User talk:CordeliaNaismith

Archive 1: November 2009 - January 2010

Frederick Douglass needs your help!

Cordelia -

I've added a reference to the quote you like so much. When you get back from your long wiki-vacation, would you consider improving on the intro to his article? I've mulled it over some and haven't come up with any inspiration.

Bloody Viking (talk) 19:43, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the ref, and for your note! I'd been thinking about the intro too, and am not sure what to do with it at the moment. Perhaps it might be easier to improve the other sections first, and then work on the intro...since the lead is supposed to summarize the rest of the article, if the rest of the sections are improved, it should make the intro easier to write as well. I do think it's a shame to have such an important article sitting with the "needs improvement" tag for so long... CordeliaNaismith (talk) 03:41, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the Welcome!

Nihilianth (talk) 06:34, 19 February 2010 (UTC)Nihilianth

Those cookies made me hungry! :)

Thanks for the Cookies!

They were much appreciated! :D Johncab593 (talk) 03:37, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi! I am trying to get the hang of editing but am a bit confused by the format, even sending this simple message :-) AnnaInDC

Dear Cordelia, could you point me to the instructions for decorating my user page. Currently, there is nothing there and I would like to add more about myself, for example photos. --Thanks!! AnnaInDC (talk) 05:50, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

The User page design center (WP:UPDC) might help. Cheers, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 01:43, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Appreciate yr welcome

Hi Cordelia

I am an opera lover and enjoy adding information when I can. My only good characteristic that I speak several languages (English, German, French, Hungarian and some Spanish) and try to contribute in those languages. I particularly like the stories of Jewish opera singers and artists.

Keep well! Just love and be silent

Andrea (age 72) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ag Andras (talk • contribs) 02:27, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Dear CordeliaNaismith, I haven't had a pleasure to know you before my ordeal. If I could talk about something good that came out of it, it is that I got to know you. Thank you very much for your kindness and your understanding! --Mbz1 (talk) 03:31, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Dear Mbz1, Thank you very much. I admire your work on Wikipedia, and wish you all the best. CordeliaNaismith (talk) 16:06, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Well done! --AFriedman (talk) 06:02, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Somewhat late to the party however may I add my thanks for words well said which I've found remarkably rare in this place (in part explaining why I am rarely here). Regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:28, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello

Hey Cordelia,I'm Mumak.I got it from the Mumakil of Harad.Anyway,Thanks for that warm welcome. Contact me On my User page if you'd like.Thanks again.From:Mumak.Also,I Haven't actully read the Books,only seen all 3 movies.From:Mumak.Feb. 7,2010. Are you a fan of LotR?I'm a HUGE fan as well.From:mumak.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mumak (talk • contribs) 16:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mumak. CordeliaNaismith does NOT like the Lord of the Rings. We're all too familiar with both the books and the movies, as well as the Silmarillion. She also doesn't like the sunlight :). I don't have her problems with sunlight, but I share her hatred of the Lord of the Rings. We were very upset with how we were portrayed. BTW, do you like my Username? I'm named after my favorite food, which my Master, Saruman the Wise, gives me to eat ;). --A Fried man (talk) 21:54, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

This user is a member of the Kindness Campaign.

Cordelia, You were so kind not only to Mumak, but to Griseum too. Please believe me when I say that kindness isn't even one of Ugluk's faults! Here is something accursed that I'm leaving for you.

Question

Hi Cordelia, thank you very much for the welcome...

Im new here and very confused. I read an article and found it to be incorrect and wanted to change it, but i couldnt.

I joined to learn more about wikipedia and to change the article.

Somebody is reverting the article everytime i change it. It seems somebody with a hate-agenda is misusing wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathenkozhencherry (talk • contribs) 19:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mathenkozhencherry, Which is the article are you trying to fix? And what is the problem with the article that you're trying to correct? One common reason why information that's newly added to an article might be removed is if it is not referenced, perhaps seeing WP:SOURCE will help. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 19:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mathenko,

Are you talking about the Indian branch of Christianity that had a schismatic group originating in the 19th century under the influence of protestant missionaries? Not the first time I've seen disputes like this on religion-related pages. Please do add references to the materials you'd like to add. Also, if there is a controversy about the succession of the clergy as it relates to the identity of the church, "neutrality" means all significant POVs should be represented in the article. Good work so far, and quite impressive for a new user. --AFriedman (talk) 19:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Cordelia, i had some concerns about the Indian Orthodox, Marthoma Church, Syro-Malabar Catholic pages. I have posted some them on the discussion pages. I have only started to understand how wikipedia works and now im hoping to help out with the nasrani chart which depicts the various splits in the Saint Thomas Christian community of Kerala after 16th century.

Thanks AFriedman, I will take your advice,i didnt understand wikipedia edits or how it works at first. Im learning and only getting accustomed to the way wikipedia works and its culture and i think its fascinating. I have been contributing in some laymens websites of the indian orthodox and syro-malabar catholic church, especially some articles related to history and culture of the saint thomas christian people of kerala and ive also been active in some online forums before i created an id in wiki.

Mathenkozhencherry (talk) 16:05, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Looks like you're doing really good work so far--thanks for your contributions! Also, I'm glad you're enjoying learning about Wikipedia :-) I find this place fascinating too. Cheers, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 01:58, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Mathenko, welcome to Wikipedia! Nice to see someone else who cares so much about improving the information on Wikipedia, not that we have a shortage of those on the site. You may want to write to User:Tinucherian, who is one of the more well-known Wikipedians and is also interested in the pages about the Christian community of Kerala. --AFriedman (talk) 04:14, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah i know him, he might be the reason im here in the first place:D.

Mathenkozhencherry (talk) 18:48, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Well yeah. Everyone has a point of view about this subject. As a Jewish person, I understand where you're coming from re: the succession of the clergy. I can tell you that I don't appreciate Christians claiming our mantle as actually belonging to them and calling themselves "completed Jews" and other such things. I'm also annoyed when people imply that Christianity (and Islam) replaced Judaism--Judaism is alive and well, thank you. So is the Orthodox side of Saint Thomas Christianity. Plus, the Saint Thomas Christians were one of the last surviving groups of Jewish Christians before the missionaries from Europe endangered this part of their identity, and I'm grateful that Wikipedia has this information ;). I'm not so familiar with the specific edits Tinucherian made to the articles in question--I just know he lists these articles on his Userpage. However, the very best Wikipedia editors are welcoming, encouraging and positive even when people (and especially newcomers) are trying to constructively edit articles from opposing points of view. Tinucherian's request for adminship passed almost unanimously, which makes me think he might be one of those people. But never mind. If you aren't being treated nicely on the pages you're trying to edit, you've got lots of administrative recourse, such as reporting to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Just explain what you're doing and why on the Article talk page or the other person's Talk page, if someone undoes the changes you make. Both CordeliaNaismith and I have defended Users we felt were getting the short end of the stick, sometimes successfully. --AFriedman (talk) 21:52, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank You very much Alfriedman, for the award and even more for your understanding. Yeah our identity is really dead now, we lost all our cultural identifications. My grandmother is almost 80 years old and she is the last person in my family who wears the traditional kerala nasrani(syrian christian) dress. These dresses, our family culture, nasrani names, art forms, local "syrian christian slang", spirituality, even our food delicacies etc all will be dead or are already dead by last generation. The new generation dont know anything about it or are uninterested and are swept away in the tide of both cultural westernism and western religions, evangelism, rock gospel shows etc

I feel really bad when people talk bad of our community, in their attempt to distort our history or to convert us, for this reason. Its even worse when its same indian people who try to force european version of our history upon us because of their religious affiliations. Its very frustrating and saddening for me personally, to be part of a generation that has to witness the death of 2 millenia of a way of life. In India, christians are a small minority. Syrian Christians are a minority within this christian minority, maybe you can call it a super minority. So i guess i can understand how other cultural-ethnic minority people feel about representing their history properly and so does you it seems.

We are not jewish in blood as some among us may claim(due to their great fascination for everything semitic), though a few early ancestors may have immigrated from persia(iran-iraq region) in 4th century due to persecution and mixed with keralites. But our spirituality and culture has many jewish-semitic influences, especially the prostrations, fasting, costumes of our clergy, the beards, caps, our syriac/aramaic liturgy, dravido-hebrew names of people, special food delicacies on passover, etc. Id like to think of our near extinct community as something of a cross between the Hindu-Dravidian-Jew-and the Syrian christians of persia.

Thank you very much again for the support, it was very kind of you.

Mathenkozhencherry (talk) 14:46, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Welcome Cookies

Based on your user page, I guess you've been around Wikipedia a lot longer than I have, but I figured I would drop you a welcome template anyhow--hope you enjoy the cookies :-) CordeliaNaismith 05:03, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

• Also based on my user page, and the not-really friendly message I chose to carve there, you could guess that I'm pretty fed up with certain cyber people right now and a cyber cookie couldn't come at a better time. Thank you Cordelia! --Griseum (talk) 05:13, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Greetings

Please dont greet vandals with cookies. Please check user's contributions fisrt and then [a message]. - Altenmann >t 06:27, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

You're right. I checked his contribs and they're definitely not what is supposed to be on Wikipedia. I left him an additional welcome template with more specific information about what he did, and how he can help. --AFriedman (talk) 07:07, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome and cookies

Thanks for the welcome and cookies. I edited a semi-protected article, "Valentine's Day" in the talk section No.10. I understand it will be reviewed by an "experienced editor" for publication. Do you know about how long that should take? I love Wikipedia and appreciate the opportunity to be part of it. Ernies35 (talk) 00:19, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Good catch--I have fixed the article per your suggestion. Thanks, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 00:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mourning Mothers

The article Mourning Mothers has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:NOTNEWS.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 03:59, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Mourning Mothers

I have nominated Mourning Mothers, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mourning Mothers. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 04:14, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for your warm welcome! I hope to be of value to Wikipedia and am sure I will enjoy it here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2342WLNMACHPE (talk • contribs) 03:21, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for your Welcome! (And for the Cookies...:)

M.--Michin2 (talk) 22:26, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Biased Wiki Entries and Editors

Could you please help advise on this matter? I noticed a wiki entry that I would like to contribute to and refresh as the current views are based on old/outdated articles, obscure sources, and somewhat one sided in the way they are presented. When I make an addition or modification (mostly a few words from the sources or other articles from authors already cited) I find hours later that they have been reverted. Since, I have added a {POV} and {unbalanced} at the top of the page and have been discussing in the talk section. However, the {POV} and {unbalanced} are also being reverted by one of the editors who has monitored the page for several years and helped by another editor. In the {POV} and {unbalanced} it says do not remove until the dispute is settled, yet he has continued to do so. Also, the points from the references cited in this Wiki entry are "cherry picked" to support what now appears to me as this editor's personal standpoint on the issue. For example, from a 200+ page book by an expert the editor has plucked out one negative statement to represent the entire book/citation which in whole makes the opposite conclusions and points to the one this editor has chosen to cherry pick and include in the wiki entry. This editor does this with many of the sources he uses, ignoring main points and honing in on those that support his point of view, are the weakest, or opposite to the perspective of the reference when taken as a whole and adding those to the articles as being representative of the citation. He gives little if no reasons for reverting new contributions to the wiki entry. What is one to do? Is this normal and how can one have contributions/modifications stick without an old editor simply coming along and deleting them (i.e. claiming ownership of the article in a sense)? At the very least, the {POV} and {unbalanced} should not be removed as I sense this editor may be breaking basic Wiki rules by removing them. AnnaInDC (talk) 22:16, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmm...discussing the issues on the talk page is exactly the right thing to do. It's not unusual for editors to disagree about where neutral point of view lies, especially with articles dealing with religion, politics, and the like. For suggestions on dispute resolution, you could see WP:DISPUTE. I'd suggest continuing to discuss the specific changes you want to make to the article on the talk page, including citations to relevant reliable sources. Cheers, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 05:12, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the useful link!

AnnaInDC (talk) 06:46, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. Another point--always remember to assume good faith (ie, that the other editor is genuinely trying to improve the article, just as you are. See: WP:AGF. Looking at the talk page of the article you're editing, it looks to me like there's been quite a lot of previous discussion on this article (there are 5 pages of archives on the talk page)! Also, since this is a featured article, some editors have put in quite a lot of work in the past in improving this article. It's possible that some form of the debate that you're currently having has previously been discussed here. If you have time, it might help to have a look at some of the previous discussion on the page (or to ask the editors who have been around the article for a while to point you towards previous discussion of the issue). The wiki editors reverting your changes may not be "biased"/trying to push a specific agenda, but consensus may previously have been reached on similar issues in the past. That doesn't mean that your changes don't belong, but you probably should explain what changes you think the article needs on the talk page and work towards consensus before making changes. Another wikipedia essay that may be interesting to you is WP:BRD, which talks about how to work towards consensus. Happy editing! Cheers, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 02:20, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Help with English?

Hi Cordelia, I wonder, if you have a time to fix my English in Ronald Levy? Please do not worry, if you do not. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:33, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I have made some edits to the article. I was really interested to learn about Dr. Levy's work, and hope to go back and read more about it sometime when I have a chance--it seems like he has done incredibly interesting and useful research. Thanks for pointing me towards that article. Cheers, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 21:39, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Why are you reverting my edits

I am Mormon. I know what is going on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.129.110.35 (talk) 03:13, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

But he just banged them -- he didn't marry them. --24.129.110.35 (talk) 03:15, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I am new on Wikipedia so I am going to probably stick to less controversial topics. --24.129.110.35 (talk) 03:56, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Images

Hi, the sources of File:Khazeikids.jpg, File:Khazei cityyear.jpg, File:Servicenation.jpg, File:Cityyear.jpg, and File:Kennedy cy.jpg don't have licenses compatible with Wikipedia, so I nominated the images for deletion. Regards Hekerui (talk) 12:44, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Patronisation

I've swiftly removed your patronising comments at my talk page. You really oughta show some more respect for other editors!!! Vexorg (talk) 02:54, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I regret you found the comments patronising, I didn't intend them that way. But in my opinion some of your recent contributions are uncivil. Thanks, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 03:02, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

You've done exactly what you are accusing me of doing. You posted what is nothing more than a rant at my talk page. For example, what on earth has my opinions about ZOG got to do with anything? Nothing. It wasn't directed at any editor, but an opinion that ZOG isn't anti-semitic, followed by the rational for that. FWIW I find JOG anti-Semitic and also FWIW I haste racism. So why did you mention that in a post about some claim of incivility? If someone spoke to me in real life the way you spoke to me at my talk page I would certainly not put up with it and I would put that person straight in no uncertain terms. And I won't take such crap on the Internet either. I'm not being uncivil, I'm being straight to the point. Your rant listed a whole lot of things. Would you like me to demolish them item by item? Because I can do. However I won't waste both our time on each point but for example: Asking the editor whether he was the IP; What's uncivil about that? It's a straightforward question. All he had to do was answer the question and I would have respected his answer. The following lecture by you is particularly patronising, "It's my hope that you will remember in the future that everyone who edits this encyclopedia, including those who edit war with you and those who find your comments objectionable, are people and deserve to be treated with great civility and respect." IMHO you should heed your own advice. Vexorg (talk) 03:25, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Just to say hello

I appreciate the comments you have been making at various venues the last few days. You sound like a real human being.  :) All the best, Stellarkid (talk) 04:23, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Unlike the rest of .. etc.

Anyway :) I saw you commented on the AE appeal, I am wondering if you know that she is free to work with photography and indeed anything that she wants as long as it does not touch on Israel-Arab conflicts? Your wording seemed to imply that you thought she stood to be blocked outright. Unomi (talk) 11:39, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hi Cordelia, Thank you very much for your comment on my appeal. Although it failed, I will always remember your help. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:52, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Editing error explanation.

Hi Cordelia,

I just saw your editing on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bircham_International_University

You removed the status of Authorized Provider. As a Wikipedia editor you should be more responsible of your decisions. When you are not sure about something, take the time to do a quick research. It took me just 5 clicks to find this. Check the following links http://www.iacet.org/component,1/action,directory/char,B/ http://www.iacet.org/component,8/action,show_content/id,3/ Do fix your correction according to this input if your think that is correct. Thanks

Help with image licensing/copyright, please!

Hi, thank you for noticing my trouble with image licensing. I am working to create a page for a well-respected, recently-deceased illustrator. Her daughter has provided me with some images to use on her page, but I am not sure how to go about properly tagging and uploading them. Can you please help me figure out the process? Thanks! Mmschettler (talk) 02:34, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

POV pushing

What you say here is interesting. Do you have any specific examples of disputes where a good editor/arbitrator did good work only to have the article descend into chaos again? 86.164.213.139 (talk) 09:11, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:FesshayeYohannes.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:FesshayeYohannes.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 03:02, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

I've added a fair-use rationale for the image. Thanks, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 04:51, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

News

Have you heard that Bujold has a new novel coming out? Cryoburn is being released in a few weeks. DS (talk) 00:29, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes--I actually got the advance reader copy, first time I ever did that. I thought it was not as good as most of the other books, though... CordeliaNaismith (talk) 00:42, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello, CordeliaNaismith. You have new messages at Beeblebrox's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your comment on my comment (nationalist POV pushers and similar)

Hi,

Thank you for your positive and helpful comments. I agree that the discussion is over - and indeed now long over. (And maybe there was no real need for a lengthy discussion anyway, I'm not sure). However I don't accept that a declaration of "well I'm leaving Wikipedia because you bad people have driven me away" by someone after they get caught breaking the rules, is a reason not to take any action. Such declarations are often made in the heat of the moment, and someone who has already stated "you can't ban the whole university", in addition to editing from at least four different accounts and making IP edits as well, seems likely enough to try to return sooner or later.

I also don't accept the excuse of "early wiki misadventures" when we're talking about an editor whose determined abuse of policy stretched over several years, many warnings, successive blocks and more than ten thousand edits. The big problems with the Historicist account came more than six months after it was first blocked for edit warring.

Thank you for pointing out the WP:CPUSH essay. I had never seen this page before, although I had already understood some of it from observation of ANI and other places. I had, of course, read WP:Tendentious_Edtiting, but the closest thing to WP:CPUSH that I had already read is another essay linked from it, WP:PBAGDSWCBY (currently being considered for deletion, gosh). In fact, I was very tempted to link to that essay in my posting at the noticeboard, because AMuseo's behavior is described in it several times. This was my purpose for quoting his thoughts about "how the system works" and how one can "get away with murder" if one doesn't technically violate rules. The behaviour of the AMuseo account seemed to be his implementation of that, and now that I read some of the policy and opinion material on related problems, I also see how WP:PLAGUE also has a particular resonance with the way he acted with the AMuseo account.

Here's a quote from that essay. I don't agree with all of it, but it's relevant: Living-persons issues apart, most admins are too scared to block for POV pushing, even though neutrality is supposed to be our most important principle. Nor are such blocks readily endorsed, no matter how justified, largely because the majority of those expressing an opinion are not familiar with the subject matter, and either cannot or will not properly check the issues concerned. As a result, admins are unable to deal with pure POV-pushing, and can only address the other symptoms of the nationalist disease. Typically the nationalist troll does, in fact, infringe user conduct rules, but this cannot be universally relied upon. Even if he does, the nationalist cannot be relied upon to violate the user conduct regulations to the extent that he can be removed permanently.

I really don't think he was a troll in the full sense of the term, since he obviously had at least some sincere belief in the POV that he was pushing. (Now I think of it, the word troll is out of place at that point in that essay, maybe I should write to its author.) It's worth noting that all of Historicist's initial blockings were in fact for edit warring on a BLP article; if that particular article hadn't touched a particular nerve with him, then it's quite likely that the essay author would be correct; the nationalist POV pushing might never have generated a substantial admin reaction at all.

I do sympathise with the points you make about there being bias in that news coverage (and therefore the chances of proving notability) is significantly greater for some nations than for others. And I realise this was a point that AMuseo had made on his user page as well as other places. However it's worth noting that in order to make that point on his user page, he had to commit a flagrant breach of the BLP policy in making insulting unsourced comments about someone on the "wrong" side of the Israel-Palestine conflict. I don't think cultural bias was his main target here - I think cultural bias was merely one obstacle in the way of him wanting to make Wikipedia's content serve his purposes.

Although I do occasionally comment and edit in extremely contentious areas, I have the advantage of not having strong attachments to either side, in most of them. (Although I'm aware that no-one is truly neutral.) In fact, the first and last comments currently on my talk page are a rather ironic example of that, if a rather obscure one. But for most of the people editing in the highly contentious areas, it really is a POV battleground. When that causes problems for other parts of the encyclopedia, it bothers me.

Anyway, thank you again for your input, and it certainly is a learning experience on how these things work. Am I still frustrated? No I don't think I am - although a lot more sceptical.

--Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Happy CordeliaNaismith's Day!

CordeliaNaismith has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, so I've officially declared today as CordeliaNaismith's Day! For being a great person and awesome Wikipedian, enjoy being the star of the day, CordeliaNaismith! Signed, Neutralhomer A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, click here. Have a Great Day...Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:04, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

The above is given on behalf of User:La comadreja. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:04, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Congrats! Love, La comadreja _{formerly AFriedman} RESEARCH (talk) 07:02, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

You're quite welcome! :) Keep up the great work! :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:42, 15 December 2010 (UTC)