User talk:Juliancolton

Please click here to leave me a new message.

Juliancolton's archives

· March 2008 Archive · April 2008 Archive · May 2008 Archive · June 2008 Archive · July 2008 Archive · August 2008 Archive · September 2008 Archive · October 2008 Archive · November 2008 Archive · December 2008 Archive · January 2009 Archive · February 2009 Archive · March 2009 Archive · April 2009 Archive · May 2009 Archive · June 2009 Archive · July 2009 Archive · August 2009 Archive · September 2009 Archive · October 2009 Archive · November 2009 Archive · December 2009 Archive · January 2010 Archive

RE: Deletion of an article.

Hello Juliancolton,

My name is Paul Schindler and I wanted to ask you for the reason you have deleted the Wikipedia article on Chi Rho Omicron in Jan. 2009. The organization is very near and dear to my heart and I am saddened to see it not be available for others to see on such a respectable site as Wikipedia. I am asking you this because I see your name and link to the deletion page and would like an explanation and possible action I or Chi Rho Omicron can take to reinstate the stub. The page is important to establish our credibility and exposure. Since we still are a relatively young fraternity (8 chapters) we are trying to grow our membership and a vibrant and open Wikipedia article is essential to this end.

I look forward to your reply and I trust the situation can be remedied. You can reply to my personal e-mail @ schindler(dot)paul(at)gmail(dot)com.

Sincerely,

~~Paul Schindler XPO 247~~

Closure of your RfB

I am saddened to inform you that your RfB was closed as unsuccessful after bureaucrat discussion. I encourage you, however, to carefully review and consider the reasoning given by those who were opposed and use the information to address any valid concerns which may have been raised. You have a long history of excellent work on the site as an editor and as an administrator, and I encourage you to continue with that. I understand how frustrating it can be to have the community indicate that they aren't willing to accept your help in this role at this time, but I encourage you to use it as a stepping stone for improvement. I think you will eventually be successful in becoming a bureaucrat, should you choose to run again in the future. Please let me know if you have any questions or if there is anything I can do to help. Thank you, again, for all your hard work. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 03:51, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of the 'cratchat and the closure. Sorry your first RfX closure couldn't involve pressing the button, but I tried. :) Thanks to all who participated as well; the criticism and support are both appreciated. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:55, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Dont give up Julian. You will be a crat someday. Regardless of your views.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 03:56, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

It's very possible I'll try again sometime, but I have other priorities at the moment. Thanks for the support and encouragement nonetheless. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:57, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I only echoed what was said above though :D--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 04:04, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

In fact, quite a few of the bureaucrats have had multiple RfBs, so I think Julian will be just fine. ;) ceranthor 04:24, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Im sounding a bit on the stalker-ish side aren't I? I think that the issues from last night have messed me up in the head a bit. You already know that you will do fine Julian. Im reasureing myself now!--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 04:27, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I thought 80% was passing or is it different for RfBs rather than RfAs? Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 04:34, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

RfB standards are a good deal higher than RfA. RfA requires around 75% for promotion, while RfB is abut 85%. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:35, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

With over 200 votes and you were still below 85%!--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 04:37, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to see it didn't go well, best of luck. MBisanz ^talk 05:34, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

What Matt said. Lucky for us, you can still help plenty without being a crat and I am sure that you will Regards SoWhy 15:18, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Worst case scenario, once you turn 18 I'd guess that enough people would move to support so that you would pass. --Rschen7754 21:29, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I think that its kinda odd that people opposed him becasue he's not 6570 days old. Julian is one of the most mature people here. I have meet alot of "adults" that act like 4 year olds here You dont see that take up as much on an RFA. No one seems to care about mental age. Rather you must be X years, X days and X minutes old to be able to grat others adminship. Julian. You will pass you next RFB regardless of your birthday. Your suporters will only continue to grow.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 21:35, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I think you need to spend some time growing up before you criticise grown-ups Coldplay Expert; I had hoped you'd learned that lesson. Sympathise with Julian all you like, heck I've sympathised myself, as I too think the RfB bar is ridiculous, but don't use it as a stage to pontificate from. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:54, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I think that you need to keep your mouth shut when it comes to "growing-up" Malleus. Your actions in the past have show that you act just as immature as the "minors" here. If your gona start an argument on ageism, do it on my talk page.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 22:14, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Believe me, you're doing yourself absolutely no favours at all. Give it up. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:52, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

3rd Opinion, how about both of you cease and desist. I'd prefer that no one talks about age/maturity, especially mine. :-D --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:58, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry. Me and Malleus have a history of disagreeing with each other.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 00:03, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

No we don't. You have a history of making an arse of yourself. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:11, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Malleus, that is a bit outside the realm of civil discourse. Time for the both of you to do as Kansas Bear suggests. Prodego ^talk 00:15, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Ahem. --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:15, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

If I may be blunt, Coldplay, I think your biggest issue is that you focus far too much on the ageism debate. Don't get me wrong—I was guilty of this same crime several years back and that's probably one of the reasons why my RfB failed. But you need to realize that with thousands of Wikipedians, some will disagree with you on issues that may even affect you personally. Trying to prove that you can be mature looks more immature than simply acting mature, if that makes sense. I know you want to be an admin eventually, so if you want to pass you'll need to work on not giving a rat's ass. Probably time to take a step back and work on a nice article or three. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:19, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

your right. Malleus, you may not like me or even hate me for some unknown reason but you are entitled to an opinion and im entitled to mine. As for ageism. It's no rumor that teenagers are immature. I myself can act very immature here--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 01:30, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

209 to 46? 82% and they decide "no consensus"? No comment on the above weird "discussion", but to simply comment on the closing decision, I weep for this project. People have completely lost sight of the fundamentals, the objectives, and made it into some perverted social "game". Tan | 39 14:57, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes. How can 200+ votes result in "no concensus"?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 17:24, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

WP has somewhat butchered the concept of "consensus" beyond all recognition... –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:42, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

I've noticed that. "90% has to be considered no concensus due to the fact that not everyone agrees."--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 17:50, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

There is indeed an apparent confusion amongst many wikipedians between "consensus" and "unanimity". "Consensus" (from the Latin consentire, meaning to feel together), by no means implies that everyone, or an overwhelming majority, or even any majority at all, agrees with a certain course of action, simply that that it's been agreed to take it. To give one very specific example: I voted oppose in Julian's RfB for reasons that are well-known to you, but I do not consider myself part of the consensus not to promote, as I would not have objected to Julian's promotion, for the reasons that I also gave. --Malleus Fatuorum 18:01, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes. There is a diffrence between not supporting (oppose) and not wanting to promote him. However, most wikipedians think that there is no difference between oppose and not promote. ITs gererally considered (wrongly) that it's the same thing.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 18:09, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't vote; I just didn't notice it. I'll be more careful next time, as I am sure there will be, and successful then! All the best as always,--Wehwalt (talk) 18:16, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

As I have already commented elsewhere to Julian, although I gladly supported his RfB, the 'crat discussion yielded the correct decision as the bar for 'cratship currently stands. I happen to think that the bar is set too high, and that JC should now be a 'crat, but that is a discussion for other places. I am sure that you will get the 'cratship in the near future, JC - you know you'll have my full support! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 19:56, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Whatever, 209 wikipedians clearly think you are competent and ready to be a bureaucrat. I think it's a mistake to consider that bureaucrat is a higher level than adminship, but that's probably due that lamely quoted essay with the Jimbo quote about adminship being not a big deal. Good that you ran to see how many wikipedians support you. Now, go out and calmly start getting involved as an admin in some more controversial settlements. --IP69.226.103.13 | Talk about me. 19:27, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

I doubt that. Jimbo also said bureaucratship is a "dull technical position". ;-) Regards SoWhy 19:30, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Doubt what? "dull technical position" sounds about the same as "no big deal." So you doubt he said what I said he said which is about the same as what you said he said, but don't doubt he said what you said he said... Huh...--IP69.226.103.13 | Talk about me. 20:00, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Tan in his "weep" comment; expectations are way out of control and the consensus minimum will soon soar above 100%! upstateNYer 19:40, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Don't be ridiculous, it will only reach 99 44/100%. --IP69.226.103.13 | Talk about me. 20:00, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry that you didn't pass this time, maybe try again in a few month and then you'll pass. Good luck. –BuickCenturyDriver 19:45, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, although I doubt I'll be running again anytime soon to be honest. Hopefully understandably, I'm not very confident in the RfX process at the moment, but even so I might as well wait until some of the age concerns become moot. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 19:46, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

There's no age requirement. And you handled those questions well by ignoring them. It doesn't take a majority person to do what bureaucrats do. You appear to be able to read. --IP69.226.103.13 | Talk about me. 20:00, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Can you help?

This editor[1] continues to remove references[2][3][4] that state Ali Riza Efendi was of Albanian descent. I've posted numerous warnings[5][6][7], to no avail. Thank you. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:33, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

These editors[8][9][10] appear to be the same person, intent on deleting the talk page of Ali Riza Efendi[11]. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:17, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Seems the offending users were already blocked. Let me know if you encounter any additional trouble. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:21, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

It would appear that this individual[12] is back removing references,[13] following his/her 31 hr block.[14] --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:13, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Question

Where in Southeastern New England do you live? I'm on Cape Cod, but you seem to be active in places around here. Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 16:32, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm actually in southeastern New York, but I'm a fan of the Connecticut/Rhode Island area so I do quite a bit of editing on articles related to New England. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:06, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Ah, a Yankees fan. I guess we can no longer interact. Well that's good to know that you are fairly "close" to me. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 17:24, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

WP:AGF that he doesnt like the Yankees. Has he said that he does? (Sorry but I had to butt in)--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 17:27, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Um Coldplay Expert i think Kevin was joking.Jason Rees (talk) 17:31, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

So was I--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 17:33, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Okay, so I want to again throw my hat into the RFA bin. I just going to ask Secret, and he apparently has an illness that will keep him off of here. Would you be willing to nominate me in lieu of Secret's absence? Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:55, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Give me a bit to review your contribs and see if you're ready. If so, I'll have a nomination written up ASAP. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:07, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:12, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Would you be able to notify me if I'm not so that I won't be left hanging? Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:29, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

If you aren't able to do this in the next 12 hours, I understand and I will go to Xeno for this. Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:50, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. To be perfectly honest, I still believe you need a bit of maturing and seasoning before you're likely to pass. For example, you seem to be getting a bit impatient here—which is definitely understandable, but delays are something one encounters quite a bit as an admin and it's something to get used to. Might be a good idea to ask Xeno for a more in-depth review, but at the moment, I think you'd be good to wait a bit more. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:53, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

The impatientness is probably the result of me being bored out of my mind during a month-long vacation. I'm sorry if I start sounding a bit off and impatient, but there is nothing to do here on the Cape, and Wikipedia is really the only form of entertainment that I have (well not really, but doing this is rather fun). I agree that Xeno is someone I should probably ask, so I will get right on over to him and ask for a quick review. Thanks for your time and effort here! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:07, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Alea iacta est

My RfA is up and transcluded, so let's see. Thanks for your kind nomination statement Julian. Olaf Davis (talk) 19:39, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good. Best of luck! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 19:41, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Rename request

Dear Juliancolton, Thanks for responding to my username change request. I don’t want to leave Wikipedia permanently. What I want is to remove all traces of my former username from Wikipedia. I want all references to my former username to be replaced with references to the replacement username. Sincerely, Shiafishman (talk) 20:21, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

re: Arlene

wow, an administrator likes my work! thanks a lot. i guess it just comes pretty natural, i get hit by storms all the time! do you have any advice, since you've been here so long? --Viennaiswaiting (talk) 23:11, 4 January 2010 (UTC) wait, do you get an actual hat (or some article of clothing) for being an admin? sell that shit on ebay!

There is a shirt, but I doubt you'll get much for it - it's public domain, after all. Olaf Davis (talk) 23:32, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

What am I bid for this fine item of apparel?

hah, good to know that fundraising drive wasnt to buy pointless stuff for admins! keep it real my friend. --Viennaiswaiting (talk) 16:16, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

hey, cyclonebiscut told me to ask you, where could i find info for a storm back in the 50s. the news reports are small, and outside of the mwr there isn't much. isn't there some database of hurricane links so i don't have to keep asking you guys lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by Viennaiswaiting (talk • contribs) 17:28, 5 January 2010 (UTC) i did find this - http://ams.allenpress.com/archive/1520-0493/102/7/pdf/i1520-0493-102-7-476.pdf - from a google search. think there's any way to get more stuff along those lines? --Viennaiswaiting (talk) 17:32, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

darn, there's actually a site called the hurricane archive? grr... what about anything more along the lines of the above, like some papers? Viennaiswaiting (talk)

nah, google scholar didn't help much, i got the same link as the one above. what's ams, is it worth a shot? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Viennaiswaiting (talk • contribs) 17:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Munir Hussain (businessman)

Hey JC, sorry to your crat effort come up short. Your politicking needs work, apparently. Could you move the deleted article to my userspace as User:ChildofMidnight/home invasion in Britain or some such (per BLP concerns). Gracias. ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:10, 5 January 2010 (UTC) Or you could reopen the discussion and let it run another week. I don't think consensus was clear. ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:12, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Odd, the article doesn't appear to be have been deleted in the first place. Was it moved or something mid-discussion? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:13, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Yup. ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:18, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Bah. Well, I moved it to your userspace as a preliminary measure for now. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:23, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your assistance. Enjoy yourself. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:43, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I had edited the page Munir Hussain, but CoM reverted it. Obviously I thought my page was better than the page it was reverted to (my reasons on the tagged for deletion page), but I left it as it was and waited for the discussion. OK, it has gone, but I'm interested in what the discussion was and whether it was deleted or not and by whom. Any information? Cheers Aarghdvaark (talk) 10:28, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Michael Baic: User Name Change

Dear Julian, Thank you so much for your reply to my request to change my Username. The reason I made the request is because when I initially became a Wikipedia User I did not fully understand the system and have noted that using one's own name is not always a good idea. I have found an amount of harassment, which is causing distress, as you can imagine.

In the meantime I have deleted all content on my Michael Baic Username page, which is now blank and I would obviously not wish anybody to userp my name and enter false details.

In addition to the above, I was very concerned about a deletion on Sir Frederick Ashton's page. I knew him very well indeed for many years and noticed I was mentioned as were the Pagets. Suddenly my name was deleted by someone and I was not able to restore it.It must have been an error but, whereas I am not particularly concerned if I am mentioned on his page or not, it is at least as relevant as that of the Pagets.

I apologise if I may appear to be somewhat ignorant as to the correct protocal re editing and changing etc, but you will understand that at 60, the mind is not as sharp as at 30!

Thanks so much for your help Julian. ----

Michael Baic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Baic (talk • contribs) 11:47, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Coaching: Rollback

I've typed up a couple of scenarios for both use and non-use, when you are ready to look at them! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 15:21, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Deletion: EMazzanti Technologies

Hello,

I reviewed the reasons for deletion of my page, EMazzanti Technologies. I believe I have corrected many of the errors of the initial posting -- if you could review at some time my talk page is at Talk:EMazzanti_Technologies. Thanks for your time!

Hoboken engineer (talk) 19:59, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I've restored the article, so you can go ahead and simply copy/paste the revised version. Still seems a bit promotional in tone, though, so that's something you might want to consider. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:35, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Creampuff

RE: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Cremepuff222

I just wanted to lend you moral support. I am completly uninvolved with Creampuff, and only know about this case because I stumbled upon it on AFD one day.

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		The Barnstar of Diligence may be awarded in recognition of a combination of extraordinary community service. This barnstar is awarded to Juliancolton. Juliancolton defending the defenseless was brave and very commendable. We desperatly need more inspring leaders like you. Ikip 21:05, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Seems like a lost cause at this point, but I still believe they should be given another chance. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:36, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Just one question Julian. Would you be prepared to put your balls on the block for Cremepuff? I recall back in the days that Keeper76 offered to do exactly that for me at RfA. If I fucked up and got desysoped then he'd give up his tools as well. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:58, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Eh, unless the situation necessitated it, probably not, but I'm willing to take responsibility for him if he goes nuts after being unblocked. I'm not nearly as much fun as Keeper though, so I doubt it would have the same effect. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:32, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't questioning the effect, I was questioning the committmemt. Thanks for answering. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:36, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Malleus, your comments above inspired me to propose a variation of that here. I don't know Cremepuff, nor have I ever even seen his name here (hence the addition of "five editors..."), but I'm willing to take a risk. —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 03:09, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm a bit puzzled. You don't know Cremepuff yet you're willing to put yourself in the firing line for him, albeit to a very limited degree? Why? --Malleus Fatuorum 04:21, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

• If he will actually rewrite an article on his talk page, I'd reduce the block to, say, three months. Obviously the consensus is to keep him blocked at the moment, but I think that if he is willing to rewrite an article... Also, what about this? The potential positives are huge (imagine the better articles!), while the negatives (idiocy, vandalism) can be fixed with a couple clicks on rollback and a tap on the indef block button. —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 02:10, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

• Fully agree. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:13, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

  So would you be willing to give this option to every blocked socker and vandal (one could use the same arguments about the potential positives outweighing the potential negative)? To me this just looks like "trading" constructive edits for block time (and therefore disruption). It's a bad idea to openly say that users may harass and disrupt, so long as they write an article after. I don't think we should allow users who have caused as much disruption as cremepuff to be unblocked if they can't admit what they did (socking, harassment, vandalism, deleting pages for giggles) was wrong, but they will write articles. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 07:03, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

• Hi Kingpin, certainly not. But a former admin who has previously rewrote articles (unlike most socks/vandals)? I'd do it in a heartbeat. I think that cremepuff understands this would be his last and final chance, so I don't think he would screw it up. If he does, it really doesn't cost us much beyond a few clicks and typing "goodbye", as we wouldn't let the disruption go beyond a couple edits before blocking. However, if he doesn't screw it up, the encyclopedia benefits. In my mind, it's worth the gamble. —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 07:41, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Essay on consensus-building

I've been puttering around with an essay about consensus and wouldn't mind your commentary if you're so inclined. It's my first attempt at starting an essay.--otherlleft 21:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I like it, and I agree with the sentiments there. I wouldn't object to it being moved to the main projectspace actually. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:33, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate your endorsement. I wasn't sure if it had already been said better elsewhere. I'll put some headers in, I think.--otherlleft 22:51, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

You probably don't want to hear my opinion, but I'll offer it nevertheless. Consensus has to be built. not determined by some third-party after you've cast your "vote". Consensus, in other words, emerges from reasoned discussion. A strange concept for some, I know. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:01, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate any and all opinions, actually. As an essay, do you feel it expresses a unique point of view, or is it repeating something you've seen expressed better elsewhere?--otherlleft 23:11, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Since you ask, I think it expresses a point of view that is all too common here, and one that is killing the project. For more details contact my talk page. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:35, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Michael Baic

Dear Julian,

Thank you for your speedy reply and help. You suggest I contact Annonymous Dissident. Could you tell me how to do this as there does not seem to be a similar method to that which you use on his talk page. Sorry to be so slow to grasp the correct method. Thanks Julian. Michael Baic.

92.11.160.19 (talk) 10:34, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Whoops

Well that just shows you how up-to-date and observant I am. Thanks for clearing up after me.Fainites ^barleyscribs 14:55, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Heh, no worries. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 19:52, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Milhist task force reorganisation

Following the project's recent discussions, I've now merged the Science task force with the Engineering and technology task force to form the new Military science and technology task force. Because you were a coordinator of one of the two defunct task forces, I've transferred your coordinatorship to the new task force; you may wish to update your watchlist accordingly. There are still a few wrinkles being worked out, but most of the new infrastructure is in place and the rest should follow shortly. All the best, EyeSerene^talk 19:51, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 19:52, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 January 2010

• News and notes: Fundraiser ends, content contests, image donation, and more

• In the news: Financial Times, death rumors, Google maps and more

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:25, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Did You Know question

Hello! Your submission of February 1995 Northeast United States snowstorm at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Note: I always leave approvals to others. Art LaPella (talk) 06:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Ernest Cook information

I am sorry I don't know how to reply to this comment but will give it a try. I have been asked by the Ernest Cook Trust to amend information to do with Ernest Cook and the estates owned by the Ernest Cook Trust. Is this OK? Viva communications (talk) 11:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Ernest Cook Trust

I have had two messages about adding information about the Ernest Cook Trust. The secretary to the Trustees has asked me to amend any incorrect information about Ernest Cook and/or the Trust which currently appears on wikipedia, which is all I have been doing. I have also added links to the Trust's own website for further information. I am not sure what the problem is, and would appreciate some help! Many thanks Viva communications (talk) 15:28, 7 January 2010 (UTC)