User talk:K13060

Twenty senators, not eighteen. And your edit of the Carper article makes it seem like it's about Lieberman, when it isn't. Please fix. -- FRCP11 20:57, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're right about the twenty senators figure. However, the beginning of the article is absolutely necessary to contextualize it. He cites Carper as having the worst voting record among blue-state Democratic Senators, but makes it clear at the beginning of the article that he still considers Lieberman the worst for the party. KP 21:27, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archive talk conversations, don't blank them. -- FRCP11 19:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer me to the page that explains how to do that, and that's what I'll do in the future (and feel free to revert to before the blanking and archive the section instead).-KP 19:13, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Lieberman edit war

You really need to be careful that you don't run afoul of the Wikipedia:Three-revert rule, if you haven't already. Sorry, I'm not going to be able to get in there and mediate, but I encourage you to seek mediation. -- RobLa 05:39, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know. I'm trying to be careful on that and just recopy sections. I wanted to seek mediation, but when I went to the page I found that the wait can be up to 10 days. -KP 05:45, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't give you an excuse to violate policy. Since this is page relates to an upcoming election, you can make a plea that this jump the queue. Go first to the Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal page. You may also want to try Wikipedia:IRC.

I agree that User:LionO is out of line, but being similarly out of line is not going to fix things. -- RobLa 05:56, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you at least post on his user talk page that you agree he is being so? I think he needs to hear from someone other than me, and he may rethink his position. I feel I can't stop and let JL's page be a PR article. -KP 05:59, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AMA Request

Hello! I'm Steve and I'm a member of the Association for Members' Advocates. In response to your request on Wikipedia:AMA_Requests_for_Assistance, could you please provide a detailed description of what has gone on with this article, thusfar and plop it down on my desk? Just create s subsection under "Advocacy Requests" and try and be as thorough as possible. While you're doing that I'll be looking over the article and asking some questions so I can better understand how to help. :-) I'll warn you though, I'm not an expert on Lieberman, but I am very well-versed with Wikipedia policy so I'll be doing the best I can. Peace! אמר Steve Caruso _(desk/poll) 17:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]