User talk:GoodDay

Welcome!

Hello, GoodDay, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

---

Hello to all fellow Wikipedians. Be assured I'll be as curtious as possible & hope to provide worthy answers to your questions (about wiki edits), I'm looking forward to meeting you. User:GoodDay 22:40, 17 November 2005 (UTC). PS- Usually from 16:00 AST to 20:00 AST), I'm signed in. Please be patient, as I'll eventually get to your questions. GoodDay 02:17, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

References

Don't wait for a lack of references to be pointed out before adding references. Get into the good habit of providing references all of the time. Uncle G 12:46, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Acknowledged, thanks for the advice. GoodDay 15:02, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Bloc Québécois forming a minority

Can you please tell me how the BQ can form a minority government? There are 233 seats in the House of Commons outside Quebec, so if those 233 seats are equally divided among the 3 other parties represented in the HC, then the party with the most seats would get 77 seats, which is still greater than the number of ridings in Quebec.

So unless there's another political party represented in the HC (possibly the Green Party), I don't see how the BQ can form any kind of government. Bourquie 8:41 utc, 17 Jan 2006

I see your point. But I think you should make a note in the article that there are only 4 parties represented in the House of Commons. The reason is that unless there's another party that is successful in winning a seat in the House on 23 Jan, the BQ will still not be able to form a government. Bourquie 22:51 utc, 17 Jan 2006

Check out the first skid 1. Bourquie 4:11 UTC 8 Feb 2006.

sports wiki

Hi!

I noticed you were active on many sports pages on Wikipedia. My friends and are I starting a sports wiki that you may be interested in. It uses Wikipedia's software but we made a lot of technological improvements to allow for more news and opinion articles, as well as regular encyclopedic entries. If you're interested, contact me and I'll give you the URL. --DNL 22:29, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Ottawa Senators

Thanks for fixing my mistake, I was trying to edit out the players salaries in the 'current roster' section & I accidently erased the Senators lower half of the page (everything below Ray Emery). So again ,I offer my appreciation and heartfelt thanks. GoodDay 18:06, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. Although it startled me at first because I thought half the Senators team was traded on the deadline or something... ;) Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 18:15, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Admin nom

Hey, GoodDay, how goes it? Just wanted to let you know that Croat Canuck was kind enough to nominate me for adminship, and I'd be grateful for a kind word from you in support! Regards, RGTraynor 15:10, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Check Flyers website

Forsberg is the only Flyer listed on the Injury Report. (http://www.philadelphiaflyers.com/pressbox/injuryReport/injuryReport.asp) --S. Parkhurst 17:32, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

changes

Your changes to Diana Spencer's name were wrong. In historiography deceased former royal consorts are always referred to by maiden name. That is because

• Consorts do not have ordinals (numbers) like reigning monarchs and so become tangled up and confusing if consort names are used.
• Consorts undergo numerous title changes during their lifetime, confusing readers.
• Using maiden name or maiden title allows readers to understand the origins of the person, while avoiding consort confusion.

That is why biographies refer to Catherine of Aragon, Elizabeth of York, Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, Blanche of Castile, Marie-José of Belgium, not Queen Catherine, Queen Elizabeth, Queen Elizabeth, Queen Blanche and Queen Marie-José. Diana is referred to on WP as Diana Spencer because that is the standard biographical reference used internationally.

You are also wrong about King Constantine II of Greece. Greece is a republic. Under international historical referencing, deposed monarchs continue to be referred to by their former constitutional title as a courtesy title for their lifetime, as do deposed crown princesses, etc. That title then dies with them. That is standard usage worldwide and WP follows it under its own MoS and NC rules. The rules have been carefully worked out on WP and are followed in articles. I've reverted back to the standard usage on Wikipedia. Please be careful to follow the Manual of Style and Naming Conventions rules on Wikipedia. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 18:32, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Captain correction

Guh, thanks for picking up on that Yashin/Sundin mix-up, since I probably would've never noticed. I've been going at this since the early afternoon, and even after a break it's like all the boxes and names are melding in to one giant ... something or other.--Resident Lune 23:51, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Edward III's sons

I agree that technically William of Hatfield was Edward's second son. However, there seems to be a tradition of ignoring children who died young when allocating succession numbers. All the references I can find to the Plantagenet claim to the throne have Lionel as the second son, John of Gaunt as the third and Edmund of Langley as the fourth. Although you're right, would it be better to stick to the traditional numbering? That way, anyone moving on from Wikipedia to other sources won't be confused about who was who.

Thewiltog 08:09, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Clarification (Garth Snow)

When I used "American", I was referring to his nationality and not which league he played in (or preference between AHL and NHL). I was going by the example set in Wayne Gretzky, where it makes note of his nationality in the opening comments. Just wanted to clear that up--Resident Lune 20:32, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Grover Cleveland

Please stop perpetuating error in Wikipedia. Presidential terms ended the 4th of March before the 20th amendment. It is true that not much tends to happen the morning of Inauguration Day; but a crisis arose on 4th March, 1933, and it was Hoover, not FDR, who dealt with it. (True, he dealt with it by denying the necessity of Federal action, but that was a policy difference.) Septentrionalis 14:42, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Jessup's position, which nobody else supports, and which is there contradicted by evidence, is a perfect example of original research. He decided what ought to be true, based on his private reading of the Constitution and the law, instead of consulting secondary sources on what was true. Let's put it back. Septentrionalis 19:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Did Cleveland; I intend to do them one at a time, going backward; Coolidge, Wilson, and so forth, until I get back to Washington. If you leap ahead, I will support your edit in time (I will take time to find a source for each hereafter.) 20:54, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Presidential term ending days

Please stop changing the date to March 4. You are incorrect in stating that the terms ended at noon. See the biographical entry for James Buchanan or James Monroe for just two examples, which clearly state the terms end on March 3. Thanks. --tomf688 (talk - email) 22:46, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure; you'll have to ask someone who knows more about presidential term beginnings/endings than I do. However, the terms did end at midnight on March 3. That is the source of the term Midnight Judges, for example. --tomf688 (talk - email) 22:55, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Also, see in the bioguide that it specifically states that John Adams' terms ended March 3, both as VP and POTUS. --tomf688 (talk - email) 23:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

The bioguide is produced by the U.S. Government. If they say the terms ended March 3, I suppose that's the truth. --tomf688 (talk - email) 23:07, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your edits in this area. If you haven't already seen it, there is now extensive evidence compiled at Talk:List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States establishing that the March 4 term-expiration date is correct, which should be useful in addressing this ever-present controversy in the future. User Tomf is right about the bioguide, but I believe that is a function of a limitation on their database (not being able to have two different people in the same office on the same date) as opposed to a substantive governmental comment on the legal expiration time. Regards, Newyorkbrad 00:56, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Mike Ricci

I must say I was quite surprised to see a question about an edit I made six weeks ago, but I'm glad there are always editors making sure Wikipedia is the best it can be. Here's why I removed the captaincy box: I had seen boxes like this for awards and such, but never for captaincy, on other player pages. So when I saw this one, I assumed it was an attempt by an over-zealous Ricci fan to make his achievements seem great. Since then, I've seen quite a few of the captaincy boxes, and I now accept them as appropriate. I totally forgot that I had removed this one from the Ricci page, or I would have added it back myself. I hope this answers your question. --Muéro 21:53, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

---

		The Minor Barnstar
		As of today, 1858 minor edits . . . all of them great! Thanks especially for your commitment to fixing the little things in hockey-related articles. Muéro(talk/c) 04:10, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to 2006

re: No need to double wiki-link dates ([1])

I reverted that change. All dates on those pages are intentionally wikilinked to allow for localized date formats. A date can be entered on the page as January 19, but it will display according to the reader's local preference. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 01:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

It took me a few minutes to dig up where I saw that discussed; it's here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Years/August 2005 survey results#Question_5 (Fourth option.) (And I just noticed that a lot of dates on 2006 aren't wikilinked, but should be). -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 01:52, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey, nothing to apologize for. There's really no way to tell what the standard is from looking at the page; it's not consistent right now. I'll go back add the missing wikilinks later when the article isn't being edited much. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 02:01, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden

Good day, GoodDay! Just to check, you've change Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden's coronation date to Sept 19, but put in your edit summary that the coronation date was Sept 15. Was the edit summary just a typo, or was "Sept 19" a typo? Thanks, Mr WR 07:42, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

No need to apologize - it wasn't a criticism, I was just checking! Mr WR 10:13, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Redden

Redden may have missed his third straight game but he's back on the ice. However, he is still considered as injured I THINK but before the game, Ottawa Senators declared he was going to play. --Deenoe 15:52, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, althought I'm not the one who puts the A next to Fisher, and we shouldnt change it, even if for a game Fisher is Alternate, simply because Redden stays Alternate even if he's not playing (not sure if you get what im trying to say..) --Deenoe 16:56, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't really understand your idea...? --Deenoe 17:08, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok I get it, and agree! --Deenoe 17:35, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

El Jigue

Hi GoodDay

I've seen your attempts to highlight EJ's talk page banter. All I can say is, EJ is a unique character, and his writing is usually worth a read even though it is often outside the boundaries of policy - thus users tend to give him some leeway. I understand your attempts to get him to buckle down, many have tried over the years including me. All have failed!--Zleitzen 23:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi GoodDay, this is the first time we've come across each other so please understand that I'm coming at the subject from my own narrow view of things, and I'm not trying to express an opinion about articles or situations about which I don't have any direct experience. My own experiences with EJ have been entirely refreshing and educational. I originally became engaged at the CG page in an attempt to balance what I viewed as some POV use of language and content within a couple of trouble-spots at a featured article. As a complete novice in Cuban history (yet with a deep interest in Latin America history and culture in general), I was both enthused and energized by the reception I received there by such stalwart gatekeepers as Polaris and Zleitzen. Spending a good part of my time at Wikipedia navigating the swamplands of articles and debates involving the Israeli-Palestinian dispute and other related issues, I have found the climate at the CG article to be almost all clear skies and fresh breezes. What El Jigue has done for me personally with his unique personal observations and detailed knowledge is to spark a desire to dig much deeper into Cuban history, and to that end I have solicited and received his recommendations on some source material which I have ordered and will be receiving within days (you can check out his IP talk page if you're at all interested in this exchange between him and me). To what extent I follow-through is now up to me, but I am grateful for the help and inspiration I've already received, and I find myself looking forward to the insight and color he provides to the discussions here. I much appreciate that your experiences with him have left an entirely different impression, and having glanced through some of the discussions to which I was not a participant I can see quite clearly why that could be, but I do want to note that he doesn't impose his views into the articles (as far as I can tell, perhaps I'm wrong though) and that the talk page policy, while paying homage to WP:NPOV, WP:NOR and WP:V also says that there is reasonable allowance for speculation, suggestion and personal knowledge with a view to prompting further investigation. It doesn't take much WP:AGF at all for me to find that allowance for EJ in every encounter I've had with him to date, and I will be sorely disappointed if he chooses to desist from his participation here. Thanks much, GoodDay, for having taken the time to post to me and to read this response. Dasondas 02:27, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Very cool, GoodDay. But, please, don't feel constrained about complaining in the future if the behavior changes or if upon reflection you feel that your own editing experience is being unduly compromised. As much as I appreciate EJ's contributions to the small corner of Wikipedia in which I meet him, if I thought he was in clear violation of any policy I would say so -- and I'd say so to him directly. You may be right that it would be more appropriate if some of his commentary was placed on his own talk page, but I only weighed in because I felt that WP:TPG could be fairly interpreted to permit that activity of his that I have personally come across. Anyhow, whatever comes of this in the future it's been nice to meet you. Dasondas 04:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Fyi, I just posted this to EJ. Dasondas 04:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Zleitzen said he and others have tried many times without success. I wish he would as well. Here's hoping... Dasondas 04:44, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Governor Elects

I've got huckabee on my watchlist for other reasons, but I'll try to hit a few of the pages. ThuranX 02:36, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

All done. ThuranX 02:52, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I've fixed up all, Governors-elect; Lt.Governors & Lt.Governors-elect, to show lame-ducks are still in office & elects have yet to be inagurated. GoodDay 20:56, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

S'pose y'all could be a little bit more careful with the governor template? I just removed a link to "Governor of Ohio" from the template over on Bill Ritter (politician). Also, it looks like at least the "office" value on that template is automatically linked, so you don't need to add brackets. Brennen 19:28, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping on top of Charlie Crist there. buddhagazelle 20:20, 13 November 2006 (EST)

Congresses of the United States

I've edited the pre-20th Amendemnt Congresses ending dates to March 4th. I've edited up to the 27th Congress & will tommorow complete the corrections up to the 72nd Congress. If there's any dispute? see Grover Cleveland & Presidential term ending days discussion sections (above). GoodDay 21:01, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Except that you are wrong to do so. Congressional documents describe the sessions as ending on March 3. For example, see Statutes as Large for the second session of the 8th Congress. It was a common and consistent practice to describe the previous Congress as ending the day before the next Congress begins. older ≠ wiser 21:32, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

No I'm not, again see above arguments. GoodDay 21:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Please see extensive discussion and evidence at Talk:List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States#Term_expiration_.28March_3_vs._March_4.29. Newyorkbrad 21:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Entertaining irritants

I've been exchanging quips and slights with El J for a good while now - I was fairly active on the main Cuba pages last winter/spring. Banning him is IMO a waste of effort - he's not going to change - better to use his provocations to undermine the self righteousness of the anti-commie/Castrophobe tendency. MichaelW 08:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Order of Mexican presidents

Hi GoodDay, please do not reinsert an arbitrary order into the infoboxes of the Mexican presidents. There's absolutely no evidence whatsoever to back up those claims. Follow the discussion at President of Mexico or Felipe Calderón. Cheers, --All-Bran 00:50, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I've now stopped numbering Mexican Presidents. Your're correct, it's near impossible to number them correctly. GoodDay 00:53, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Ed Stelmach

Good point, consider it done. Kc4 18:09, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Calgary Flames

I've added the note. Resolute 04:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Papal Numbering

What is your source? I used the book "Lives of the Popes" written by Richard P. McBrian, which contains a listing of all the Pontiffs up to Pope John Paul II (it was written before the pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI began.) It uses official Vatican lists for all papal dates as well as succession numbers. Pope John Paul II is listed as the 262nd Pope, NOT the 264th. ludahai 魯大海 23:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Pope Benedict III is 263rd ludahai 魯大海 23:17, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I meant the XVI - I am VERY busy with 2006 Asian Games results at the moment. ludahai 魯大海 23:26, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I said don't change the numbers until you can find the allegedly missing Popes. The list I used is from the OFFICIAL list. You aren't fixing anything, you are putting in incorrect information. ludahai 魯大海 00:30, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

source? Also, find the missing pontiffs. I went through every year METICULOUSLY and counted the pontiffs. Antipopes don't count. ludahai 魯大海 00:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Something is wrong. I'm not argueing with your finding, just want to know Why? the Vatican numbers differ. GoodDay 00:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Will you please tell me what your source is? ludahai 魯大海 00:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

FIRST, find the missing Popes, then get back to me. I am VERY busy with the Asian Games right now.ludahai 魯大海 01:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

My entire list in in the year entries, beginning right from Saint Peter with numerical ordering from 1st to 263rd. ludahai 魯大海 02:34, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, got your message on my talk page. Sorry but I was away from Wikipedia for a few weeks so not sure whether this is still relevant. The official Vatican count is 265 for Benedict XVI. I can't find a source immediately but it was discussed ad nauseum regarding Pope John Paul II so someone there should be able to find a source. The Vatican doesn't count Pope Stephen II, so some sources may list Benedict XVI as the 266th pope. 263 is right out of the question, at any rate. Cheers, JYolkowski // talk 00:19, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

New Jersey Devils

Hi GoodDay, I altered your edit to the New Jersey Devils article. There were several reasons. First off, your edit eliminated the wikilink to two pages regarding former Devils players. Secondly, it removed the picture of Stevens' jersey being raised to the rafters. Third, it's acceptable to list former Devils who are enshrined in the HoF. However, I understand your concern that it may be too "fan-site"-ish, and so I edited the former edit so that it was not gushing about the Devils, and was more neutral. I hope you understand why I made the changes I did. Anthony Hit me up... 18:09, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Problem fixed - I copied it almost directly from the Team format of the Ice Hockey project (with the minor exception of the "Leaders" section to include captains & coaches. Hope this resolves any debate. Anthony Hit me up... 18:33, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey! Unfortunately your removal of my edit is not anti-devils "rhetoric" as you called it. It is a distinction that the Devils do hold. Not a proud one, but as a fan of a team, you should allow information about them, warts and all, to be on the page. Fortunately, as the season is going, the Devils might not hold that distinction for much longer. The Carolina Hurricanes are doing a very good job of eliminating the Devils' ownership of the title "Last Stanley Cup Champion to miss the Playoffs the Following Season." I am the first to admit that I wouldn't raise a LSCCTMTPTFS banner into the raftors of Continental Airlines Arena, but editing out that Distinction from the team history is censorship, and I'd appreciate your keeping it on the page. Thanks, CSTV

El J

Well spotted. My suspicion is that it's the real El J using another computer. The other address seems to be a communal one - do you think EJ accesses from an internet cafe ? -- Beardo 18:30, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

The way I see it - sources for Cuba articles are not always easy to come by. EJ acts as a resource - trawling the internet. It is then for the rest of us to sift that to find what can go into the articles. He's useful, and really does no harm. -- Beardo 00:25, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

This computer's IP is used by many throughout the Radisson hotel group in Nashville. My name is PL, I am a regional board member for Radisson.

I have sent an email to all of our various hotel brands throughout Nashville basically stating that vandalism of websites such as yours must stop now or there will be an investigation by myself.

I apologize for this problem and hope that it stops NOW1.

Stelmach and Klein

To be perfectly honest I have no idea what happened, Whilst Stelmach was sworn in today his cabinet is sworn in to office tommorow, I think that Ralph Klein stepping down today had some kind of special symbology as it was 14 years ago today that he took office as the premier of Alberta. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jack Cox (talk • contribs) 01:20, 15 December 2006 (UTC).

He was actually sworn in today, there are photos from the event and he actually took the oath of office in front of Norman Kwong http://premier.alberta.ca/gallery/2006_Swearing-in.cfm--Jack Cox 01:40, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

39th Canadian Parliament, 1st session

Hi, GoodDay. Could you please provide a source for your statement that the 1st session of the 39th Parliament ended on December 13th? I haven't read anything about that, and it seems odd that the government would kill its own bills by starting a new parliamentary session after the Christmas break. Thanks, --Arctic Gnome 03:24, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

El Jigue again

Taken from my page:

Hello Beardo, I'm seeking your guys (Zleitzen, Polaris999 & Goatboy95)'s support in a request to Administrators to allow Blogging on public Discussion (Talk) pages. I've called on you particular users, as you've like me have conversed -positively OR negatively- with 'El Jigue'. IF Administrators consent to this proposal- blog away, IF not - then I'll seek a 1-year ban on EJ, who currently is begining to blog again. I too am pro-democracy, the sooner Fidel is dead the better. That's not the issue however. So, how about it? GoodDay 20:03, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

How about focussing our attention and efforts on more important matters? -- Polaris999 21:13, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Aren't WIKIPEDIA policies & rules important too? Help me guys; help me to help 'EJ'. GoodDay 21:59, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I suggest we concentrate discussion here - rather than scatter. -- Beardo 22:58, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I don't see a problem. I think EJ provides a useful resource to those of us active in the Cuba pages. GD - I haven't noticed many edits from you on the actual articles. Why are you so worked up about EJ's blogging. -- Beardo 23:01, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I guess the policy is:

Wikipedia pages are not: Personal web pages. Wikipedians have their own user pages, but they may be used only to present information relevant to working on the encyclopedia. If you are looking to make a personal webpage or blog, please make use of one of the many free providers on the Internet. The focus of user pages should not be social networking, but rather providing a foundation for effective collaboration.

really, I think that EJ is only borderline crossing that. We are better off with him (with all his faults) than having him banned on flimsy grounds. Does that policy prohibit discussing an articles subject matter on its related talk page ? -- Beardo 23:05, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

---

Zleitzen, though it may not seem that way, I too am trying to help EJ. It's so simple, 'Register'. EJ is obviously an intelligent person, why doesn't he understand 'Blogging' & why doesn't he see the benefits of 'Signing In'? GoodDay 21:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

In respect to the subject matter. It is immensly complicated. The subject is mired in an unprecedented level of propaganda, false information, highly partisan varying accounts of every single aspect, where reports by govenments and ostensibly citable media organs radically contradict both each other, and people's own eyes. With this in mind, and with editors in effect largely fumbling in the dark, the boundaries between speculative "blogging" and discussing sources is not so easy to define. Remember that there are people who live in Havana who don't even know if their president is alive or dead. So for us to attempt to uphold an accurate encyclopedia article under these circumstances means that a degree of flexibility is essential.--Zleitzen 22:29, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

So, you're in favor of Blogging 'talk pages', if it helps promote Cuban democracy? Promoting Cuba democracy is great, but first review Wikipedia: What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a blog, webpage provider, or social networking site, those are the 'current rules'. Do you back my proposal of changing, those rules? GoodDay 22:45, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

There is no need to forward a proposal to change the rules, GoodDay, there is already an official policy called Wikipedia:Ignore all rules which states

"If the rules prevent you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore them."

I also strongly advise that GoodDay reads this short essay : Wikipedia:Use common sense. If EJ's actions were agreed by consensus to be obstructing the improvement of wikipedia, then GoodDay would certainly have my support. You could also consider a Request for Comment on this matter for further community opinion.--Zleitzen 23:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

To add - it is not clear to me that EJ is breaking that rule anyway. It says don't use user pages as a blog. But it doesn't say don't provide commentary on the article on its related talk page. -- Beardo 23:27, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

You guys have given me something, to think about. There are indeed, Conflicting rules. It's all in how we interpret them, I won't recommend a Blog amendment to Adminstrators, however we need clarification on these rules. I think we should contact some Adminstrators, get their opnion (not rulings), just opinons. GoodDay 23:33, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Though admittedly EJ occasionally oversteps the mark with the volume of theorising, which can fill up a talk page more quickly than is neccessary, the overwhelming majority of his posts tangibly help editors who are working on the articles. EJ might mention something that seems to GoodDay like isolated blogging, but in a month or 3 months time, the issue resurfaces and is addressed in some fashion in the article. I even have a sandbox where I keep snippets of EJ's musings and links for future reference. Because details concerning Cuba are so convoluted, EJ - who seems to scour the airwaves absorbing all kinds of details - is a valuable resource in his own right.

In regard to asking for administrators, they have no more power to adjudicate on this than any other editor. Consensus among editors should define how we approach this issue. --Zleitzen 23:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Since Administrators, have no more power to adjudicate then other editors. And, since I'm only seeking opinon NOT ruling (Opinon, isn't that consensus?), what's the worry. I invite you guys, to offer your opinons to the Adminstrators as well. I'll contact 3 Administrators randomly, let you guy know which Admins. so you guys (including EJ) can give your opinons on Conflicting Rules. Let's all seek clarification. GoodDay 23:53, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm contacting this randomly picked Administrator David Gerard, to get help on Clarification of Rules (you guys can pick the other Administrators). Glad you brought up, the conflicting rules. Ya got a sharp eye. GoodDay 00:02, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Reason for contacting 'David Gerard'? I figured he could give us a NPOV on this debate. GoodDay 00:14, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

There'll be no Review of Rules interpretations. I've cancelled by contact with Administrator 'David Gerard'. I've choosen to go along with the Consensus (interpretation of Rules). GoodDay 21:00, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Predictions

By the way, GoodDay, I recommend you change your prediction on the UK election. There's no chance of a UK general election in 2007. I'd guess 2009. But it could be 2010.--Zleitzen 00:46, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Atlanta Thrashers

Sorry, didn't mean to change your edit. Trying to get rid of the vandalism. My bad. --Zpb52 05:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Long blocks

I generally avoid superlong blocks on IPs. It is not good practice nor really within the norms of wikipedia. Thanks for the heads-up, though. - Kukini 00:49, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

No problemo. Keep up the good work! Kukini 00:59, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Niitty

This has been brought up before. The page was moved many times. However, it was agreed that the diacritics would stay. I am not going to go through another diacritics war. Please leave it the way it is, as this is the way that everyone involved with the last dispute decided it would be left. Thanks for your hockey contributions to Wikipedia, though. Hazelorb 01:54, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

This has already been argued. Please just drop the subject. Hazelorb 01:12, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Christmas greetings

Merry Christmas!

Best wishes to my fellow wikipedian GoodDay! From Zleitzen

Eva Peron article

Thanks for the thoughts. If they had just said, "The picture doesn't look good there," I'd have understood. But the various other bizarre accusations made me question their motives. And, yes, it is annonying to put so much effort to one article and then see anonymous editors attempt to destroy it. But such is Wikipedia's editing policy, leaving articles open to such stuff. Andrew Parodi 07:11, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Come to the discussion?

Why me? I do not understand anything about it? I just reverted your edit for the heck of. I am not the anon 83. I am just having justice. Yankees76 may know who I am. Who am I? Good Sunny Morning 22:55, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply

No offense taken. And I hope you didn't get offended by my remark, my intension wasn't to directed it at you or anyone else in the discussion. Sorrym, my comment was exaggerate and way over line, I'll take back what I said. --Krm500 23:30, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Sure. --Krm500 03:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

One argument that was used for not using diacritics was that the players didn't care since the NHLPA doesn't use them. Well now we have proved that NHLPA use them but it wont matter, as long as one single media, NHL official page or team page doesn't use diacritics all of you will argue for not using them. It's just ridiculus, it's just small marks over letters that aren't used by the public mass (hey, I never use them either) since they are somewhat hard to add to the text. How about an argument for not using apostrophe when you write can't? --Krm500 22:07, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and Brière isn't even european, he is from Canada. So even when it a name from a county with English as its official language diacritics shouldn't be used? --Krm500 22:10, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't matter if it is englsih or not, it's an encyclopedia and should use the correct form. And if this argument never comes to an end I'll start translating all swedish players name in to english just like russian players. Since å, ä and ö isn't part of the english alphabet. And btw, the argument of non diacritics goes for the current roster and for all time leaders maybe, but not for the rest of the article. --Krm500 22:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

It does so matter. Once more, understand I've nothing personal against diacritics. The NHL official websites & media guides, don't use diacritics, I didn't create those websites, nor did I write those guides. If I did, I'd alow the diacritics on those other sites & guides. My concerns are (still are), that the ENGLISH Wikipedia NHL team articles, which are sourced by these NHL official website, reflect the fact, that non-diarcritics aren't used. I sincerely hope, your threat to dicriticalize the NHL team pages, won't come to pass. GoodDay 22:36, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

What threat? --Krm500 23:01, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Tentative agreement: Yes. --Krm500 23:32, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Colorado Avalanche

I left a response on the article's talk page. Nishkid64 01:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Speaker, President Pro Tempore

I've reverted your edits, should an emergency arise, Hastert would lead the House, and Stevens would be Pro Tempore. If Cheney, and Bush died today, Hastert would be President. Carpet9 00:22, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

It's fine, just so long you know you were making a mistake. You might take notice that in 2003, Hastert's term ended on January 7 at 12:00pm Noon because that's when the new Congress was sworn in. Maybe it was 2005. But your sort of right, Hastert and Stevens aren't doing anything right now. Carpet9 00:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Actully, I'm now edging toward your side. I'm not sure about this now. Cheers! Carpet9 00:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Re:GoodDay

I am sorry if you didn't like my grammar correction on your userpage. I am a grammar freak and will always correct errors when I can. By what I've found, it is frowned upon making major edits to other userpages but very minor ones are okay. About 'New Messages,' it is supposed to be a practical joke. 'New Messages' links to Special:Mytalk and 'last change' links to practical joke. Reywas92^Talk_{Sign Here} 16:04, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I have removed my orange bar per your request. It's possible, however, to see that it's a joke when it also links to the practical joke article. AstroHurricane001 17:52, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't find you grouchy with a name like GoodDay! But why did you revert your userpage back with the comma? Are you proud of not knowing your punctuation? Seeing you are Canadian, the article has no difference. Also, your age is in the 30s, not 30's. Reywas92^Talk_{Sign Here} 20:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

No, it's ok. I don't really mind people posting on my user talk page and adding a request. However, are you sending practically the same messages to every user with the same joke orange bar? AstroHurricane001 23:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

It links to special:Mytalk, so for whoever click it, it links to their talk page. If you're not logged in, it probably directs to your IP talk page. If I clicked it, it would link to my user talk page. AstroHurricane001 18:18, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

1947 President Succession Act

Although the 25th Amendment does not specifically say that an "acting" President could nominate a Vice President, the Act does give an "acting" President all of the powers of a President, just not the actual office. So, the Act enables them to nominate a Vice President, who, upon becoming Vice President, would automatically assume the Presidency. Hope that's helps. JCO312 22:36, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't go so far as to say that they are "wrong." Technically she is 2nd in line to the authority of the Presidency, but not technically the office itself. For all intents and purposes it is one and the same. JCO312 23:07, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Glad to help

Happy to hear my edits were helpful. Cheers, JCO312 04:08, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Talk: Colorado Avalanche

Hehe, I already did it like 30 minutes ago. I was going through my protected pages, and I saw you guys had some consensus at the talk page, so I unprotected the page. Hopefully, things will work out now. =) Nishkid64 00:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

English Wikipedia

Why is Nittymaki's (I know he's a Finlander) name being spelt with Finnish diacritcs. This is the English Wikipedia, are Angolphone names being placed (without diacritics) on the Finnish Wikipedia? Seeking information, rather then an argument. GoodDay 21:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi GoodDay, this is from the Nittymäke article talk page. If I understand you question correctly you suspect that the finnish Wikipedia use diacritcs one american names? For example Joe Sakic becomes Jöe Säkic? This is ridiculous, NO, european wiki's doesn't miss-spell names of forigen born people. See here for example, swedish wikipedia and finnish wikipedia. And Å, Ä and Ö are not diacritcs. --Krm500 09:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't speak or read finnish but since all wikipedias are the same I checked the history and the bolded Sakic in the beginning has been edited today and did not look like that when I linked it. --Krm500 20:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

We could just end the diacritcs dispute for now by keeping to the compromise.

• No diacritcs on NHL team articles.
• Diacritcs on player bio articles.

And I also suggest to add another guideline;

• Players who will be career NHLers for most of their remaning career should not have diacritcs in the article title.

Hopefully this is a good compromise since the more famous will not have diacritcs in the title during their career in the NHL. For example, Ales Hemsky who will most likely play in the NHL for a long time should not have diacritcs in his article title/name. And a player who may not have as a successful career and might go back to play in Europe (for example Martin Cibák) should have diacritcs in his article title/name. However, we stick to the current format of using diacritcs in the first line of the article for all players. But look at the Jagr article where the edit war was stopped (by me) by using diacritcs in the first line and non-diacritcs spelling in the rest of the article. So basically, all career NHLers with diacritcs should follow the format on the Jagr article. What do you think? --Krm500 20:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I like this compromise (not on the teams' pages, but on the player pages), but I still hold that Niittymäki, as the MVP of the olympics, still has many English-speaking fans who want the diacritics. While many people play in the NHL, they are nationally aclaimed in their home country as well and so the diacritics are known. This should also be taken into account.

I think that the best compromise is to go make valuable contributions to the article instead of changing diacritics back and forth. If the articles have diacritics as they were created, leave it; if not, leave it. Wikipedia is too concerned with these things. In the end, if all of the articles have diacritics or not, no one really cares if all of the articles are stubs (as is the case with many hockey articles).

But I am glad to be able to have someone on the other side who is reasonable, like I said. :) So in conclusion this can be applied to new articles... But the old ones, well, there are more important things to be doing with your time than adding/deleting diacritics. Hazelorb 03:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I would prefer that the compromise simply be this:

• No diacritcs on NHL team articles.
• Diacritcs on player bio articles.

It's immaterial (and subject to too many variables) whether a player is now a career NHLer or not. Or for how long. Or if that changes in the future. A name is spelled either correctly or not. Making an allowance for NHL team articles simply respects an existing lingustic norm in that community, but Wikipedia should provide accurate information - including the spelling of people's names in bios. For example, on the Polish wikipedia foreign names with letters not in the Polish alphabet are faithfully spelled using those letters. English Wikipedia also does this. Hockey players' bios should not be an exception; NHL team pages would be exception enough. --Mareklug ^talk 00:26, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

You wrote on my discussion page that you want constancy in all the European and Canadian NHL hockey player pages. But what about wider constancy, across the Wikipedia? What about soccer/football player bios, what about composers? All these people, regardless of where they play (!), have their names spelled correctly. What makes you think hockey players should be an exception to the rule? --Mareklug ^talk 14:13, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Valiant effort

I read a lot of your writings in regards to diacritics. You did a great job, but you ran into the same closed minded POV that i did. I posted a response here as one last shot at.... I don't know... reasonability? common sense? ENGLISH? anyways, good luck. I will pop into wikipedia now and then to see how things are going, but not too often. Not only was it the POV that pushed me away from wikipedia, but it was also the vandalism. I used to work very hard at keeping the NHL player lists updated and vandal free, but i got so sick of reverting out vandals who like to add their own name that i gave up that too. Masterhatch 02:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I try not to focus on the subject right now

This debare has taken up as much time as vandalism reverting (which is a shame...) so I'll juts be focusing on editing and adding new articles to the project. --Krm500 22:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

My suggestion?

I support diacritics most of the time. However, I support consistent policy more, and your change made it contradict even worse than previously. --tjstrf talk 02:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

The more we get together, the happier we'll be

Compromise: Settlement of differences by arbitration or by consent reached by mutual concessions

Here's hoping for agreement on 'Diacritics' across English Wikipedia. GoodDay 22:14, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

PS. there should be only one Naming conventions article. That being Wikipedia: Naming conventions. GoodDay 22:16, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

NHL team season infobox

Borrowing from the infobox that the college football wikiproject created, I came up with a modified (and expanded) template for each NHL season here: Template:NHLTeamSeason. Please feel free to add suggestions on its talk page, and to add it to the articles. Thanks! Resolute 00:48, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Calgary Flames

Hello, Resolute. On Talk: Calgary Flames, I had (months ago) been in an argument with an anon-user about the Flames captaincy in 1988-89 season. My point was McDonald & Peplinski were co-captains, Tim Hunter alternate captain. The anon user's point was McDonald, Peplinski & Hunter were tri-captains. We both came up with conflicting sources. Though a compromise was reached (on the Flames page), I still think I'm correct. Think you could convince that anon-user? PS- I'm checking out, Infobox proposals. GoodDay 21:07, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

The section in talk: Calgary Flames was 'Tim Hunter'. The disagreeing anon-user 24.66.200.193. GoodDay 21:19, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

At the risk of reopening the edit war, I've gone ahead and removed Hunter, as you are absolutely correct. I've also added a citation to the Flames Media Guide, which, frankly, should trump most other sources. The Flames themselves did not consider Hunter a captain on that team, but an alternate captain. Resolute 21:26, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

LA Kings HHOF Members

I reverted your changes in the LA Kings page. Although one could argue your point, it is definitely your POV. How can you say what player's years were HOF worthy or not, since the HOF inducts based on a lifetime of play. The listing on the Kings article merely states that they are member of the HHOF and played for the Kings. Think about the arguments that could be made regarding Gretzky. I wouldn't want to go there. Anyways, the article is supposed to be NPOV, and your revisions would put in an opinion as to what portion of a players HOF career can be allocated to what team. Everyone would have a POV. Orangemarlin 19:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I just noticed you've gone a one-man rampage through numerous hockey teams. Every single revision is your POV, not an NPOV. I'm going to revert every change you've made. Again, how can you alone make a determination what constitutes what part of a players career as a HOF part and what not. The listings are just players who are HHOF members who have played for that team. Orangemarlin 19:57, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

WPT guideline, backs my edits. GoodDay 22:01, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

It's silly to discuss this on your page, so I'll bring it to the WPT discussion. I definitely won't engage in an edit war, because you're right, this deserves discussion. Orangemarlin 00:08, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Philadelphia Flyers

Yes that would happen under a ladder system and the best team from the AHL would move up to the NHL. John R G 19:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Gen. Petraeus

GoodDay, note on your reversion of Gen. Petraeus' rank on the bio page: Petraeus was elevated to General upon his approval by the full Senate (the vote being 81-0) of the Senate Armed Services Committee's nomination. See: cbsnews.com as just one point of reference. - Thaimoss 02:55, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Acting VP page

Hey--

I added a (hoax) tag to the article since I think it is false. I didn't want to steal your nomination for AfD so I left off the delete tag. But I will support you in an AfD for that article unless and until I can see several sources actually use the phrase "Acting Vice President." Rarely are articles allowed on wikipedia when the article itself mentions that no organization actually recognizes its claims to be true. I urge you to nominate it for deletion.JasonCNJ 14:45, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Source on alternate captains?

Do you have a source that describes that teams can designate a captain and more than two alternate captains? Based on watching the Islanders, I recall that in 2001-02, they designated Peca captain, Yashin as an alternate, and then had Claude Lapointe and Dave Scatchard alternate wearing the other "A". If they could've just made them both alternate captains, I expect that they would have. Croctotheface 05:27, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate the text you added to the article, but that's not the same as citing a source. Could you please cite one? Croctotheface 05:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I checked out the rulebook (which was already linked right from that section--gotta love paying attention!), and it settles the issue. Teams can designate, according to the rules, either a captain and two alternates or three alternates per game. If a team wanted to, they could have a different lineup of captains and alternates every game, as the rules do not require that any sort of consistency be maintained. Croctotheface 05:47, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem re: posting on my userpage. :) I tried to address the issue by adding in a sentence about not needing to have the same players wear the As. If you wanted to add to or rewrite it, I wouldn't be opposed, but I don't know if there's a particularly better way to phrase it. Croctotheface 06:07, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, sorry I missed your message in my talkpage chatter. I did want to say thank you though for the kind words. They are much appreciated.  :) --Elonka 20:34, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Carolina Hurricanes

Greetings. I reverted your edit of the roster for the Carolina Hurricanes. Ray Whitney is not currently designated as an Alternate Captain for the Hurricanes. My sources for this is from the Carolina Hurricane's official site which list Brind'amour as Captain, and Wesley and Stillman as Alternate Captains. Also, in viewing my DVR copy of the Boston game played last night, I also was able to verify that Whitney was not wearing the "A" at that time. As you are aware, NHL Teams generally can only have 3 players with a "Captain" designate, either 1 player wearing a "C" with 2 wearing the "A", or 3 players wearing "A". Unless Stillman or Wesley are injured, they are currently designated as the alternate captains. Pparazorback 20:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Your a man before your time!! Just wanted to let you know that the Cane's website now officially lists Whitney as one of the Alt Captains, so I put the "A" back on the roster for Whitney on the canes roster. Pparazorback 19:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

You are probably right, didn't think about Stillman's day-to-day injury as a possible reason for the "A". Guess that is what happens when you begin to edit a wiki article less than 20 minutes after you wake up (Got to sleep in today, been a long week). Will monitor the situation after Stillman gets back on the ice to see if Whitney keeps the "A" designate on the roster. Pparazorback 19:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I am designating Ray Whitney as an official alternate captain, pretty much the same as several teams such as Columbus, Atlanta, Florida, and some others have more than 2 alternate captains. The Cane's official website still designates Whitney with the "A" even after Stillman was reactivated. I suppose they decided to keep Whitney on the rotation and keep him designated like they had Kevyn Adams previously. I will monitor the roster from time to time to make sure they still have him marked with the "A" and act accordingly if they drop the "A" from his roster line. Pparazorback 00:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your edit made on June 28th, 2007, I see that his "A" is back today. It definately was not there the day I did the edit, because when I looked for a jersey number for the new goalie, I noticed it was gone so I decided to remove the "A". If you had not of notified me and I saw the edit, I would have checked the website to see if it was back and would not have reverted as I see that it is there now. I generally do not "blind" revert something unless it is blatently obvious that it is vandalism. Btw, add your name to the list: WP:Ice Hockey Participants because if you are not an active member, I don't know what an active member is!! Have a "YOU".

Puzzled

Hey, just leaving you a personal note. I'm puzzled about your sudden change of direction regarding hockey articles. You are doing good work and the work is needed. Most hockey articles are not very well written (they are written by biased fans) and we need more good editors working on them. I urge you to reconsider undoing your work. You are part of the WikiProject whether you have signed your name on the member list or not, just based on the work you have done. Have a "good day". --Mus Musculus 22:17, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

PM dates

Hi. You should talk to Arctic.gnome about the dates of Canadian PMs. He changed them earlier this month, citing the Library of Parliament. -- Lonewolf BC 23:21, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

moved to here for continuity's sake -- LW

I've just contacted him momments ago. I have a book, plus Funk&Wagnalls Encyclopedia set to back my edits. GoodDay 23:26, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Cool. I don't know who's right (or see that the technicality matters a great deal). Just trying to get it settled collegially. -- Lonewolf BC 00:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Re:Prime Minsters of Canada, departure dates

The Library of Parliament disagrees with Jim Lotz's, and it seems that the Library of Parliament would be the ultimate source for this information, or at least a better source than some random book. It seems to be the government's convention to not include the day when a PM left office. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 23:42, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

No, don't bother. It would be nice to have a more official reference, but including the day that power is transfered makes the most sense. The one place where I think we should keep the government's dates is on List of Canadian Prime Ministers by time in office, because when adding up the total time in office we would be a day off if we included both of the half-days in a PM's term. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 20:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Interim tag on Hatcher's Captaincy

Do you think we should bring this discussion over to the Ice Hockey/Teams Pages project discussion board, so that what ever decision is made can be consistent? If you think so, i'll leave that to you. Bjewiki 23:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Don't update the roster date without verifying correctness

Don't blindly update the roster "as of" date without verifying the roster is correct. You changed the date on New Jersey Devils, but failed to add Mark Fraser to the roster. – flamurai (t) 03:15, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Constantine II of Greece

Thanks for making the reign end dates the same in the infobox and the text. I didn't understand your purpose and now that I do, I appreciate your attention to detail.Argos'Dad 05:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oath of office for President

Hello. I noticed you removed the line on the 1974 page that Ford took the oath of office because succession is automatic. I reverted it back. Although true, the line of succession is laid out and automatic, whoever is next in line should the office of President become vacant must still be sworn in and take the oath-of-office. There is a famous picture of Lyndon Johnson being sworn in hours after Kennedy's assasination. You can see it here: Lyndon_B._Johnson#Presidency_1963-1969. All Presidents must take the oath of office, regardless how they came to occupy the office. --DavidShankBone 22:05, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying, although if Ford did not take the oath of office he would not have been able to succeed Nixon. The entry is technically correct; however, I think you have a point that it may confuse some readers, especially those not familiar with the nuances of the American system. Maybe you should instead leave the oath in there, but mention it happened post-Nixon's resignation. I think it is important because this tradition is important to American notions of our democracy. It is a powerful symbol to many people, the taking of an oath of office. I don't know if you read any of the news accounts of the only Muslim U.S. Representative using the Koran to take his oath, and how that unleashed a firestorm? Virgil Goode and the Qur'an oath controversy of the 110th United States Congress. --DavidShankBone 22:20, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Is it that you think Ford was President before he took the oath? If so, that is not the case. It is only after the oath is taken does a person become President, elected or not. --DavidShankBone 22:22, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll do more research before I revert again - interesting topic! I'll get back to you. --DavidShankBone 22:52, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I think you have a decent argument, but it's premised on the idea that there are two categories: President, or not President. In reality, there is President, President-elect, and possibly one more for situations such as Ford's and Johnson's. I'm only speaking off-the-cuff here. But the U.S. Constitution does seem to directly contradict your line of reasoning: "Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

That is from Article 2. And it states, before he enter...his office.... What say you to that? --DavidShankBone 00:23, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I don't mind if you dispute me - I take this discussion not as adversarial or contentious, but to sort out an issue. To be honest, I've been pretty lazy and I'm sure a simple internet search would resolve it immediately. But I believe if the VP is in a coma, and the President steps down or dies, then the Speaker of the House would then take the oath and, after having done so, become President. Right? So have I convinced you that a person isn't President until they take the oath? Or are you still doubtful? --DavidShankBone 01:10, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I'm still not 100% convinced, A)What happens if the Pres-elect is comatose & the VP-elect is healthy. B)If both the Pres-elect & VP-elect are comatose, then the Speaker of the House would 'only become Acting President (merely assume the Presidential powers & duties, not the office) see Presidential Succession Act. Holy smokes, this is actually getting more confusing. Perhaps, we'll never know, until these events actually happen. GoodDay 01:19, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, let's stick to the issue at hand: a person doesn't become "President" until they take the oath of office. Acting President is not President, but a temporary position. If, God forbid, Bush should go into a coma like Ariel Sharon, then we'd get Cheney making the decisions (perhaps the only thing that hasn't made Bush a target of extremists - the second option is worse). I don't know how the decision would be made in such a situation that the President could no longer fulfill his role, thus making Cheney the President (after the oath). But, the oath is a time-honored tradition, and, as we have seen with Bush's policies, a formality with little real effect on the actions of those who hold the office. It's simply the "starting gun" that changes the status of a person from "in waiting" or "next-in-line" to the real thing. Pomp and circumstance means a lot in this country, even if we don't always follow what our founding principles stand for. But the oath hasn't been watered down; it's too unimportant (but important in an "official" sense) to be changed. --DavidShankBone 01:30, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Vandalising User

Re your message: Thanks for the info. If they return after their block expires and do additional vandalism, please report them to WP:AIV and an admin can add a second block for a longer amount of time. -- Gogo Dodo 02:34, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Oops, sorry I forgot the sub-title bar... It's about the habs

Hi, for the Montreal Canadiens article, you removed the reason for the players to be on the disable list saying that the reason is on tsn.ca... very well, but can you at least add a link or something? A user might like to access this data directly without having to search too long. All right, I found it on tsn.ca, but it took me a minute or so, and their IR roster is not updated daily. Come on, a saturday hockey night happened and their IR roster is still dated from Thursday, they're sloooow :) Thanks, Courascrap 05:37, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I know the TSN website is slow (concerning IR reports). From now on, I'll check on the 'respective' team's official websites. GoodDay 18:14, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Senate in Canadian Parliament

Just thought I'd let you know (since you commented on Talk about it) that 39th Canadian Parliament now includes detailed info on the Senate. Not a full membership list, but documentation of all changes since the last election. - Cafemusique 03:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Stastny

Hello. Daddy Šťastný is Slovak but I don't know if his sons are (by citizenship), too. If not, perhaps they should be without diacritics. - Darwinek 19:12, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Bob Murray

The two articles defineately need to be merged since they are for the same Bob Murray. I can't seem to find the merge template. Once I find it, I'll add it to both articles. We should probably merge into yours since it has more informations. Thanks. Patken4 22:00, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Detroit Red Wings

Hello. To the best of my knowledge, both Pavel Datsyuk and Chris Chelios have worn the alternate captain's "A" during recent games. Datsyuk had worn it in all games in which Zetterberg had not played, except for the 3-4-07 game vs. the Avalanche, in which case Chelios wore it (Chelios had not played in some of the previous games). How should these be listed on the team's current roster? I think it is worth distinguishing the original and interim alternate captains. I've noticed the current rosters for other NHL teams feature the original "A"s as hyperlinks and the interims in plain bold. Should the same apply for the Red Wings current roster? Or should a temporary note be placed somewhere until Zetterberg returns? Perhaps next to the players name or under the current roster section?I know this is a small detail, but I think a hanfdul of people come to these pages looking for the players to have most recently worn the "A". Or maybe there should be a note explaining the home/road rotation? Let me know what you think. TheKuLeR 23:24, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good. Should there be a note about the home/road rotation? Seems worth noting somewhere, if not the current roster then perhaps the players pages. TheKuLeR 23:36, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with your decision to remove the "home" and "away" notes. It definitely does not make the table look cluttered, especially with the smaller font. It's no different than listing a player as "injured". The fact that so many Wings are injured shouldn't be the reason that the alternate captain note isn't included.TheKuLeR 08:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Re:Columbus Blue Jackets

Thanks for the heads up. Alex43223 ^{Talk | Contribs | E-mail | C} 02:01, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Names

Hello. That's a way to go, too. Old WPPIH policy goes against generally accepted policy "article name with diacritics + redirect without diacritics". - Darwinek 20:17, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Pittsburgh Penguins

That was not me; that was 155.247.166.29. I only deleted the unneccessary "Staying in Pittsburgh after all" section. Please check that edit history page. 24.136.167.164 23:34, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Los Angeles Kings

Very well. My apologies for my edits. I was not aware that an agreement had been made to keep diacritics off of team pages. I apologize. Ksy92003 22:31, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of this article, what was wrong with the anonymous editors' edits of today? They seem to fill in the gaps, and I don't think wholesale reversion was necessary. I want to assume good faith in your reverts, but I'm not sure I agree with your decision. There seems to be several people who are regular contributors to the article, myself included, I read his edits as they were being added, and I did not feel a revert was necessary. Can you explain your thoughts on at Talk:Los Angeles Kings. Orangemarlin 23:13, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Quebec Nordiques

Thanks for the heads up. The points you made did not come across as anti-French at all. Skeezix1000 17:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

List of National Hockey League statistical leaders

Why have you added in the piped links for players with diacritic characters in their name? − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 02:18, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I am going to systematically go through the player names on this list and add the diacritics where necessary. This will remove your concern that the page was inconsistent with this convention. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 11:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Coaches section

I've added a section for coaching leaders at the end of List of National Hockey League statistical leaders. Their achievements seem to be under-appreciated by many fans, but obviously what they do is important. I couldn't find any existing list for active coaches, so I did the tiresome task of looking at what teams each active coach has coached, and then checked that team's record for the period they coached it (taking into account mid-season hirings/firings). Have a look. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 23:02, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Richard Codey

Thanks for your monitoring and corrections on the Richard Codey article. There is so much misinformation, including in the media, regarding Codey's status. Thanks for keeping an eye on the article. Alansohn 21:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

List of family relations in the National Hockey League

Hi GoodDay, I was hoping for some input on this. I've been quietly overhauling the article on families in the NHL on my userpage. It's not entirely done, but I was hoping for some input before I complete the section on Parents-Children, which is the last part. The main points I'm looking for is formatting (are the columns too wide/narrow), pictures (include/not include) and overall length (we're looking at something like 200KB when it's all said & done). If you could offer me some feedback on it I'd appreciate it. Anthony Hit me up... 19:49, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Favorite team?

I hope you don't mind, I've been wondering this for a while. I've seen you editing (or at least writing on the talk pages) a couple NHL teams articles, if you don't mind me asking...who/what is your favorite team? This won't make any difference, really....it's just out of curiosity. Bsroiaadn 20:37, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, alright. Thanks. If I remember correctly....all I can say is "Good luck next year". :-/ Sorry. :-/ (My favorite team is the New Jersey Devils if you were wondering.) Bsroiaadn 03:28, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

William M. Jennings Trophy

Just saying thanks for the clarification on why Harding is not included in the William M. Jennings Trophy with the Minnesota Wild. Jmlk17 21:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

New Jersey Devils Alternate Captains

GoodDay and Njdhockey. I checked the 'source' that was listed to supporting giving Rafalski alternate captain and discovered another source one day later from the same site that shows that information was not correct. The original source listed supporting Rafalski was Dated Oct 6, 2006. However, the same site listed a Devils notebook that listed Langenbrunner as an alternate captain and not Rafalski just one day later: Dated Oct 7, 2006.

As such, it appears that Rafalski is not on the Alternate captain rotation and Langenbrunner is, unless you can come up with another source that shows that is incorrect. --Pparazorback 17:03, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

infobox changes

hi - since you'll no doubt get complaints from some purists who don't care if infoboxes are crowded, but insist on the so-called correct names.... I thought I'd tell you that I think your changes are a good improvement. Let's see how long they last! Cheers Tvoz |talk 20:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Ha - I should have taken wagers. NOt worth fighting over, but I do think yours read better. Tvoz |talk 21:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Hockey and Bill Clinton

I was almost not going to revert, but when I saw it was a NHL editor, I figured you had been checked one too many times!!!! And besides, I always assumed you were a Canadian, which means there is a rule in Wikipedia that you can edit Pierre Trudeau but not Bill Clinton. LOL. Anyways, I was laughing to myself when I saw your name, because I just consider you the CEO of Wikipedia's various hockey-related pages. I never thought I'd run across you on another article, but I did look at your contributions, 95% is in hockey!!! Back to seriousness, I do think we should have formal names used as much as possible for world leaders. No one calls Queen Elizabeth, Bessie. Or maybe you Canadians do. Orangemarlin 22:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

2007 PEI Election

What a coincidence! I thought since I was reading about the election I might as well go ahead and add in the candidates. Zygar2k6 21:10, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Electoral Ridings

I sort of agree with you. But for historical purposes I think the MLAs should be kept there, maybe if a section was added which discussed the changes to the map, and what old ridings are part of the new riding. Maybe in the way the chart is done on Ron MacKinley's page for example. Of course it wouldn't be like that, but you know what I mean. Zygar2k6 20:59, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Article names

Hello and good day ;). I am not seeking problems and don't want to fight somebody. I just see that all over the Wikipedia diacriticals are used in the article names with no problem. WPP Ice Hockey is probably the only exception, so I moved several articles in a good faith, that the use of diacritical letters is a general consensus and most of people have no problem with that when a non-diacritical redirect exists. - Darwinek 20:32, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Attwell/McCreary

Rather than get into a 3RR dispute, I was hoping to explain myself on your talk page as to why I had reverted your edit (which you then re-reverted). The Attwell father/son connection and McCreary father/son connection are separate. In addition, the McCrearys being uncles to Bob Attwell, and Ron Attwell being uncle to Bill McCreary Jr., are each separate and unique familial connections. This is why Bob Attwell and Bill McCreary are not listed under the "Cousins" section; the order of familial connections was done for a reason. Every possible connection is not listed on the page; that's why many grandfather-grandson connections could be listed under two separate Father/Son listings. In short, the Attwell/McCreary connection is distinct from both the sibling and father/son connections above, and that is why it has its own line on the page (as does the additional McCreary/Attwell connection below it; just because they're uncles in one direction doesn't mean they're uncles the other way). I hope I have made myself somewhat clear (genealogy is a hobby of mine, so I understand family links very easily). Please respond, because I would like your understanding before I revert your edit back to the way it was originally. Thanks you very much. Anthony Hit me up... 18:38, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Elizabeth II of the UK

GoodDay, I respect an editor, such as yourself, who has a different opinion, and treats others with dignity. Yes, we took ages to get that compromise, didn't we? And then TharkunColl comes along as if that meant nothing. In the recent bizarre exchange between he and myself, he 1) called the non-UK realms 'preposterous' monarchies. 2) He then went up a notch and called them 'no' monarchies at all. 3) Then he called them practical republics on the ground that they were democratic! He appeared not to recognise the absurdity of calling his own monarchy a republic, even though he said it possessed 'republican qualities'.Does he think the President of the United States is more a monarch than Elizabeth II? 4) He resorted to absurd arguments about monarchy depending upon the distance between the monarch and her dominion, which he later wisely dropped. 5) He resorted to a bizarre argument stating that a frustrated young man dressing as a Nazi with a father who badgers the government about every issue under the sun and an Aunt who runs up speeding tickets makes the UK more a monarchy than Australia? These poeople aren't even monarchs!

In the end he had to admit that everything was his personal opinion. He had to recognise the pettiness and absurdity of his arguments. The only final argument he could come up with is that the Royal Family lives in the UK. So what?

As I say, I don't mind different opinions. What I do mind is silly, insulting arguments. That is why I was determined to see that exchange with him to the end. He genuiinely does not appear to see how insulting and undignified he is. An unfortunate quality in an editor.--Gazzster 07:10, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Colorado Avalanche

Next time, be less disrespectful with other editors. You are right about the Wiki project guideline, I didn't knew it. But what you posted in my talk page treating me like an idiot, I sure didn't like it. "PLEASE stop going" as if I had gone against the guidelines several times, when the concern is about editing made 2 months ago. "Be patient", as if I was posting their names again after people having deleted them. Next time, have more respect for people and for their work and don't treat them in an arrogant way. Relax.--Serte ^{[ Talk · Contrib ]} 16:59, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Offered my apologies at Serte's talk page. GoodDay 17:40, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Cheers, man. :-) Serte ^{[ Talk · Contrib ]} 17:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Ghiz-Binns

I'm well aware of the fact, thank you. Just thought I'd prepare the articles. I did infact say Ghiz was "Premier-elect", but thank you for reminding me it's "designate" -- Earl Andrew - talk 23:21, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

It's customary to do it on election night. That's what I and others have been doing for many elections in the past. Plus, it's best to do it while we think about it. -- Earl Andrew - talk 23:30, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. GoodDay 23:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Give him a warning first, and if he continues, I will look into it. -- Earl Andrew - talk 20:27, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Question: Are the borders the same or very similar? If they are, then a merging I think is warranted. You may also want to take this up with the Canadian Electoral District Wikiproject. -- Earl Andrew - talk 03:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Anaheim Ducks and other "bloated" info

You recently modified the intro with the comment that it was bloated. If that is the case, you may want to review many other teams, notably the New Jersey Devils which has a similarly "bloated" intro but has also been listed as a featured article. Ccrashh 18:13, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

You replied that you removed the Stanley Cup info...which is wasn't what I was directly referring to...you also removed info on when they joined the league, etc. Take a look at the article on New Jersey to see what I mean. Ccrashh 18:19, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Anaheim Ducks

GoodDay, I'm well aware of the diactrics escapades, my edit to the ducks roster was simply to keep consistency within the article, since on the roster Selanne, and Pahlsson's names DID have diactrics, I assumed some sort agreement was met on that article to use them. Apparently not. But for the record I am anti-diacritic as well. But I just think in certain situations when editors insist on using them, the best solution would be to keep consistency with whatever the particular article has. Also, because diactrics are still randomly being used in various ice hockey related articles, it's tough to keep up with what consensus were made for what areas. IrisKawling 18:43, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Because it's just plain merited ...

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For laboriously stripping those dratted diacritics out of hockey-related articles!  RGTraynor  20:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Your RFC idea for Crosby era on Pittsburgh Penguins page

I'm satisfied with leaving the discussion on the article talk page, and seeing what other opinions float in over the next while. I'm not the original editor who had created that section, but I appreciate the idea. ColtsScore 13:04, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I see it's been added back in. I guess we'll see what happens. ColtsScore 10:30, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

88.112.222.56

FYI: 88.112.222.56 is at it again. Just noticed the same kind of edits on Erik Johnson. I filed a complaint at WP:AIV and they hit him with a 7-day block. Gmatsuda 02:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Guess what? Our "friend" struck again on Martin Skoula's page. He's now blocked for a month. Gmatsuda 07:11, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

FYI: Our "friend" is back after his/her one-month block, but this time, under 88.112.220.238. Just reported the IP to WP:AIV for more of the same vandalism to Anže_Kopitar. Gmatsuda 20:35, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

He commits really lame acts of vandalism, but what makes him a "sicko?" Not that I'm defending him or anything...just wondering. :) Gmatsuda 23:52, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Pinochet

all the articles do not have to use the word dictator i think Wikipedia:Ignore all rules applies, that is why this article has this special circumstance.^{T ALK}•^QR_C2006•¢ʘñ†®¡ß§ 01:04, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Re:Nashville Predators

Maybe saying "10th-year anniversary season" or "Ten year anniversary season" would be better? Instead of "10th anniversary season". So it would be going more by year than by season, ya know? That's what we did on the List of family relations in the National Hockey League when the Ducks won the cup, too. Talking about how the Neidermayers played against eachother in the Finals just 4 years earlier, instead of saying 3 seasons. Bsroiaadn^Talk 19:26, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Yea, that sounds a lot better than what I suggested, good idea. Bsroiaadn^Talk 19:34, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, they've mentioned that June 25th is their ten-year anniversary, so I don't see them not having patches or marketing it in some way, but I suppose we'll see what they do. Bsroiaadn^Talk 19:49, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

"Iwoto"

The issue here is that "Iwoto" and "Iwo To" are incorrect romanizations, not English spellings. Iwo Jima, though an incorrect romanization, was an accepted English spelling. Sumo (rather than sumō); Tokyo (rather than Tōkyō) and Kyoto (rather than Kyōto) are similar examples: established English spellings exist for each of those words/names, so that's what we use.

In the case of いおうとう, no established English spelling exists, so the correct romanization Iōtō should be used. The spellings "Iwōtō," "Iwoto" and "Iwo To" are incorrect because お is romanized "o," not "wo."

Separating the two words is not common practice either: it's Hiroshima, not Hiro Shima, and Hokkaido, not Hokkai Do. Exploding Boy 00:31, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Never assume...

I loved your Brown deletion, however since one of your British predictions seems unlikely, I bloody well hope the other two won't happen either! Gareth E Kegg 22:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Why am I having the British swear word (the B-word) uttered in-directly towards me? My edit at List of Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom was a good faith edit. GoodDay 22:55, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

It wasn't your edit I was swearing at! Your edit was useful and good, I was just swearing at the thought of Cameron becoming Prime Minister! Gareth E Kegg 10:56, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I see, that's cool. GoodDay 18:33, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Just NHL?

On Wikipedia:WikiProject Ice Hockey#Wikiproject notice you added NHL (it was to "all player pages" not team, but that made me think of it), but is it just NHL or is it all North American team pages? I thought it included the AHL, ECHL, etc. too. Or am I wrong? I just wanna make sure before I keep going. Bsroiaadn^Talk 19:21, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I forgot to put NHL for (NHL team and NHL player pages compromise) from over a week ago. The addition to the 'current policies' have nothing to do with the current debate (other hockey related pages). GoodDay 19:29, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I understand that it has nothing to do with the current discussion, but I was just confused since I thought the AHL and other North American league team pages shouldn't have diacritics. So every league other than the NHL should have them? I'm asking you instead of bringing it up at WP:HOCKEY since there's already enough arguing there right now, unfortunately. Plus, even if it was calm, it's pretty apparent that it would just start another heated discussion. Bsroiaadn^Talk 19:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Alright, I understand. Thanks. Sorry I didn't respond sooner, I was reading something and decided to wait till I was done to reply. Thanks, though. Bsroiaadn^Talk 20:26, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: WikiProject Ice Hockey

I signed it Peter Forsberg to go along with my attempt at humour. CroCan I'll die before I surrender, Tim 15:27, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

List of [insert NHL team name] players

These articles are for players who played at least one game with that team. As such, Daniel Briere does not qualify for inclusion to the Flyers players article yet. The same goes for other players being signed today. --Sparkhurst 21:22, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I rarely sign in these days. Well, that and I haven't been editing Wikipedia articles much the past six months. --Sparkhurst 21:29, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

dylan hunter

on sabres.com, dylan hunter is listed as a part of the sabres roster. now if i were you i would get my facts straight before you take him off the page. since the sabres lost two centers they need to bring up two more players, i put hunter up there because he is on the roster.

Don't fuss about it any longer. I've re-added Hunter to the Sabres page. GoodDay 20:33, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

3 Reverts

Any reason I shouldn't have you put up for the 3 revert rule? I would suggest reverting your last edit so you don't break the 3RR. --Djsasso 23:19, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

None at all. I'm through with diacritics usages. Add them anywhere, remove them anywhere. The constant bickering is too much, I've put myself deep into this. I'm taking my self out. GoodDay 00:03, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Again the policy agreed on, was NO DIACRITICS on any North American hockey pages and DIACRITICS on Non-North American hockey pages. No matter how others 'perceive' them. GoodDay 00:28, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

President of Israel

I don't understand the problem. Acting presidents are not counted as presidents (or Katsav would be listed as the 11th), so why include them in the succession box. Based on this, I didn't think it was worthy of discussion, so I was WP:BOLD! Number 57 10:19, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Fellow Fidel Castro editor

"You're a Castro lover, I'm a Castrophobe," music of your own choice.

I've put a response on SV's talk page - pointless arguing really, but occasionally I feel the need to get in a jab or two. MichaelW 07:18, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

FYI I just got this on my talk page. I see he's continuing his campaign on the Fidel talk page - I'm off there now.

"From Silent Voice to the Castro idolatries

I see this is the meeting place of all of you. Since you all happen to like Castro so much why don't you sell everything you have or own and give as gift to the Cuban revolution or Castro the same thing and ask if he can take you in. :-) It is nice to be able to voice your opinion in a free society like ours. Imagine a dictator all the way to the right searching thru IPs etc trying to locate you guys to put you in prison just because you happen to like Fidel Castro! My beef is not with Fidel Castro is with the fact that he had to hold on to power for so long about Cubans not being able to choose their leaders. But you guys know that. I may not agree with what you guys think but I do not think but I still believe in a free society everyone is entitle to their opinions. Enjoy freedom why you still have it! Is sad that for less things things that you guys are allow to do here many people are in prison or die back in Cuba.

SilentVoice 04:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)." MichaelW 06:43, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

GoodDay I am not saying all Castro editors are commies Sorry! I am saying the main POV in that page is slanted towards Castro's favor. It is interesting this effect in wikipedia where people with devoted followers get their pages dress in better light than they should be. It is for the unesperiece casual wikipedia user that will take everything there as true. I am giving up is useless so do as you pleased. Just like the man said History will take care of him! :-) Regards SilentVoice 18:50, 12 July 2007 (UTC).

Wikipedia: WikiProject Ice Hockey

Actually, Djsasso and Krm500 are wrong. If you take a look at the bottom of this section it says "NHL-related pages: No diacritics at all", note the at all, it doesn't say for player names and Djsasso even agreed to it. I saw how the whole place name thing started, too, since I took them out in one article (Detroit Red Wings I think) and it got reverted by Krm500, then I saw the couple edits between you two and yea. I decided to just stay out of it, I've only been at WP:HOCKEY for one diacritic discussion, and I have already had enough of it. Though, this may be different, as they are wrong in this case and agreed to none at all. Really, I think we should just make it clear cut and no grey areas. North American hockey pages (excluding player pages) have no diacritics, where as international (except if they only include North American countries) have diacritics. It should be for both player names and places. And I think that would make everyone happy and is a fine compromise, this way we'd be able to get it over and done with and never bring it up again. Bsroiaadn^Talk 00:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Yea, I have nothing against them either. And thanks, I probably will make an attempt at it. I think I'm gonna plan out my side of it and everything first, though. Also, when it happens, you shouldn't feel the need to get involved. Everyone would completely understand if you didn't want to, at least the ones who have read how much you dis-like the arguing. Bsroiaadn^Talk 00:28, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. Bsroiaadn^Talk 00:55, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia, partially in English

Indeed lack of respect for English is a growing problem. Hysterical reactions by some users is a good indicator of the depth of this problem. What is common sense to some, is seen as an attack on their nationalistic ideology by others. And when nationalism is an issue things tend to get ugly and unreasonable. M0RD00R 09:02, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Precocious Editors

I noticed your "welcome" to a new editor. I have been castigated recently for a similar error of my ways. Apparantly new editors who are familiar with policy, afd, aiv, ani etc may have been editing for a long period under an IP address. It is bad faith to imply a new editor with monobook.js and every WP quote might be a sock. If you continue you could well be accused of being a stalker. Mike33 - t@lk 00:01, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I hope you don't mean me ? Response to your "Welcome" which I initially misconstrued (as being friendly, which having read Mike33's post above, I'm now not so sure about) here. For the record I haven't been editing for a long time from an IP address - if by implication you mean me of course - I have done the occasional edit, but not very often - can't people here stop being 'snidy' - it's all so false. Sprigot 06:37, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm very, very sorry GoodDay - with all the nastiness I've found here - I mistook your welcome - I initially thought it was friendly until I saw the strange post from Mike33 above - your not guilty of anything and again - I am sorry - I hope we can we 'chalk' this one down to experience and put it behind us. Sprigot 20:41, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm back (sorta)

Yea, I was like "Oh, he's back" when I saw your discussion, haha. Anyway, I know you're not a "linguistic bigot", and I don't think Krm500 and Djsasso think you are either, they just think diacritics should be included. Though I'm not sure why they aren't ok with the none-on-North-American-pages compromise, I think it's a fair compromise. Krm500 says he isn't going to continue discussing it, he's probably frustrated with the whole situation. Hopefully this problem will be resolved by the time hockey season rolls around. Bsroiaadn^Talk 19:45, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Yea, I guess so. Anyway, in the mean time, I've gotten pretty interested in editing templates (in case you haven't seen the new parameters for {{ice hockey}} I added all of the new ones (which is everything except "class"). Well, not me myself...an sysop did...but I wrote it...anyway, can you think of anything else that would be worth adding to the template? Bsroiaadn^Talk 19:58, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Ice Hockey template

Hmmmm...ok. I'm almost searching for things to add, but I don't want to add anything that wouldn't be userful (whether it be now or in the future, as the peer review thing isn't very useful now...but may be soon), that's how interested I am in editing templates right now. Haha. Oh well, I'll find something else to edit.....maybe get some rest...pretty tired. Bsroiaadn^Talk 20:13, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: diacratics

You can't look at it with an "us" vs. "them" mentality, even if you are on differing sides of the coin. That's how probably 95% of the personal attacks on Wikipedia break out, is when people have that mentality... We're all in this together, so we should try and be as accommodating as possible. I understand where you are coming from though, and I'm not saying its your fault, but still, the more often you check your personal biases at the door, the more success you will have in finding a resolution. Croat Canuck talk 00:31, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Well its good that your able to accept it even if you don't necessarily agree with it, the sour feeling is unavoidable sometimes, trust me, I know. But you just move on and keep doing whatever it is that you do best on Wikipedia. Croat Canuck talk 00:58, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Ice Hockey August 2007 Newsletter

WikiProject Ice Hockey Newsletter Dear GoodDay! You are receiving this newsletter because you have signed up as a member of WikiProject Ice Hockey. The purpose of this newsletter is to update on the goings on of the project, as there have been major changes, and a lot of new recognized content in the past few weeks. If you are an inactive user, you probably won't recognize the new and improved state of the WikiProject! From the project, Maxim. New recognized content By Maxim There have been a lot more Good and Featured articles written in the past few weeks. Here is a list: Featured articles Wayne Gretzky — Promoted on 2006-02-14; on Main Page on 2006-06-13 New Jersey Devils — Promoted on 2006-11-20; on Main Page on 2007-06-30 Martin Brodeur — Promoted on 2007-04-28 Fighting in ice hockey — Promoted on 2007-05-07; on Main Page on 2007-07-19 Dominik Hasek — Promoted on 2007-05-25 Good articles Calgary Hitmen Colorado Avalanche National Hockey League Joe Sakic Nottingham Panthers Stanley Cup Traditions and anecdotes associated with the Stanley Cup Ray Emery The French Connection (hockey) Featured lists List of ice hockey teams in Alberta List of ice hockey teams in Saskatchewan Frölunda HC seasons List of Colorado Avalanche players List of family relations in the National Hockey League List of New Jersey Devils players List of New Jersey Devils head coaches List of drafted Frölunda HC players Notes Article Improvement By Maxim Upon some discussion on the WikiProject talk page, the Article Improvement Drive page was revamped by Krm500 and Maxim. It was renamed Wikipedia:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Article Improvement, and it includes two section. The first section is called articles in dire need of improvement. It list articles, usually important, that are in very poor shape. The second section is called requested help. Users list an article they request help improving a certain article, which will facilitate collaboration, which is the aim of any WikiProject. There is one article currently listed there, Henrik Lundqvist, here. The goal is to at least get it to Good article status. Diacritics By Maxim In the past few weeks, there has been quite heated discussion about the use of diacritics in article name. The current guideline is using diacritics in the pages of articles of all player names which require them, but redirects are exempt. Task forces By Maxim There have been two new task forces started within the WikiProject to coordinate major topics. Sweden Ice Hockey task force This task force was initiated by Krm500. Its current goal is to improve Henrik Lundqvist to Good or Featured article status. It covers all Swedish clubs, leagues and competitions and associated articles, players and coaches that are Swedish, or have played/coached for a Swedish club, and arenas in Sweden. They plan to eventually operate as a sort of a sub-project, which will have its own articles for creation, ranking importance and quality of articles, and co-ordinate article improvement. Its current members are Krm500, Bamsefar75, and CLAES. New Jersey Devils task force This task force was initiated by Bsroiaadn. Its goal is to improve New Jersey Devils to Featured Topic status. Although it currently meets the required article count, the task force wishes to improve it further. Its area of coverage is very similar to the Sweden Ice Hockey task force. Its members are Bsroiaadn, JHMM13, FutureNJGov, Sportskido8, Michael Greiner, JRWalko, and Soxrock. Requested Images By Maxim After discussion on the WikiProject talk page, Serte created a page for Requested Images. The page encourages users to license images for use on articles. The page also has section to request images for players, arenas, game situations, miscellaneous, and team and league logos. The page has been quite popular; since it was created on July 21, there have been six completed requests. There are four currently outstanding requests: Patrik Eliáš — Photo of player, requested by Bsroiaadn Scott Stevens — Photo of player, requested by Bsroiaadn Daniel Alfredsson — Photo of player, requested by Maxim Hart Trophy — Photo of the original Hart Trophy (retired in 1960), requested by Scorpion0422 Article assessement completed By Maxim On July 12, Kaiser matias announced that he had completed assessing all the articles with a {{ice hockey}} tag, sorting them into Category:Unassessed Ice Hockey articles. Kaiser matias has ranked about 9000 articles in that category, and most were stubs, and "have no information at all", according to him. Everybody is encouraged to expand the stubs into real articles. This effort took around 5 months. A big thanks goes to Kaiser matias from me and all the project. Note: You have received this newsletter because you have added your name here. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter, please remove your name. From the automated Animum Delivery Bot (delivered on 18:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)).

Sorry for the disturbance

I'm extremely sorry about the disturbance on your talkpage. It was not my intent or expectation that my request to you, here on your page, would result in Gbambino attempting to argue here with me. For the difference it makes, I was not going argue back (not here). However, I completely understand your deletion of the whole works, and likewise if you decide to delete this as well. Again, sorry "about the mess". -- Lonewolf BC 18:53, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Quite, alright. GoodDay 19:05, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Request for arbitration

You have been named in a request for arbitration at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Commonwealth_realms. Jonathan David Makepeace 00:49, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Please vote!

Hi,

Since you've been involved in the recent discussions at Talk:Commonwealth Realm, your vote would be appreciated on this proposal. Thanks. -- Hux 09:48, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the help on my talk page. Croat Canuck talk 00:21, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Battle for the Hall

I don't think we should wait for the block to expire at all. I expect that if Lonewolf has any issues he should bring them up at Talk:Rideau Hall first; that's what he failed to to after his initial postings there, and why the page lock was implemented in the first place. If, after two weeks, and being well aware of the existence of both the lock-down and the discussion at Talk:Rideau Hall, he hasn't raised any concerns, then continued reverting should result in a) the page being re-locked, b) him being reported for abuse and disruption, and c) an RfC as the first step in the dispute resolution process. In hindsight, this probably should have been done some time ago, but I guess we'll start again from scratch. --G2bambino 20:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

As I said at Talk:Rideau Hall, I think we should leave the unblock request until we're sure Lonewolf doesn't have any qualms about the present wording - either through a comment from him, or inferring it from his silence. Maybe until Monday? --G2bambino 20:33, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

PS- why can one not edit each section individually here? It's rather frustrating to have to edit the entire page to add a comment. Just curious. --G2bambino 20:34, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

United Kingdom

Hello GoodDay, and thanks for the contact. I have seen them dispute in the past, and tried to mediate. I wasn't aware they'd continued to battle this out. I hope it has remained civil?

On that issue, I'm quarter Scottish, English, Canadian and Bangladeshi (well, technically British Indian); I'm pretty much a product of the commonwealth, and certainly don't have a British-bias that it is the centre of the world! However, I do still think that ultimately (where citation and consensus allows) a little more detail should be given on the UK related articles as, for better or worse, it was the centre of British Empire, and the traditional home of the British monarchy (I think it also helps British readers who aren't really aware of the Queen's international status).

I think it's pretty akin to saying Gordon Brown is the Priminister of the UK, despite him being a Scotsman. Does that help? Jza84 23:19, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Re:Edit Wars

Um... Thanks for the note on my talkpage. Content dispute is content dispute, and there are several ways of addressing that. I don't think admins are any better than anyone else at helping resolving differences. If one party reports the other (I don't do 3RR much, mostly WP:AIV) then a decent admin should investigate enough to determine if there is only one party at "fault" before acting. That is the only time admins should get involved in the dispute - if only to point them to WP:DR. I hope this helps. LessHeard vanU 19:23, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Passport

Don't worry GoodDay, I said I would not responded after my last comment and I won't. Brian | (Talk) 21:58, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Commonwealth realms

Hello GoodDay,

I've read the articles on voting and consensus but am left wondering when we can say we've achieved consensus on the capitalization of Commonwealth realm, given that we probably won't achieve unanimity.

There are other concerns I cannot voice for fear that my words will be twisted by others. Editing Wikipedia can be quite harrowing.

Your advice would be appreciated. You may contact me by email if you prefer.

Regards,

Jonathan David Makepeace 22:59, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Ps. I'll try to hold my tongue on the Passport page as well.

IIRC it's the vote on "Realms of the Commonwealth" that closes on the 14th; the footnote vote closes on the 15th.

You are, of course, free to do whatever your conscience dictates. However, the motion you suggest has already been submitted and failed. JDM proposed it on 27 July and it closed with the result "No consensus to move" on 2nd August. The only difference I can see is that you are lowering the bar. Suppose you don't get the 67% result you are looking for -- are you then going to resubmit it again with a 50%+1 threshold?

JDM's refusal to accept the earlier result does not, in my opinion, justify a resubmission of the motion. It smacks of stacking the deck. --Chris Bennett 21:29, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

PS: I think G2bambino has been the chief advocate of retaining the current position, not me. I've added a couple of arguments that seem relevant to me, and suggested the current approach to reaching a compromise solution, but he's the one that submitted the motion. It was going well too, until JDM made it clear -- again -- that he wasn't interested.

I may be saying more about it at the moment, but that's just because G2bambino, poor bugger, is completely frustrated and fed up with the topic. I don't blame him. I've got past the frustration stage -- I'm disgusted. --Chris Bennett 21:44, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello GoodDay,

I have to be very careful what I say in this situation and will respond on the article's talk page.

Jonathan David Makepeace 22:50, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello again,

I would like to explain why this edit is important, but, on second thought, I'm not sure it would improve the situation for any of the participants.

It will likely be up to Mackensen to judge whether we have reached consensus, since it is he who would most likely decide whether to lift page protection. It's out of any of our hands.

Jonathan David Makepeace 00:01, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

It also seems to me that we've already had a motion on moving the page, which reached a "no consensus." As JDM has refused to accept the failure of said motion, JDM has reneged on his words of accepting compromise, JDM has duplicitously argued one thing on users' talk pages while saying another on Talk:Commonwealth Realm, and JDM has canvassed only his supporters to vote on other motions at Commownealth Realm, I now see the whole process as corrupted.

I believe it is now at the point where outside parties need to step in and take the reigns out of our hands. In my mind, an ArbCom case, where each side presents their arguments and a committee of non-involved admins makes a ruling on the matter, is the only way to resolve this once and for all. --G2bambino 02:02, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Again, the page move request to "Commonwealth realm" was already made by JDM; see Talk:Commonwealth Realm#Requested move.

Again, the events that have unfolded after the failure of this motion have led me to believe any second vote on moving the page will be one corrupted by the political machinations of an uncompromising totalitarian who simply will not stop until he has had his way. Thus, I feel a second vote is a complete waste of time.

Again, I maintain that the ArbCom should rule on this matter; a ruling by such a non-partisan body has a far less chance of being affected by political campaigning and currying favours. Even if the ruling is in favour of respelling "Commonwealth Realm" as "Commonwealth realm," I would respect the decision. --G2bambino 18:34, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

"Support"

Hi, GoodDay. This is minor, but in regard to this edit of yours, to your vote in the current poll at "Commonwealth Realm", it is customary in Wikipedia polls to lead off each vote with a bolded "Support" or "Oppose" (or "Delete"/"Keep", or whatever, depending), despite the placement of votes under headings. This is, I guess, partly a hold-over from earlier formats I've seen, where the votes were not sorted by kind. However, even with sorted polls it helps to give a better visual impression of the relative strengths of the positions, by polling numbers. (Of course raw numbers are not the only consideration for the outcome.)
I suppose that technically I should not have modified the earlier votes by giving them leaders, but I didn't think anyone would mind. Sorry if you did. However, can I persuade you to put the leader back onto your vote? With all the other votes having one, for yours to have none gives the impression that there might be some question about your position. Besides, what harm in it? Please consider it. -- Lonewolf BC 23:27, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

(Moved to here from my talkpage -- Lonewolf BC 23:40, 15 August 2007 (UTC))

No need to plead, I've re-added. GoodDay 23:34, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I thought that was "reasoning". ;-) Thanks. -- Lonewolf BC 23:40, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Quiet in the Hall

Greetings, again, GoodDay. Regarding this message that you left for G., it was my understanding that you were going to make your interim compromise edit to the article. I don't find G's last word acceptable any more than I did before. I've just been holding off because I know he'll edit-war me to his last breath, and because I've been waiting for you to act. Please do or, if you're not going to, please tell me so. Thanks. -- Lonewolf BC 04:36, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

And how long is it to remain as this non-compromise "compromise"? There's no justification for removing cited material, so... something's going to have to change sometime soon. --G2bambino 19:21, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I still don't understand what you are (or were) trying to do, GoodDay; your compromise edit didn't compromise at all, and you sill inserted it knowing it didn't solve anything anyway? I thought the goal was to compose something that made everyone happy.

I also just noticed this: "he'll edit-war me to his last breath." Ah, Lonewolf, reverter supreme... he cracks me up. He really must believe there's a halo above his head! ;) --G2bambino 19:31, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

(Moved to here from my talkpage.)
I requested the addition of my compromise to the protecting Administrator (when the page was protected) he didn't apply it. Since the unprotection of the page, 'nobody' reverted the G2 edit or disputed it on the talk ('til now), I took that as acceptance by you & others. My 'compromise' is always there at your disposal, but I'm personally through with the 'struggle'. Remember to keep the dispute at 'talk' and goodluck to the both of you. GoodDay 18:56, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

PS- Added my 'compromise', again 'no edit warring'. GoodDay 19:04, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for making the edit.
Just out of curiousity, do you have section-editing somehow disabled on your talkpage, or is that just some temporary glitch with Wikipedia? This is, if I rightly recall, the second time I've had to edit your page as a whole, for lack of "edit" buttons for the sections. As another by-the-by, I generally prefer to keep user-talkpage conversations on the page where they began, for sake of continuity. Unless you have some strenuous objection to that method, please let us follow it in any future user-talk conversations -- though with your withdrawal, there might be none.
I'm sorry that this whole business has, as it seems, frustrated you into leaving it. -- Lonewolf BC 22:42, 16 August 2007 (UTC)