User talk:Eric Corbett

I am outraged that the AdminWatch initiative to level the playing field between the standards of behaviour expected of administrators and non-administrators was taken to MFD. It may work, it may not, but the defensive attitudes being displayed by some administrators leave a bad taste in the mouth. No wonder that so many editors simply walk away from the project in the face of unchecked administrator abuse.

WikiProject Greater Manchester Announcements

• Manchester Mark 1 promoted to FA 28 September 2010
• Manchester computers promoted to GA 23 September 2010
• Trafford Park promoted to FA 9 September 2010
• Hyde F.C. failed at GAN 5 September 2010
• Belle Vue Zoological Gardens promoted to FA 7 August 2010
• Manchester United F.C. promoted to FA 27 July 2010
• 1910 London to Manchester air race promoted to FA 1 June 2010
• 1996 Manchester bombing promoted to GA 17 March 2010
• Chadderton promoted to FA 2 February 2010
• Rochdale Town Hall promoted to GA 26 January 2010

Father Christmas sent me...

Ecoleetage (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

WikiProject Greater Manchester January Newsletter, Issue XIII

Delivered on 5 January 2009 by Nev1. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add two *s by your username on the Project Mainpage.

WikiProject Cheshire newsletter

Delivered on 19 January 2009 by Nev1. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add two *s by your username on the Project Mainpage.

Questionnaire

In an effort to assess the progress of Wikiproject Cheshire, it has been decided to send a questionnaire to members. To answer, please copy this questionnaire and paste your answers on the answer page. While participation is, of course, not compulsory, thoughtful answers will help the project to develop and improve. Thank you.

1. The project is always looking for new members, so we want to find out which ways of attracting and approaching potential members work best. Do you remember how and why you joined?

Answer:

2. How would you describe your involvement in the project? What activities do you undertake and how often do you edit Cheshire-related article?

Answer:

3. Do you feel like you receive adequate support/contact from project members?

Answer:

4. The project talk page is intended to be the hub of the project, where members discuss articles and help each other improving them. Until very recently it has been almost inactive, but do you check the project talk page?

Answer:

4a. If the talk page was more active, would you get involved in discussions there?

Answer:

5. When viewing Cheshire-related articles, are there any issues that have stood out as needing attention or frustrated you? (Traditional counties POV, poor coverage about a particular subject, vandalism going unnoticed etc)

Answer:

6. Maintaining the Cheshire portal is one of the Cheshire WikiProject's main aims, providing a display of the best and most up to date articles that are part of the project. There is currently a drive to promote it to featured status, but input from a wide range of members is needed. Do you have the portal on your watchlist?

Answer:

7. Would you be interesting in subscribing to a newsletter covering North West England, with details of work done by WikiProjects representing Cheshire, Greater Manchester, and Merseyside?

Answer:

8. Finally, are there any improvements or initiatives you'd like to see WP:CHES undertake, or general comments you'd like to make?

Answer:

Latest RFA thread

Malleus, I always drop by a talk page when I say something in a thread that someone might interpret as a put-down ... I never consciously put anyone down on Wikipedia, and I want to make sure we're clear. I talked about people talking with "moral authority" at WT:RFA#Arbitrary break about how arbitrarily everyone is dismissing keepscase's perspective. I agree with you that people should never be silenced or put down on Wikipedia, but I also support the idea of looking at anything that would improve RFA, looking for consensus, and writing it down. My sense is that consensus is leaning in the direction of letting people ask whatever question they want to at RFA, but that whatever it is that's making people uncomfortable might be dealt with by letting candidates know in the RFA instructions that it's a minority position that "silly" questions are useful in RFAs. Whatever your position is, I'd appreciate your input in the thread. (Watchlisting) - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 18:43, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Btw, my viewpoint has evolved on the point you brought up in my RFA. At the time, it felt unfair; now I think that you were right. No one person should be saying, "if you're thinking of RFA, then do this". What will or won't help someone pass RFA is for everyone at RFA to decide, and what does or doesn't constitute good copyediting is for copyeditors in general to decide. In my defense, I think my viewpoint was in line with expectations at the time, but I pride myself on thinking for myself, and I should have known better ... I do know better, now. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 23:54, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

LOL, your RfA was not in anceint history...NOTHING changes that fast on WP... especially on RfA---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 23:57, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't know B-man, I think the times, they are a-changin'. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 02:13, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Interesting to see you say that. I suspect that you and I are very different from each other in our outlook on life. I have never been a joiner, so I don't much care what the consensus is about anything, I only care about what I think is right. The world is big enough for both of us though, and more importantly it needs both of us. Go in peace my son. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 00:03, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

That's strangely comforting. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 02:13, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Arley Hall and Rowland Egerton-Warburton

I've decided to put Arley Hall on hold as a GAC for the time being because of the website change, so instead I've switched my attention to its builder, Rowland Egerton-Warburton. I didn't think he was much of a subject for an article until someone else started one - and then I discovered he is much more interesting than I had appreciated. So I think I'll go for GAC with what it's become. May I have your comments, suggestions for improvement, and of course the usual copy editing. Many thanks in advance. Peter. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:05, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

That's another nice little article. I've made a few minor tweaks, and it looks good to go to GAN so far as I can tell. --Malleus Fatuorum 18:31, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I've already stated that it looks GA standard to me and should go to GAN. Nev1 (talk) 18:43, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Ah, but you're often sometimes a bit more bullish about going straight to GAN/FAC than I am. ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum 21:11, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the work you've done and for your opinion. Now, more advice please - into which subsection does it fall? There's no section for biography (or for wealthy Cheshire landowners); is there enough art/architecture for that section or should we settle for miscellaneous? Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:51, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

World history seems the best match. --Malleus Fatuorum 18:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Blyth Power Station

Thanks for working so hard on getting the article to GA! Great to see it get there after only about a week as well. And you're a bloody good and thorough copyeditor too. I don't know if you'd be interested, but I asked a copyeditor to give the Stella Power Station article a going over way back in November, and it'd be nice if you could give it a similar treatment to the Blyth article one day if you could. Best wishes Fintan264 (talk) 23:50, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

You're very kind, it was a pleasure. I love to see articles this at GAN, on subjects that would otherwise be lost and forgotten if editors like you didn't take the trouble to care. I'll be happy to take a look at Stella. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I've been through and made (what I think are) a few improvements to Stella Power Station. I have to say that I'm astonished it was listed as a GA, but I think it's worthy of the label now. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

This is the version [1] of Stella Power Station that I award GA-status back in October 2008. It bares little similarity to the version to which you commented: "I'm astonished it was listed as a GA". These changes, between the award of GA and your series of improvements, can also be verified from the article's history page.Pyrotec (talk) 16:45, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

That explains it then. --Malleus Fatuorum 16:57, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

River Parrett

Hi, If you had any time to take a look at the River Parrett it would be really helpful. The GA reviewer has commented about the prose, particularly in the course section, which could do with a copyedit.— Rod ^talk 12:29, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I've made a few changes to the Course section, hopefully enough to satisfy your reviewer. If there are still prose problems that need to be dealt with before GA listing, let me know and I'll do what I can to help. --Malleus Fatuorum 14:56, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Brilliant thanks.— Rod ^talk 14:59, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Scout Moor Wind Farm

I am curious why the wikilink to England was removed with the comment "shouldn't wikilink common terms". Let's suppose a user in China sees the wind farm article and wonders "Where is it located? Oh, it's in England. Where is that?" Isn't it a good usage of information to give Wikipedia readers an easy link to the information they seek? After all, the purpose of an encyclopedia is to make information available to its readers, is it not. As a regular wiki patroller, I find that the vast number of geographic articles identify the country with a wikilink in the intro, so there is ample precedent for such wikilinks. To paraphrase your earlier edit summary "one man's common term ..." Cheers. Truthanado (talk) 18:11, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I find it rather a stretch to be asked to believe that someone who speaks English has no idea about England. But wikipedia articles ought not to include wikilinks just because they can, but because they add value to the article. I take it that you are familiar with the Manual of Style on the subject of linking, and the recent discussions that have taken place around the linking of common words and major geographical features? I quote: "It is generally not appropriate to link ... items that would be familiar to most readers, such as the names of major geographic features and locations ...". I submit that "England" can be considered a "major geographical feature". For the few to whom the word "England" remains a mystery, there is always the search box. --Malleus Fatuorum 18:57, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I am aware of WP:MOS and have been involved in several discussions there. The cited text goes on to say "except if they are particularly relevant to the topic of the article", which applies in this case; it's relevant that the wind farm is in England. I guess I also subscribe to the earlier MOS quote "Think carefully before you remove a link altogether—what may seem like an irrelevant link to you may be useful to other readers." Let's just say we disagree on this topic and leave it there. Happy February. Cheers. Truthanado (talk) 15:10, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

We most certainly do disagree on this point. The article is about wind farms, not the well-known country known as England. I thank you for your warning, but I will continue to remove such irrelevant links wherever I find them, whether that's agreeable to you or not. --Malleus Fatuorum 15:16, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Second opinion request

I am about to pass Outliers (book) as GA, although I think the review is overly long and repetitious. See Talk:Outliers (book)/GA1. For example, do you think seven times is too many to mention the simplistic "10,000 hour rule"? —Mattisse (Talk) 18:26, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, I think the article meets the GA criteria, although its subject is a staggeringly trite book. Specifically, no, I don't particularly think that the "10,000 hour Rule" is mentioned too frequently. It just seems that way because it's bleedin' obvious, I think. Looks like the review's been a bit of a marathon though. --Malleus Fatuorum 18:49, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice. I passed it as GA. However, I think mentioning the "10,000 hour Rule" seven times is at least five times too many. Wikipedia will take a step up when it starts discouraging selfindulgent (and opinionated) writing. The POV of the article is the type that occurs when an editor is over invested in the subject matter and cannot, for whatever reason, maintain distance. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 01:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

You may be right, but if you are, then you ought not to have passed the article, as failing criterion 4 of the good article criteria. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I know better now than to go against your opinion. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 03:00, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Please stop this nonsense. You asked for my opinion and I gave it to you. If you don't like it, then don't ask again. --Malleus Fatuorum 03:35, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, Sir. I will not. I will comment and dewatch. I apologize deeply for the posting of a request for your opinion. Let us forget it ever happened. I will not post here again. Forgive me, please. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 03:53, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

The apology which is required is for your continuing petulant and vindictive behaviour, not for requesting an opinion. --Malleus Fatuorum 15:18, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Okay okay you two, get a room. :P But seriously, the way I read the above is that Malleus was stating that Mattise, if you have doubts about passing something then you should have confidence in your intuition and not pass it. You shouldn't have to feel like you must pass something that you honestly don't think should pass, even if its only a small doubt. So, lets stop the whole aggressive retorts and continue helping the GA process. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 17:25, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Mattisse does great work at GA, and I try to help out there when I can as well, but I have no idea what has caused this animosity, and no interest in it in any event. Wikipedia's a big place; it's very easy to avoid those who (probably inadvertently) rub you up the wrong way, for whatever reason. But asking for advice on their talk pages and then getting all huffy when you get it most likely isn't an optimal strategy. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:00, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Greater Manchester February Newsletter, Issue XIV

Delivered on 1 February 2009 by Nev1. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add two *s by your username on the Project Mainpage.

List of Ah! My Goddess episodes (season 1)

I have nominated List of Ah! My Goddess episodes (season 1), the list you copyedited, for FLC again. Just wanted to let you know as you requested! NOCTURNENOIR ^{( t • c )} 21:33, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Best of luck! I'll keep a watch on it and help out if I can. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:35, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for all of your help! NOCTURNENOIR ^{( t • c )} 21:51, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh my

This gave me a laugh. I don't know if it will display properly. Seems like they just translated all of our work into some kind of mysterious language of squiggles. :D Ottava Rima (talk) 03:22, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh, its Malayalam. Ottava Rima (talk) 03:23, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Seems quite a bit shorter than our version. --Malleus Fatuorum 03:57, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I assume they will go after the whole thing based on their copy and pasting of the reference section. :) Its nice to see that Johnson will now have an impact on India. Ottava Rima (talk) 05:49, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Robert Burdon Stoker

Hi Malleus! I've started to add material to this article, following your contribution. Have added a reference section, notes and bibliography, but cannot sort out a conflict with the previous layout. Please could you look at it and rescue the position, so that I can add further material and references? Regards RuthAS (talk) 14:26, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorted. There were two of the {{Reflist}} templates, so I removed the last one. --Malleus Fatuorum 14:45, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Malleus - perhaps I'd tried to remove the wrong Reflist template! RuthAS (talk) 15:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Malleus, there's a link on the MSC article to a video on Youtube. There is a sequence in this which shows ML vessels and R.B.Stoker (the second) relating a couple of stories about the line. I don't know how to link the video to the ML article. Please could you help? Regards RuthAS (talk) 17:09, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

It's just a matter of copying over the external link, which I've done. Very interesting video that. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:25, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Malleus - but I just don't know how to 'copy over ...' anything! 79.79.194.36 (talk) 19:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Oops - forgot to check if I was still logged in! RuthAS (talk)

Crewe

I'll make a start on the history stuff tomorrow (I can also throw in a bit about governance history as well). Things have been "interesting" IRL today, and so I need to sleep now.  DDStretch  (talk) 23:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

WikiSpeak

Hi, I came upon your (un)official 'insider-guide' on Wikipedia, when it was casually mentioned by a distinguished guest speaker during a public talk on Web 2.0 development which I attended recently. I had a good laugh reading it, and have reccomended it as a 'must read' to others too. I've some queries in mind and would greatly appreciate if you could satisfy my curiousity on the following:

• What motivated you in the first place in starting WikiSpeak?
• Are there any future plans in store for WikiSpeak, like WikiSpeak 2.0 or any similar undertaking in the near future?
• Is there a way to get auto updates on WikiSpeak?
• Are you from the academia? (or formerly?)

Thank you -- Kulikah (talk) 04:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

• My motivation was to relieve the frustration caused by the pompous inflation of language here on wikipidia by self-important, self-appointed authorities. Where else are you likely to come across the word "redact", for instance? Also to poke fun at Americanisms like "my bad", when used by English schoolboys in a misguided attempt to sound "cool".

• I've got no plans for any similar undertaking, but then neither did I have any plans for wikispeak. It was simply born from a moment of frustration. My hope for wikispeak is that others will build on my small beginning.

• You can subscribe to an RSS feed for changes to the page here.

• No, I have never worked in academia.

--Malleus Fatuorum 12:29, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt reply. In case you may ask, the speaker I mentioned above is someone whom you may have known in Wikipedia all these while. He was invited by a tertiary institution as one of the panel of speakers to give a public talk on the security, economical and social issues that are associated with Web 2.0 technology. Due to privacy reason and his affiliation to a certain govt body, I'm not at a liberty to divulge who he is, but I believe you could be able to second guess who the person I'm referring to should you try to recall carefully. On a final note, do keep up your good work and take care minding your steps here. -- Kulikah (talk) 16:53, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah yes, I believe I know who it is you're referring to. ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum 18:45, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

That's great, you are strong with the Force too. As the Japanese used to say: "One should be mindful not to disturb (or tempt) a sleeping dog or its owner too". Bye. -- Kulikah (talk) 02:06, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Believe me, I have the utmost respect for the person of whom I think you are speaking, and would never dream of awakening that old staffie. ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum 02:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm beginning to wonder though, have I done something wrong, and upset the old dog? If I have, it certainly wasn't deliberate. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:21, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Based on your past discussions above, it seem like you have stepped on the toes of almost everyone here except for the person I was referring to earlier - It's your past good karma I think ;-) He did not make any negative comments about you, except in referring you as "an English gentleman" who initiated the WikiSpeak project when someone asked for his view on Wikipedia during the Q & A session. On a serious note, looking at his well researched presentation, it isn't hard to imagine the level of his technical skills and insight, the influence and official links he has (like access to govt statistics/officials) even though he has always keep a low profile in the public eye. I think we should end this thread now as it wouldn't be nice should any of the 'watchers' informed him that we are discussing about him here. Adieu! -- Kulikah (talk) 03:33, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

"Based on your past discussions above, it seem like you have stepped on the toes of almost everyone here ...". Yep, I think you got that right. More like a bull in a china shop than an English gentleman. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 03:58, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Actually, Myth busters tested that old saying and discovered that Bull's in china shops are actually pretty safe, they walked around the china and didn't break a thing... perhaps the most anti-climatic moment in the shows history!---I'm Spartacus! ^PoppaBalloon 19:06, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Ugh, Agh, Ooh

[2]

• "Ugh" - No personal attacks please
• "Agh" - Please try and do that correctly next time
• "Ooh" - You just did a rogue promotion of Malleus to Sysop? WTF??

:) Pedro :  Chat  11:24, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Apology

I admit that trusting in your offer to ventilate on you page was a big mistake, as well as asking you for an opinion, and in trusting that I actually had a relationship with you that I could openly express to you my deep feeling of hurt to you in an email. (I falsely though that you were my true friend.) I humbly apologize for those huge mistakes. I openly published my email to you for everyone to see. I hope that is of satisfaction to you. I am very sorry. In the future we will have no contact what so every, so these sorts of horrible transgressions on my part will not occur again. Purhaps with these assurances, you would be will to drop you vindicative statements in the future. I profoundly regret each and every interaction I engaged in with you. Please, let me go on with my life with out your continuing to demaind your pound of of my flesh and blood. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 19:02, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Just stop with all this nonsense Mattisse. You're going the right way for your RfC to be escalated to ArbCom, and nobody wants to see that. Give it up, get back to doing something productive and enjoyable, and stop hounding me with all this lost trust and faith maudlin nonsense.

PS. I don't expect to see you on this talk page again, at least not until your attitude has improved substantially. --Malleus Fatuorum 19:16, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

(leans)

It's that time again... Ealdred (archbishop) could use your attention over the next few weeks. I think he's all assembled. There are still a few minor points I'm trying to chase down, but nothing major. I've made a few CE passes, but... well.. I just finished off the last of the red links. Anything context wise that's missing, I'm more than happy to add, I just need to know what's left out. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:27, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I asked David Fuchs to look it over also, so he'll be fidding with it some. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:28, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Many hands make light work. I'll be happy to take a look. When are you looking to take it to FAC? --Malleus Fatuorum 21:31, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

When it's ready? (laughs) You know I don't care about front page exposure, so they go to FAC when they are ready, not before. The actual research is mostly done (the chances of me acquring the last couple of missing works I'd like is slim and none) so he's as comprehensive as I can make him. Johnbod's weighed in on any missing art/architectural items, so I don't really see anything that is missing. Of course, that's what you and David are for, to find glaring ommissions of background! Ealdgyth - Talk 21:33, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

That's just about the nicest way anyone's ever called me an ignoramus. :lol: --Malleus Fatuorum 21:42, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

LOL. I prefer to think of it as you don't spend your time worrying about obscure oddments of historical trivia. How's that? Ealdgyth - Talk 21:46, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Better, but not entirely accurate. ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum 21:53, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Saxbe fix

Would you please take the time to say whether your concerns have been addressed. Four editors have gotten involved in cleaning up the article.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:38, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Waigeo Island Upton, Cheshire Blackley Scottish Crop Research Institute List of places in Greater Manchester Graham Sandercock Chromoplast Salford (hundred) Association of Greater Manchester Local Authorities River Roch Wigan Plant Sciences at Wageningen University Pankhurst Centre Chorlton-on-Medlock The Institute for Genomic Research Vale Royal Marketing Manchester Jungermanniales Castlefield Bridgewater Hall

Cleanup Mersey Ferry Davyhulme Quality Street gang Merge Tropism University of Hull Differential Manchester encoding Add Sources Newton Heath Samuel Bamford Macclesfield Wikify Etchingham Mick Jones (footballer) Nerul Expand Cheadle, Greater Manchester Abram, Greater Manchester Worsley

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Plant Sciences at Wageningen University??? – iridescent 23:28, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm kinda puzzled by that as well. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:34, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Waigeo? Man that bot must be broken, or someone is playing silly games.... Quick - get editing. Pedro :  Chat  23:45, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I often tend to do quite a few copy edits to articles I'm reviewing, not because I'm interested in the subject, but just to get the article up to spec. Probably SuggestBot isn't really meant for editors like for me. (Are there any other editors like me? :lol:) --Malleus Fatuorum 14:28, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Copyediting requested

Dabcomb87 wanted me to specifically ask you about going over a copyedit for List of Popotan episodes since he believes it's still not up to stuff.じんない 01:35, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I'll do what I can to help, but probably not until after the weekend. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:33, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

No serious rush. The FLC was just put up 2 days ago. It'll be there for atleast 8 more days.じんない 02:42, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alder Coppice Primary School (2nd nomination)

Quick note: Don't forget to sign your closing comment when you close an AFD. Also, since you're not an admin, you should also make it clear it's a non-admin closure in the same statement. I've altered the closure comment for you this time. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:10, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, I'll try to remember next time, thanks. --Malleus Fatuorum 10:21, 6 February 2009 (UTC)