really change. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:28, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 is best —Sandahl (talk) 01:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 05:58, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Mathieu Drujon

1 Great smile Bastique ^demandez 03:24, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 per above.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 —Sandahl (talk) 01:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:58, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Matteo Bono

2 Obstruction in 1 Bastique ^demandez 03:24, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Don't like the teeth-situation in 1.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:33, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 —Sandahl (talk) 01:56, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:57, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Matteo Tosatto

3. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:28, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 Great shot --Bastique ^demandez 03:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Looks better in this one.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:35, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 05:53, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Matthew Goss

2 1 is better quality but that tongue ruins it. Bastique ^demandez 03:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 per above. 1 might be more a good pic for this article.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:37, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 per Bastique —Sandahl (talk) 01:57, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 despite tongue -- Samir 05:53, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Matt White (cyclist)

1 Dimensions are terrible on 2. Bastique ^demandez 03:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This guy obviously does not like yellow monkeys.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:38, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
0 as per brewcrewer Pdfpdf (talk) 15:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:52, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
crop 2. -- Y not? 03:25, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Maxim Iglinskiy

2 Bastique ^demandez 03:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. The other is too in-your-face.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:43, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 looks a little like a mugshot but it's OK.—Sandahl (talk) 01:59, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:52, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Michael Rogers

1. It is a different pose from nearly all the others. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. This is a wonderful shot. Bastique ^demandez 03:21, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 nice shot of profile.—Sandahl (talk) 01:26, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:51, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Mickael Buffaz

1 Best expression. Bastique ^demandez 03:20, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. per above.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:51, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Nicki Sorensen

3 best expression Bastique ^demandez 03:20, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:48, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:51, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy makeover -- Y not? 03:26, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Nicolas Portal

3. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Best face shot. Bastique ^demandez 03:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toss up. Looks better in 1 but 3 is a better pic.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Nicolas Roche

1 better lighting of the two Bastique ^demandez 03:18, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Baseball cap hides too much of the other one.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Durova^Charge! 00:44, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 05:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Nikolay Trusov

2 Eyes are closed in 1 Bastique ^demandez 03:16, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 per above.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Cirt (talk) 05:43, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Oscar Pereiro

3 Bastique ^demandez 03:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3–Capricorn42 (talk) 05:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:54, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3, but I would erase that terrible vertical line with Gimp or Photoshop.--Unai Fdz. de Betoño (talk) 09:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 05:41, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Pablo Lastras

1 Bastique ^demandez 03:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, 1 –Capricorn42 (talk) 05:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:55, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Cirt (talk) 05:41, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:49, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Paul Sherwen

2.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:55, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Durova^Charge! 06:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Cirt (talk) 05:40, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:49, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Perrig Quemeneur

Both are same images –Capricorn42 (talk) 05:48, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. ~~No, I changed my mind. Now 2~~. Again 1.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:57, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
0. Hey Brewcrewer, what about #3?? (They all look constipated to me.) Pdfpdf (talk) 14:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Marginal preference for 3. Durova^Charge! 06:53, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
no preference, all the same. ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 05:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 05:49, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Perrig Quemeneur - take 2

Hmmm. Hard one. Either #0 or #2 Pdfpdf (talk) 14:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 per above.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:42, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Durova^Charge! 06:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Cirt (talk) 05:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Pieter Jacobs

3. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:38, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 06:01, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 Durova^Charge! 06:13, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 Cirt (talk) 05:37, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 05:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Rein Taaramae

Don't like either, but 2 might be good for Cracking joints.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 06:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Durova^Charge! 06:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. —97198 (talk) 07:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 05:37, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Phil Liggett

2–Capricorn42 (talk) 05:47, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 06:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Durova^Charge! 06:06, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 05:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:47, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Remy di Gregorio

2–Capricorn42 (talk) 05:47, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. The other at overbite.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 06:06, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Crop the bottom third and adjust the levels. Durova^Charge! 05:30, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 00:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:47, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Rene Mandri

2–Capricorn42 (talk) 05:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 06:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Durova^Charge! 05:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 00:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:40, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Rick Flens

2 –Capricorn42 (talk) 05:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 06:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Durova^Charge! 05:24, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 00:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:40, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Ronny Scholz

3 Although the background it too bright, the profile and smile are nicer.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 06:16, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 with levels adjustment. Durova^Charge! 05:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Cirt (talk) 00:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 05:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Rony Martias

1. Less scrunchy.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 06:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 better lighting, equally grimaced expression. Durova^Charge! 05:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 00:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Scott Davis (cyclist)

versus

0. Don't like either much, but both are MUCH better the the photo on Scott Davis (cyclist)!! Pdfpdf (talk) 14:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- (And what's he doing using our Scott's name?!) Pdfpdf (talk) 09:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Gun to my head, I would go with 2.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the existing photo. Durova^Charge! 05:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. —97198 (talk) 07:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Cirt (talk) 00:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3, sorry -- Samir 05:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3-- Y not? 03:27, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Sean Yates

1.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Durova^Charge! 05:10, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 00:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:38, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Sergey Klimov

3 –Capricorn42 (talk) 05:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:45, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 Durova^Charge! 05:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 23:59, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 05:38, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Sergio de Lis

1, –Capricorn42 (talk) 05:44, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:45, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Durova^Charge! 05:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 23:58, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 --Unai Fdz. de Betoño (talk) 21:32, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:37, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Stef Clement

versus

3. The least frowning.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:47, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 Durova^Charge! 05:08, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 Cirt (talk) 23:56, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 -- Samir 05:36, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Thierry Bricaud

1 –Capricorn42 (talk) 05:43, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:47, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Durova^Charge! 05:08, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Cirt (talk) 23:55, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:34, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Thomas Rohregger

versus

I think we should stick with the current pic.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:49, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Current pic. Durova^Charge! 04:59, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. —97198 (talk) 07:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 Cirt (talk) 23:54, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Sorry dude -- Samir 05:34, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Timmy Duggan

Nah.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:50, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Durova^Charge! 04:58, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. —97198 (talk) 07:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 23:53, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:34, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Timothy Gudsell

1 –Capricorn42 (talk) 05:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Better smile.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:56, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 for the lighting. Durova^Charge! 04:53, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 23:53, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:33, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Tom Leezer

It's really a toss-up. This is the second toughest decision I've ever made (there was this donuts incident), but I guess I'll go with 1.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:59, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Durova^Charge! 04:52, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, it's twins...wait, nevermind. 1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 23:51, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:29, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Travis Meyer

0. (Did he come last?) Pdfpdf (talk) 12:23, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Durova^Charge! 04:51, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. —97198 (talk) 07:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 23:51, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 -- Samir 05:28, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 -- Y not? 15:41, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Vitaliy Buts

1 (cropped) –Capricorn42 (talk) 05:40, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nice smile! I like all three. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:21, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Durova^Charge! 04:50, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 Cirt (talk) 23:50, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 05:28, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Vittorio Algeri

2 -- Tinu Cherian - 06:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2 Durova^Charge! 04:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 —Sandahl (talk) 04:13, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Cirt (talk) 23:50, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:27, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Volodymyr Zagorodniy

3. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:52, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Tinu Cherian - 06:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 Durova^Charge! 04:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 23:49, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 -- Samir 05:26, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Wesley Sulzberger

1 -- Tinu Cherian - 06:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Durova^Charge! 04:47, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 —Sandahl (talk) 04:12, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 23:48, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:26, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Willem Stroetinga

Number 1 -- Samir 07:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 –Capricorn42 (talk) 05:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 --Unai Fdz. de Betoño (talk) 21:52, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Durova^Charge! 04:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 —Sandahl (talk) 04:11, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 has better expression. Cirt (talk) 23:45, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Yoann Offredo

Number 2 -- Samir 07:17, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Tinu Cherian - 06:37, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
0. Pdfpdf (talk) 00:16, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Durova^Charge! 04:39, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 —Sandahl (talk) 04:10, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. —97198 (talk) 07:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 but crop it to head/shoulders. Cirt (talk) 23:44, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Alison Carle

Added at the request of Brewcrewer (talk · contribs) and Pdfpdf (talk · contribs)

1. Obviously. I had some suggestions for the other pic but I'm trying to be a little classy these days.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:39, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:19, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- (Given Brewcrewer's new found predilection towards trying to be a little classy, my safest option is to attempt to refrain from putting my foot in my mouth by making no comment. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:19, 22 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]
- P.S. YellowMonkey: Thanks for the additional photos. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:19, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Durova^Charge! 04:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 —Sandahl (talk) 04:10, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 if you can crop it. Cirt (talk) 23:44, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Uno -- Samir 05:25, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Invincibles issues

Other stuff

Your requested photos

Đài kỉ niệm thánh tử đạo ngày 8-5-1963
Chùa Từ Đàm
Chùa Từ Đàm
Chùa Diệu Đế
Cầu Bến Ngự

DHN (talk) 16:17, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for teeing it up YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 02:17, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

??

OK, I give up. Why have I been had? Do they not call it the American war? If so, the lead sentence in the vietnam War article needs editing. Mdw0 (talk) 11:01, 24 February 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Only the communist government propaganda does that. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:59, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't sound very neutral. Fact is, in the context of history there is a victorious socialist government and also one or two victorious socialist Vietnamese, so what they call their wars is relevant. You cant edit out history just because you disagree with the politics of the figures involved. Incidentally, I say socialist because communism is actually a utopian impossibility that isnt self-sustaining. All the extreme left wingers degenerate into either more practical socialists or very temporary murdering nutters. Anyway, I think the name American War is an interesting reminder that not everyone has the same POV as the Americans. I've gotta say that once I heard that name I thought it was obvious - what else would they call it? I've heard more than one person from Vietnam remind me that the war is referred to as part of a series of wars by the Vietnamese, from both sides of politics, but of course that's hardly a valid Wiki reference. When I get a decent citation I'll put it back in. Mdw0 (talk) 03:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Everyone calls it the Vietnam War inside VN and outside, except for communist party textbooks. Ask Kauffner (talk · contribs) about this. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 01:36, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then you ought to edit the first sentence in the Vietnam War article. But just to follow the logical outcome of your comment - if its in the communist party textbooks, then it would be referred to as such by the Communists and Communist Party supporters in Vietnam. Which would mean thousands if not millions who use it. Correct or not??? Mdw0 (talk) 03:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Yes, but academic usage is the determinant on Wikipedia, and VCP textbooks don't qualify. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 08:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Seraphimblade/Bollywood

Thank you for protecting the Bollyarticle and blocking this user.

On a more lightened note, do you know when the IPL games start? I hope Zinta does not end up crying in the last match LOL... BTW, have you seen Slumdog Millionaire? Shahid • ^Talk2me 06:45, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

April 19 IIRC. I think there's a pretty good chance that she will end up crying again this year, perhaps earlier than the semifinals. I think Rajasthan, Chennai and Delhi will be leading the way again. Some of the Rajasthan players like Ravindra Jadeja, Siddharth Trivedi and Yusuf Pathan have improved even more after working with Warne in the first IPL, Delhi will have Vettori for the whole season this year and got some cunning buys of uncapped Australian players before the auction, CSK bought Flintoff. IIRC Punjab got a bit lucky in one game against Delhi where it was rained out after about 3 overs, and because they were ahead after three overs they won. And another one where VRV Singh lost the plot against Mumbai in the last over and luckily for them when Mumbai needed a quick single the batsman hit it straight to Yuvraj and he jumped on the stumps. They'll probably work out Shaun Marsh as well. Still funny that a billionaire and proven businessman like Mallya bought a ridiculously cosnervative Test team and got smacked everywhere. I would have thought SRK and PZ would have been the ones more prone to silly decisions, but there you go. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:53, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No I haven't watched Slumdog, or any other movies at all recently, except some random patter on free to air TV. They haven't had Bollywood month (only about 4 per year) for about a year now, and they keep on repeating the same ones, including a few annoying SAK ones. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:53, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I hope she doesn't cry if she doesn't get Canada's academy award. She's nominated for Genie Award for Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role.

That's where you draw your Bollywood awareness from...! Are there any Bollywood films you liked in particular?

And you won't believe this, Bollywood now has its own Razzie Awards, nominations announced... [1]... Shahid • ^Talk2me 10:17, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't watched many. In order of watching ... Asoka (ridiculous history, a soap, pretty silly), DDLJ (good, with obligatory slapstick flirting etc....), Hum Tumhare Hain Sanam (big thumbs down, although Salman playing the popstar, as always playing himself rather than the character amused me), Devdas (very boring), Karan Arjun (good, mainly because it wasn't so serious, it took its ridiculousness in its stride), Baazigar (good although the blood was a bit much), The SRK/SAK/PZ in USA one (stopped after half an hour), Main Hoon Na (ridiculous, a 40-yo student), Don't Say A Word (Bachan and Rai one - cheesy as), Hil De Chuke Sanam (too pompous, notwithstanding the ridicolous slapstick by Salman in the first half hour), an adaptation of a famous Bengali novel with SAK as some rich businessman's son who demolishes the wall separating him and his love (down with SAK), Lagaan (the best), Mangal Pandey (good, although I was told it was fake history afterwards)....Basically AK is good, Salman is good for slapstick, SRK is only worth watching with Kajol, they were good together. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I nominate SAK's pink shirts....YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HAHAHAHA!!!! Oh my, you saw some of the uper-commercial films and most of what you mentioned I personally hate, though I like Baazigar, Kal Ho Naa Ho, Lagaan and DDLJ. Have you not seen Salaam Namaste? I find it light and fun and I really thought you saw this, don't know why. I don't like SAK films. The old ones particularly suck. But he has now improved tremendously, Omkara and Hum Tum were good. I do like SRK and SK films though. Salman, because he is always playing himself LOL and I liked his work in Jab Pyaar Kisise Hota Hai. SRK's great (I also HATE Asoka!!! And Devdas was a real boredom I agree), if you liked his Baazigar (watch Anjaam, he is even worse in it), Karan Arjun (oh I don't like it, I liked it as a child) and DDLJ, who knows you may also like Yes Boss, Kuch Kuch Hota Hai (+Kajol LOL). And if you liked Lagaan, you may like Swades made by Gowariker and Chak De India. I like Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa and Pardes (film) of SRK...

Don't Say a Word? That's soo bad. I'm really sorry you had to go through this. Well, nice to know that you liked some. Shahid • ^Talk2me 08:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Salaam Namaste - how could I forget. Yes I did see that. A totally crude/slapstick version of DDLJ with no charm, eg the social difficulties of Simran's conservative family situation. SAK and the American Pieification of Bollywood. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 08:28, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh have you not watched Dil Chahta Hai and Rang De Basanti? I'm almost sure you'll like them. Shahid • ^Talk2me 08:27, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure you're talking about Salaam Namaste? How is it a version of DDLJ? I liked the as I found it funny in its way. It is by no means a great film, but I enjoyed it and I liked SAK and PZ in it. Shahid • ^Talk2me 09:00, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I was. The one in Melbourne with SAK as the cook. Not so much with the family situation, but with the love-hate slapstick type thing of DDLJ. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok!! LOL!! This is that kind of a film which is either liked or hated to death. LOL... But I'm in the middle: Not great but entertaining. If you are reminded of any other Bollyfilms which you have watched let me now... I wanna know LOL.. Shahid • ^Talk2me 14:27, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vietnam translation

Hi buddy. I've begun going through the Districts of Vietnam. I have decided to create some merged regional templates instead of the seperate provincial ones for now to connect more together. However the provincial templates will be filled out with the communes of each province and any other topics etc over time so they will still be kept but just not used in the district articles. I would be very grateful if you could still consider developing these sub stubs on the districts of Vietnam as something of a priority and practically the whole country is missing on here. I've begun connecting the wikipedias with tags, if you could help translate any articles from Category:Articles needing translation from Vietnamese Wikipedia this would be useful. Thanks. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 16:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this might take a while. There was a table somewhere on the net with a list of all the districts with popn and area size. To get it direct from teh govt website you need to go to this interactive map thing which takes about 2 minutes to load per picture. Thanks for your work. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've started Communes of Vietnam. Perhaps you could find a source to support the number of communes. A number in english say around 1000, one says 1003 yet the Vietnamese wiki says 9109. Also any government lists of communes and population etc would be very useful. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 17:42, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely closer to the second number. The # districts is about 500 and there are many more than two communese per district. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah thats what I thought apparently there is 436 communes in one province alone, the highest. Thanks Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 10:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anstey Hill Recreation Park

Hi and thanks, your help so far and any further is wonderful....when you have time from the many great articles on the physics of historic Vietnamese cricket matches you have on the go. - Peripitus (Talk) 03:18, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, all the best, I should think about it some more. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppets?

Hi YM, Could you please take a look at Talk:British_India#Sockpuppets.3F? Thanks. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 04:13, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying. Please see this subpage of my user page for some answers to your questions. I will be compiling more stats there. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 15:03, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed, also he has Umar Zulfikar Khan (talk · contribs) and two others... what were they called? YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:53, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dzw49 (talk · contribs) and RF75 (talk · contribs) YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 01:26, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! This is amazing. To think that so much time was wasted not only by these sockpuppets but also by us: user:RegentsPark, user:Nichalp, user:Philip Baird Shearer, me and a few others!! Thanks a million for working on this! (I had my suspicions about Umar Zulfikar Khan when he turned up on the talk page, but he seemed more knowledgeable than the others. There is one other person, user:Doorvery far, who has also sided with these folk on Talk:British Raj, see here for examples of him and Xn4 supporting each other. You are welcome to investigate this at your convenience ... but he might be innocent as well. Thanks again. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 02:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most people on Wikipedia, including me, are pretty unsuspicious of socks, although some lodge RFCU for any guy that disagrees with them. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have a lot of experience with sockpuppets, so I would appreciate your advise on what if anything should be done about user:UmarZ (contributions) given my actions in baring User talk:Xn4#Topic ban on British India and other similar articles (see this and that edits in particular). --PBS (talk) 14:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's him again. It needs a block. you can do something with Xn4 if you feel necessary, or ask someone else. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

history of education in India

I was planing a rewrite of history of education in India since late February but could not get to it earlier due to time constraints. I have rewritten it recently. Don't forget to take a look and thanks in advance for your time :) JSR 0562 19:07, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

rfar you might want to help with

Hi, a dispute where your name has come up a few times is now at RFAR. Maybe you can advise us? John Vandenberg ^(chat) 09:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

?? Well, I haven't edited the article since Skatergal popped up except to lock. I think the edits are fairly self-explanatory. As for the lack of interest from WT:INB, not entirely surprising. AM I not supposed to intervene, or am I supposed to. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:BlueHulk

Hey Bln!

I would like to report that I strongly suspect (well, almost sure) BlueHulk (talk · contribs) is a sock puppet of Al Deniro (talk · contribs), who had many other sock puppets like Martineejames (talk · contribs) and others. All these accounts were blocked indefinitely for vandalising the Bollywood article and The List of Top Bollywood Films articles.

I'm not sure if you will be able to get it via checkuser because their IP is changing everytime. What I can assure is that the IP begins with "117...". Shahid • ^Talk2me 16:27, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. But there is something even more frustrating called 91.130.91.92 (talk · contribs). As you know, A. R. Rahman won two Oscars. His lead included a mention of awards he won, Filmfare Awards, National Awards, Golden Globe, BAFTA, Oscars. This user started removing Filmfare Awards (which is one of the most veteran and prominent ceremonies in India) claiming they are not notable, reverting everyone who even dared to mention it. And he himself started adding Tamil Nadu State Film Awards, which is a relatively new and even more non-notable ceremony.

Well, Jagged started a discussion about this anon on the talk page. The anon just repeated that it is POV and that Filmfare is just stupid and so on and on and on. Jagged cited sources proving the importance and prominence of Filmfare. In fact, it is well known that National Film Awards and Filmfare are the most prominent film functions.

But it doesn't help, and despite warnings, consensus and obvious facts, he keeps reverting it all the time. He says on the talk, "I will never allow it to be on this page" or something... He clearly does it because of POV issues, which you may already guess (I think you were involved quite a lot with Indian editors).

Please help me with that. BTW, the article has been extensively edited and vandalised since his Oscar win fwiw. Shahid • ^Talk2me 07:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WOW that was fast, thank you. Let's see how long it takes until account socks of these anons turn up LOL. Shahid • ^Talk2me 08:25, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And I now get a warning from another anon, 195.64.23.130 (talk · contribs). I think both these anons already have accounts judging by their edits. But it will be clearer if a registered user starts doing similar edits. Can it be checked? Shahid • ^Talk2me 08:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't I tell you? Rajapalani (talk · contribs) - the first sock. I'm sure. Shahid • ^Talk2me 08:37, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rajapalani has been logging out and doubling up on his IP, not the 195. You can remove the warnings of course. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh God! Is this Clubover a sockpuppet? I can't believe. Thank you for taking time to chack it. Well Rajapalani (talk · contribs) just amazes me with his nonsense edits. He removes the Filmfare Awards completely. I've warned him. Let's see.

The fact is that this issue does not even need a consensus. Filmfare is the most prominent and veteran film ceremony in India along with National Film Awards. That's a fact. This user claims that State awards are more notable, which is a joke (a ceremony that has been held for some 10 years. Merely has general notability but no particular prominence whatsoever. But anyway, his user page clearly shows why he does that. Do you guess?). Jagged cited sources for Filmfare being prominent, and I offered to give even more and many other reliable sources from internet and books. I asked him to find some for State Awards as well. What do you say?

Are you sure Bollywood-Turk (talk · contribs) is not a SP? (come on, a newly registered user who knows everything about how Wikipedia works, protection, signatures, and as he logs in he instantly visits the ARR page? LOL) Shahid • ^Talk2me 14:43, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perry

This edit may be of interest. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 22:42, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And see here as well. Hope you don't mind some wider discussion. I am always nervous about BLPs where there has been claims of defamation (although I think there is no evidence of defamation in the article) and thought it wise to get a broader perspective. Cheers, Mattinbgn\^talk 00:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. I don't think it is defamation. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I borrowed the book through an inter-library loan. Our library here, while shiny and new, is very small and I had to send away for it. ILLs only give me a month and by the time the article was reviewed I was on my second letter from the library looking for the book to be returned. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 04:21, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How many cricket books are down there. The suburban library tends to have too many light-hearted cricket books (anecdote type), or Perry. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not a lot, I need to order in most books that I am after. It does have some Perry books as well; his book on Monash is in the recommended section! My personal cricket library would be around 100 times bigger than the town one. It is otherwise well appointed for facilities however and it has the only wireless hotspot in town. Will keep an eye on the attack article. Plenty of conspiracies on the web at the moment. Take a look at Pakpassion for lots of speculation (and lost of refutation as well, to be fair.) -- Mattinbgn\^talk 09:53, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Districts and provinces

User:Dr. Blofeld asked me to help out - I think what he wants to do is lay the groundwork for some extensive work on Vietnamese towns and villages. Consequently, "X District" because "X town" also exists; he'll expand the initial title into a disambig page. In cases where the town and district are codependent, I tried to avoid moving over to "X district" - I may have missed one or two, though, sorry. --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 03:12, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So you're saying that the moves to "District" everywhere are deliberate? YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. That's how I was requested to do them, anyhow. --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 03:41, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point. As I say, I was requested to help out; I had assumed some sort of discussion had already happened. --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 05:30, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Officially the name is in Vietnamese, obviously district does not come after it. Moving them to the correct Vietnamese names would seem appropriate but the reason why it was moved to district is because yes I intend starting the communes once I have sorted out the infoboxes on the district. Often the districts, communes and main village will shyare the same name, this is why I moved to district and yes also in consistency with the naming of the provinces ... Province. Ar eyou telling me this is incorrect also?. The difference is there are communes and towns which share the same name. There are no towns called "California". Surely you wouldn't recommend moving back to the plain name and making it confusing with the main cities? Anyway for starters the communes will be extracted from Vioetnamese wikipedia where naturally they are in the official naming so it makes things simpler later. I'm rather surpised that you've said anything as you left me the impression you're not interested in these districts anymore, or perhaps just too busy. Yes I do intend starting the communes but not like with France. They will at least have an infobox and map and some data if possible. KNow of a website? Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 17:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DHN has the link to the government website maps which have the area and population at least. You can ask him if they have a tabulated online version of census with % males/females/literacy and all that. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Normally if there are different communes with the same name, they are in different provinces or districts so Chau Thanh, An Giang or whatever is needed, so the usual dabs are only needed for cities having hte same name as the province, but that's no big deal. Consistency is the main thing and unless a bot is around it isn't worth doing by hand to move them. I am a bit busy, although the prospect of doing all the districts properly is rather daunting. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan attacks

I wonder what will happen to the 2011 Cricket World Cup? I wouldn't be to keen on going to either Bangaldesh or Sri Lanka. With the Mumbai attacks, no where is safe. I hear the 4th umpire is in a critical condition. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 09:42, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the Pakistani matches won't be going ahead, now that India won't go there, that changes one vote against them and the Champions Trophy was already voted down last year anyway. The BCCSL are broke and get handouts from the BCCI and the BCCI will probably cut off their money if they won't vote against Pakistan now, if they weren't already staying away. The Tamil Tiger blast in 1996, well the SL govt were trying their best to stop them, but as far as Pakistan goes, there is a rather large elephant in the room as to Pakistan funding Islamists. The other countries aren't going to sit there and gift Pakistan all their group matches by forfeit. Maybe Bangladesh might go but Pakistan should beat them anyway (95% chance). I don't think the other countries should be cancelled, it isn't nice but the murder rate in RSA is the highest in the world, and the % chance of a terrorist death compared to car accidents and ordinary criminals is much lower, and the other three governments are doing their best. With no checks whatsoever at Australian cricket grounds on training, and pretty perfunctory ones on game day, there's nothing stopping them travelling overseas and walking straight through the gate at a practice section. I'm surprised LET haven't already done that to India, or that the BCCI hasn't insisted on meaningful security in Western countries, because there isn't any apart from a few unarmed bouncers. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A. R. Rahman

Please unprotect the page. Consensus was not found. And the version of Shahid is in my opinion a clear violation of WP:UNDUE. He reverted again to his version pushing his POV. The last stable version was without any mention of filmfare awards. The discussion on the talk page is ongoing and has not ended it seems. --Bollywood-Turk (talk) 09:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you 91? well you can debate on the talkpage for a few more days until your account matures. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "until your account matures."? I'm most probably older than you Monkey. --Bollywood-Turk (talk) 10:40, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Attack on Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore

Mind monitoring this article for a while? I lost all knowledge of cricket when Steve Waugh retired so my knowledge is a little archaic. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on how you look at it), I won't be able to tell the difference between vandalism and fact. —Dark ^talk 10:14, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

... and just in case you're too "busy" . *offers a banana* —Dark ^talk 10:17, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need any cricket knowledge here. Just info about Islamists, unless these gunmen are Tamil Tigers. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please check over User talk:Champarani, as this editor is causing some problems and has now resorted to swearing at me in Hindi Thanks :) Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 10:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked him. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the article to my watchlist. It's hard to know if some statements that will and have been added are factually verifiable or just personal opinions. I strongly suggest that any statement added needs to be reference otherwise it should be removed. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 10:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah me too. No doubt when there is information on who the culprits are there will me more fringe theories espeecially from a few Pakistani users with a pro-Islamist bent like Yousaf465 (talk · contribs), eg see the junk on state sponsored terrorism, whitewashing the Taliban etc. Some Pakistani guys have been saying that the Mumbai attacks were done by India or Israel, and that will crop up here as well. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

speak of the devil. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:23, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose this user is in denial. But wikipedia isn't exactly the place for expressing these opinions on articles. Hilfy and Siddle are in doubt. Damn! Although from what I've seen locally at the old NTCA Ground and on TV, I'd rate Brett Geeves higher than Hilfy. Geeves is a good lower order batsmen and probably a better fielder (not saying that's very hard). Geeves is also a top bloke, not saying Hilfy isn't though. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 09:11, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After reviewing some of Yousaf465 (talk · contribs) contributions, I now see what you mean. It's a bit of a worry that on his talkpage it states "This experienced editor is seeking to adopt new users." Well hopefully I don't have too many altercations with him the future, although I see you already have. I've also just noticed he has given himself a barnstar! :S Very very strange indeed. If he gives himself a barnstar for just removing red links, imagine how many barnstars some other wiki editors (including yourself) could give themselves. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 09:27, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just when I thought things couldn't get any stranger, his blog says "(the terrorists) seem to belong to southern or western Indian states". Don't know where he got that from. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 09:33, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sincere question

I wanted to ask you this a long long time back. But never did coz' it was off-wiki-ish and too personal. But anyways, I ll do the honours today.

Why is an Australian so interested in stuff related to India? We all know the ugly Border-Gavaskar saga. I have also seen some uncharitable rebukes from India POVists on your talk page. But still there is no loss of interest on your side! You still revert vandalism on India-related pages, still check into discussions related to WP:IND...n dude... you also are responsible for elevating articles on Indian cricketers (which includes monkeygate villian Harbhajan Singh!) to FA or GA status...Either you are crazy or God! Whatever it is... you amaze me! Same question bout Vietnam --KnowledgeHegemony ^talk 13:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mostly cultural reasons, relating to Buddhist culture. Asoka, Nalanda and all that. I guess the cricket doesn't hurt. I'm not too worried about the troublemakers per se, whether they were Islamist/BJP/regional ethnic/LTTE/Bollywood/Khalistan although I think a lot of the seniors didn't/don't do their share of dealing with idiots or doing work but are busy with gathering disciples, subtle self-promotion and climbing the ladder and whatnot so that cheeses me off. The other thing was that I thought some of them were being duplicitous, double dealing and running sting operations against each other, which turned me off a bit. There were some really trivial ego clashes there. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've scaled back my participation on India articles since mid-2007, I'm hardly as pro-active there as I used to be, especially with dealing with disputes as I think I'll be blamed if something goes haywire, although others are quick to say "we" everywhere if the project goes on a FA/GA boom even if they didn't do the work themselves and blame others for their own screwed up double deals. Too much bandwagoneering. I've stopped writing new India articles, and haven't done any new article work since then, except to upload bits and pieces from the depths of my computer, or to keep Bhajji, Irfan Pathan, Murali Kartik and Dinesh Karthik up to speed as they are all FA/GA. Reverting watchlists don't take much time at all. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Although hardly anyone wants to do the dirty work so sometimes vandalism on Indira/Sanjay/Rajiv/Sonia/Rahul Gandhi stays a long time. Once I didn't check my full watchlist for a week and some vandal put in that they were Muslims with secret circumcisions and it stayed there. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am ethnic Vietnamese: Nguyen. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The India Star
		YellowMonkey deserves this honour for his innumerable contributions to WP:IND! Thanks you! Cheers! -- KnowledgeHegemony ^talk 07:27, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Viet history

My pleasure :). I would also like to thank you about the article Gia Long. I'm doing a small research and your works give me a lot of new information.

By the way, I think you should write some paragraphs about Chau Van Tiep and Vo Tanh on article Gia Long, they (plus Do Thanh Nhon) played an important role in bringing Gia Long to power.--Amore Mio (talk) 14:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll have a look. Also, on wikipedia the policy is to not but titles before articles, so no Emperor/Empress and so forth. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me fix it, I can't change the title because Thuan Thien and Thua Thien were already taken.--Amore Mio (talk) 03:24, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I got it. Thank you very much.--Amore Mio (talk) 05:39, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well well its not his fault

The good thing is he has started using sources!! Conspiracy theories will float around for quite sometime (thanks to the Pak national leaders and media). Its not Yousaf's fault entirely, but its the Pak government which floats these theories. I remember watching a Pakistani national channel on youtube hinting Hindu terrorists for Mumbai attacks. Only on 12th February (2 ½ months later) did Pakistan accept the perpetuators were Pakistanis (Pakistan finally admits Mumbai attackers link -- The Independent (UK)! --KnowledgeHegemony ^talk 07:54, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

None of the sources say that or don't work. Also I googled it and only see Pakistani webforums and wacky newspapers. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:56, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems he is trying to bring the attention away from Pakistan. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 09:40, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I could not but praise the coverage of Geo News as it came up. Unfortunately some people, including cricketing personalities such as Miandad, tried try to deflect attention while the usual hawks like Sherry Rehman were uncharacteristically placid at first. I should be trying and editing the article in a few hours since it seems to have gotten the attention it needs right now. As a current event though, the article can always use more attention. JSR 0562 12:54, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning Vietnam

Would be good if you could spend 5-10 on one every day or two for sure. I understand you are always very busy but we do need to get some details into these districts, very glad though that you started them all off otherwise there would be more to do! I'll be looking to develop the communes over the next few months. 9,000 articles on places in Vietnam would be great. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 14:12, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for advice about the spam queue

A lot of articles show up in the db-spam queue that are about Indian educational or community service organizations. I'd like to get some feedback from some editors living in India on how to handle these; is there some website or some kind of search that would help us decide which institutions are notable? For instance, New article appearing on wikepedia has a link to un.org that mentions the subject favorably; is that important? (Watchlisting) - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 11:47, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Read this

Here is a conversation between Yousuf and user:Adil your (who IMO should have been blocked for sockpuppetering). I hope they don't team up. Also note user:Adil your used the similar sock ip which I had contacted about earlier and you replied in affirmative) for contacting Yousaf. I wonder why Adil your was not warned for socking :S BTW, he has also been warned earlier by another admin (user:Hipocrite) for vandalism on India related page. --KnowledgeHegemony ^talk 14:16, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey that was not sockpuppy but a meatpuppy as I have already told YellowMonkey......And from then on ALL my posts have been from the Adil_your account with the exception of only my first post after the Block where I forgot to sign in but I have been logged in since then....And All Yousuf told me was to follow Wiki-Rules at all times....You can see that for yourself....Adil your (talk) 16:38, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A. R. Rahman

I think, you misused your privilege of administering Wikipedia at A. R. Rahman here. A complaint is on the way. I'm sorry, but this is not the first time, I have observed such kind of behaviour of you. I'm assuming bad faith, because you are involved in the "Filmfare" Award problem at A. R. Rahman and also were/are a real life Times of India contributor in the Cricket section. Since Filmfare Award belongs to Times of India I believe you have decided at A. R. Rahman in your (company's) favour. --91.130.91.92 (talk) 16:17, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CfD

I hate to say it but I just knew this would happen. See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 March 4#Category:Shane Warne. I don't know why I bother. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 20:32, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

		The Military history A-Class medal
		For prolific work on – Military career of Keith Miller, Keith Miller and 1964 Brinks Hotel bombing – promoted to A-Class between February and March 2009, by order of the coordinators of the Military history WikiProject, you are hereby awarded the Milhist A-Class medal. -MBK₀₀₄ 00:38, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1,317: / Line 1,317: @@
 ==CfD==
 I hate to say it but I just knew this would happen. See [[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 March 4#Category:Shane Warne]]. I don't know why I bother. -- [[User:Mattinbgn|Mattinbgn]]\<sup>[[User talk:Mattinbgn|talk]]</sup> 20:32, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
+== Congratulations! ==
+{| style="border: 2px solid lightsteelblue; background-color: whitesmoke;"
+|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | [[Image:WPMH ACR.PNG|90px]]
+|rowspan="2" |
+|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" |&ensp;'''The ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Awards#A-Class_medals|Military history A-Class medal]]'''''&ensp;
+|-
+|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid lightsteelblue;" | For prolific work on – [[Military career of Keith Miller]], [[Keith Miller]] and [[1964 Brinks Hotel bombing]] – promoted to A-Class between February and March 2009, by order of the coordinators of the [[WP:MILHIST|Military history WikiProject]], you are hereby awarded the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Awards#A-Class_medals|Milhist A-Class medal]]. -'''[[User:MBK004|MBK]]'''<sub>[[User talk:MBK004|004]]</sub> 00:38, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
+|}

Revision as of 00:38, 5 March 2009

Requests

Checkuser and sockpuppetry

Straw poll for selecting photos of cyclists at the 2009 Tour Down Under

Voting section

Poll: Allan Davis

Poll: Andre Greipel

Poll: Cameron Meyer

Poll: Christian Knees

Poll: Daniele Nardello

Poll: David Loosli

Poll: Davide Malacarne

Poll: Davide Vigano

Poll: Dries Devenyns

Poll: Francesco Chicchi

Poll: Francesco Reda

Poll: Francis van Londersele

Poll: Frank Hoj

Poll: Frederick Willems

Poll: George Hincapie

Poll: Gert Steegmans

Poll: Gianni da Ros

Poll: Graeme Brown

Poll: Greg Henderson

Poll: Guillaume Blot

Poll: Henrik Redant

Poll: Hilton Clarke

Poll: Hubert Schwab

Poll: Imanol Erviti

Poll: Inaki Isasi

Poll: Ivan Dominquez

Poll: Jacopo Guarnieri

Poll: Javier Megias

Poll: Jeremy Roy

Poll: Jesus Hernandez

Poll: Jos van Emden

Poll: Jose Luis Rubiera

Poll: Jose Rojas

Poll: Josu Larrazabal

Poll: Juan Horrach

Poll: Julian Dean

Poll: Julien el Fares

Poll: Jussi Veikkanen

Poll: Kai Reus

Poll: Kasper Klostergaard

Poll: Kenny de Hayes

Poll: Kym Dillon

Poll: Lance Armstrong

Poll: Laurent Biondi

Poll: Laurent Lefevre

Poll: Luca Barla

Poll: Luis Leon Sanchez

Poll: Maciej Bodnar

Poll: Mario Aerts

Poll: Mark Renshaw

Poll: Markus Eichler

Poll: Martin Elmiger

Poll: Martin Muller

Poll: Mathew Hayman

Poll: Mathieu Drujon

Poll: Matteo Bono

Poll: Matteo Tosatto

Poll: Matthew Goss

Poll: Matt White (cyclist)

Poll: Maxim Iglinskiy

Poll: Michael Rogers

Poll: Mickael Buffaz

Poll: Nicki Sorensen

Poll: Nicolas Portal

Poll: Nicolas Roche

Poll: Nikolay Trusov

Poll: Oscar Pereiro

Poll: Pablo Lastras

Poll: Paul Sherwen

Poll: Perrig Quemeneur

Poll: Perrig Quemeneur - take 2

Poll: Pieter Jacobs

Poll: Rein Taaramae

Poll: Phil Liggett

Poll: Remy di Gregorio