Jump to content

User talk:Ryan4314

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ryan4314 (talk | contribs) at 07:41, 3 August 2012 (→‎Barnstar of Recovery: rep). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

I will reply to your posts on this page

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of the occult secret societies

Please take your schoolboy arguments elsewhere. This AfD is not the venue. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 18:03, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry I think there may have been a little mix up, per your edit summary: "revert deleted entries, removed for inexplicable reason". I wasn't trying to delete those comments, rather I moved them to the talk page, I was attempting to "disengage". It's my fault, I should've made that clear in the edit summary. Ryan4314 (talk) 22:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, though I am not a fan of removing comments from an AfD except in the most extreme circumstances. Having said that, things were getting that way, as User:A Nobody is making life somewhat difficult for all concerned. Do you have a history with this guy? He seems to be a bit of a troublemaker. I've never encountered him before. He's not the only one involved in this mess, though. I'm inclined to let him and his adversaries have at it and pee all over each other for now. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 23:14, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry thought you had gone offline, were you happy for me to restore the move? Ryan4314 (talk) 23:15, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
History, not especially, he does have some history with bigger editors though. I used to comment at AFD a lot in 2008, so we butted horns then, nothing exciting. I've recently just returned to AFD, otherwise I was only one of the many who commented at his RFC and Editor Review last year. I've seen your talk page, I wouldn't worry too much, he reported me to ANI once, because I nominated some copyrighted images he uploaded for deletion. There's not much advice to give, just hope the people in authority are monitoring the situation and keep an eye out for any oppurtunities to raise your concerns i.e. RFC etc. Ryan4314 (talk) 23:30, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
An ANI post has been started here, concerning his behaviour this evening. It doesn't mention your exchange, so you may wish to add your thoughts. Ryan4314 (talk) 23:57, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Catching all three comments above: Restoration is fine. Thanks for the heads-up on ANI and the links to other pages regarding his history, I added a comment to the ANI. Apparently this chap can best be summed up as a royal pain in the ARS. :-) - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 01:06, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Southern Pride

Hi Ryan, I see you're interested in boats. I'm trying to flesh out the history of the whalecatcher Southern Pride which served in the Royal Navy and was the inspiration for the design of the Flower class corvettes - do you have access to any info that might help?   pablohablo. 23:44, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Although the cold war era is more my speciality (therefore most of my sources are current online givernment ones), I can recommend searching:
Hansard
Perhaps an FOI request (not sure if you have to be a British resident to do this)[1]
Navy News etc, might be to modern, but try the refs on my Cardiff article, they were all ok'd at the FAC. Ryan4314 (talk) 23:54, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your VOTE 2 vote at CDA

Hi Ryan4314,

you are receiving this message as you voted in VOTE 2 at the recent Community de-Adminship 'Proposal Finalization' Poll. Unfortunately, there is a hitch regarding the "none" vote that can theoretically affect all votes.

1) Background of VOTE 2:

In a working example of CDA; ater the 'discussion and polling phase' is over, if the "rule of thumb" baseline percentage for Support votes has been reached, the bureaucrats can start to decide whether to desysop an admin, based in part on the evidence of the prior debate. This 'baseline' has now been slightly-adjusted to 65% (from 70%) per VOTE 1. VOTE 2 was asking if there is a ballpark area where the community consensus is so strong, that the bureaucrats should consider desysopping 'automatically'. This 'threshold' was set at 80%, and could change pending agreement on the VOTE 2 results.

This was VOTE 2;

Do you prefer a 'desysop threshold' of 80% or 90%, or having none at all?
As a "rule of thumb", the Bureaucrats will automatically de-sysop the Administrator standing under CDA if the percentage reaches this 'threshold'. Currently it is 80% (per proposal 5.4).
Please vote "80" or "90", or "None", giving a second preference if you have one.

This is the VOTE 2 question without any ambiguity;

Do you prefer a "rule of thumb" 'auto-desysop' percentage of 80%, 90%, or "none"?
Where "none" means that there is no need for a point where the bureaucrats can automatically desysop.
Please vote "80" or "90", or "None", giving a second preference if you have one.

2) What was wrong with VOTE 2?

Since the poll, it has been suggested that ambiguity in the term "none at all" could have affected some of the votes. Consequently there has been no consensus over what percentage to settle on, or how to create a new compromise percentage. The poll results are summarised here.

3) How to help:

Directly below this querying message, please can you;

  • Clarify what you meant if you voted "none".
  • In cases where the question was genuinely misunderstood, change your initial vote if you wish to (please explain the ambiguity, and don't forget to leave a second choice if you have one).
  • Please do nothing if you interpreted the question correctly (or just confirm this if you wish), as this query cannot be a new vote.

I realise that many of you clarified your meaning after your initial vote, but the only realistic way to move forward is to be as inclusive as possible in this vote query. Sorry for the inconvenience,

Matt Lewis (talk) 14:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I selected 80. Ryan4314 (talk) 15:14, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Argentine Army Aviation

Hi Ryan, when you have a minute a little c/e would be appreciated --Jor70 (talk) 20:49, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be honoured. In the next 24 hrs. Ryan4314 (talk) 22:50, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thks for that, but I meant this new one Argentine Army Aviation :-) --Jor70 (talk) 13:02, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, feel free to revert the other c/e if you wish. Ryan4314 (talk) 13:57, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Snipergate listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Snipergate. Since you had some involvement with the Snipergate redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Horologium (talk) 14:13, 16 February 2010 (UTC) Horologium (talk) 14:13, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Nida Sameer

An article that you have been involved in editing, Nida Sameer, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nida Sameer. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 16:34, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Patetic

Did you see this ? [2] . UK DoD just denied all [3] what the problem with these guys ? they even stole the Drummond pic from poder naval blog without properly source it ! --Jor70 (talk) 21:01, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jor, this is why it is important that individuals like you, me and Darius ignore the right-wing sentiments of our countries and continue trying to forge friendships for the future. LOL don't read The Sun, it's terrible. ;) Ryan4314 (talk) 12:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Still learning English... :)

Hi Ryan. A mix of non native English and hypercorrection led me to do this edit. Thank you for for enlightening me about the correct meaning of "to limp". Cheers.--Darius (talk) 23:17, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's ok mate, your English is very good :) Ryan4314 (talk) 00:22, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open!

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 8 March 2010! More information on coordinatorship may be found on the coordinator academy course and in the responsibilities section on the coordinator page.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:18, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The RfC on the Community de-Adminship proposal has begun

The RfC on the Community de-Adminship proposal was started on the 22nd Feb, and it runs for 28 days. Please note that the existing CDA proposal was (in the end) run as something of a working compromise, so CDA is still largely being floated as an idea.

Also note that, although the RfC is in 'poll format' (Support, Oppose, and Neutral, with Comments underneath), this RfC is still essentially a 'Request for Comment'. Currently, similar comments on CDA's value are being made under all three polls.

Whatever you vote, your vote is welcome!

Regards, Matt Lewis (talk) 10:37, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

spanglish

As always, I will honoured by your c/e of Argentine defense industry. Im still adding data to Battle of San Carlos but of course you are welcome there too --Jor70 (talk) 12:29, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It'd be my pleasure amigo. Ryan4314 (talk) 20:59, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nimitz class aircraft carrier

I have edited this article based on your suggestions in the GA review and am now in the copyediting stage. Although I haven't really added an enormous amount of detail for each point, I thing what I've done is fairly good. One slight problem was that I couldn't find any decent references to show what the USN intends to do with nuclear powered aircraft carriers after decommissioning (I was looking to see what would happen to Enterprise), although I think a substantial proportion of the costs would be safely removing the spent fuel and the reactors. Anyway, what I wanted to ask you was how far you think the article is from being an FA, and roughly what would need to be done to improve it. I've never done an FA before, and I don't really know what is required. And thanks for the suggestions on the GA review by the way. Jhbuk (talk) 17:29, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Content wise, I believe you're ready FA. However passing FA is more about minor technicalities:
  • Are the references all formatted correctly and uniform
  • Do you have the correct licensing on all the images (they're really strict on this!)
  • As ever, people who don't know what else to say will request a copyedit be done (by someone else other than you), therefore you have to find a friend who'll do one for you
  • Check the article against all of the Wikipedia:Featured article tools
  • try and rally support over at Milihist before you apply, other milihist members will help. Ryan4314 (talk) 20:59, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I've decided to start another peer review just to make sure that everything is good enough, and to get some other ideas for improvement, although I've carried out some of your suggestions. Jhbuk (talk) 22:36, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator elections have opened!

Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinator elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:17, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Navy Pilot Carlos Benitez

Hi Ryan, do you know if we have any Port Stanley's wikieditor among us ? I would like to have confirmation if Carlos Benitez tomb who was killed on May 3 when he crashed with his MB339 is still on Stanley cemetery or he has been moved. cheers --Jor70 (talk) 15:02, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I don't even know any Falklands-based editors, sorry. Jor, have you read: "The Red & Green Life Machine"? Ryan4314 (talk) 15:56, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
unfortunately not, but I read one Rick Jolly's letter here [4] and seems a very honorable man. I also was profound impressed with a video I recently found about HMS Fearless rescue of Lt Lucero 7:00 an A-4C pilot who died last month on an aircraft accident --Jor70 (talk) 16:26, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Lucero is featured heavily in the book and also seems a very honourable man/pilot. I recommend you read it, the book is very much written in the spirit of reconciliation. Ryan4314 (talk) 16:30, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

in lieu of email

I request here that you not comment ofn the health conditions of other editors. It is not to your credit. DGG ( talk ) 01:41, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd rather you'd just e-mailed me in private if you felt that way, instead of trying this publicly on my talk page. That was not to your credit sir. Ryan4314 (talk) 19:25, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

re:RoLF

Transcluded from here:

Hello mate. I see you are "are actively involved" with the Romanian Land Forces article. I couldn't help notice there is no record of the army's role in the revolution. I'd be interested to learn more about this and maybe add to the article, your thoughts? Ryan4314 (talk) 01:22, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, excuse me for my late response, I was quite inactive on wiki during the recent period. The most important issue here on wiki regarding Romanian military history is the lack of reliable English sources and low level of interest besides Western historiography. The best thing I could do is to start adding information based on press articles - but that wouldn't be very professional for an encyclopedia. Briefly, starting with the evening of the 21st December the army switched sides and joined the protesters; afterwards, until 22nd evening there where intense fightings between protesters and army on one side and Securitate together with other loyalist forces on the other side. What is most important is that out of 1.150 victims of the revolution, about 940 died in confrontations between army and securitate after Ceausescu was overthrown and the new regime seized power. All the best --Eurocopter (talk) 19:47, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thankyou for replying, I hope you don't mind me replying on my talk page. Of the 1150 killed, how many were soldier and how many were civilians? Ryan4314 (talk) 21:58, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Karanacs (talk) 17:24, 15 June 2010 (UTC) [reply]

AfD nomination of List of fictional magic users

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of fictional magic users, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional magic users (2nd nomination). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Axem Titanium (talk) 14:50, 23 August 2010 (UTC) [reply]

{{cite web}}

It's a formatting template. Nothing about it restricts its use to citations.

This being the Wacky World of Wiki, citations (and yes, I do appreciate the distinction) are indicated with an XML-style tag "<ref>", short for "reference". Neither of these names are proscriptive of their use. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:47, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever mate, don't burst a blood vessel over it, I don't care that much. Ryan4314 (talk) 14:05, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Milhist A-class and Peer Reviews Jul-Dec 2009

 Military history reviewers' award 
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your good work helping with the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews during the period July-December 2009, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:54, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space

The Milhist election has started!

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,  Roger Davies talk 19:35, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

South Atlantic Medal

File:South Atlantic Medal.jpg nominated for deletion yet again. Do you have time to rescue it? Justin talk 07:52, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming "Battle of Top Malo House"

Hello, Ryan4314. You have new messages at Talk:Battle of Top Malo House.
Message added 08:34, 13 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your revert

Actually, the Lynx flights were originally part of 829, later the Lynxes were absorbed into 815. (829 NAS states this, as does the source I use for Lynx 335). WikiCopter (radio • sorties • images • shot down) 17:06, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MV Atlantic Conveyor

Did your mate Ken have a photo of Atlantic Conveyor? Article currently has no photos due to a copyright violation. Justin talk 23:07, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nah mate, Cardiff didn't get to the TEZ till the 26th. Ryan4314 (talk) 06:49, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you back?

Ain't seen you around buddy? Wee Curry Monster talk 10:15, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi mate, recently moved house, but editing wikipedia has been becoming less interesting to me recently as well, still read it though. Ryan4314 (talk) 17:54, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't blame you, losing interest for me as well. I naively believed in WP:NPOV as a policy but find that increasingly it is not really valued. Wee Curry Monster talk 22:41, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey about the 3 British soldier were killed by a US Jet fight planes in August 23, 2007?

i tried to take it out on the "list of post-1945 of British victims by the United States military" is because i don't want people to think it's a US-on-UK friendly fire. It was clearly a Brit-on-Brit Friendly Fire. Remember where it says in august 2007 where there British soldier were killed y US jet fighter planes. that It was well-documented that the British Foward Air-Controller will face Manslaughter charges so the US was not to blame for this. I mean some one look it it and just blame on the US. Especially when Brits(even today) are very quick to blame this on the US despite the fact it was proven it was the fault of the British FAC giving the bad coordinates to the US pilot. That's why i'm trying to take it out many times and yet someone still post it in there. I do not want people(mostly foreigners) to continue to believe it was the Americans fault for this.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1038781/British-soldier-faces-manslaughter-charges-Afghanistan-friendly-deaths.html

I tried removing it but they kepy putting it back on. Now many people will continue to think it's a US on UK friendly fire. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulioetc (talk • contribs) 23:35, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I think the reason why people were reverting your edits was because you were simply removing the whole entry. I'd recommend updating the entry with a recent source (the daily mail reference you gave above is two years out of date). Our role is to simply inform and allow readers to choose to investigate further and formulate their own opinions. How does this updated entry sound to you:
  • 23 August 2007: a bomb dropped by an F-15 killed three soldiers of the Royal Anglian Regiment and wounded a further two. An inquest is currently ongoing, issues such as inadequate communication equipment and incorrect coordinates from a British forward air controller have been raised. A coroner has stated it was down to the "flawed application of procedures".[1][2]
Also I would like you to read my former correspondence on the article's talk page. I hope you will see that my discourse is neutral and I believe this article actually exonerates the U.S. military in what is a very prevalent issue in the minds of the British public. Ryan4314 (talk) 00:28, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marty Burke (Politician)

Can you have a look at your !vote here. From what you wrote it sounds like you meant to delete, but your !vote says to keep. Note: I believe that your vote was changed by another user (the next editor after you), but just want to double check first. Ravendrop 20:44, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Rodney Morison for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rodney Morison is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rodney Morison (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Sadads (talk) 13:50, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Falkland Islands Article in Arbitration

Having briefly reviewed the article's discussion history, I've identified you as a potentially aggrieved editor whose contributions may have been negatively impacted by the actions of a group of editors who are alleged to be POV-pushing and engaging in WP:GAMES. I invite you to peruse the arbcom request and voice your opinion and experiences, at your leisure. The link is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#WP:NPOV_and_WP:GAMES_in_.22Falkland_Islands.22_and_related_articles

Thank you.Alex79818 (talk) 22:53, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 18:38, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXVII, September 2011

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 02:44, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXVIII, October 2011

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 08:44, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,

I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)

Wee Curry Monster talkis wishing you a Merry Christmas.

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.


Spread the cheer by adding {{Subst:Xmas4}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

The Bugle: Issue LXIX, November 2011

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:06, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Military Historian of the Year

Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:20, 16 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXX, January 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:39, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Your invitation to participate in a Wikimedia-approved survey in online behavior.

Hello, my name is Michael Tsikerdekis[5][6], currently involved as a student in full time academic research at Masaryk University. I am writing to you to kindly invite you to participate in an online survey about interface and online collaboration on Wikipedia. The survey has been reviewed and approved by the Wikimedia Foundation Research Committee.

I am contacting you because you were randomly selected from a list of active editors. The survey should take about 7 to 10 minutes to complete, and it is very straightforward.

Wikipedia is an open project by nature. Let’s create new knowledge for everyone! :-)

To take part in the survey please follow the link: tsikerdekis.wuwcorp.com/pr/survey/?user=73533646 (HTTPS).

Best Regards, --Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 12:04, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PS: The results from the research will become available online for everyone and will be published in an open access journal.

UPDATE: This is the second and final notification for participating in this study. Your help is essential for having concrete results and knowledge that we all can share. I would like to thank you for your time and as always for any questions, comments or ideas do not hesitate to contact me. PS: As a thank you for your efforts and participation in Wikipedia Research you will receive a Research Participation Barnstar after the end of the study. --Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 12:01, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Research Participation Barnstar
For your participation in the survey for Anonymity and conformity on the internet. Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 13:56, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar of Recovery

Hi Ryan, I was browsing the list of barnstars and couldn't help but notice your Barnstar of Recovery seems functionally identical to {{The Rescue Barnstar}}. Since that one "can be independent of or in cooperation with the Article Rescue Squadron," isn't the Barnstar of Recovery a bit redundant? I wouldn't want to propose deletion or anything without hearing your perspective first. Best, BDD (talk) 21:42, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really care about barnstars, inclusionism and those sort of things anymore and I genuinely don't mind you proposing deletion (didn't even know they really did XFD's for barnstars). Can I point out that when I created it, the ARS barnstar didn't exist, you're welcome. I wont comment on the XFD, but the only reason I could give for keeping it would be: perhaps someone would want to award a barnstar but not wish to be affiliated with the ARS (and therefore some of it's more eccentric members), but I doubt that, because no one really gives a shit about those sort of things, it's just a PNG on some website and I never really saw it as popular barnstar anyway. You have my full support with this and anything else you wish to do in your life, I'm channelling my love and good kharma towards you brother, namaste. :) Ryan4314 (talk) 07:41, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8414406.stm
  2. ^ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8645456.stm
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ryan4314&oldid=505543762"