Jump to content

User talk:JamesTeterenko

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kroche14 (talk | contribs) at 18:36, 25 July 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to the Wikipedia

Here are some links I find useful


Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Cheers, Sam [Spade] 02:28, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome. See ya around! -- JamesTeterenko 05:52, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Dmitro Bortniansky

Hi James--thanks for the note. Bortniansky is a very fine composer and ought to be better known; I was actually listening to some of his music while I added to that entry. I don't think it is well enough known that Galuppi was in St. Petersburg in the 1760s and that there was a very active musical scene there, with Russians and Ukrainians both; the combination of Italian and Slavic elements made for the composition of some truly beautiful stuff. Happy editing, and be well! Antandrus 14:49, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Last week I expanded the stub on Mykola Lysenko a little. Any idea where I could find CDs or MP3s of either Lysenko's or Bortniansky's music? Del arte 20:56, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the link, James. By the way, just yesterday, WCPE] played Bortniansky. Del arte 19:37, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

High jump

Nice addition. If this was her winning jump, she is "scissoring" over about 5'3". I wonder ... what settings did you use to stop the action so nicely? and BTW, ever hear of the Boston Bruins "Uke line" of the early 60's? Featuring Johnny Bucyk, Vic Stasiuk, and Bronco Horvath, they were very popular, in seasons when the team couldn't buy a win.Sfahey 19:15, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Culture of Greece

Culture of Greece is this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.

U.S. embargo against Cuba

You voted for U.S. embargo against Cuba, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.

James, can you ...

... give me a hand with getting some pictures for "Niagara Falls". I went to your suggested archive link, searched for keywords "Niagara Falls" and clicked "photos with digital images". I wanted photos #4 and 8 from the offerings, but couldn't figure out how to get them. Could you deliver them to the "Niagara Falls" page, or to my page? ... or perhaps tell me what I'm s'posed to do. Thanks.Sfahey 00:38, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

What a nice surprise this morning. I think now I can nominate this for "featured article" after the Thanksgiving holiday. Thanks, sfahey

Check out the "featured article candidates" section. Exciting time to be Ukrainian, eh? Thanks again for the help.Sfahey 02:59, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

nice shot. you must own a helicopter. hope you don't mind that i moved it down, to break the run of b&w photos. feel free to "vote" on FAC.Sfahey 21:29, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

No to multi-licensing

At this time, I do not want to multi-license my work. I believe that the risk of forking articles is too strong. If you remove one decent sentence that is only GFDL licensed out of an article just to make the article multi-licensed, I believe that this will reduce the value of the article. -- JamesTeterenko 06:28, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Not multi-licensing means that none of the article can be used. Multi-licensing may allow parts of articles to be used, but if someone like WikiTravel desires to use only a part of an article to improve their travel brochures, then maybe the part is multi-licensed, which is all they would need. It doesn't reduce the value of the article but to increase the general sharing of information. No one wants a fork, least of all myself. But it is unlikely that another encyclopedia would compete with us using our content because we would always be a step above them. It just wouldn't be worth using a different license. But if a non-encyclopedia wants to use our articles, by all means let them. WikiTravel and Wikipedia are very different projects and any improvements in either are good, as far as I am concerned. Anyway, I've added you to the list of opt-outs. – Ram-Man (comment) (talk)[[]] 13:03, Dec 14, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks

James, thanks for your help in reverting that vandal. He was moving faster than I could repair. I really appreciate your assistance. — Knowledge Seeker দ (talk) 08:22, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Trial of Louis Riel

Hi James, I have been enjoying working with you on Louis Riel and related articles. It is my intention in the next few days to continue working on Louis, but I was hoping that I might interest you in a more formal collaboration. It's a big job and I need help. In particular, I think that the section there right now for his trial is wholly insufficient. This is perhaps the most famous trial in all of Canadian history, and it only gets a bit more than a paragraph. Would you be willing to focus on buffing up that section? As I've notated in the article code, I think that ultimately there will be enough to justify a whole separate article, Trial of Louis Riel. My way to approach it would be to write it up in Louis first, then spin it off after it becomes to unwieldy for the main article. What do you say? If you go for it, do edits just on that section, since I am frequently editing other sections right now, especially the RRR, -- It'll avoid edit conflicts....please let me know what you think... Cheers, Fawcett5 21:53, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

New template

Hi, I just wanted to let you know about a handy new template I created.

{{Canadabio|ID=}} expands to:

*[http://www.biographi.ca/EN/ShowBio.asp?BioId={{{ID}}} Biography at the ''Canadian Dictionary of Biography Online'']

You can use it with subst: to avoid the small server hit associated with templates. Fawcett5 15:59, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

== {{Canadabio|ID=}} template == Hi James, many thanks for correcting the template. A slightly embarrassing mistake - and too bad that I had already used it on at least a hundred pages - with subst: no less, which means that all of them are wrong and there is no easy way to clean it up... I guess I'll ask one of the bot guys to make the fix. ~~~~

Louis Riel again

Hi James, just a quick heads up that Louis Riel has been scheduled for the front page! The article will appear on May 13. We'll have to keep an especially vigilant watch for vandalism that day and for maybe a day or two following. Thanks for your many contributions, and congratulations! Cheers, Fawcett5 13:42, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi James, thanks very much for reverting the vandalism on my user page. Rje 19:19, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

Calgary edits

Hello. Welcome to Wikipedia. I am excited to see another active user contributing to Calgary, Alberta related pages. I see what you have done in the Calgary neighbourhoods category. I think that these types of articles might be better suited for the Calgary Wiki. I am not trying to discourage you, but just identify another venue that might be more suitable for your content. -- JamesTeterenko 00:16, 14 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi. You might be right. However, I think there are relevant issues in there, particularily with regard to the Beltline, which embodies many of the social and economic changes, pressures, and issues that are currently facing the city. I was also trying to implement a similar organizational scheme to the family of Calgry-related pages that exist for other cities. For example, Vancouver has a whole suite of articles discussing its more unique and interesting neighbourhoods. I understand that Calgary Wiki is focused more on providing a forum for those who are interested to find out more about things to do, entertainment, events, etc. This was not my goal with the pages I created. I was hoping other users would add more information about these neighbourhoods such as history, social issues, culture, etc. I believe that these things are more relevant to Wikipedia proper than to the Calgary wiki. Tyson2k 00:25, 14 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

CJAY and others

Thanks for adding CJAY to the list, I had forgotten about that part of the process. freestylefrappe 22:42, May 31, 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Hi James, Congratulations on the good news...I'm getting married myself this summer, and 300 people sounds like a pretty big party to me! Anyway, all the best, and good luck. Give my regards to Christie as well. Cheers, Fawcett5 11:42, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Calgary Wikipedian Meet Invite

I'm inviting all the Wikipedians who are listed as Calgarians to get together for a casual, in-person, chat about Wikipedia and whatever else strikes our fancy.

I've got a Meetup.com group set up that we can use to organize local meets. (the fees are covered for a while by my Meetup+ membership carrying over into the new fee regime.) Please sign up for that group, or post a message to my talk letting me know if/when you might be available for a Wikipedian meet. --GrantNeufeld 02:20, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ah, the POW-UH!

James, thanks for your support on my recent RFA - in another 1,000 edits or so, I think you'd have a very good chance of flying through too (things seem to go smoothest for those with >2500 edits), especially if you cast a vote on Vfd now and again, or did a little bit of recent changes patrolling... Let me know when your edit count gets up around that range, and I'd be happy to do the nom... Regards, Fawcett5 19:12, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

James, while technically the edit count is currently enough to satisfy some people who are active on RFA, it is only one criterion. The fact that a relatively low percentage of your edits have been to the wikipedia namespace, in conjunction with the somewhat low edit count would probably cause a problem, which is why I recommended patrolling VfD for a few weeks first, and maybe getting a few more vandal reverts in the contribution history. On the other hand, you've been here for a year now.. Cheers, Fawcett5 15:06, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your vote on Talrias' RFA

Hiya, thanks for your vote of support! Talrias (t | e | c) 9 July 2005 13:08 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for the support on my RfA. :)Howabout1 Talk to me! 04:35, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Adminship

James, you have been nominated for adminship, please indicate your acceptance here. Cheers, Fawcett5 13:45, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for supporting me

Hello, just a quick note to express my gratitude for your support of my RfA. I'm sure I'll become a familiar face on places like the Administrator's Noticeboard and Requests for Adminship, as well as the murkier parts of my new job. "From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked." (Luke 12:48, NIV) Never was a truer word spoken. I feel empowered, yes, but not in the "oooh cool delete button!" way I was kind of expecting. Already I feel the weight of the responsibility I have now been entrusted with, a weight that will no doubt reduce given time. Thank you for believing in me. :) GarrettTalk 10:34, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Just dropping by. I deleted Leslie Hotson which I saw you tagged. As for my RfA, even though you voted oppose, I still thank you for your vote (as long as I still pass :P) anywho, I'm changing my vote on your RfA as Ive seen you've been active enough. Redwolf24 03:55, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Redwolf24 06:05, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help!

Don't know why I didn't know about that page. Anyway, I really appreciate your pointing it out to me. Best of luck in your quest for adminship. :-) Jwrosenzweig 05:35, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

St. Catherine

Kindly have a further look at the talk page of st. catherine of alexandria Maltesedog 13:56 24 July 2005(UTc)

Thanks from CalgaryWikifan

Thanks for the Welcome. I hope I am doing this right.

CalgaryWikifan CalgaryWikifan 20:10, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Howabout1's RfA (again)

Hi. I am copying this message to everyone who voted on my last RfA. By some strange twist of fate, I have been nominated (within 48 hours, it's probably a record). Please vote again. Howabout1 Talk to me! 21:05, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

Sasquatch's RfA

Thanks for your support on my RfA! In the spur of the moment, I decided to write 2 more pages on Edmonton mayors and rewrite one that was partially a copyvio =). Happy editting! Sasquatch′↔T↔C 19:00, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations

You're now an admin. Please be conservative in the use of your new capabilities, and follow the community's policies and guidelines. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 15:46, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi James, let me add my congratulations (and condolences to Christie, who we are all hoping will not become a wiki-widow before you are even married). This might be a good time to review the administrators' reading list. You might also want to check out the administrators' how-to guide. Cheers, Fawcett5 19:34, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on the admin-dom-ship. Now that you have some power, I suggest you protect your user page. If you are good, the trolls will come in fast. I already had to revert it once. - Dr Haggis - Talk 22:54, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Awwww, you took mine

User:Lunchmeatistasty was mine to block, you beat me to it :-P Redwolf24 03:15, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Could you keep an eye on Nivlek Disease?

The author keeps adding new accounts to redo the page and bring back the deleted copies, and keeps editing out the {{db}} comments... I'm at my wit's end! Mel "MelSkunk" Smith 05:36, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Iron Fist

There is now two Iron Fist pages. Can you take care of this?T-1000 04:37, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the wonderful world of Donald R. Alford

I see that User:67.182.157.6 is giving you trouble tonight. Specifically, he is repeatedly marking 3 user pages for speedy delete and he's utterly ignoring your explanation to him of why he cannot do this, as though you hadn't written anything at all. Welcome to the wonderful world of Donald R. Alford, web troll extraordinaire. User:67.182.157.6 is his main IP when he's trouble-making on wiki, but when its blocked (which is frequently) he uses many other sockpuppets. He has been a notorious web troll since 1998 who recently brought his "act" to Wikipedia. (For proof of this, see [1].) At least until recently he did not create a username for himself but he called himself DotSix. His behavior has been so atrocious, in less than a month on Wiki, he has already been the subject of an RfC [2] and an RfAr [3]. The latter case has been accepted by the Arb Committee and is being presented here [4] and here [5]. the evidence page is still a work in progress. User:67.182.157.6 does not deny that he is Donald R. Alford. (In fact, some of what he has written in the last couple days strikes me as a de facto admission that he is Donald R. Alford.) At any rate, what he is claiming is that he did not create the user page User:Donald R. Alford. I don't believe him, but at any rate, that is what he is trying to say when he calls User:Donald R. Alford an "imposter." Yesterday he repeatedly tried to redirect User:Donald R. Alford to his own page User:67.182.157.6. Today he is tagging it for speedy delete. Anyway, just wanted you to have some background. --Nate Ladd 06:42, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

Welcome to the marvelous argument _ad hominem_/personal attack/poison the well world of Nate Ladd and Company

Nate lies,

"User:67.182.157.6 does not deny that he is Donald R. Alford."

That is a lie, I have denied it repeatedly and consistently, moron. Haven't I made it clear that I have not created a logon account on principle, because Wikipedia is supposed to be all about discussion of content, not contributors How many times will I have to repeat it for the benefit of you thick-skulled morons that whoever created the Donald R. Alford logon identity, as well as the 'DotSix' and the 'The Donald' logon identies is an impostor trying to pass himself off as 67.182.157.6? Notice he says, 'Donald R. Alford -- DotSix' right at the beginning on his very first edit of the user page user:Donald R. Alford 01:51 16 August 2005? [6] Notice the impostor disappeared when invited to show himself using his IP address and type ~~~ so that we might see if he can make it come out 67.182.157.6? He won't because he can't, right Nate?--67.182.157.6 20:48, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nudity

Regarding: Image:Dvd 602221D2.jpg

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Porn_stars

Under structure, it says that images provided should contain no nudity.

And I found this using Random article. Imagine the reaction of the 12-year-old kid who finds this article using the same method, and his parents behind him.

{{db}} or not? I think so.

-x42bn6 10:22, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In which case, I'll leave this issue alone, though it leaves a bitter aftertaste in my mouth.

-x42bn6 07:35, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for catching 1 E8 m

The guy changed all the other ones, too - I've rolledback all the rest. Good work on your content additions, BTW. Keep it up! JesseW, the juggling janitor 22:13, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

User Categorisation

You were listed on the Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Canada page as living in or being associated with Alberta. As part of the Wikipedia:User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians in Alberta for instructions.--Rmky87 23:11, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Hi James,

Thanks for voting to support my RfA. I wasn't expecting an unopposed promotion (I thought I'd hit some die-hard edit-counters at least) and I'm touched by the trust shown in me. I'll try my best to continue to earn that trust. But first, I'll have to work on not sounding like a politician; that last sentence was awful. Oh well. Let me know when I screw something up with the shiny new buttons. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 06:03, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User categorisation

You were listed on the Wikipedia:Wikipedians by alma mater page. As part of the Wikipedia:User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians by alma mater for instructions. --Cooksey 21:52, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Survay on Russian architecture

Dear James, there is voting going on concerning ancient architecture of Kyiv on the talk page of Russian architecture. I think, you may be interested.--AndriyK 22:49, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi James, please help

I would like to request your help with serious NPOV and verifiability problems on the Arabic numerals page. I have mentioned it, yet again, here Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#December_17. Please help me recruit as many neutral and well-intending editors to the page to counter the strong and manifest bias. Regards, and thanks. csssclll (14:43, 17 December 2005 (UTC))[reply]

Ban Needed

Please see User_talk:199.185.81.242

AndriyK's arbcom

Hi James, saw your note at the ArbCom's talk. I think you've got this email because the MichaelZ, the most active admin in the Ukrainian topics, is not trusted by AndriyK anymore since, as AndriyK puts it, MichaelZ "Took Irpen's side", in itsef a rather strange and demeaning statement towards such a respected editor. Because you are interested in Ukrainian topics and, I am sure, noticed the alarming trends in them since joining of AndriyK and his namesake Andrew Alexander, your opinion would be welcome in the Arbitration itself or any of its sub- or talk-pages. OTOH, your desire to totally stay out of this nasty conflict, would also be totally understandable.

Please, stop by at Ukraine portal and its notice boards more often. We are considering what UA-related articles could be brought to a FA status at Portal:Ukraine/Ukraine-related_Wikipedia_notice_board#Bringing_publicity_to_Ukrainian_topics. Your input there would be very much welcome. --Irpen 20:33, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

So far, I can not really add much to the RFAr other than what I already have. So, I will just leave that alone. I am quite sure that the arbitrators will sort that one out. I have added a few of the Portal pages on my watch list. I'll lurk for a bit and jump in as required. See you around! -- JamesTeterenko 16:40, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: 3RR by Kuban Kazak

Thank you for your more rational approach, If you are interested this is what IMHO has led up to the edit war. On the 18th of december User Andrew Alexander adds the following [[7]] to an already highly controversial topic. Not only is it presented completely in an unrelated standalone way, the POV is EXTREAMELY skewed:

  • The events of 1932-33 in Ukraine were seen by the Soviet Communist leaders as a kind of "final solution" against possible Ukrainian self-determination....One of the leaders of the Ukrainian Bolsheviks, Mykola Skrypnyk, witnessing the results of his cooperation with Moscow, shot himself in the summer of 1933. ...The Communist Party of Ukraine under the guidance of state-appointed mass murderers like Kaganovich, Kosior, Postyshev....

These facts presented in the most unwikipedian POV, they also messed up the whole structure of the article. With this in mind, I, Wojsyl, Irpen and Michael began discussing about neutralisation of these facts and of course put a POV tag (I think it was Irpen who did that although one can always check). I deleted the section and Wojsyl replaced the disputed section with a temporary heading:

  • The events of artificial famine of 1932-33 were preceded by the onset of Soviet assault on Ukrainian national culture in their drive to prevent possible Ukrainian national self-determination.

Now Andrew Alexander come back restores the controversal material begins arguing for sources that say that these facts are not related. Although I have not questioned the relation as that is a POV regardless of how one looks at it, I have simply offered Andrew Alexander to start a new article Ukrainian Genocide and set that separately from Holodomor (the famine). He refused and continued to steer the conversation away from the topic with arguments for refrences etc. In the meantime I took it upon myself and rewrote his addition moved it to the existing portion where the facts that Andrew Alexander presented belong and actually not omitting a single fact, expanded the section AND integrated it into the article removing controvertial POV rubbish, making it once again consice. Andrew reverts everything including all my grammar corrections, all my refrence expansion... I revert this vandalism. AndriyK comes along (whom after his arbitration I don't see as a serious editor - have a look at some of the damage he cause to wiki) I revert telling him to bugger off, and well...edit war. -- Kuban kazak 22:52, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for your vote of confidence. I look forward to many useful edits here. -anabus_maximus (Talk to me) 19:06, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

I was unfamiliar with that one, I will try to be more carefull....however. My edits were to try and remove (albeit subtle) POV. These edits were in turn edited to put these POV statements back into the topic description. I have had a fair discussion with the wiki contributor(whose opinion I respect) in the hopes that we could agree on a proper wording that was a good description without being skewed towards the 'deity worship' that the article was turning into. It will eventually work itself through. Someone else will undoubtably contribute a wording that is agreed to by all.

On a side note, during your fast rv's of some of my attempts to eliminate POV(I'll give you credit on one though, It was getting frustrating) you yourself put back some of the POV that was existing to begin with. In some cases 'some' makes a lot more sense than 'most' or 'many i norder to make the statement more valid...But I won't argue it anymore for now. Also, you accidently erased a bonifide 'hero-description' from the 'list of canadians' page. I replaced it (POV excluded) It must be tiring at times to moderate such a vast page. Stay diligent. It is a grand idea for a webpage, and very informative. But I can only guess at the volume a vandalism that occurs. It must get discouraging at times? Mr Pyles

Pinawa

Can you look at moving Pinawa to Pinawa, Manitoba. Thanks! I'm trying to create articles for many of the missing Manitoba communities and I found two listings for Pinawa. jdobbin 01:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you interested...

... in translating some Canada-related articles into Ukrainian, and/or helping translate short phrases for English-language articles about Ukrainian culture? Kevlar67 01:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fethullah Gulen Article

Dear James,

The article is full of mistakes, disinformation, etc. I changed it to my version and planning on working on the article further. I tried to discuss it at the discussion page, and I will keep doing the corrections. I have got no response to my suggestion on the discussion page so far. Isn't that enough to write it once there?

I suggest to put my version and to work the article from there... Do you know any Turkish? I wonder how I can explain to you the alleged statements of misinformation and unacceptible writing like putting some Turkish links which cannot be a support for the claims proposed. Please let me now what do you think about my suggestion.

Thanks,

Resid Gulerdem 19:24, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Taken to Talk:Fethullah Gülen -- JamesTeterenko 19:52, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Dear James,
Could you please see my response in the discussion page for GUlen article. I would prefer to have my version on, up untill if a change necessary after User:baruqque's response.
I will be waiting for your action on it.
Best,

Resid Gulerdem 05:05, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear James,

As you know I am trying ot correct the article about Mr. Gulen in Turkish and English versions.

Turkish Wikipedia does not have so many members. Even the admins do not appear much. Only one or two are active. Among them an admin Template:Dbl2010imza is continuously blocking me from editing to an article by protecting the article continuously. The User:baruqque who I am corresponding in the discussion page of Gulen's article (Eng version) acting together with the admin agains me. As I mentioned in the discussion page User:baruqque even vandalized some pages I wrote after the discussion. Since there is no many admis or members around they can do whatever they want in the system using their admin privillidges.

The current articles is bias, full of mistakes. I will keep discussing on the current version as you suggested. But still no way I can edit the article in Turkish version. It is protected forever. I talked to the admin but he is also bias on the issue. He even tolerate the vandalism I have encountered.

I was wondering if you could help me with how can I handle the situation. I wrote to the help-dest couple of times, no resopnse yet. I am relatively new member so I cannot ask for admin status so that I can at least protect my rights here. Or can I ask for admin status, if so how?

Your help attention is greatly appreciated.

Best,

Resid Gulerdem 18:51, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

---

Thanks for the comments... I made the clean up for Gulen's article. It is good that you invited some more contributions. That may solve the problem if some people comes to see the article. I also would like to learn what is the policy regarding to remove the other note from the top of the page? Thanks again... Resid Gulerdem 09:12, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear James,

I am trying to create my version about the account of his life. It will be an objective and neutral version. When we finalize the discussion we will be able to merge them together.

Thanks, Resid Gulerdem 05:08, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi James,

Sorry about that, I thought you were deleting the files about the Gulen Movement. In fact, I think you redirected first and I lost the data there. When I was trying to create the other ones with one simple sentence, they deleted them. Anyways...

The reason I am writing another article is to show an unbiased one. It is far from being complete at this point.. I am working and will work on it till the meditation starts. I would like to show the people how can an unbiased article be written. I would appreciate if you could help mw with that. Your comments on the neutrality of the article is appreciated.

Best. Resid Gulerdem 23:47, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Khreschatyk

The Khreschatyk article quickly developed by the Ukraine portal members (that some called the nest of anti-Ukrainian mafia) is WP:DYK featured on the Main Page at this very moment. Take a look if you are interested. --Irpen 05:10, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFA/William M. Connolley 2

You participated in the first RFA so you may be interested in Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/William M. Connolley 2. (SEWilco 07:33, 11 January 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Box lacrosse

Thanks, James, for your message at Talk:Box lacrosse. I've moved the image to Indoor lacrosse and made a couple of other changes. I guess in Calgarybox lacrosse isn't as big a part of the culture as it is here in central Ontario, so the confusion is understandable. Hope the Roughnecks do well, except against the Toronto Rock. John FitzGerald 17:16, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Winnipegers Winnipeggers

Thanks on making changes on the Pinawa to Pinawa, Manitoba. I am still trying to finish all the communities in Manitoba. There is a category that lists Winnipegers rather Winnipeggers. I think the standard is Winnipeggers for anyone who has grown up there. There is talk on the discussion of page of Winnipeg about it. I don't think there is any debate on it but we would need an admin to change it over. Thanks! jdobbin 22:29, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks. WikiThanks.
Thanks. WikiThanks.

I would like to express my thanks to all the good people who spent their valuable time time and effort working on my (failed) RfA voting. Especially for those who actually voted to support me :). Lets move on and make together our Wikipedia an even greater place abakharev 09:54, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Gulen Movement

Why did you delete Gulen Movement? It is a different article... Resid Gulerdem 05:13, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Evolution of knowledge

As an admin, would you please take a look at this page? It has some copyright issues.--Esprit15d 16:19, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy

Dear James,

At the article 'Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy' the cartoons about Propher Mohammed is posted. 1.3 billion Muslims are considering this as an insult. I know that an insult cannot find place in a wiki article. I would like to ask you please do something for it. We can discuss the issue without pictures too. That is totally unresponsible to put those cartoons to the article. It is very dangerous and a step towards clush of civilizations. Resid Gulerdem 19:19, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Louis-HonoreFechette.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have questions about copyright tagging of images, post on Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags or User talk:Carnildo/images. 10:42, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your voting!

Thanks!
Thanks!

Hi, thanks for your voting on my RFA. It has finished with the result 88/14/9, and I am promoted. I am really overwhelmed with the amount of support I have got. With some of you we have edited many articles as a team, with some I had bitter arguments in the past, some of you I consider to be living legends of Wikipedia and some nicks I in my ignorance never heard before. I love you all and I am really grateful to you.

If you feel I can help you or Wikipedia as a human, as an editor or with my newly acquired cleaning tools, then just ask and I will be happy to assist. If you will feel that I do not live up to your expectation and renegade on my promises, please contact me. Maybe it was not a malice but just ignorance or a short temper. Thank you very mach, once more! abakharev 07:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saeed Rashid

Thanks for your verdict. --Falcon007 04:12, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Paul J. Henderson

Regarding this edit. That is really not the way to deal with such obviously libellous and scurrilous allegations. When they are that obvious, and totally unsourced, they should be removed at once. This one got us (the Foundation) a letter about libel, and was probably the most valid complaint I've seen. -- sannse (talk) 12:37, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Oilpatch?

Hi, I read on your userpage that you work in the energy industry. I was wondering your opinion on a possible merging of oilpatch and Canadian Oil Patch, or perhaps a renaming, to Petroleum Industry of Canada or Energy Industry in Canada, etc. Thanks, Kevlar67 11:51, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I commented on the talk page. -- JamesTeterenko 19:37, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alberta Junior Hockey League

Hi, I've been working my ass off on these hockey pages for a while now. I have built probably over 40 league articles, most with all the team emblems involved... and I seem to find more to do every day. Since you've added a category for the Alberta JHL, maybe it could be possible for you to build team stubs or something for the teams in that league? Maybe even the Saskatchewan or British Columbia? Someone has already done all the teams in Manitoba. DMighton 19:59, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DoCB Initiative

I noticed that you are interested in the DoCB Initiative and are also an administrator. I imagine that you may havr more info on what will happen to those pages. I had a conversation with a good legal source who feels there is no copyright violation under Canadian law. So, are we talking something wider? I'm reluctant to do too many more articles before it is sorted out since it is sort of the "glue" that holds the project together. Any insights? (Stormbay 23:05, 22 March 2006 (UTC))[reply]

  • Any new news on this topic? I have a number of articles that I would like to verify and remove from my "to do" list. Do you think that the pages as they exist now will be reinstated? Should an alternate site be opened to post verifications? Thanks in advance for your insight. Stormbay 21:35, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cognitive reserve

I've made some attempts at wikifying the above named article. Could you let me know if it is now compliant enough with the guidelines and, if not, tell me where should I focus my efforts to make it compliant? Much obliged. JASFonseca 10:41, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delinquent User

Could you please take look at User talk:82.198.250.7 and see how this account has repeatedly been warned over vandalism? Is there something more forcefull that can be done here? PS thanks for your help with Canadian Oil Patch and your general good work on ice hockey-, Canadian History-, and Ukrainian Canadian- related articles. Kevlar67 16:10, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. Kevlar67 09:20, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There are three more vandalism warnings on that user's talk page today (March 31). Could you please escalate the discouragement? Thanks. dfg 20:14, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Got the message and the advice. Thanks. dfg 19:54, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Calgary GA status

Hi James. As a resident of Calgary, an admin, and the founder of the Calgary Wiki, I was wondering if you know of any of the references that may have inspired some of the text in the article, Calgary, Alberta. I have been working hard to improve the article and I had nominated it for good article status. It was turned away by a hair only because it lacked a references section. I have since added one and put some websites that I have used as references on it. Do you know of more? --Arch26 04:32, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the support

Hi James- thanks a lot for your support on my recent, (barely) successful rfa. Please feel free to leave me any comments or criticisms on my talk page! --He:ah? 22:55, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CHL alumni categories

+ all sub categories moved from "alumni" to "players" categories. Some examples include:

The standard for sports team players is to have have players (e.g. look at Category:Ice hockey players by league or Category:Basketball players). Also, the criteria noted in all of the "alumni" categories of having played in the National Hockey League is not necessary. -- JamesTeterenko 19:08, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I STRONGLY DISAGREE with this deletion. The unique purpose of the CHL and other junior leagues are to graduate players to higher levels. Junior teams are alma mater and part of the production sytem for professional players. Accordingly the categories should be called "Alumni". Flibirigit 19:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ProhibitOnions's RfA

Thank you, JamesTeterenko!
Thank you! ...for voting in my RFA. It passed with a result of 58/2/0. If you have any comments, or for some reason need any new-admin help, please let me know here. Sorry about the boilerplate. Regards, ProhibitOnions 22:57, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:142.22.16.58

I occasionally get stuck behind it, its a wifi hotspot I use, I might play unblock / block games, I hope that doesn't cause any major problems, I'll have my bot watch all contribs like a hawk (it should stop most of em) -- Tawker 02:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, I can always unblock if I need to use it, so block length's aren't the end of the world :) -- Tawker 03:46, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CFL alumni debate

To be honest, I was unaware of that section. We (those who regularly work at CFD) have not handled things that way as long as I can remember. Definitely long before I became a moderator and started closing things regularly. To be honest, listing every "no consensous" debate for an extra week would be a major burdon on those of us who try to keep the place running. There are really only two of us currently keeping the place running, and even so we've got massive backlogs. More complications, when the returns are doubtful, would not be beneficial to things. We do list things to the unresolved section, but generally when we specifically thing there is a possibility that the extra time may yeild a consensous.

This section of the guidelines is definitely outdated. VFD does not even exist any more. It was replaced with AFD, specifically for articles. And AFD would really not be the appropriate place for listing categories for additional support. I'm not sure there *is* an appropriate place to list them for additional debaters at this point in time.

The policy definitely needs updating, and I'll get working on seeing what needs to be done to bring the policy more in line with the reality of how CFD currently functions.

As for your category set in particular, given that it had two extra days for debate (because of backlog), and had no comments in over four days, I don't see it as likely that giving it even more time would have changed the results. - TexasAndroid 04:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm familiar, and I'm not going to go just change policy pages lightly. My plan is, sometime today, to start up a discussion on the Talk page of the policy page, and likely leave a notice on the main CFD talk page. You are more than welcome to chime in on the debate. The whole point of debating first is to get multiple views working to craft a useful policy that also reflects the reality of the current situation, which the current policy does not.
As for closing debates, mostly admins do it, but technically anyone can do so. A few tips.
1) Make sure that the debate has had a full 7 days since initial listing.
2) If you are involved in the debate, either as submitter or as a voter, tread lightly about closing. There is no absolute here, and I've closed quite a few that I submitted or voted on, but none that were really in dispute. The closest to an in dispute one was one that I submitted for deletion that had like 6 oppose comments and no support. ^_^;; The opposition had good arguments, so I felt no qualms about closing that one as Keep, as I was following the clear consensous and closing against my initial position.
3) If you close a debate, deal with the results. If it's rename, place it on the working page. If it's delete, and has contents, place it in the appropriate section on the working page. If delete and empty, put in the bottom section of the working page, and one of the admins will do the actual delete. If it's keep or no consensous, remove the CFD tags from the category.
4) If it's at all controversial, be ready and willing to take the heat for your descision. Either way you close, someone may not be happy. If you don't feel confortable about closing difficult ones, then don't. Help closing the non-controversial ones will be a very big help, and will leave the controversial ones to us admins with our flame-retardent suits. :)
5) As a basic rule, going just by strict counts, a delete or a keep result should get at least 2/3 of the total for that to be the result. Andything between is No Consensous, which defaults to keeping as-is. The key diference is that people have less problem bringing a no consensous desision back up for another listing than they do a Keep. But beyond strict counts, try to read the arguments and see where consensous really lies. Also, comments split to multiple outcomes can easily push things to no consensous. Ex: A debate of 6-delete, 2-rename, and 2-keep is no consensous. While the 6 deletes are 3X either the renames or keeps, the deletes do not have 2/3 of the total.
6) The real backlog is on the Working page. We lost our bot about a month back, and the backlog of renames that need to be done has been slowly building. The problem is that, to do a rename, every single article in the category must be moved to the new name. A bot can do this kind of repetetive chore easily. Humans tire of such repetitive work much more quickly. - TexasAndroid 15:49, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Heh. Obviously I had no idea you were also an admin, so that makes a number of the points above moot. I guess I will stress one final thing then that makes CFD/R/M a good bit different from other deletion systems. Here, with all three possibilities handled in one system, the line between them can at times blur a bit. It is quite possible for someone to submit a category for rename, only to have the debate quickly shift towards deletion of the category. This is perfectly normal and common around here. In the end, if the consensous is for a given result, it's not too important what the original submission was for.
And I meant to comment last time, weekends is actually the perfect time to assist currently. Neither I nor Syrthiss, the other regular CFD admin, do much work on the weekends, so that is when things tend to back up most. Then we have to play catch-up up during the week. I'm still behind from last weekend. I'm almost done with the 9th, and the 10th is the date that can be fully closed today, and I haven't even started on it. So help on the weekends would be wonderful. - TexasAndroid 16:11, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pnatt - NHL article 3RR

I count him making the same edit five times today alone, and there are still several hours to go. Since you've reverted him once, want to take a swing at it? RGTraynor 22:28, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rand Dyck Page

Hi. I've noticed you tagged this article for a copy right violation. In the last hour I've reverted this page twice as the copyright violation was removed. Once by user kroche14(who I see you reverted edits by in the past) and once by ip: 208.96.78.122 (whom I believe is a sock puppet of kroche14, and I've added a checkuser request for that). I'm just posting this as a heads up to maybe keep a watch on that page if you aren't already. Thanks! Tomb Ride My Talk 17:23, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kroche has reposted a slight rewording of this page on the temp page, it seems to me that it is still in copy right violation. Tomb Ride My Talk 23:38, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the "rewrite" and whether it is a copyvio: Well, the list of publications does seem to be copied from his university web site. Even the headings have the French translations like the original source. The text does seem to be modified, but it does read like manipulated text from the original. Let's let the people who monitor the copyright violations make judgement on this one. -- JamesTeterenko 00:31, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
This is how I feel. If I thought it was clear cut I would have renominated it myself, but I'm only semi-clear on the copyright procedures (reading up on them soon), so that's why I left the note here for you (as the OG nominator). Thanks! Tomb Ride My Talk 00:34, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Would it make any difference if I were to take the same information and type it myself? I find that is utterly unnecessary. I reaffirm my former position that members of the Wikipedia Community who are not from the Laurentian University Wikipedia Community are less likely to be aware of the notability/copyright/legitimacy of the particular information under question, than those who are in fact, members of the particular community under question. In this respect, I find the actions of particular members to be in violation of essential human decency, and I find that the particular members of the community under question are acting on behalf of an interest that is against the interest of the Wikipedian Community as a whole, therefore, I call for the immediate dismissal of any member acting in a behaviour that would constitute violations against another in the respect of his or her rights as an individual living and participating in any human society whether its existence is limited to that of the physical or virtual dimensions. Kroche14 04:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am sorry you feel that we are not acting decently toward you. I understand you are new here. However, you must understand that we have certain policies and guidelines in place within Wikipedia. The only edits I have done to articles you have touched were in line with these. If you continue to violate these policies, you will continue to find your time here difficult. As an example, the very first point in articles tagged as a copyright violation is "Please do not edit this page for the moment." You are either not reading this or ignoring it. It goes on to further explain how the issue will be resolved. Every time you remove the copyright violation notice, you will find that someone will put it back. -- JamesTeterenko 04:35, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

Which page are you talking about? Pnatt 22:21, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Comrie

Uhh, could you plz tell me why u removed my info on Comrie getting heavily booed during that one Oilers game? I even saw the game and the boos where deafening.--Killswitch Engage 19:55, 28 April 2006 (UTC)Killswitch Engage P.S. Respond on my talk page[reply]

Tim Welch

Hi James, thanks for adding the categories to my Thomas Vincent Welch posting. I appreciate your assistance; I was actually trying to sort that out and saw you had done it for me! Appreciate your work on the Niagara Falls entry too. Tim WelchTim Welch 03:17, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edmonton Oilers Page

Thanks for your condescending "Thank you for experimenting with the page Edmonton Oilers on Wikipedia." I was not experimenting, but adding some content. I admit that it was unwise to try to do this during an amazing 6-3 game against the Sharks, but my edits were in progress when you reverted the changes. --68.149.167.90 03:04, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

islam vandal

JT, take a look at the history of the Islam article. I think the IP you just blocked and the new IP are the same dude. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 05:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi James, could you also sprotect Danny Lilithborne's user page? The dynamic IP involved left many many personal attacks. It's been some time since the last attack, but many of them were very personal and insulting. Many many thanks. -- Samir (the scope) धर्म 03:53, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciated. Thanks man. -- Samir (the scope) धर्म 04:06, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IP vandal/content dispute

I feel obligated to point out that according to WP:VANDAL spamming links is considered vandalism. You misinterpreted my report as a content dispute. Adding unrelated links, presumably for personal gain is considered vandalism and is instructed to be treated as such. This user has gone through the appropriate warnings, and the appropriate action was taken up to the point of the intervention page [8]. Please reconsider taking the appropriate anti-vandalism action against this user since their actions most certainly qualify as vandalism, and my actions constitute attempts to deal with that vandalism, not a content dispute. --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 19:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sukh's RFA - Thanks!

Thank you for your vote on my RfA. Unfortunately there was no consensus reached at 43 support, 18 oppose and 8 neutral. I've just found out that there is a feature in "my preferences" that forces me to use edit summaries. I've now got it enabled :) Thanks again. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 15:52, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Vandalism

Please stop your vandalism of the International Hockey Hall of Fame page.--JohnnyCanuck 06:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel there is a copyright problem please follow proper procedure, what you are doing is considered vandalism--JohnnyCanuck 06:18, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please be specific on the copyright problems, you have not stated that--JohnnyCanuck 06:34, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank-you

The count is in, and now I join the crew who wield the mops and pails.
Thanks for your support! I pledge to serve both you and Jimbo Wales.

If you have anything you need, then please don't think to hesitate.

For I am the very model of a grateful admin designate!
♫Bucketsofg✐♪

IHHOF

  • Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. Please note both you and User:JohnnyCanuck have been warned. - pm_shef 16:22, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Clarification of Hockey Hall of Fame’s inductions

I noticed you left a note on the Dit Clapper page. All inductions made into the Toronto based NHL Hockey Hall of Fame was made after 1961 (the year they were established) prior to 1961 ALL the inductions were made into the Kingston based International Hockey Hall of Fame (the Toronto based NHL Hockey Hall of Fame did not exist prior to 1961 as the NHL was a partner in the Kingston based International Hockey Hall of Fame). The NHL then seized support in 1958 to form their own Hall splitting the International Hockey Hall of Fame and the NHL Hockey Hall of Fame. In 1961 the NHL decided to recognize all past inductions as also being inducted into their Hall therefore all these people that were inducted prior to 1961 are now inducted into both Hockey Hall of Fames but at the time of the induction (in the 1940’s) they were inducted into the Kingston based International Hockey Hall of Fame. I know you are asking for sources but I can’t seem to find any posted on the internet. You know its difficult to find info posted on the internet that the NHL would like the public to forget about. I recently posted a page about the 1970's London Lions NHL affiliated team, I was very surprised to find something on the internet about this. How many people know about the London Lions and the planned NHL European expansion in the 1970's? As much as the NHL doesn't like it these are facts. You seem very interested in the history, which is great! I would suggest you may be interested getting involved with the Society for International Hockey Research http://www.sihrhockey.org or if you are ever in the Kingston area check out the International Hockey Hall of Fame museum. --JohnnyCanuck 00:02, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merci beaucoup!

 Thank you, JamesTeterenko!
Thank you for voting for my recent RfA, which passed (to my extreme surprise and shock) with a total tally of 66/15/2. For that, I would like to thank you and offer a helping hand in any admin-related tasks that may be required -- it's as simple as leaving a message on my talkpage. Thanks again! -→Buchanan-Hermit™/!? 22:18, 23 May 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Fort Anne

I noticed your name as an administrator and that you have weighed in on potential copyright violations. The above referenced article may fall into this category. I was looking for further info on the fort and found a site that appeared almost the same. Maybe it's not important. I have referenced the site at Talk:Fort Anne. Thanks! Stormbay 20:33, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Block of User:William Ford Jr.

Hello James. I have changed the block to indefinite because it seems very apparent that the account is used only to propound racism and vandalism. Thanks.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 07:05, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comments on article naming

Talk:World Junior Ice Hockey Championships If you're interested. Thanks. ColtsScore 09:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John Glenn (Alberta)

The John Glenn (Alberta) article is started new on the temp page, with all copyvio removed. Can you please remove the copyvio tag so the editor can start working fresh on the article? Thanks. - Qyd(talk)03:40, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vaughan Election "Controversy"

  • James, first off, good on you for catching the POV reference... I had missed that. However, you might notice the Controversy section which ED recently added. The section is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts, not to mention totally unverifiable and clear electioneering on the part of the aforementioned Elliot Frankl. After Mr. Frankl contacted City Council, he was informed by the City Clerk that his complaint was groundless and that the so-called "controversy" was in fact regular practice and perfectly acceptable. Since these people seem to have this idea that I'm biased (though they can't seem to provide any examples of that bias), could you please remove the section? Thanks. - pm_shef 01:09, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am User:Ackoz previously. Check my contributions, I think I contributed enough to discuss at least ~300 mainspace edits should be enough. I will continue contributing if things change here. Azmoc 22:28, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Black Cat International

For what it's worth, the editor who wrote up the article got it slightly wrong; the store's actual name is Black Cat Too International (don't ask me to explain that, because I can't.) That title does get Google hits, but still less than 10; there are about 200 hits if you ditch the word International. I do agree that it's not notable, though. Bearcat 16:50, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are two Black Cat stores in Sudbury. There is Black Cat One, and Black Cat Too! Together they make Black Cat International. The stores are located side by side. Black Cat One is a quick stop shop, you can come in and grab a newspaper or pack of cigarettes whereas Black Cat Too allows you to browse the magazines and have lunch. Kroche14 18:36, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JamesTeterenko&oldid=65803658"