User talk:Spinach Dip
- 1 Welcome to the PCP!
- 2 Wii Startup Disc
- 3 Revisit of AfD for The WiseGuys
- 4 Imposter Professor Oak
- 5 AfD
- 6 WP:POKE is doing some housecleaning
- 7 Thank you
- 8 April 2008
- 9 RFA Thanks
- 10 My RfA...
- 11 Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Pascal's triangle
- 12 thank spam
- 13 Rfa thanks
- 14 Thank you from Horologium
- 15 'Net gain for wikipedia' on RfA
- 16 RFA Thanks
- 17 RfA thanks
- 18 Thanks
- 19 New Moon (2009 film) and Eclipse (2010 film)
- 20 Picture candidates
- 21 Reviewer granted
- 22 Oxaziridine GA review
- 23 Misleading edit summary at Common Era
- 24 ArbCom elections are now open!
Welcome to the PCP!
Thanks for joining the Pokémon Collaborative Project! We hope you have a great time editing Pokémon articles. If you have any questions about the articles, style, content, or simply what our favourite Pokémon are (our opinions vary, trust us!), leave a message on the project talk page. Cheers, and happy editing! -- THL 04:33, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Wii Startup Disc
I noticed that you voted for merge on the AfD page of Wii Startup Disk. User:TJ Spyke has provided us with the following information: "In the new IGN Weekly (IGN Weekly Holiday 06), they have the final Wii box and take everything in it out. There was no startup disc there (they also re-confirm that Wii Sports will just come in the same cheap cardboard that Metroid Prime Hunters: First Hunt came in)." Please consider changing your vote to redirect, as this disc does not exist, and people may search for it and need a redirect. A consensus for this issue would be excellent. Scepia 07:28, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Revisit of AfD for The WiseGuys
I would like to see if you had changed your views concerning the AfD for The Wiseguys: Comedy You Can't Refuse. There have been major edits performed to the enrty in an attempt to meet Wikipedia:Notability (comedy) since your comment on the talk page. Any additional comments would be appreciated in the effort to make the entry comply.
Thank you for your consideration.Apatronoftruth 18:31, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Imposter Professor Oak
Hi, I'm contacting you because you previously voted on the AfD for The Intelligence Summit. I am contacting everyone who voted on that AfD regardless of how they voted. Someone re-created the article and it is again up for deletion -- if you have any input, please add it to [this page]. Thank you! csloat 21:09, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
This notice is to inform you that because many people have added their names to Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon#Participants but do not seem to be active, all names are being deleted in an effort to find out who is still truly interested in the project. All you have to do is re-add your name if you'd still like to be considered a member of WP:POKE. Any questions, you can contact me on my talk page. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 17:46, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your comment regarding one of my pictures. Though the result is hundred percent oppose, I learned many issues related to photography from your and others comments. Since I am a novice in the filed of photography, I am still in my learning phase and would like to receive tips from you. I hope you won't mind if I request you in future to guide me through your comments regarding my pictures. Cheers. -- Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 14:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Brisingr. Your edits appeared to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Chris19910 (talk) 18:42, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
- Removing something that is a clear violation of copyright is NOT vandalism, regardless of what your automated tools say! Spinach Dip 18:48, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
- Striking above comment, unless someone cares to refute me... Spinach Dip 20:50, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments on my RFA. Even though it failed with 28 supports, 42 opposes, and 15 neutrals, I am grateful for the suggestions and advice I have received and I do hope to improve as a Wikipedian. If you ever need my help in any endeavor, feel free to drop me a line. --Sharkface217 20:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello, you had previously commented in this discussion, so I wanted to let you know that a new version of the image has been uploaded for comment. Thanks for you time. Hersfold (t/a/c) 19:54, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for supporting my recent request for adminship which was successful with 89 supports, 0 opposes, and 2 neutrals. Unfortunately all I can offer is this lame text thanks rather than some fancy-smancy thank-you spam template thingy. I was very pleased to receive such strong support and to hear so many nice comments from editors whom I respect. I’ll do my best with the tools, and if you ever see me going astray don’t hesitate to drop a note on my talk page. Thanks again for your support!--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 04:07, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you from Horologium
'Net gain for wikipedia' on RfA
Spinach Dip, I'd like to thank you for voting in my RFA. Thanks also for expressing your trust in me, and I hope that I live up to your expectations. Don't forget, if you have any questions (or bits of advice), please leave a message on my talk page. Thanks again, SpencerT♦C 03:01, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
|Hello Spinach Dip. Thank you very much for your support in my recent Request for Adminship, which was successful with 111 supports, 0 opposes, and 0 neutral. I have to say I am more than a little overwhelmed by this result and I greatly appreciate your trust in me. I will do my best to use the tools wisely. Thanks again. Regards. Thingg⊕⊗ 01:36, 12 October 2008 (UTC)|
New Moon (2009 film) and Eclipse (2010 film)
- Both these two articles were recently submitted for a name change. I did agree with this name change in February, however, now I am a strong opposing factor in why the name should ramian New Moon and Eclipse with the signifigant other name in the first line of the articles.
- WP:NCCN and WP:PRECISION both state the title should be "terms most commonly used", "A good article title is brief and to the point", "Prefer titles that follow the same pattern as those of other similar articles", "An article can only have one name; however significant alternative names for the topic should be mentioned in the article, usually in the first sentence or paragraph". "And despite earlier reports that the movie would be known as The Twilight Saga's New Moon, the title will remain New Moon according to the movie's rep. They just have Twilight Saga in the artwork to identify it for anyone less devoted than your average fanggirl."Source.
- Also see WP:PRECISION. I quote from there: "Articles' titles usually merely indicate the name of the topic. When additional precision is necessary to distinguish an article from other uses of the topic name, over-precision should be avoided. Be precise but only as precise as is needed. For example, it would be inappropriate to name an article "United States Apollo program (1961–1975)" over Apollo program or "Nirvana (Aberdeen, Washington rock band)" over Nirvana (band). Remember that concise titles are generally preferred."
- However, I personally do not think we have had enough input and would like input from people who might not like these movies, or just edit them to help wikipedia out. The pages are: Talk:New Moon (2009 film)#Requested move and Talk:Eclipse (2010 film)#Requested move. Any help/input would greatly be apriciated.ChaosMaster16 (talk) 22:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC)ChaosMaster16
Previously you voted at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Barack & Michelle Obama. I have nominated it at WP:VPC as well as several other Chicago related candidates that could use some feedback. Please stop by and help us make some decisions.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:52, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.
Oxaziridine GA review
Hi Spinach Dip... I wanted to express some concerns about the oxaziridine article and areas which I think you might have picked up during your GA review. I agree that the article is promising and could reach GA status, but I think there are some issues that should be addressed. You may be aware that I made some suggestions to User:DMelvinKaphan for potential improvements. In particular, I am concerned about:
- The lede contains material (such as the history of contributions from Emmons, Krimm, and Jürgens) that appear nowhere else in the article - perhaps a 'History' section is needed? Removing the lede should not result in loss of content as the lede summarises the article, but that is not the case here. (GA criterion 1B)
- The references are inconsistent - some journal articles are abbreviated, some are spelled out in full; some authors have full names, others have only initials; authorlinks for authors with wiki-bios are not included; some titles are fully capitalised, others have only first words capitalised; formatting of alpha and gamma in ref 13's title is incorrect, italicising in title of refs like 21 is missing; refs like 1 and 2 are missing titles; refs only give number of first page (though this appears consistent throughout); and, some articles appear to be in foreign languages (such as ref 22), which should be noted. (GA criterion 2A)
- File:N-sulfonyloxaziridineTable.png looks like something reproduced from a journal article. Even if it isn't, the 9 references preceding it belong in the table if they refer to the table's content. The table needs to be an editable table and not an image, too, in my opinion. (possibly problems under GA criterion 2B and 6A)
I think it would have been appropriate to put the nomination on hold and ask for some of this and maybe the some of the suggestions I made to DMelvinKaphan to be considered and / or addressed. I am interested to hear your view. Thanks, EdChem (talk) 12:41, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Misleading edit summary at Common Era
That wasn't a 'grammar' edit, that was a content edit, changing the meaning of sourced text. If you want to make it, please show on the talk page that the source justifies it. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 07:25, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
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) 16:29, 23 November 2015 (UTC)