User talk:Cla68
| “ | If one sins against the laws of proportion and gives something too big to something too small to carry it -- too big sails to too small a ship, too big meals to too small a body, too big powers to too small a soul -- the result is bound to be a complete upset. In an outburst of hubris the overfed body will rush into sickness, while the jack-in-office will rush into the unrighteousness that hubris always breeds. -Plato | ” |
|
/Military history project dialogues |
Merry Christmas
Hello! I wish you a Merry Christmas and all the best in the new year. - Darwinek (talk) 11:47, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
DTCC
given your prior comments, the talk page discussion at Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation may interest you.--69.203.81.71 (talk) 01:27, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Peer Review for Blackwater Worldwide, please help!
Blackwater Worldwide, an article under this WikiProject, is up for Peer Review to move to Featured Article status. Please help out and offer up reviews, advice, or edits to the article or review at:
Thanks! Lawrence Cohen 14:42, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Happy New Year
|
Hello Cla, I hope you had a pleasant New Year's Day, and that 2008 brings further success, health and happiness! Thanks for all your work on MILHIST, as an editor and coordinator and making it such a pleasant area in which to work. No wonder it is so successful!~ Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:13, 2 January 2008 (UTC) |
File:010105 fireworks2.jpg |
Thanks and Happy New Year
Firstly, let me wish you a very happy New Year and thank you for all your help in the Milhist Tag & Assess 2007 drive.
Secondly, although the Tag & Assess 2007 drive is now officially closed, you are very welcome to continue tagging and assessing until 31 January 2008. Any articles you tag and assess during this time will be credited fully to your tagging tally for further award purposes.
Thirdly, if you can find the time, it would be great to have your feedback/comments and participation in the recently-set-up Tag & Assess workshop The idea is to see what lessons we can learn from the 2007 drive to make the 2008 one more efficient and enjoyable.
Thanks again for your help, --ROGER DAVIES talk 10:34, 3 January 2008 (UTC) Happy New Year
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXII (December 2007)
The December 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:33, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was definitely a dramatic debate, that landed on WP:100! I paid close attention to everything that was said, and, where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. I'm taking things slowly for now, partially because of the holidays and all the off-wiki distractions. :) I'm also working my way through the Wikipedia:New admin school and double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, but I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are several more that I definitely want to get to WP:FA status! Thanks again, and have a great new year, --Elonka 05:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, — Rlevse • Talk • 22:24, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- I had seen the link you mentioned, and I had already responded. In short, it had nothing to do with Israel/Palestine articles. – Quadell (talk) (random) 00:44, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- There's no more reason for Jayjg to be a party than you or me. Please don't add parties after the request has been accepted. – Quadell (talk) (random) 00:49, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- I added him name before the case opened. Anyway, I looked at some more directly related articles and didn't take long at all to find one with his name in the recent history and talk page debate. I linked it on your userpage. The clerk can remove his name if he sees fit and I won't readd it in that case. Cla68 (talk) 01:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- I have removed Jayjg's name from the case for now, since there seemed little consensus to it and a quick look saw no reason to include him. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 01:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- I added him name before the case opened. Anyway, I looked at some more directly related articles and didn't take long at all to find one with his name in the recent history and talk page debate. I linked it on your userpage. The clerk can remove his name if he sees fit and I won't readd it in that case. Cla68 (talk) 01:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- From what I read on the arbitration request for this case, and in some discussion since, I think you're going to see some evidence of Jayjg's involvement. If not, then I was wrong. Cla68 (talk) 01:35, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I didn't think it was the arbitrators' job to decide who to name as being parties - only who to sanction. The instructions at WP:RFAr#Requesting arbitration state "Fill in the names of the involved parties" and are clearly directed at the initiating parties, not the arbitrators or clerks. There's no provision for third parties to remove names (unless, I suppose, it's a really frivolous listing - which this plainly is not). -- ChrisO (talk) 01:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- One question Matthew, is Jayjg still on the ArbCom's private mailing list? Cla68 (talk) 01:41, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- There's no more reason for Jayjg to be a party than you or me. Please don't add parties after the request has been accepted. – Quadell (talk) (random) 00:49, 11 January 2008 (UTC)