User talk:Ktr101

User	Talk	Contribs	Sandbox	Userboxes	Awards	New pages	Humor	E-mail	Logs	Moves	Uploads

RE:Veggie-Tales

There are a lot. I might make a project, but I'm pretty busy on other wiki sites and won't be as active if I create a Wikiproject. Rowdy the Ant talk to Rowdy 20:31, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Sure thing, I could use the help. :) Rowdy the Ant talk to Rowdy 19:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

It is? That's great! So it's long enough not to face deletion, right? Otherwise, I'm still making improvments to the page so i'm not creating the Minnesota Cuke quite yet. Rowdy the Ant talk to Rowdy 16:30, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but right now i'm on lunch break. :D Rowdy the Ant talk to Rowdy 16:38, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIII (September 2009)

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) 00:44, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films September 2009 Newsletter

The September 2009 issue of the Films 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:34, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion

You might want to drop a note to the failed candidate explaining why you thought he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell at passing his RfA. Tan | 39 16:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Your RfA close

If you're going to close RfAs, I would strongly recommend leaving a note to the candidate. Otherwise it comes off as quite rude. Thanks. — neuro 16:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't notice the above section. — neuro 16:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I've been here since April 06, but thanks anyway ;) — neuro 22:05, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Special:Log/Asenine :) — neuro 22:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

WikiBirthday

I saw from here that it's been exactly two years since you joined the project. Happy WikiBirthday! Keep up the good work, rʨanaɢ  ^talk/_contribs 21:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Indeed - happy WBirthday from me as well. Also, should you submit an RFA in future, please let me know. I don't vote very often but you would have my support. Manning (talk) 06:08, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

101 AOS

What's up? How's college going? Ok, I'm confused; so the 102d is an intelligence wing, and their main squadron is an air operations squadron - who the heck thought that up? Sorry for my squirrely attitude today - most intel wings/groups have intel squadrons under them. Is the 101 AOS primed to backfill Air Operations Center duties somewhere or ??? TDRSS (talk) 17:27, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

BTW - saw your 102d related FOIA requests on www.foia.af.mil. Very cool stuff. TDRSS (talk) 17:28, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Your removal of Cat from polanski

I was wondering, why did you do that, create that new cat and then add it to the polanski without any discussion at all? Have you read the polanski talkpage and seen the lengthy discussion regarding the cats there? Off2riorob (talk) 17:29, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I saw the comments and I think you should take your time a bit, there is a lot of discussion at polanski talkpage, that supports the stat rape cat, and you changed it without any discussion on the tapkpage there, I suggest that if you want to alter anything you should go there and talk about it, discussion is the way to affect change, thanks.Off2riorob (talk) 18:19, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Also, could you please stop adding minor to your edits that are clearly not, ta. Off2riorob (talk) 18:20, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

As I said, I suggest you take your time a bit more, of course if someone is in a group that he does not belong, then remove him, that is not to say that there is any need to create other hard to define groups that are not needed, ta. Off2riorob (talk) 18:22, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I can only stress as I have expressed here to you that you leave it alone and attempt to find out if there is any need or any consensus for your ideas. Off2riorob (talk) 18:24, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Polite Warning. Please do not remove prods from cats that you have created, ta. Off2riorob (talk) 18:28, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

You can read on the template... do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself. If you created this page and you disagree with its proposed speedy deletion, please add: {hangon} ..I would thank you to please revert your removal of the template and add the hang on ..as is stated on the template. ta. Off2riorob (talk) 18:31, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Your edit here is in breach of guidelines, please revert it, ta. Off2riorob (talk) 18:35, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Rapists category

Before you unilaterally empty Category:Rapists if its contents, you should be aware of this recent decision. It's certainly OK to create "convicted of rape" categories for those who were indeed convicted of rape, but there are some in these categories who were not convicted of rape, so the Category:Rapists categories would presumably be parent categories of the Category:People convicted of rape categories just as Category:Murderers is a parent of Category:People convicted of murder. Once the "convicted of" categories are established the deletion of the "rapists" categories could be reconsidered, but they shouldn't be unilaterally obliterated. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 22:27, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Minor edits

Could you read the minor edit article and let me know why you think that removing a section from an article as you have done here is a minor edit. Off2riorob (talk) 18:34, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Having it set to minor doesn't make it correct, did you have a look at the minor edit page? Or perhaps ask your mentor about it. Off2riorob (talk) 20:24, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

It is not a matter of making mistakes once in awhile, as you have stated, you have your edits set to default minor and you say you know what a minor edit is and yet you continue to make major edits and leave the setting as minor, please mark major edits as such. Off2riorob (talk) 20:30, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Comments

Thanks for the autoreviewers link, but I've only created one article. Usually, I just try to improve articles. Other stuff is being sent via e-mail. — BQZip01 — ^talk 22:47, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Thanks for just being a sounding board and giving me some basic feedback. Steps in not over-reacting: 1. Recognize you might be over-reacting. 2. Check with someone else to see if you are over-reacting. 3. React accordingly. Thanks for step 2.— BQZip01 — talk 01:33, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kari Ferrell (2nd nomination)

Hi, Ktr101. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kari Ferrell, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kari Ferrell (2nd nomination). Cunard (talk) 08:36, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Pittsburgh Air Reserve Station

Regarding Pittsburgh Air Reserve Station, I think the GFDL terms require acknowledgment that the content came from an existing article. I believe a note in the edit summary on creation with a link to Pittsburgh International Airport and/or the edit that removed the content from there would be sufficient.  Frank  |  talk  18:42, 17 October 2009 (UTC)