User talk:Ckatz

Hello! Thanks for dropping by... please feel free to leave me a message below. I don't have a convention as to where I'll respond, be it here, your talk page, or the talk page of the subject we're discussing - but I'll do my best to keep things clear. Let me know if you have a preference... now, get typing! Ckatz

Archives

Page One · Page Two · Page Three

Moo!

l

You get a cowstar for being SUPERGREAT!

--217.134.237.125 19:36, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Hi Ckatz, thank you for your interest in VandalProof. I am happy to announce that you are now one of our authorized users, so if you haven't already simply download VandalProof from our main page, install and you're all set!

Warning to Vandals: This user is armed with VandalProof.

Please join the VandalProof user category by adding either: {{User:UBX/VandalProof}} (this also places the user box attached) or, [[Category:Wikipedians using VandalProof|{{PAGENAME}}]] to your user page.

If you have any problems please feel free to contact me or post a message on VandalProof's talk page. Welcome to our team! - Glen ^T_C (Stollery) 10:04, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Barn + star = Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For your continued diligence and hard work towards Greater Vancouver-related articles. :) -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 03:54, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

9617 Grahamchapman

Thanks for creating the above article, I think it inspired C-w-l to create articles on the rest of the "Monty Python asteroids". Quite the nice set we've got now! Have a great day, — riana_dzasta • t • c • e • 08:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

About the Vancouver College Article

Wow! Thanks for contributing to the VC article! I go to VC, and I'd like to say what a great job you've done. You wrote some stuff that even I never knew about VC! Again, thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.71.43.200 (talk • contribs)

Signature thanks

Thanks for fixing my mistake with my signature. -- Jeff3000 00:32, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

No problem - I've forgotten before, and I always appreciated it when someone did the same for me. --Ckatz^chat_spy 00:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

np . Matthew Fenton (talk · contribs · count · email) 09:11, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Title

I think "of the" is supposed to be lower case - I don't mind either though, The 4400 epsiode is "of the" according to USANetwork.com not sure about Buffy though. Matthew Fenton (talk · contribs · count · email) 09:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

7 Minutes to Midnight Edit

Thanks for the edit. I wasn't sure the best way to word that and not take out the other guy's Gattaca movie trivia. I like your rewording. Thanks!

RE: Beyond Jericho update advice

Just wanted to say thanks for the feedback on how to address the info I've gotten on the fate of Beyond Jericho. Your input was, above all else, given in a positive, professional and above all else *adult* manner. That's how an RFI over Wikipedia policy should be handled, and there are those who could use that as a lesson on how to conduct such affairs. 66.90.151.114 05:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome! I appreciate the note, and the BSG information as well. Cheers! --Ckatz^chat_spy 23:04, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Glad to be of help. Are you planning on using the info in the Pegasus article, or should I bother to add it myself, as it's obviously *not* "fancruft"? Sixty Six 06:37, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the userpage revert (although it made me look way more impressive than I am ;) ). -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 19:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Ckatz, it was very thoughtful of you to create an edit-count userbox with a comma in response to my moaning. I've checked it out and it works just fine. I think people will appreciate having the choice. Thank you. :-) SlimVirgin ^(talk) 18:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Sklocke

Ckatz, I'm for the investigation into user Sklocke's activities. If I can help let me know. He has as you say done some "strange edits" on my user and talk page. I'm more concerned of the vandalism he might be doing to the rest of Wikipedia. I wasn't aware of how to report Sklocke so I'm glad that you have.-BiancaOfHell 20:47, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Solar System interactive template

The new ineractive image looks great -- I especially liked the touch of having the asteroid belt on both sides of Ceres (and likewise for Pluto and the Kuiper Belt, Eris and the Scattered Disc). On the large Solar System template, I moved the image to the top, just under the "Solar System" banner -- I hope without breaking anything. I also changed the margins so that there was less of a gap between the edges of the image and the edges of the box; unfortunately, I wasn't able to make them match exactly. RandomCritic 20:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello. The complilation, solar system image is finally finished (on my part), while I had some ideas of improving it while doing it, it would require starting form blank, and I'm not going to do it. The first version (in latin) of the image took almost full two days to do and I believe that a more experienced image processer could do a better version in a day (if the scale can be modified to allow larger images of the planets). Then maybe someone finds an even larger Eris or something, and that would require again a new scale to be adopted... Dreg743 13:54, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your support

It's been a long haul, and I really do appreciate you and everyone else who stepped in to help. Any ideas for another article you think needs improvement? Serendipodous 10:56, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Colonization of Pluto

What needs citation, I assure you all on that page can be found at a website please tell me what it is.. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Post Falls Man (talk • contribs) 01:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC).

I see now thank you, I will put in the Refrences :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Post Falls Man (talk • contribs) 19:18, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

hey, thanks

Got your note - thanks very much! Now, how do I edit my monobook? This is an area I have not ventured into since I've been here.... Tvoz | talk 03:06, 7 February 2007 (UTC) (Meaning, I have not a clue.... I've seen "monobook" but I don't what it is, what it does, what I want from it, or much of anything to do with it!)Tvoz | talk 03:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

trivially easy to do, and awesome! thanks so much! They absolutely should incorporate this into the watchlist Tvoz | talk 03:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Surreal Barnstar
		For your insighfull edit summaries, I proudly award you this barnstar. --Qyd 16:05, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

External Links

Thanks for the heads up! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Luxborealis (talk • contribs) 11:22, 10 February 2007 (UTC).

• Thanks helpin' to clean up the spam external links. --MaNeMeBasat 11:29, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

User edit templates

Hello - I noticed that you created {{Template:User 45 000e/test}} which allows the user to specify a preference of whether to use commas or simply a blank space. I took a look at the code, and managed to replicate it at {{Template:User 1 000e/test}} after a bit of trial and error! I think implementing this feature into all the edit number templates (with the obvious exception of those under 1,000) would be a great idea, and was wondering if there is any talk page that I should achieve consensus on first, or whether I should just be bold and do it straight away? It'd be great if you could reply on my talk page whenever you've got a minute - knowing me, I'll probably forget I ever brought this up here! Thanks,  H4cksaw  (talk) 13:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I thought you might also be interested to know that I've removed the non-existent category that appears at the bottom of your test template on my own test version.  H4cksaw  (talk) 13:58, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert

Thanks for reverting my talkpage. It's the second time something like this has happened recently (user with no prior contrib history vandalizing my userpage)... strange. Thanks again! -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 06:08, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

My comma

I'm editing faster than you can build templates. ;-D SlimVirgin ^(talk) 06:12, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much. :-) I was wondering if you could say on the 50 000 talk page why you're reverting the addition of the comma, as people do seem to want it. I left a message for you there. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 06:23, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Sklocke, Invader Soap, Invader Poonchy

I have a feeling it would be more appropriate to remove this to WP:ANI - this doesn't seem to be run-of-the-mill vandalism. – riana_dzasta 06:42, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with that. I removed the report from AIV. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 06:43, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Jelly Belly Award!

Here are some "Wikibeans" for being a very GOOD VandalProof user!

This message is issued from Loop 101 Dead!. If you have any questions, send it to my talk page. 15:23, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Heroes

You're welcome, and thank you for the awesome work you do on the articles as well! - fmmarianicolon | Talk 23:25, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I was just tidying up my talk page...

when I realised I never said thank you for the very nice compliment you paid me over getting a GA notice for Solar System. I have to say, the process of getting that article up to code was fairly ardurous, and I really appreciated your help, particularly in the whole "planet vs. dwarf planet" edit war. Serendipodous 08:38, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the autocollapse imagemap hybrid for Solar System footer!

Thanks so much: I really really like how it came out. I hope other people like it, too.

For a bit of amusing historical context, check out Talk:Solar_system/Archive_1#Navigation_footers for the original discussion of the design of the footer 3 years ago. I'm glad that WP now has fancy stuff like imagemaps and collapsible tables... we can now present a lot more information in the amount of space. hike395 14:48, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Banner

You might be happy to find out users are now no longer taken off-wiki by the banner.

Thanks for the revert

Thanks for reverting my user page to a non-koran-quoting version; much appreciated. Mike Peel 19:09, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi; it's Serendipodous- I think I might be being trolled

And I'm not sure what to do about it. User:Piercetheorganist changed the spelling on the Pluto page from "recognised" to "recognized", leaving the following illuminating justification in the edit history: "Corrected spelling of "recognised" to "recognized". Welcome to America, asshats. We speak REAL English here". I reverted it, leaving the explanation in the edit history that Wiki convention is that spellings be consistent. Unfortunately, the line didn't take and all that showed up was "it". This prompted the guy to post the following on my talk page:

I undid your revisions to the article, as your spelling is incorrect according to both Merriam-Webster's dictionary and my computer's standard spell-checker.

Wikipedia was founded by Americans, and is hosted on servers in America.

Pluto was discovered by an American, and its named approved by Americans.

So you and your retarded-ass Asperger self can shut up and go cry in a corner about how your country sucks ass compared to America. Leave your goddamn piece of shit British spellings where they belong: in the toilet where America rightly put them. Piercetheorganist 13:57, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

If this guy reverts me again, I'll be up against the three revert rule, and I really would not have to deal with this kind of abuse. So what should I do? Serendipodous 14:35, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

		The E=mc² Barnstar
		I've been meaning to give you one of these for ages, but I couldn't figure out where to put it :) Serendipodous 21:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

The episode deletion guy

You may also find this interesting (notice the ignoring of the part of the third opinions he doesn't agree with): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Ocean_Hunter#3rd_opinion --164.107.222.23 04:16, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

episode redirects

If i may be blunt for a moment, that's complete bullshit. We worked so hard on the episode articles. They meet all notability requirements, so i don't see any f*cking problem. Things shouldn't change because one user has a beef about it. If that user wants something done, he should speak with the community here at wikipedia and form a consensus. Episode aritcles are not only important to the overall status of articles, but they are quite imformative as well.

Damnit. This really sucks. :( dposse 12:44, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I quite agree, policy or no policy. Angie Y. 20:46, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Episode pages

Are you committed to saving episode pages on Wikipedia? Matthew 13:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I am. Angie Y. 20:46, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Me too. --164.107.222.23 23:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I am encouraging everyone to discuss the issue at Wikipedia talk:Television episodes#DISCUSSING THE GUIDELINE. It would be good if a civil, rational discussion can take place, so consensus might be reached. This means compromise rather than 'winning the other side round', of course! Gwinva 21:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

We have to keep trying! We can't let this guy or girl vandalize so many hard-working editors! Angie Y. 02:56, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Clarification on "Off the Grid" Sg1 episode

Hello! I've seen your impressive contributions to Wikipedia, and before anything else, i'd like you to know how much i appreciate you, and people like you, who tirelessly work to better this wonderful project.

As for me, i've been making some sporadical contributions, but i go quite proud of my (albeit insignificant compared to yours) work here. What i'm asking to you is to let me know what you mean with "not notable", in you last revision of "Off the Grid", the wikipedia article of the Stargate SG1 episode with the same name. If it's a matter of the information being false, i can guarantee to you that i've double checked it, and the symbols are really the same as Abydos. Also, I find that piece of information quite interesting (surely more so than a lot of boring trivia that litters lots of articles on wikipedia). I'd also like to add that I'm a great fan of SG1, and that note i added wasn't intended to undermine in any way the ability of SG1 writers and producers, people which i actually admire.

Please let me know where you answer me, possibly by sending me an E-Mail via wikipedia, because i'm really eager to better my way of contribution. :-)

Flavio, aka ZeframCochrane, an italian fan of the Wikipedia project.

Dr. Who

First let me say "hi" to a fellow Canuck from the East Coast to the West Coast.

Second, if you're talking about the dates, say so, instead of going on and on with words I have no idea what they mean or their purpose. Seems everyon on Wiki has this annoying habit.

Third, since I'm Canuck like you, the dates are not wrong, that's the way we were taught from birth. I'm changing them when I change the information about Season 3 in North America.

More TTN trouble

User:Vilerocks has spotted more TTN trouble. Angie Y. 10:20, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

While not "TTN trouble", it does show why that proposing discussion will get you nowhere if the fans object in any real way. He had to be blocked for breaking the 3RR with other people to stop. And I would classify him as one of the less obsessive ones. TTN 11:29, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

He was defending himself against you. YOU'RE causing the trouble! Angie Y. 18:12, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

R-file TTN complaint!

Ckatz, I need to speak with you about TTN. He's doing the bad stuff again. Angie Y. 18:12, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, really

I don't want to give you the impression that my thanking you for the heads up on my talk page was a "standard response" or not genuine. I've learned from experience that discussions about a particular article are best held on the article's talk page so that everyone interested can be included, but I've left the section on my talk page open too for flexibility and a sign I appreciate your style of editing. I wish there were more like you. Anynobody 08:16, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

The better to see you with

Yeah. 930 for Spider-Man 3. I'm pretty sure I'm at the top of the list for that article. Next is Smallville. Right now I'm trying to crank out this new season format. As I'm reorganizing I'm coming to the realization that certain episodes have like 1 sentence of information in a given sentence. So I'm fretting having to smooth it out, because if I can't then it means it really doesn't have a place at all. I think I can get it all together in a nice way so that it doesn't come off as just a paragraph worth of production trivia. We'll see.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:59, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if you mean the current articles or if you mean the format I'm using, but the current articles are in bad shape. The way they are set up, if you did a proper production and reception section for each one (each wouldn't have a reception section anyway, because each didn't get professionally reviewed), you'd end up with a table of contents that's as long as the page itself. If you read Gwinva's latest additions, they want to see the articles move to the "List of" or "Season" type pages, were you don't have to worry about copyright violations with the plots (granted they need to be kept in check in those places as well, but people are less apt to write overly long plots in a table format), and where you can work in a good reception section for the seasons. Most shows are not reviewed on an episode by episode basis, at least not by professional news organizations. You are more likely to find reviews for seasons as a whole, especially after a DVD comes out and people sit down and watch what they missed. There are just far too many shows on television at one time for them to review each, especially when you deal with shows that aren't on the bigger networks. If you go through my new format, and look at the information (it's really chaotic so be somewhat warned), some episodes only have like 3 sentences of production information. I got that from a book, where the author actually went out and interviewed the cast, writers, directors, etc and had them talk about the episodes. I know that probably doesn't completely address the question you asked. What I mean to say is that most of us aren't trying to just delete this information altogether, but find a better alternative to just creating an article where the plots are huge, and we list random trivia. We think that moving them to larger articles, and creating sections of "combined" information will be best. I mean, there's only so many times someone can explain how they draw Bart Simpson, if you know what I mean.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:21, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I chose the table format to keep it all neater, and limit the prospect that people will put overly long plots in them. I could probably expand on what's in them a bit, but my idea was that they should be proportional to the amount of production information they have. I didn't want to have plots that were larger than their real world content. I mean, I didn't see a reason to detail "Shimmer" if I had absolutely nothing to say about it. That said, I don't mean to say there should be one plot that's huge, and one that's thing. I was trying to keep them equal to each other. But, we'll see how it all looks when I get the last two episodes finished. "Tempest" will most likely be its own article, because it actually has "in-depth" coverage (it got 10 pages, as opposed to the 2 1/2 the rest of the episodes got). I'm sure once I get all the points turned into prose that I'll make more adjustments to the format. If you look at my note, I didn't originally intend to have more than a "Production" header, but the way the information became spaced, I realized I needed subs.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:46, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Trying to get some feedback. How do you think this section of my new season format reads? It's only a section, but it was the easiest to go ahead and convert to prose.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:55, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Take your time. It's just one section anyway, which will probably grow. I'm having difficulty finding any criticism on "Metamorphosis", and since there isn't "a lot" of information on it (more than some, but no where near that of the pilot episode) it may be merged back into the season page. I won't know till I continue my search, and until I get through the "Meet the Crew" section of my book. I'll be out of town all weekend, so it won't get much work anyway. I think it turned out alright, needs to copyediting, but I always save that stuff for last. Then again, I have bias. ;) Bignole 00:14, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

We can't review an article that has nothing but a plot, as there wouldn't be anything to review. The idea behind the review isn't to help find information, it's to assess if the article is close to meeting the standards and just needs more time, with maybe some helpful pointers on what to do. If you still only have a plot after 14 days (which it will be longer than 14 days, because I'm positive we wouldn't be able to look at every article the day it hits the category) then what is there to review? Review all the non-free content?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:56, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

You haven't given up have you?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:54, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I completely understand. That new season format is just about complete. It needs serious copyediting, which I won't worry about till I put it up, but the only big thing left to do is go through some links I have in my favorites and prose-up the Reception section.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I like your wording of the introductory sentence better. Thanks.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:31, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Nope, I was working in specific sections when you did that so it didn't affect me. I didn't even notice you had changed it till I went to remove the "inuse" tag and notice the lead sentence (which I had planned to rewrite again, but you did a better job than what I had in mind) was different. Then I realized someone changed it and just checked the history. Yeah, "pilot" titles are weird because they are generally referred to as "the pilot" and not "Pilot". I think the way you wrote it should be implented for Pilot (House) and any others (I mention house because it's FA).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:45, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I finally finished the work on the season page. Take a look and tell me what you think. It needs a good copyedit for wordiness and word choices, but that's easy to find if the page is implented into the mainspace.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:03, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and dumped it on the mainspace. It's been in "proposal" since May 26, with no actual objections. I'd still appreciate a read from you when you get the time, I'm sure you are busy, as am I. I guess that means I can legitimately redirect the episode pages for at least that season?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:54, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad someone else is seeing this. I saw you had to have a chat with Robin before. It seems she does something, you correct her, and then she either does it again or just simply does something else that proves to be just as wrong. I've gotten to the point that I've ignore the delinking in all the citations, and the removal of what she considered "extra space", but I get annoyed when she rewords sentences so that they are no longer a representation of the citation. She labels things as "minor" and then removed 500 characters, and not all are simply removing spaces. *Sigh*. Anyway, how are things where you're editing?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:06, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Blink (Doctor Who)

So Sally didn't exclaim "Oh my god it's turning out the lights"?--Dr who1975 03:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Episode-notability template

The template is meant as a fair warning to users. Removing the part about deletion doesn't protect the articles in question from deletion, and only misleads users to thinking redirecting or merging will be the only outcome. The template is just saying "this might happen". -- Ned Scott 08:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Calvin and Hobbes

If the reference to Buffy and Sugar Bombs (which is Calvin's favorite cereal) is too trivial, then so is the one for the Marvel Comics Runaways, since it uses the same trivial reference (Sugar Bombs). As well, there is no comic I can find listing Lucky, so that should be removed as well. Ccrashh 19:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Done. (Generally speaking, unreferenced trivia should be weeded out.) Thanks for mentioning those two. --Ckatz^chat_spy 19:26, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I hate removing things on my own. Not 100% sure yet what is valid and what isn't. By the way, I noted the Trivia warning, and am attempting to make that section a prose rather than a list. Would love your comments before I post it. Ccrashh 23:45, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

So sorry

in mtg.salvation we are solving some problems with disambiguation, and when I was cleaning out the terminology I did not notice that our disambiguation talk is directly linked to yours. I will work on cutting that link so this wont be happening again 131.165.74.253 03:12, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edit to B Line

Hi, Ckatz. You recently reverted my edit to B Line with the es, "Other - format per disambiguation page guidelines." Could you be more specific about what guideline you're referring to and why you think it makes sense here?

I initially debated with myself whether there should be an EL here, and concluded that if a disambiguation page is to reference a company or product line (which it should, I think, if the name has almost any market penetration and matches the name of the disambiguation page), then it should include a link to how to get more information. If there is a Wikipedia page on the topic, it should link to that page, but if there is not, it should link to the company's web site (or some other applicable external link). I also think it is helpful to have markup applied to the substring of the disambiguation text which matches the name (my use of bold). One markup would be to make it a link, which is the usual thing, but I think we should treat external links with a bit more care and make them clearly external links, rather than to do them in the same style as internal wikipedia links, which could be confusing. That's why I made the edit that I did.

I agree that WP:MOSDAB does say, "External links should rarely, if ever, be given entries in disambiguation pages. Including them as comments or on a talk page is a way to mention URLs that might be helpful in the future," but my sense is the intent is to refer to topics that have a Wikipedia page, not topics where the external link is the only link. As such, I would say this falls under the "rarely" case, or, alternatively, under "Break rules" (WP:IAR).

Thanks! jhawkinson 13:09, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I had not noticed the Cooper Industries page, I agree it is right to link to it. On the other hand, someone looking for information on Cooper B-Line will now not have a good opportunity to find www.b-line.com, which seems IMHO poor. I can (and will) add a link to it from the Cooper Industries page, but I'm not sure the situation is better that way. I'm not well convinced on your directory argument -- where there is no other directory service to link to, it seems to me wikipedia's disambiguation pages seem decent...jhawkinson 22:13, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

City Centre Development Plan section I added

Hi there,

You added a "clean-up" tag to the City Centre Development Plan section of the Richmond, British Columbia page that I put up. I was wondering if you could be more specific as to what I should fix up. This is the first real content that I have put up. I realize that I have to go back an put in my "internal links" to some of the topics that I mentioned, but I was wondering what else I should do.

Also, since I used four different newspaper articles as sources, is there a way to make a reference tag point to one I made before? I mean, references section of the Richmond page, 10,13,14 all point to the same article. Is there a way to make them all one?

I also noticed that you removed the
I added. I put them there to make the pictures I posted line up with the text. With the
removed the picture of the Aberdeen Centre expansion slips down to the film and television section instead of staying up near the Aberdeen Centre section. Is there a better way to get them to line up?

I really appreciate your help and advice. Thanks!

Alex (asorokop)

The pictures

Hi there,

I think the paged looked better when I had the pictures in the Castan Way Development section Co-aligned. I can understand why you resized them, but why put them to the right side again. Now the pictures don't line up with the text they are referring to. Putting them in the middle can't be against the rules since they show you how to center the pictures in the tutorial.

Alex(asorokop)

^The Master

It's not gramatically incorrect, it's his name. Hence, in the credits, it says "The Master" not "Master". The full name of the UK isn't "the UK".--Rambutan (talk) 07:46, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

It's on the talkpage.--Rambutan (talk) 07:54, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

List of 24 episodes

I have commented at Talk:List of 24 (TV series) "days". --DLand^TALK 22:26, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

TV templates

Yes, your changes have improved the template considerably: less aggressive, more helpful. I threw a few ideas down on a blank template that were generated by an equally blank mind! We need to prepare a few more templates for other stages in the review, so have a think about the wording for them, also. Thanks. Gwinva 18:48, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Gwaii Haanas etal

It is very unlikely that any article will have agreement from all editors. If edit disputes arise, they should be handled with one of the various mediation alternatives that you can research. However the best one is usually to resolve edit disputes on the article talk page so that a consensus is reached. At that point all of the editors should be respectful of that consensus. If not try resolving disputes.

If an article is a content fork or combines two already existing articles then it probably needs to removed by AfD or one of the related processes. There is a point in time when it is better to bring the article to the attention of others Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard is one if there is an apparent conflict of interest by the editor which might be in play here. You also always need to be aware of the WP:3RR rule.

I'm not going to take the time to dig through this to comment about the specifics. My time is going to be limited for a while and there is a bunch of work I'd like to do. I think my general comments should get you started. But do read the conflict resolution process. If you believe that another user is attacking you, the do take that to, I believe, WP:ANI for someone to look at it. A user can be blocked for this if it is excessive.

Vegaswikian 18:57, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

TTN arbitration

[1] Angie Y. 03:22, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Aboriginal_Voices_Radio_Network_top_banner.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Aboriginal_Voices_Radio_Network_top_banner.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. The Sunshine Man 16:11, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in proposed 'Oceanography' wikiproject

Hello. I hope you're well, and thanks for your recent edits of 'ocean', etc. An 'oceanography' wikiproject is being proposed: are you interested in participating? Thanks for your consideration! Quizimodo 03:00, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Beach

Interesting. i guess it is. Google Maps (satalite view) however shows a beach with that distinctive multiple arcs/points on the north of the University Endowment Lands. i dont think i saw one with that design anywhere on the downtown pininsula where Sunset beach is.  Adam2288  T  C  22:44, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh i checked agian. and there is  Adam2288  T  C  22:46, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

And its Locarno beach that has that similar design that confused me.  Adam2288  T  C  22:47, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: planet articles

oh okay, sorry for the inconvenience. ill take out any mph entries that u missed. my idea was that speed per hour is an easier frame of reference for most people, but standardizing is good reason. pz
Bigdan201 03:04, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Blair Wilson Interview

Why did you delete this documented video interview?

I'm sorry but this is very relevant to the article.

I vote that this interview should be added to the Blair Wilson article on the Wikipedia.

Punctuation in Doctor Who

I noticed your reversion of most of my reversion of some punctuation in the Doctor Who article--commas within rather than outside quotes. I hope my summary indicated that I did consider it possible that with titles it might have been a case of US vs. Brit English usage, and I see that you left the dialogue quote alone. I for one now consider this issue settled, but cannot speak for the person whose edit I reinstated. Ted Watson 19:29, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. My changes weren't based on the U.K.-U.S. differences, but on the style guide (and hence the changes were only to titles). In terms of titles, Wikipedia treats quotation marks as applying only to the title in question. All punctuation is kept outside of the quotation marks, and the same is true for italics as well. --Ckatz^chat_spy 20:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Interesting, for putting punctuation outside quotation marks is in direct violation of the rules of proper English as taught in my formal education from beginning to end. I even had difficulty with more than one teacher when I would write a question that ended with a direct quote--the question mark would not be part of the quoted material, but the teachers wanted it inside the quote marks simply because of that rule. I still think that this rule still exists, and in general believe it is right, so I'll check the Wiki style guide you linked in and perhaps raise the issue on a talk page there. However, you did previously revert the punctuation location in the dialogue quote I cited. No offense, but the History listings there will prove it. Ted Watson 20:26, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

"Asked in 'Smith and Jones' whether he had a brother, the Doctor replied, 'Not any more.'" The last three words are, according to the passage, dialogue from the programme. As a hypothetical example of commas within quotation marks for titles, when one has a series of such titles, the comma between each would be within the quote marks, according to my teachers and the textbooks issued in their classes. Ted Watson 21:02, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

My most humble apologies, you are correct, it was not you before. Very, very sorry. For some reason, I just assumed the same person jumped back in, but not so. My bad. Ted Watson 18:11, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

RfC for Angie

Currently an RfC is taking place involving Angie Y. (talk · contribs), here. Your opinions are welcome.

Seraphim ^Whipp 17:24, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Woundering why you hate my edit!?!

Hi Ckatz, I was just woundering why you and some other people think I am spamming on the "Extraterrestrial real estate" page. I just am posting a fact that Joey Glaser did claim the Kuiper Belt in 2006. I put this under the "History" section. I even said that that claim was not in Mr. Pop's book. Please let me know why I can not add my edit without you or someone else saying I was spamming.

Your Friend, Galactic Joe

PS: It is great that you love astronomy! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Galactic Joe (talk • contribs) 20:53, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, for one thing, it is unsourced. Second, it seems non-notable. Third, there is a conflict of interest on your part in the edits. Fourth, please figure out how to fit into Wikipedia, including signing your posts on Talk pages with ~~~~ (four tildes). Hu 17:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Notability

I have responded as you suggested on the Discussion page of the List of Doctor Who vehicles. Wolf of Fenric 17:07, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Revert of my revert

Heh, it was framed in the context of a discussion board comment and provided an unreliable source as reference for the comment, but if you see value in it being on the talk page, no skin off my back.;) --Bobblehead ^(rants) 02:27, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Hans Island

No problem I figured that's what you had done. Some of the anons edits seem OK but other seem to be very POV. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 03:04, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

The Vancouver Whitecaps split issue

What's happening on your efforts to rejoin the split articles? --Walter Görlitz 20:06, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

reply to recent change

Hi, I recently got this message from you. "Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, the external links you added to the page Fredericton do not comply with our guidelines for external links. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Ckatzchatspy 17:13, 14 June 2007 (UTC)"

Hope that is enought for you to know what I"m talkign about.

The reason why I put a link to www.mightyfredericton.com on the Fredericton listign you have. Is simply put it is a great site for people to find local businesses and what is avalable in the Fredericton region. I do not work for them or am in any way affiliated with them.

This is the reason why I placed it under the "=====Business, development & technology links=====" Simply put that website fits all those criterias.

I understand allot of people might think it is a form of advertising, but MightyFredericton is no different then : Fredericton Chamber of Commerce Downtown Fredericton Inc. Fred-eZone "The city's free WiFi network" Enterprise Fredericton Team Fredericton

Link you allready have there. Personaly I find M?ighty Fredericton to be a bit better as they are not goverment funded and it shows they put allot of effort in their site.

Please reconsider leaving it there as allot of the population need to be aware of this site.

".Everyone"...

... functions as a singular pronoun in the sentence you corrected, yes. You beat me to it. --Mark H Wilkinson ^{(t, c)} 19:32, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi!

I stole a few war medals from your user talk page and put them on mine, but I couldn't figure out how to make them look as neat and tidy as yours. Would you mind trying to clean them up? They are on the bottom of my user talk page: User_talk:Pmbcomm

Thanks for cleaning that stuff up! Best regards. Peter

My background is in oil and gas, and I've written a couple of books on the subject. I'm trying to create a complete summary history of Canada's industry for Wikipedia. I'm at five enties so far, as you have no doubt seen, but there's a lot more to tell.

Congratulations on your great work with Wikipedia.

Best regards. Peter

SAMANTHA WEBB AND LUCY MERRETT

Hey, I just thought I'd give you a heads up -- the creator of this page removed the speedy deletion tag that you added mere minutes ago. I stumbled upon it and put another tag on it. Where Anne hath a will, Anne Hathaway. 07:38, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Heroes project

Just because the show isn't on, doesn't mean the project should be inactive/little activity. That's not how projects work. They don't just go on vacation because of the show being in reruns for the summer. Frankly, Heroes is a broad scope for a project. It should've been a taskforce in the first place. I might just put the project in MFD, for that reason itself. Heroes being popular is one thing, but that doesn't make it less broad. A few articles total isn't much for a project. What is there, 20.. maybe 30 for Heroes? I'm a fan of the show as much as the next person, but I'm highly against broad scope projects. RobJ1981 21:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Falklands Page

Thanks for tidying up my edits, I'm just getting used to Wikipedia formatting and that really helped. Justin A Kuntz 18:50, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up.

I am a bit of a Dodge and an SRT4 junky. So I keep an eye on that particular page. If there are any issues with changes I make please let me know. Thank you again :)

Hoaxes

Hello - Space, Arizona, etc. are definitely hoaxes, but hoaxes are not candidates for speedy deletion, so we have to let the prod take its course. If they continue to create hoax articles or make other disruptive edits (for example removing the prod tag), they will probably be blocked. ugen64 05:36, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Dodge Automobile Pages and the EL spammers

CKatz, I've noticed you've been doing a lot to try to keep some folks from spamming the dodge vehicle articles with links to forums. Kudos. I was wondering if you thought it'd be worthwhile sending an e-mail or posting a message on those boards asking folks to refrain from continuing to do so? I've thought about doing it, but I'm not wholly up-to-speed on the "rules" of wikipedia and what is and isn't acceptable. Regardless, I'm trying to keep an eye on those pages too, so you're not alone! Keep up the good work. croll 13:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

TVM

I notice User:VitasV has added a discussion on your user page, rather than your talk page. I have warned. Stephenb (Talk) 09:41, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Scrubs broadcasters

Hi, as an editor regularly involved in the editing of scrubs related articles, would you please be willing to give yours views on the discussion over the list of scrubs broadcasters, see here Talk:Scrubs (TV series)#Removal of International Broadcasters section, thank you--Jac16888 19:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Excitement

This Reginald character seems to loose his/her temper a lot. Have you had much experience with them? It seems like they were extremely uncivil on the Potter talk page, then the conversation carried over to Wikipedia talk:Consensus#Consensus vs. Policy, to the point that he was yelling and making personal attacks. I'm curious if you know if this is their normal behavior or if I just happened to bring this out of them? They've only been registered for over a month, but they edit like they've been here awhile.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:17, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I noticed they made some similar uncivil comments to others on various pages, but not the straight yelling and attacks I got on the consensus page. Oh well. I took that page off my list, I don't particularly care to listen to his/her rants any longer. You participating in any episode discussions?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 11:14, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the help with JJonz

Dave has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

It is stated...

...On the Liar Liar page that he chose not to star in the film and to persue Liar Liar.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Blazemaster4R3AL (talk • contribs)

Unfortunately, that note isn't referenced either, and we cannot use Wikipedia pages to reference other Wikipedia pages. I've added a citation request to the Liar Liar" text. If one turns up, you can restore the text. --Ckatz^chat_spy 08:45, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Reply

Hi, Ckatz. I've replied on my talk page. Please check it out at your convenience and feel free to add it to your watchlist. If possible let's keep the entire discussion over there rather than having it split between our talk pages where it will be confusing for future readers. Thanks. --Nonance 22:58, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Vancouver

As a fellow Canuck and one who resides in B.C. I'm really surprised you're not in favour of having it read Vancouver B.C. on Stargate - which I have NOT changed this past week, so I don't know what you're talking about.

As you've been told many times by several different editors, this is an international project and we have to write in a manner that reflects the audience. As for the warning, you are well aware that you changed the Smallville article once again, against the wishes of other editors and in an identical manner to your edits at Stargate SG-1. --Ckatz^chat_spy 08:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ckatz

Why did you remove an External Link I added to Granby Quebec?

I feel like http://www.infoaboutyourcity.com/Canada/Granby_Quebec/index.html tourist attraction section is a very good addon to the information about the city.

Back on the granby external link ... I did read the guideline ... so, you must explain why you removed it please. Because as far as I know, the url does not contredict the guideline. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cocacolafun (talk • contribs) 19:33, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Simply put, the link fails based on several conditions under "Links normally to be avoided":

1. Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article. (The site in question contains very little information, none of which is unique.)

3. Links mainly intended to promote a website. (Given the lack of unique information present, this link serves no purpose other than to gain a larger audience for the site.)

5. Links to sites with objectionable amounts of advertising. (Site has prominent text advertising in column on right side of page, visible at all times.)

As well, an examination of the site (home page etc.) reveals that it appears to exist primarily to get viewers for advertising. (This is a subjective analysis,of course, but the home page boasts of "anylizing reports" [sic] and information on the "best looking girls/boys in the world".) Sorry, but it just doesn't meet the guideline. --Ckatz^chat_spy 19:53, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

SRT Syndicate

Why do you continually remove SRT Syndicate from the external links? It is not a commercial site, the owner contunally loses money but keeps the site there for the betterment of the SRT-4 community. I find it ironc that you will keep the srt forums link but refuse to keep the SRT Syndicate link. Srtforums is run by a money hungry admin that makes over 100k a year off that site alone and he owns several large site that rake in money. The site is well know for scams by paying vendors and the owner does nothing to help or even screen incoming vendors to try to prevent scamming. While srt forums has a larger member base it takes forever to get a response to questions and most of the time the information is incorrect. However, even with a lower number of members when a question is asked on SRT Syndicate it is answered as soon as possible and by people that are essentially experts in all aspects of the SRT-4. I do not request that you remove the SRT Forums link, I just politely request that you add SRT Syndicate to the external links page and at least let people decide what site they would prefer to frequent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.91.186 (talk • contribs) 18:38, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Please read through the external links guidelines - they will explain exactly why your link is being removed. If you feel that the SRTForums link is also unsuitable, please make your case on the article talk page. (As I've already explained there, I have no interest in the SRTForums link - if it is invalid as well, I'll remove it.) --Ckatz^chat_spy 19:12, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

reference language specifications

Per [2], is there an SOP for not utilizing the "language" variable in citation templates if the reference is in English? While there are no other references in other languages, how does stipulating these as "English" cause confusion? Because the article is English, and the subject is in English, that doesn't follow that the references will be in English; having references tagged as "English" seems to be clearer and less ambiguous than not. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 21:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

While I haven't found an explicit guideline regarding that, there are several examples from the citation templates that suggest we should not state "English":

• From "cite web":"language: language of publication (don't specify "English" as this is the default)"
• From "cite book":"language: The language the book is written in, if it is not English."

As well, the lack of citations using "language=English" would lead one to think that such usage is discouraged. Thoughts? --Ckatz^chat_spy 21:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

King levitation

Thanks for your clarification; I wasn't sure if it was a new editor or not. Cheers! Ratiocinate ^{(t • c)} 01:17, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

CHMB

The simplest way to confirm a station's city of license is to search the CRTC website (http://www.crtc.gc.ca/) for the call sign; that will bring up all past license decisions and such related to that station, and for obvious reasons the CRTC always uses the actual city of license. For what it's worth, CRTC documents relating to CHMB do all say Vancouver rather than New Westminster. Bearcat 04:16, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick reply.

24, 39 minutes long

It was actually the DVD, the last episode of 24 season 3 was 39.5 minutes long.

sepmix 10.22, 6 August 2007 (GMT)

A question

You recently reverted edit claiming it was vandalism. The editor in question simply reordered the external links. Promoting his preferred external link to the top of the list is, perhaps, inappropriate, but I must question whether it qualifies as vandalism. Could you perhaps explain your reasoning for using this edit summary in this case? Chromaticity 14:32, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Comics guidelines

In the comics articles, we specify Fictional character biography as a way to meet numerous Wikipedia guidelines, especially those about making fiction clear and to keep from having to rewrite fictional biographies in weird warys to avoid writing them in-universe. Many, many people have weighed in on developing this. Doczilla 21:13, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

• "is considered to be redundant" by whom? A fictional character has both real world behind-the-scenes history and a fictional biography. (Oh, yes, and a publication history.) Specifying which is which would not be inherently redundant. Do you have specific WikiProject Television guidelines and exemplars you're referring to? I ask because I'm sure I've probably added "Fictional" in a section heading on some TV character's bio at some point, out of sheer habit myself. Doczilla 21:22, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Doctor Who story chronology

I know you said that the Doctor Who movie should be called Doctor Who but this page is not the list of serials page, it is the chronology page so it's better to be called "The Movie" just on this page. You may call it Doctor Who on the list of serials but not not in this page please. VitasV 13/8/07

Please check [report on VitasV]. Does that sound like an accurate representation of the situation? Dr.Who 08:39, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

It's technically not a 3RR violation, and he hasn't been warned. In fact, I'm not even sure he's aware of the rule. --Mark H Wilkinson ^{(t, c)} 09:09, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Four reverts in under 20 hours. That's a 3RR violation. Read the 3RR guidelines. It does not have to be a 100% page revert every time. Each time, he reverts the name of that darn movie. That counts. As for the warning, no, I can't find that he was ever warned about 3RR. He'll probably only get a warning for it, but then again, he's gotten plenty of other warnings and is not a brand new user at this point, so a brief block is possible. The requirement about a past warning is mainly for new users. Dr.Who 09:12, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I'd been looking at the more recent edits, not the ones you reported. It still would've been better to warn first and then report if further violations were made. I rather question how much of the rules he's picked up. --Mark H Wilkinson ^{(t, c)} 09:25, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Result was 24 hour block. He got warned, immediately reverted again despite the pending 3RR decision, and then got blocked. Dr.Who 10:48, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Little Lebowski Urban Achievers

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Little Lebowski Urban Achievers, which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial, and sent it to AfD as an aparent hoax. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, it is best not to propose deletion of articles that have previously been de-{{prod}}ed, even by the article creator, or which have previously been listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Od Mishehu 11:16, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Whistler Blackcomb link

Please see my note at Talk:Whistler,_British_Columbia#Whistler_Blackcomb_link --KenWalker | Talk 18:32, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Scrubs (TV series) - TTN merging

Hi. I gather from looking through the past history and actions of TTN that you've been involved in discussions on the subject of his merges before. I don't suppose I could get you to weigh in on the merge proposed by that user at Scrubs (TV series) please?

I also refer you to the talk page for J.D. (Scrubs) where TTN has been reducing large sections down to single sentences with no prior discussion (edits reverted, discussion now taking place). I particularly liked his comment "See, this is why I hate discussing most of the time"...

Sorry to drag you into this whole thing again, I imagine it's a bit tiresome. For the record, I'm a disinterested party - I made one edit to a Scrubs-related article, some while ago, and that was just correcting a misdirected internal link.

Many thanks, Chrisd87 22:56, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey

Long time no edit (small joke). I put Pilot (Smallville) up it's own FAC, and I was wondering if you'd come help tear it down, so as to build it back up stronger. That is, if you have the time and are not working on anything more important (if so it's cool). I noticed that you were having a bit of a scuffle with the loveable Matthew.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 13:41, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

re Sacred Heart Hospital

Hi, i saw you were editing sacred heart not long ago, i was wondering if i could have your opinion on something, soemone recently removed the location speculation section, i think it was Sigma Epsilon, which seemed ok as it wasn't a great section, except that people keep adding speculation to the main scrubs article bit about sacred heart, do you think it should be re-added, in your opinion. Thanks.--Jac16888 17:48, 20 August 2007 (UTC) (btw, it would be easier if you replied here, thanks)

Stargate Atlantis

Hey, I'm sad to say i've cut back alot of my edits in an effort to try and compromise/appease Andromeda. But Andromeda just keeps reverting my stuff without compromise,reason,w/e. So I was hoping you could somehow help end this edit war. --88wolfmaster 04:47, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Doctor Who story chronology

Yeah merchandise. The books are merchandise, how about we take them away too. VitasV 28/8/07 —Preceding unsigned comment added by VitasV (talk • contribs) 09:38, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

Jericho (fictional town)

I have reverted your Fact|date=April 2007 revision as the PDF [3] states the Goodland Maintainance Unit does not have M1A1 Abrams or M109A6 howitzers. Thank you for your interest in the Jericho article! --Brian_{(view my history)}/^{(How am I doing?)} 22:17, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Trivia

Template:Trivia has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Pixelface 22:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Automated reversion

Howdy! This isn't a policy, per se, but wikitiquette strongly suggests that automated reversion of any form should be reserved for edits identified as a form of vandalism or other bad faith edits. This reversion was of speculation someone had added, but the edit appeared to be good faith. The courtesy of an old-fashioned hands on revert is welcome in situations like this because it helps avoid some of the more avoidable friction that comes from misunderstanding. For your consideration, and best regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 19:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

If the apparent diameter of 0.4907 to 0.5482 degrees is out of place, where does it belong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.203.244 (talk) 18:44, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

deleting pages

Hello Ckatz, I thank you for your contribution, but Hydraulic torque wrench is a very common industry tool and is warranted in many of the locations that I put it in. I mean, I'm not being fecicious when I say this but you must not know much about a hydraulic torque wrench.. for example.

Under: Types of tools, Impact wrench is the same as a hydraulic torque wrench (air vs hydraulic) Hydraulic torque wrench is warranted in this section

Under: Power Tool, impact wrench is listed under LIST OF POWER TOOLS is the same as a hydraulic torque wrench (air vs hydraulic) Hydraulic torque wrench is warranted in this section

Under: Wrench, It is the section of SPECIALIZED WRENCHES, Hydraulic torque wrench is required to be listed under and along with the other listing of Torque wrench, Spoke wrench, Podging wrench, Lug wrench, Spanner Wrench ETC. these are all the same classifications.

Under: PIPE in the section of JOINING. It is required to have hydraulic torque wrench thr, because it is talking about joining, welding, etc and gasketed pipe flanges which is put together with a hydraulic torque wrench.

etc...

This is just stating facts. I do not understand why you deleted them. Please let me know if you can revert the changes you did. I would appreciate if you review your findings once more. Thank you. Send me another message. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Industrial Torque Tools (talk • contribs) 20:31, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Imperial units on solar system bodies

Hi - I'm glad you agree. There have been some bizarre conversions in the infoboxes. Jupiter had density in lb/US gallon and the Sun had it in lb/cubic foot! These are absolutely useless to anyone. Even if someone needs the exact figure for some calculation they will always use the metric unit.

I've been working through solar system objects and have had full support so far. I'm also getting the format of the infoboxes all identical. Have a look at Mars - I've worked on it. If you think that's ok, let me know and I'll fix the others up. Basically I've removed spaces in decimals, removed () from conversions, got rid of imperial units and linked the first use of a unit. Let me know what you think. Regards, Jim77742 09:01, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Venturi Automobiles

Please do a page move to change the name of the article from Automobiles Venturi to Venturi Automobiles, which is the correct name of the company in both French and English. 199.125.109.77 07:27, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Move completed. --Ckatz^chat_spy 09:19, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Interac (Japan)

Oh, thanks. I don't know much about deletion.--Dustin Asby 18:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

...

I accept your apology... -Xornok 06:32, 14 September 2007 (UTC)