User talk:Coredesat

; Archives
	9 March 2006 – 27 July 2006; 27 July 2006 – 14 September 2006; 15 September 2006 – 1 November 2006; 1 November 2006 – ?; Archived WPTC Newsletters; ; ;

Template:Administrator-tan

This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to User talk:Coredesat/Archive 4. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

This is Coredesat's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16

Shanshan

It's done, could you please do the necessary move, and assess it? Cheers. – Ch acor 04:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Weekly Notification!

This is just a friendly reminder that Wikipedia Weekly has been released with a new episode!

This week's topics include - 1.5 million articles, an exclusive of Danny's latest contest and more!

As always you can download old episodes and more at http://wikipediaweekly.com/!

Please spread the word about Wikipedia Weekly, we're trying to spread the word so that people know about the project, we've got some cool guests lined up and it makes it much more fun if people tune in!

For Tawker and the rest of the Wikipedia Weekly crew -- Tawkerbot 23:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are recieving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery - if you do not wish to recieve such notifications please remove yourself from the list.

Tubezone barnstar

Just a note to thank you for the barnstar, didn't expect to get one, esp just for AfD comments! Tubezone 08:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for November 27th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 48	27 November 2006	About the Signpost

Arbitration Committee elections: Candidate profiles	Steward elections begin
Group apologizes for using Wikipedia name in online arts fundraiser	News and notes: 1.5 million articles, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 01:31, 29 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Deletion Request

I noticed you deleted the article Eagle Spirit Ministry per its AFD. Could you delete its "daughter page" Universal chapel as well? (I nominated it with Eagle Spirit Ministry.) Thanks. —EdGl 03:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Move Request

Would you please move User:Storm05/Hurricane Dora (1999) onto the mainspace over the redirect. Storm05 14:26, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FAC of Bacteria

An editor has made some major changes to this article, could you please return to the FAC and provide some feedback on whether or not these are an improvement? TimVickers 21:27, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Reevalutation

I would like to request that Pear Cable Audio Cables be considered for undeletion. The article was deleted, then reposted with the addition of 3 links to point out the notability of the company. This repost was also deleted. To address the complaints specifically: The page is factual material that does not make any biased claims whatsoever, ie the article does not state that Pear Cables are the best, or anything of that nature. The company is notable due to the fact that it has been written about by multiple independent organizations (3 links were provided). If Pear Cable Audio Cables does not qualify for notability, then virtually every company on the High-end audio page should also be deleted except for perhaps a couple of publicly traded companies. The complaint posted by Tubezone that complains about the price of 1 product sold by Pear bears no relevance to the subject of deletion. However, it does exhibit a bias that is exhibited by some who do not believe that high-end audio cables are worth the money they cost. This opinion is diametrically opposed to the opinion of virtually all respected high-end audio publication reviewers, but more importantly bears no weight on weither companies should have articles in wikipedia.

Article has been recreated per the discussion on the deletion reevaluation page.

Re: 3RR

I anticipated to see a similar message on User:Chacor's talk page but was (not really) surprised to find that you hadn't put one there. Seeing as how he reverted me, I would have thought that you'd give him the same warning. Regardless, I don't care. Please see the <rant> section I just added to the 2006 Hurricane page. Maybe it will be a bit enlightening. Thanks, though, for warning me of my consequences. → JARED ^(t) 02:51, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help?

I could use some advice here. Please look at the talk page plus the article's history. Nashville Monkey 09:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]