Jump to content

User talk:JamesMLane: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
User2004 (talk | contribs)
23,415 edits
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Archives''': [[User talk:JamesMLane/Archive tables of contents|Archives tables of contents]], [[User talk:JamesMLane/Archive1|Archive1]], [[User talk:JamesMLane/Archive2|Archive2]]

==[[Wikipedia:Forum for Encyclopedic Standards]]==

I have drafted a proposal for a new voluntary association on Wikipedia (joining groups like the [[Wikipedia:The Business and Economics Forum]] and the [[Wikipedia:Harmonious editing club]]) to promote discussion of a sort of system of expert review on Wiki. Please take a look and add your ideas. [[User:172|172]] 02:42, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

== irregularities title ==

What's up, I didn't exactly understand your vote about the naming for the title... not a flame, I just didn't understand what you meant. Does this mean you want to keep the title as it is? I would just like to add "voting" somewhere in the title so it excludes other possible election controversies, as "2004 U.S. Election controversies and irregularities" seems to be able to include pretty much anything, including the debate topics. Voting seems to narrow the focus enough. What do you think? --[[User:Kizzle|kizzle]] 20:58, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea, except I don't think you're going to get too much support for statistical analysis, because that seems like a prime target for people who think this page is original research, but I'm ok with it. --[[User:Kizzle|kizzle]] 21:47, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)

Oh, so now you found a better source on the ohio recount you think you're better than I am? ;) --[[User:Kizzle|kizzle]] 13:39, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)

== Chess ==

Thanks for pointing out the anomaly. I stand corrected.

== sbvt talk archives ==

fixed. it was just a problem with the move not recognizing subpage syntax. [[User:Wolfman|Wolfman]] 21:11, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

==Contest==
'''Posted on [[User_talk:ClockworkSoul]]'''

To TheArtistFormerlyKnownAsClockworkTroll: Thanks for giving us all a good chuckle with your contest! You're a prince. [[User:JamesMLane|JamesMLane]] 06:30, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
* It was a blast to have! Plus, I like my ''shiny new name''! [[User:ClockworkSoul|ClockworkSoul]] 06:33, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

==apeman==
Hi. Just wanted to let you know I turned [[Apeman]] from a redirect to a disambig as we both suggested on the VfD page. As you had some interest I thought I'd let you know and encourage you to check it out and see if you think it needs any work. -[[User:R. fiend|R. fiend]] 17:06, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
:If you think some of the specific hominids should be mentioned then you can and add them if you wish. I was hesitant to; apeman being an unscientific term I didn't want to have to play specifics about what should be included as an "apeman" vs. early human. I thought I might ask my father (a professor of evolutionary biology) but I think he'd frown on the term "apeman" altogether in such context. But thanks for your input. And if you can think of other examples (particularly in fiction; I swear there are more. Morlocks? I forget how ape-like they were in the novel) throw them in there. -[[User:R. fiend|R. fiend]] 22:15, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

==Re: kryptonite lock==
...Ooops, Good point, I've changed that paragraph accordingly[[User:Dhodges|Dhodges]] 06:24, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

==Request IRC chat==
I am requesting IRC chat on #wikipedia. [[User:Kevin baas|Kevin Baas]] | [[User_talk:Kevin_baas|talk]] 23:15, 2004 Dec 4 (UTC)

== Multi-Licensing ==

The multi-licensing template has recently been clarified to read: "''I agree to multi-license my text contributions, unless otherwise stated, ...''" Someone had pointed out that it wasn't clear (a) which contributions were included (media files are not included by default) and (b) whether the notice takes priority over other notices. In the the case of (b), the "''unless otherwise noted''" clause should make this quite clear. I don't know if that makes a difference to you and your notice on your page, but I thought I'd mention it anyway. -- [[User:Ram-Man|Ram-Man]] ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit&section=new comment]| [[User talk:Ram-Man|talk)]] 13:47, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)

== Meetup ==

Your name is on the list at [[Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC]] for December 12. In case you forgot to check the page, the venue and time have been both been set. We are planning on meeting at the Moonstruck Diner at 1:30pm. Just wanted to let you know. -- [[User:Ram-Man|<nowiki></nowiki>]] &ndash; [[User:Ram-Man|Ram-Man]] <sup>([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit&section=new comment]) ([[User talk:Ram-Man|talk]])</sup>[[<nowiki></nowiki>]] 23:08, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

==[[2004 U.S. election voting controversies]]==

This is quite good work I must say. This definately clears out most of the clutter and presents the information in a manner that is both concise and relevant. I could certainly support this wholeheartedly. You are correct that we still disagree on daughter pages, but if any such pages are as well done as this one, I would put such quibbles aside in any renewed VFD vote for the sake of community unity. [[User:Indrian|Indrian]] 03:28, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

== Bobby Fischer ==

The problem with making Bobby Fischer into a "chess champion" is that he ceases to be a human being. By taking out the theme which HE clearly makes plain that his life was divided into two parts and the second part governed the first, it is impossible to understand Fischer. These are not just religious beliefs the way they have been restyled they are his life and governed everything. Also removed is the reason WHY Fischer would not play in 1972 and by removing all of that text the article go back to confusion. The reason why he would not play when overlaid on the timetable is because his whole world had just come crashing down and he eventually turned into the hostile and suspicious person that he is today. This article makes Fischer into a cardboard chess piece. I do not wish to get into any sort of revert war so I am writing to you here. Would you like to discuss this a little more? Obviously it is easier and quicker to wade in and delete than it is to create something and by just wiping out half of my text without offering anything new leads to creative frustration on my part. I would like to discuss this matter further with you with a view to resolution that we can both agree with. [[User:MPLX|MPLX/MH]] 06:13, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

== summary article ==

I like what you've done, however I do think you need about 2 more paragraphs on each subject, ideally we should use your article as kind of a "portal" to go to the other articles in depth. This month is hell for me, I think when I get a chance i'm going to try to help out on the summary aticle... I don't know if you've already done it but the subsections should mirror the sub-pages and soon-to-be subpages of the main page. Good work :) --[[User:Kizzle|kizzle]] 06:33, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

Hey, I was thinking, if we use a summary article as a starting point, do you want to put back in pre-election night controversies (i.e. debate stuff), so as to have one place where all the 2004 U.S. election controversies can go? Using short summaries, it would all fit. Just a thought. --[[User:Kizzle|kizzle]] 03:13, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)

== Licensing categories ==

You could always try moving the licensing information to a subpage like [[User:JamesMLane/Copyright]] or [[User:JamesMLance/Licensing]]. You could also COPY the information to the subpage and delete just the categories from your main user page. [[User:Ram-Man|<nowiki></nowiki>]] &ndash; [[User:Ram-Man|Ram-Man]] <sup>([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit&section=new comment]) ([[User talk:Ram-Man|talk]])</sup>[[<nowiki></nowiki>]] 18:18, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

== category name ==

I want to start a category for govenment watchdog groups such as [[Judicial Watch]], [[Project on Government Oversight]], [[Center for Public Integrity]], [[Common Cause]], etc. The obvious category is "Government watchdog organizations", but I'm not sure the word "watchdog" is really neutral. Another possibility is "Government accountability organizations", but that is a bit narrower in scope and less clear. I'm stumped. Does any better name for such a category spring to mind for you? Thanks. [[User:Wolfman|Wolfman]] 19:18, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

:Good point. I guess I'll go with "U.S. government watchdog groups". "Oversight" somehow implies an official sanction to me. If anyone objects, I suppose the category can always be renamed. Thanks again. [[User:Wolfman|Wolfman]] 20:02, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

::Ok, sounds good. Government watchdog groups in the U.S. [[User:Wolfman|Wolfman]] 20:40, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

== "Dry Drunk" ==

Your right, I guess two of the other three articles, lulled me into giving that one short shrift. Thanx for catching that.--[[User:Silverback|Silverback]] 16:32, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

== "first rate" vs. "second rate" ==

You made my day with that edit summary. Cheers, --[[User:MarkSweep|MarkSweep]] 17:26, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

== [[Sollog]] ==

Over at the [[Sollog]] article there's been mention of a federal court case involving the subject of the article. All we've got is a case number, 96CV 1499, and I can't coax anything from Lexis about this article, but I've always been crappy at legal research. Perhaps you could give us a hand if you have some spare wiki time? Thanks. [[User:Gamaliel|Gamaliel]] 00:38, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

:Yes, the VfD discussion should be linked from the talk page - it ''was'' there at some point, but must have been lost in one of the many refactorings. I'll re-add it. Cheers --[[User:Rlandmann|Rlandmann]] 22:13, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

== Tucson, Arizona ==

Hi James,

First let me say that I have great respect for your vote. You seem to me to be genuinely interested in convention, while some other people seem interested in playing down the importance of the O'odham language or discussing more specific, irrelevant issues.

Second off, I have a couple of responses to your comment.

# While [[New York City]] does not include '''Nieuw Amsterdam''' in the first sentence, there is an entire article at [[Nieuw Amsterdam]], and it's actually fairly long. There is no such article for Cuk &#7778;on, and I don't think there should be - there's not a whole lot that could go there that doesn't belong at [[Tucson]].
# While '''Nieuw Amsterdam''' is indeed another name for New York, it isn't often used in a modern context as a reference to the city by any of its residents or by anybody living within a couple of hundred miles (to my knowledge). I'm not sure popular Dutch usage in the Netherlands is even to call it "Nieuw Amsterdam" - I have a sneaking suspicion that most Hollanders call it "Nieuw York", and perhaps the same is true of Hollandophone New Yorkers. In addition, when the name IS used in English-language literature, it is often written "New Amsterdam", and usually refers to the Dutch colonial era of New York. Cuk &#7778;on, on the other hand, is used in a modern context by speakers of O'odham to refer to Tucson, past *and* present, and English usage is almost 0. (edit: Haha, indeed! The article on the Dutch Wikipedia is titled [[New York]], and the name "Nieuw Amsterdam" isn't even mentioned as far as I can see... wow)
# While the indigenous inhabitants of most of what is now the US have been at least decimated, the entire Southwest (Arizona, New Mexico) escaped that fate almost entirely, having much more interactions with the much kinder Mexicans (most Mexicans are at least part American indigine, so it would be a different context, plus the ways of life were more similar), until the late 1800s and early 1900s. For this reason, the percentage of Native American languages in the Southwest which are in serious danger of extinction or are already extinct is very low, and is almost exclusively limited to languages spoken on the Arizona-California border (Mojave, Chemehuevi, Yuma, etc. - but even some of these are doing relatively well). The two largest - by far - "Indian reservations" in the United States are both located in Arizona, the Navajo Nation and the Tohono O'odham Nation, both taking up huge chunks of land. Many other reservations in Arizona and New Mexico rank among the largest in the country - Hopi (that's the name of the reservation, just "Hopi"), the Hualapai Indian Reservation, the Havasupai Indian Reservation, the San Carlos Apache and White Mountain Apache reservations... all very huge. Now, in case you stopped reading or started skimming (I feel I'm rambling now), <u>I will get to the point</u> (so you can notice that there if you don't want to read all that above): Native speakers of O'odham represent a significant chunk of the population of the Greater Tucson Area (between 7 and 15%), and they all call the place Cuk &#7778;on. If you include O'odham in the Mexican portion of the Tohono O'odham Nation (yes, it's that big, it spans the border), for many of whom Tucson is where you are going when you are "going into town", it's more like 15-20%, although I wouldn't use that figure normally. So the name is very relevant, and I believe for that reason it deserves treatment similar to that of minority language names at articles on Frisian cities, some articles on Polish cities, articles on some German places, some French places, and some British places, where it is included in parentheses right after the English name. --[[User:Node ue|Node]] 22:42, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)


==Thank you for your comment==

Thank you for your comment. I was really soliciting comment only from the individual concerned. Someone else gave a link into that user's talk page from a much more popular page, which probably accounts for why there are so many other comments on there.

There are more public fora for a wider consultation, and there are a number of issues that I feel may warrant a wider hearing. But I do not like the idea of doing it on a "named" basis. I have no desire to cause the individual concerned more public embarrassment than he has already warranted. But there are a couple of issues that may warrant a wider audience. These issues are:

1. If a Wikipedian (WPian A) invites a user to perform a background search to prove a point, is it not reasonable for other Wikipedians (WPian B) to do so and to report on the outcome of that search insofar as it is relevant? It is accepted that the following would be unreasonable: (a) where WPian A does not request or volunteer such a search, and WPian B uses info from such a search against Wpian A; (b) any such search that goes outside the scope of that volunteered by WPian A; (c) information uncovered that is not relevant to WPian A's argument or position on Wikipedia being used against WPian A.

[The facts here are that WPian A was arguing he had no conflict of interest and invited an internet background search. An internet background search was performed that showed that WPian A had been publicly censured for giving rise to and not recognised a conflict of interest.]

2. Is it reasonable to have someone in the role that we are discussing who has been publicly censured for "conflict of interest" and for "engaging in acts prejudicial to the administration of justice"?

[My answer is yes - yours may well be no. But here I am only suggesting opening up the discussion wider, not arguing the point.]

As noted above, I am thinking about raising these issues in the abstract. At present, I have not thought of a good way of doing so. If you can think of good ways of asking the abstract question, please let me know. Also, let me know if you think these points are of so little interest (bearing in mind the position those who come across this user will find themselves in), please let me know too - though in the latter instance, I'd be interesting to know why. Kind regards, [[User:Jguk|jguk]] 16:00, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

== I shall return ==

Thanks for the kind words, James. I'm sure I'll be back. But, I've been using this as a crutch to avoid dealing with my real life, and frankly it's a mess. Now that it's semester break, and I can over-indulge, my weakness has become a real handicap. I'm trying to make myself stay off for at least a couple months; we'll see how it goes. Obviously, I haven't quite managed to break the habit yet, as I couldn't help checking in today. Oddly enough, I've grown quite fond of a bunch of people I've never even met, particularly my fellow veterans of the Rex wars. Speaking of which, you might keep a friendly eye on your [[User:Antaeus Feldspar|sockpuppet]]. Best to take such comments seriously, in my sad experience, without over-dramatizing them. [[User:Wolfman|Wolfman]] 04:42, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hmmm... so JML is "Feldspar" Ha! I knew it! [[User:216.153.214.94|216.153.214.94]] 04:50, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

==On to Hiroshima==
Thanks for the invite, James. I went over and took a quick look at the Hirshima article; I will put some suggestions on the talk page when I have sufficient time to do a decent job of it. Thanks for your vote on the Tucson article. --[[User:Gary D|Gary D]] 02:05, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC)

== Slashdot ==

No problem.

Well done on making your first +5 :-)

[[User:Jdforrester|James F.]] [[User_talk:Jdforrester|(talk)]] 15:09, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

==Tucson, Arizona and more==
Hi. I saw that you voted on the RFC regarding [[Tucson, Arizona]], and I thought you might be interested in commenting on a broader application of the formatting to other city articles. The discussion (for now) is at [[Talk: Tucson, Arizona#Other Arizona and nearby cities.]] (It might get moved to [[WikiProject Cities]], if there's interest in doing so.) Thanks! [[User:Kmccoy|kmccoy]] [[User_talk:Kmccoy|(talk)]] 02:18, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

== Kaij Mek ==

It was suggested by somebody on some talkpage (either Tucson or Mesa) that if the vast majority of the people in a place called it one thing, and it's not widely known outside of that place (had you heard of that place by either name before you saw the article? Most Arizonans haven't either), that the styleguide suggests that that should be the first name given. --[[User:Node ue|Node]] 00:59, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

== Links ==

Thanks for the sub page suggestion, but I probably would have ended up throwing a <nowiki>{{db}}</nowiki> on that in my user space, anyway, so it really didn't have much benefit either way. Anyway, I'm glad I was able to help. - [[User:Vague Rant|Vague]] | [[User talk:Vague Rant|Rant]] 07:30, Dec 28, 2004 (UTC)

== RFC ==

If you don't mind me asking, I'd appriciate your support at [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Mbecker]]. Thanks. [[User:Mbecker|<nowiki></nowiki>]] &mdash; [[User:Mbecker|<font color="007700">&#12510;&#12452;&#12465;&#12523;</font>]] [[User talk:Mbecker|<font color="ff9900">&#8362;</font>]] 04:40, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

== WikiProject New York City ==

Hello, I've started [[Wikipedia:WikiProject New York City|WikiProject New York City]], and from your edits it seems you might be interested. See [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York City|its talk page]] for the beginning of a discussion on the standardization of neighborhood names, and bringing [[New York City]] up to featured status.--[[User:Pharos|Pharos]] 13:40, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

== chickenhawk ==

excellet work fixing the chickenhawk pages. cheers, [[User:Kingturtle|Kingturtle]] 22:53, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

==Thanks for reformatting [[Diplomacy (game)|Diplomacy]]'s links==
I cringed when I saw them, but I didn't feel up to changing them around. [[User:Ground|Ground]] 01:46, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

:#I think the reason you saw no Diplomacy stuff at the "njudge" link is because there was a space between the directory name's slash and "njudge". This item may have been up for VfD recently, and the early "delete" votes may have been caused by its own article having the same bad link, if I recall correctly. Please recheck the URL without the space. If that's the njudge, which is valid and notable enough for the [[Diplomacy (game)|Diplomacy]] page's bottom links but not for its own WP article, then please consider editing the link back in, with the extra space removed. Thanks for helping edit the article! [[User:Barno|Barno]] 20:15, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

==VVAW and WSI debate==

I am sorry but where do you get off pushing your nose into this debate? This is a pretty clear cut copyright violation dispute (I have many more examples other that what was given on the sample page). Instead of banning this user what is, and let me repeat incase it has not sunk in yet, '''A CLEAR CASE OF CAPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT/PLAGARISM''', everyone goes out of their way to fucking coddle him?

Please, do us all a favor and stay out of this, because as long as this user stays on, this revert war will not end. [[User:TDC|TDC]] 05:18, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC)

==Las Vegas==
I replied to your comments on the [[Talk:Las_Vegas%2C_Nevada#Moved_some_material_into_Metro_article|Las Vegas user talk page]]. &mdash; [[User:David Vasquez|DV]] 04:10, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

P.S.: While I was here, I fixed Merovingian's infection of your user talk page with his runaway font color tag, that was causing the remainder of your page to have a strange color. I hope he updates that darn thing! &mdash; [[User:David Vasquez|DV]] 04:10, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

== expand summary article ==

I will have some time over the next few days to take your article and break up the current one into daughter articles if you want to help me, so that we can present a fully-fleshed reorganization starting with your summary article rather than arguing over it in the talk page with ryan.--[[User:Kizzle|kizzle]] 23:12, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)


I have come to the conclusion that I am either crazy, stupid, or speaking a diffferent language form the controversies discussions. --[[User:Kizzle|kizzle]] 21:33, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)

== Social Security (United States) ==

I don't always agree with your POV on this article, but I would like to say that your work there is good and is appreciated. Many thanks. [[User:Stirling Newberry|Stirling Newberry]] 16:24, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I think the article is in good hands with you. I won't be editting it much because at this point I am a paid partisan.
[[User:Stirling Newberry|Stirling Newberry]] 16:37, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

==[[George W. Bush]]==
A mess, isn't it? [[User:RickK|Rick]][[User talk:RickK|K]] 09:01, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that date vandalism didn't get caught by several people who were reverting vandals, and got kept over several reverts. That was why I made the attempt to get back to a solid version, but I don't think it worked, either. [[User:RickK|Rick]][[User talk:RickK|K]] 09:13, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)

==Kudos on your Dubya article work==
Good Job James, we've got a two pronged attack from both the idiots on our side who think calling Bush dirty names will help anything, and from Right Wing censors like [MONGO] who are trying to use Wiki as a Propanganda device.

Thanks for being an inspiration to newbie Wikipedians such as myself!
--[[User:Karmafist|Karmafist]] 02:12, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Speaking of MONGO, is there any way we can stop him from censoring by reversion?

--[[User:Karmafist|Karmafist]] 05:56, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hey, some admin is trying to intimidate me from editing the Bush page, here's what he said...

"==POV warning==
- If I see you adding any more POV edits to the [[George W. Bush]] page, you will be banned from Wikipedia. I'm not playing around. [[User:Hadal|Hadal]] 14:25, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC) "

Who can I complain to about this guy? Obviously that kind of threat isn't how normal admins talk, is it?
--[[User:Karmafist|Karmafist]] 03:49, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for sticking up for me James, I completely agree with you. He even added an external link for the "Dry Drunk" debate! Maybe we are making difference in there...'

--[[User:Karmafist|Karmafist]] 14:56, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

== [[Golden Nugget (resort)]] ==

James, thank you for fixing that link to the Landry's Restaurants press release announcing the acquition of the Golden Nugget Las Vegas. I don't understand why it suddenly stopped working on the landrysseafood.com domain it was working for most of the day. Again thanks for catching that error. [[User:Misterrick|Misterrick]] 00:02, 06 February 2005 (UTC)

== request for help ==

What's up. I have always respected your ability to stay relatively neutral (as compared to the rest of us) in dealing with the facts and not letting personal opinions sway your edits from the truth, and I take with me from you that it is better to tell the truth, for better or worse towards your argument, and let it stand up for itself. I'm trying to put together a framework for a screenplay version of the 2004 U.S. Election Controversy page that I want to write, and I was wondering if you'd be interested in contributing to it. My intent is basically, if I had 2 hours to tell someone what went wrong in the election, what would I say? Not only do I need someone to double-check that my sources are not dubious, but I need someone to help me fill in the missing pieces that I can't see. Nothing would make me happier then if you every once in a while told me that some source I'm using has been discredited, or there's an additional rebuttal that I'm missing, or that any part, whether general or specific is most probably false. Also, I'm trying to fit the general layout of the movie as if it were a criminal on trial, in that the movie acts as a prosecutor building a case through preliminary evidence (the trail), motive, means, opportunity... and seeing as you're an attorney, your input would be greatly appreciated. I'm willing to do 90% of the work, but however much you would like to contribute I would appreciate it. It's going to be somewhat parallel to the current article, except that it frames an argument and draws conclusions (which wikipedia cannot do), and its target audience is towards a movie audience, in that we cannot wikilink to outside concepts, and thus the content needs to be self-contained. If you're not interested at all, feel free to tell me to bugger off, I won't be offended :) [[User:Kizzle/smoke]]--[[User:Kizzle|kizzle]] 01:00, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)

I finished a rough draft of the [[User:Kizzle/smoke/exit_polls|exit polls]] section, if you have some free time I'd like to know what you think and where I can do better. I have much to do in the actual verbiage of the page, so just focus on the argument being presented. --[[User:Kizzle|kizzle]] 19:41, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

it begins: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Neutrality/workshop_III&diff=prev&oldid=11123118]

== this page is looong ==
What's your archive policy? [[User:Kevin_baas|Kevin Baas]]<sup>[[User_talk:Kevin_baas|talk]]</sup> 15:23, 2005 Feb 17 (UTC)

==Killian==
As you have recently expressed interest in this article, please see [[Talk:Killian_documents#A_poll]]. [[User:Wolfman|Wolfman]] 18:38, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

== Social Security ==

You asked about the sort of thing that I do in the social security fight, this is public example of the sort of work that is going on behind the scenes. [http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/2/22/111240/237]

== Global ==

== Global Warming ==

That was a helpful reorganization of the [[global warming]] page. Thanks. :) It had grown in need of some reorganization to better clarify the major issues involved. [[User:Cortonin|<nowiki></nowiki>]] &mdash; [[User:Cortonin|Cortonin]] | [[User talk:Cortonin|Talk]] 09:32, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

:Heh, whoops. My bad. I misread the diffs. Well, thanks for fixing that typo and header capitalization then. :) [[User:Cortonin|<nowiki></nowiki>]] &mdash; [[User:Cortonin|Cortonin]] | [[User talk:Cortonin|Talk]] 18:16, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

::Thanks for the modesty on GW (though dodging a firestorm might mean you are wiser than I). The cabal on the page is right now using a revert war to prevent the changes and even prevent escalation to the larger wikicommunity. I believe that some larger consensus is needed there, and that discussion has broken down. (Side note, you have one of my favorite prints on your user page) Best. [[User:Stirling Newberry|Stirling Newberry]] 18:36, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)


==Genealogy==
[[User:Cribbswh|Cribbswh]] 13:28, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
::I disagree that Genealogy is not relevent to the New York article. New York-specific genealogy is as much relevent as New York history or New York economy. There are many who look for state-specific information, including genealogy, and having quality resources to refer them to is a good thing.

== Killian ==
:Repeat3: No originals have been released, only photocopies of "unsubstantiated provenance"
:Repeat3: No originals have been released, only photocopies of "unsubstantiated provenance"
:Repeat3: No originals have been released, only photocopies of "unsubstantiated provenance"
:Repeat3: No originals have been released, only photocopies of "unsubstantiated provenance"
:Repeat3: No originals have been released, only photocopies of "unsubstantiated provenance"
:Repeat3: No originals have been released, only photocopies of "unsubstantiated provenance"
:Repeat3: No originals have been released, only photocopies of "unsubstantiated provenance"
:Repeat3: No originals have been released, only photocopies of "unsubstantiated provenance"
:Repeat3: No originals have been released, only photocopies of "unsubstantiated provenance"
:Repeat3: No originals have been released, only photocopies of "unsubstantiated provenance"
:Repeat3: No originals have been released, only photocopies of "unsubstantiated provenance"
:Repeat3: No originals have been released, only photocopies of "unsubstantiated provenance"
:Repeat3: No originals have been released, only photocopies of "unsubstantiated provenance"

Received your 3RR message. Please see Killian Documents Talk Page and respond to dialog comments there. [[User:216.153.214.94|216.153.214.94]] 07:04, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

== Thanx for your work against the move vandal. ==

--[[User:Silverback|Silverback]] 11:26, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

:Thanks, indeed! Best wishes, -[[User:Willmcw|Willmcw]] 11:32, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:12, 23 March 2005

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JamesMLane&oldid=11435079"