Charles (theoldanarchist): Several months ago, I failed to assume good faith with you and you wrote me about it. I am nearly positive I apologised and explained my failure to this, in a reply posted in your talk page. Yet I can not find it, either in your talk archive, nor even in my contribution list. I reapol;ogise, and request your help finding it, if I am right in thinking I did write it. I am 1 of those who is very reluctant to try to hide criticism, or even promote attempted resolution, but I beleive in this case I have taken that policy too far. My (beleived)reply in no wise attempted to damage your reputation, and I took complete rsponsibility, and explained how the mis-hap occured; yet I think that failure to put the reply on my own talk page really goes past the point of humility, and into severe self-abnigation (like a bilboard on me saying: "I don't even apologise") and wish to rectify that by so posting, asap. Again this is in no-wise meant as any kind of an attack, just an attempt to amend a possible self abnegation instantiation, that should not be).Thaddeus Slamp (talk) 04:05, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
i have lived out here in lakelynn 42 yrs,the lake belongs to us all,people who live on the lake think they own it,far as the birds the people had no right to kill the birds,they come certain times of yr to rest on the lake then they leave,i hope this kind of act will not be performed again,the lake is becomming a water mokison lake,thats what they need to worry about,cleaning up the lilly patties and the snakes,after all this rain the snakes are comming in peoples yards like crazy,thankyou cbanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 15:10, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Troubles Arbitration Case: Amendment for discretionary sanctions
As a party in The Troubles arbitration case I am notifying you that an amendment request has been posted here.
For the Arbitration Committee
Seddon talk|WikimediaUK 16:44, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
As someone who has edited the CounterPunch article in the past, you might want to comment on this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:CounterPunch#Moving_on BobFromBrockley (talk) 10:42, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
A case (The Troubles) in which you were involved has been modified by motion which changed the wording of the discretionary sanctions section to clarify that the scope applies to pages, not just articles. For the arbitration committee --S Philbrick(Talk) 21:07, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Gone, Daddy, Gone?
Are you really gone?? I was hoping to reach you... Please tell me you aren't really gone. KDS4444Talk 21:42, 20 November 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) 13:47, 23 November 2015 (UTC)