User talk:SimonP/Archive 7

Remove the Tridel page immediately

This page is discussing a privately held company. I've requested that Wikipedia remove this page immediately (as it has in the past). Do not revert edits in the meantime. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gmaulucci (talk • contribs) 01:39, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

why did delete my atmos 2000 page

the page was in the middle of construction, it took me hours and i dont have a back up..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rowielip (talk • contribs) 17:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sir James Murray

A tag has been placed on Sir James Murray, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of Sir James Murray and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. 86.148.98.104 (talk) 11:06, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Woohoo!!!

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1570732,00.html User:Zoe|(talk) 07:34, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for noticing that. I was interviewed and photographed several weeks ago, and was wondering what had come of it. Things like this are always a useful demonstration to family and friends that I am not wasting my time by spending so much of it on Wikipedia. - SimonP 08:24, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! I was beated to it... In any case, well done. I've posted a link to the Time article on Wikipedia Signposts' tipline so that it can be mentioned in the next edition. Mikker ^(...) 16:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! Wow, that's pretty cool. Something to tell the grandkids about, in any event! Have a great day! Gozel ^talk 21:40, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, just read the article. Congrats - not everyone gets in Time. It's even pretty balanced and informed! ;) JoeSmack ^Talk 16:26, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bravo!! (Do you have a web cam, and would you consider speaking to Amber MacArthur from Citynews International, presuming the Time article is her story for today's segment, and presuming I can convince her?) -- Zanimum 14:35, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would certainly be interested in doing an interview, but unfortunetaly don't have a webcam. - SimonP 15:40, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hmm... I think she only does via webcam. Though wait, there's an A Channel in Ottawa, so maybe I could convince her to set up a satellite link... dunno. I'll let you know if anything develops. -- Zanimum 15:57, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Grats. Durova^Charge! 23:35, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WTF they totally should have interviewed Bluebot! This is bs! :P --- RockMFR 03:53, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, just wanted to drop you a "congrats" after reading the snippet in Time (I read it in the physical copy... I know, how 1999 of me). EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SimonP. Heh, I've never spoken to you, but congrats on being interviewed in Time magazine. Way to go dude! Hey, can you do me a small favor? Click on that "sign here" on my signature please (if you want to, I'm totally not forcing you, and at your own time). Again, congratulations! File:SoleteRayosÑajo.gif --Tohru Honda13^{Sign here!} 04:28, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, SimonP. I've only been on Wiki for a few months, but after reading the article about you in Time, I had to talk to you. Congrats on being featured in Time! SimonP, you are the Duke of Data! ChromeWulf ZX 23:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations for being featured in Time dude. That's probably the coolest thing that can ever happen to anybody. John earlm 01:24, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Louis de Jaucourt

Hi Simon, Louis de Jaucourt was the most prolific encyclopedist of the great 18th C French encyclopedia Encyclopedie, contributing close to 25% of the entire work, about 8 articles per day for years on end, and not paid a dime for his efforts (he even had to buy his own copy of the Encyclopedie when it was completed). Our Wikipedia article on him is "ok" but (I don't read French) the French Wikipedia version looks much better and more up to date. If you have any interest in doing a translation, I couldn't think of a better person to ask. Thanks and congrats on your Time profile. -- Stbalbach 03:58, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting character, can you imagine loosing 20 years of work in a ship-wreck and starting all over. If you want to read more I recommend Philip Bloom's Enlightening the World an entertaining history of the Encylopedie, similar to Simon Winchester's The Meaning of Everything, a history of the OED - both were large volunteer collaboration projects with similarities to WP. -- Stbalbach 19:16, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SimonP from Mumun man

Hi I am listening to you on the radio. Good :-) Just wanted to say hello. Mumun 18:45, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Radio? Please let the Signpost Tipline know... -- Zanimum 19:58, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Person of the Year 2006

Hi Simon. I am not sure how much you are into userboxes, but due to your Time article you definitely deserve the {{User Person of the Year 2006}}. Congratulations! -- Chris 73 | Talk 14:25, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for giving us a nice big reference for your article, I think time meets WP:RS :) - Again, congrats (enjoy the beautiful weather on the other side of the country, us left coasters are still shocked at the weather inversion :o) -- Tawker 23:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You made TWIT too, with a "classic photo" - whatever that means -- Tawker 08:40, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on your Time article Simon. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 07:20, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, congratulations Simon. I'm new to Wikipedia (joined August 2006). The part in the article about your including edits about the Russian Czars during your studies has inspired me to contribute to Wikipedia in the same way. As I am currently a University student I may as well update a few articles here and there with a lot of the source informaiton I've got. Congratulations again. Ekantik ^talk 04:47, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More regarding Wikipedia:Peer review/Canadian postal code

Is it possible that you could get formal newspaper citations to insert into the history section of Canadian postal code? I intended shortly to submit Canadian postal code as a formal featured article candidate. Thanks. -- Denelson 83 01:12, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you deal with this?

This sounds rather serious. Would you be able to take a look at it and decide what needs doing? I've posted to the talk pages of some of the arbitrators and one of the clerks as well, but not any further. Thanks. Carcharoth 23:23, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hip roof

Hi Simon- I just noticed your article Hip roof and wanted to alert you to another pre-existing one, Tented_roof. I'm on a deadline with a project and don't have time at the moment to look into merging or linking between the articles. I tend to use your term more than "hipped", and the AHDprefers it as well. Thanks for the article. -Eric ^(talk) 16:28, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Image:Benjamin West 005.jpg

It was tagged as db-noimage by KFP [1], so I went ahead and deleted, looks like it isn't properly linked from commons or something? —P ilotguy (ptt) 01:03, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pilotguy and the image

Thanks for placing your note on Pilotguy's talk page. I too found the deletions baffling and incorrectly summarized, at best. I wrote to him in a note two above yours and he replied with another baffling and incorrect reason. At the very least, it seems like Pilotguy recklessly applied the NPwatcher tool like a machine gun. Hu 01:07, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that if the image was deleted, it should be restored. It is a perfectly good public domain image and much better than another I happened to notice. I don't see any record of KFP having asked for it to be deleted. Hu 01:12, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article review/History of Central Asia

Your input on this F.A.R. is desired. KazakhPol 02:56, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History of Central Asia has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Sandy (Talk) 23:35, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know?

On 27 December, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gothic Revival architecture in Canada, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 13:16, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Fresheneesz

... Is being disruptive at Wikipedia talk:Overcategorization. This is what tipped it. If that was "mediation", the entire mediation cabal would have already been permabanned from the project.Circeus 14:47, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hum... Re-reading this I see I wasn't quite clear. Could a formal probation proposal be moved for Fresheneesz? His latest creation certainly seems to warrant it.Circeus 02:42, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking me Circeus. Why are you so upset at me? I've been nothing but polite to you and am completely baffled at what I could have done to offend you so much. Fresheneesz 02:59, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I fail to see where I said something that could be construed as an attack. Although, as I said above, Ibelieve you to be acting disruptively in these two instances, and did feel mildly offended (in a general fashion, as a "hard-working admin") by that "essay" of yours, you haven't personally offended me (although some of your edits at WP:OC might have offended my sense of logic

) Circeus 03:21, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I found nothing disruptive in any of Fresheneesz's edits. ATren 03:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He practically barged in and started arguing with radiant, at times misrepresenting or making false statements, and then claimed to have been "mediating" when he was supporting BDJ all along (and I am not lambasting it for him, but for claiming mediation intent afterwards), and then claimed he had no opinion on the actual policy. His proposal of a poll was especially preposterous considering the whole WP:NN thing and the fact he was arguing with Radiant! Circeus 03:54, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(1) All his edits were on the talk page. (2) He disagrees with the way Radiant gauges consensus (for the record, so do I) and he expressed that - is that "starting an argument"? (3) Did he try to start a poll? He just suggested it. IMO, you are overreacting here; but then again, I strongly disagreed with the conclusions of that arbitration, so perhaps I'm seeing this through a different lens. ATren 04:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I don't even consider freshneezs an "involved party," since he clearly hasno interest in discussing the policy, and have, as it turns out, already started a mediation request with Badlydrawnjeff.Circeus 04:40, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments like "I have no opinion right now" (when he's been clearly arguing one from the start) and While articles need to be verifiable, categories do not have such restrictions. are outright false statement and hardly help the discussion. I was not the only one baffled by the latter: [2]. I honestly hope this doesn't come through as anything but being as specific as possible with what I think is inappropriate editing. If you honestly think I'm overreacting, I will lay itto rst and try to ignore his intervention as much as possible.Circeus 05:04, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Untagged image

An image you uploaded, Image:Gotland.png, was tagged with the {{coatofarms}} copyright tag. This tag was deleted because it does not actually specify the copyright status of the image. The image may need a more accurate copyright tag, or it may need to be deleted. If the image portrays a seal or emblem, it should be tagged as {{seal}}. If you have any questions, ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 05:16, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

S. Cecilia Dougherty

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article S. Cecilia Dougherty, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:S. Cecilia Dougherty. Removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, but the article may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria.

Notice

NOTICE IS GIVEN THAT the scope of WikiProject Ottawa is being debated. Your input is requested. Thank you. GreenJoe 20:19, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Naming Conventions ArbCom Case

You said (in regards to Izzy Dot's behaviour) "Comments were unacceptable, but it does concern me that this issue was not really brought up by anyone on the evidence page, and that this is here more because of our own investigating"

Just to clear things up - this wasn't bought up because it was unimportant. Although Izzy's behaviour was bad, he was a very minor player in this dispute. He popped up once in a while to make a few incivil comments/attacks which everyone basically ignored. Also, he'd already been blocked once about 6 weeks ago, and hasn't made any edits since. I guess everyone figured there was no point dragging him into the case - he didn't play a very big part in the dispute and he's already gone. --`/aksha 11:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pastorwayne: Arbitration needed?

Please see WP:ANI#Pastorwayne and category creation. Several of us have had problems with Pastorwayne and his rapid category creation, which is out of control. On 1 January 2007, he stopped actually creating category pages after multiple complaints, but he has not stopped adding red linked categories to articles, which is the first step in a technique for creating categories according to WP:CAT. The notice at WP:ANI has not received appropriate administrative attention. I left a request for information at WP:MEDCAB (see Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-01-02 Pastorwayne category creation), but it looks like the Mediation Cabal may not act quickly on this request.

At this point, I am wondering if arbitration is needed. Since you are on the arbitration committee, could you please tell me whether this would be appropriate? If arbitration is not appropriate, could you instruct me on how to get some type of definitive administrative action in a relatively short time period?

(I will be asking several members of the arbitration committee just to get some type of feedback.) Dr. Submillimeter 16:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jc37, an administrator, has now taken a stronger action regarding this situation. Hopefully, I can discuss future concerns regarding this situation with him. If you have additional comments for me, please contact me. Thank you, Dr. Submillimeter 18:48, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian postal code

Hi, we're trying to find the source for the 1975 ad and controversy mentioned in the history section of the Canadian postal code article which is currently under review for GA status. The particular section was added by yourself on 8 June 2005 [3] and has been little changed since. You wouldn't happen to have a copy of the Globe and Mail which referenced it? Cheers Orderinchaos78 01:28, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been meaning to source those statements for a bit. Denelson asked me to do so a few weeks ago, and I'll see what I can do. - SimonP 02:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much, SimonP. Your help has gotten us closer to featuring Canadian postal code. -- Denelson 83 03:26, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's excellent :) There's four remaining citation needed pointers, once those are gone we can get it to the next stage. Orderinchaos78 08:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence question

Hello, I had a question about the current Naming Conventions case. I was in the process of supplying evidence a couple weeks ago, when my wiki-time was interrupted by the holidays (and the fact that I got stuck in the New Mexico snowstorm for a few days). Upon my return to Wikipedia, I see that the voting phase on the case has already started, before I was able to finish supplying evidence, and before some of the other involved editors had returned from their own holiday break. :/ May I continue with supplying the rest of my evidence? Or would it be too late at this point? I'd posted alerts about my upcoming absence and return on the ArbCom talk pages, such as at Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Naming Conventions/Evidence#Christmas and Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Naming Conventions/Proposed decision#Additional evidence, but I'm not sure if anyone saw them. Thanks for your time, El on ka 19:47, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, my section is now completed. Please accept my profuse apologies for the multiple delays. It's a been a really tough winter so far, with many power outages. I'm getting caught up now though, and have been able to finish presenting my own evidence, as well as a few extra proposed principles and findings of fact on the Workshop page. If you have time, I would appreciate if you could review them. If not though, I understand. To be honest, I feel better just knowing that I was able to complete my section, since its half-finished status was on my mind during the last couple weeks.

For what it's worth, I have no intention of challenging the final ArbCom decision, whichever way it goes. I see ArbCom as a useful part of the Wikipedia Dispute Resolution process. And just as with an AfD or DRV discussion, I may not always agree with the decision of the closing admin, but I will respect it. :)

Despite some of the other comments that have been made about my behavior throughout this situation, it is my hope that ultimately it will be clear that I am a longtime hardworking Wikipedian, that I believe strongly in the project, and that in general I'm not groundzero for various disputes. In this one particular case though, I felt strongly that I had an obligation to speak up. But I will be glad when the matter is finally resolved, as I am very much looking forward to getting back to writing articles! :) El on ka 04:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that a significant part of Elonka's evidence is either misleading or downright false, as noted here. >Radiant< 14:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Cheers for all this [4]. --Mcginnly | Natter 00:37, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Aarush

I noticed your revert to Aarush. I've been in a bit of an edit war on that document and have recently come to the conclusion that an entry is needed. I've recently searched and most western names have definitions of sorts for names with links to persons with said names. Obviously the names that are being listed have not proved notability. However, I feel that the entry itself should be kept in place, and have recently changed my stance to refect that.

I'd be intersted in hearing your input on this, and regarding your edit. Thank you in advance. RichMac (Talk) 04:10, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Use of {{unverified}}

Please don't use {{unverified}}, which is intended for use on images, on articles, as you did for Abdullah Baybasin. Eli Falk 23:38, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Lewis Bingaman

Please use an existing category when categorizing uncategorized pages, or create a category before using it. Putting in a non-existant category, as you did with Adam Lewis Bingaman, doesn't help. Eli Falk 11:38, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Motion to Close (Naming Conventions ArbCom Case)

I noticed the motion to close for this ArbCom case. I hope i'm not too late in asking the ArbCom members actively voting in this case to take a look at this request and consider it before closing the case? Thank you. --`/aksha 10:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guidance

Re: Starwood Arb

I implore the arbitrators who have not recused themselves in this case to please give some direction in the Starwood Arb, or at least a timeline of when they will be able to deliberate. It quite literally has devolved into a Lord of the Flies scenario on the evidence and workshop pages, and the wikilawyering, off-topic diatribes and verbosity are making it difficult to make heads or tails of what is going on. I am not trying to impose upon the process, I am just asking for some feedback & order. - WeniWidiWiki 17:38, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chilean edits

Hello, SimonP/Archive 7, since you have made several edits to articles about Chile, you may be interested in looking at the Wikipedia:Chile-related regional notice board to pick up on other topics that need attention, or to express needs which you perceive pertaining to Chile. JAXHERE | ^Talk 02:44, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ottawa Citizen

Ooh, that's gotta suck. ~ Flame vip e r ^{Who's a Peach?} 18:27, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of article 'WinBot'

I'm not sure who voted in the deletion on this or when, but this was a notable article, having been published on cover CD's of magazines in the UK and reviewed on various websites.

See PC Plus DVD edition, Issue #204; July 2003. Contact me if you need more.

Ok, confusion abound here. There appears to be two pages, One called WinBot and one (that i contributed to a while back) called Winbot without the capital B. The second of the two is the page which should remain, sorry for any confusion -- however, would it make sense to redirect one to the other? Braindigitalis 22:12, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_January_27#Marsden-Donnelly harassment case

A disagreement has arisen regarding the interpretation of your previous comments on the case, so your clarification is appreciated. ~ trialsanderrors 01:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University

Dear ArbComm Member of Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University;

This note is to bring to your attention two issues which are creating upheaval in the article located here [5]and placed on probation under the premise of "Any user may request review by members of the Arbitration Committee."[6]. This request is based on enforcement or remedies stated in the arbitration process and failure to follow up on it.

1) An article-banned user [7] orchestrated a come back through proxy IPs from Japan and then through an account "Some people" which has been blocked twice. The problem with this is that this user had modified the entire article in less than 12 hours on January 28 2007. This user partner, TalkAbout; acted in synchrony with 244 on that night and made some changes as well using "Some people" new version. User Andries had a minor edit of that version as well.

Request to investigate user Some people [8] Analysis of situation [9] Suspicion of sockpuppet account [10] Blocks to user Some people for "a reincarnation of the editor who formerly posted from the IP address 195.82.106.244"( As admin Thatcher put it) [11]

2) The only admin we've dealing with is Thatcher131. I would like to bring to your attention what I consider to be "lack of neutrality" and fairness from his/her part. Even though, user "Some people" was blocked by Thatcher131 under a strong suspicion of him being user 244 (banned by the ArbComm for a year) Thatcher131 supported the new version of the page which are the versions of a banned user.[12] A request for enforcement of arbitration has been submitted long time ago before user 195.82.106.244 (aka 244) made several changes through his sockpuppet account "Some people" [13] but the request is still sitting there.

User "Some people" transformed the article with over 30 + entries on 22:41 28 Jan 2007 [14] and then User TalkAbout added some content and at that point, that was considered the new "good version" of the article.

I would like to request the following: 1) the article to be reverted to a state before "Some people" took over. 2) To change the "admin in charge", Thatcher131 to someone who is not emotionally involved in this issue (Thatcher131 was the clerk in the arbitration case and helped user 195.82.106.244 to file the case and presented some evidence against me but not against 244[15])and that could enforce normal wikipedia procedures are taking place. I appreciate your time and prompt consideration on this.

Truly Yours, avyakt7 21:44, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on User talk:Fred Bauder [16]. Thatcher131 22:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on same user Talk page [17] Thank you. avyakt7 21:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Children of the Prime Ministers of Canada

Hi Simon. I hope you're doing well in Toronto. Do you think you could help us out by voting to keep this article? Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Children of the Prime Ministers of Canada. -- Earl Andrew - talk 01:31, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your vote, Simon. They've also put Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parents of the Prime Ministers of Canada on AfD as well. -- Earl Andrew - talk 17:22, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Durova/Community enforced mediation

I've based a proposal on the mediation from the Piotrus-Ghirla case. Your input would be welcome. Please reply on the proposal talk page. Durova^Charge! 21:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Location Maps

On the WikiProject Countries talk page, you had either explictly declared a general interest in the project, or had participated at a discussion that appears related to Location Maps for European countries.
New maps had been created by David Liuzzo, and are available for the countries of the European continent, and for countries of the European Union exist in two versions. From November 16, 2006 till January 31, 2007, a poll had tried to find a consensus for usage of 'old' or of which and where 'new' version maps. At its closing, 25 people had spoken in favor of either of the two presented usages of new versions but neither version had reached a consensus (12 and 13), and 18 had preferred old maps.
As this outcome cannot justify reverting of new maps that had become used for some countries, seconds before February 5, 2007 a survey started that will be closed at February 20, 2007 23:59:59. It should establish whether the new style maps may be applied as soon as some might become available for countries outside the European continent (or such to depend on future discussions), and also which new version should be applied for which countries.
Please note that since January 1, 2007 all new maps became updated by David Liuzzo (including a world locator, enlarged cut-out for small countries) and as of February 4, 2007 the restricted licence that had jeopardized their availability on Wikimedia Commons, became more free. The subsections on the talk page that had shown David Liuzzo's original maps, now show his most recent design.
Please read the discussion (also in other sections α, β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, η, θ) and in particular the arguments offered by the forementioned poll, while realizing some comments to have been made prior to updating the maps, and all prior to modifying the licences, before carefully reading the presentation of the currently open survey. You are invited to only then finally make up your mind and vote for only one option.
There mustnot be 'oppose' votes; if none of the options would be appreciated, you could vote for the option you might with some effort find least difficult to live with - rather like elections only allowing to vote for one of several candidates. Obviously, you are most welcome to leave a brief argumentation with your vote. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 7 Feb 2007 20:35 (UTC)

A-Channel report

Heard about a preview of a news report about Wikipedia which you are in. So I will check this out tommorrow at 6. Cheers!--JForget 04:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just getting around to this, but I did see the report air on A-Channel Ottawa way back when. Seemed to be a good feature; no doubt there are always more items that could be mentioned about WP culture. Dl2000 01:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles requested for more than two years

Hi Simon. WP:AR2 is empty at the moment, and I noted it's you who populates it with new entries from time to time. I don't mind lending a hand with this - how do you identify the oldest requested articles?

This way if I ever see it empty, I can add a few articles. There always seems to be some very dedicated editors willing to take these long-requested articles on when all else has failed; an empty page feels counter-productive. Proto::► 16:12, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes? No? Proto ► 00:26, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfArb "Pakistani Nationalism"

Hi, I noticed that the title of Rama's arrow's Request for Arbitration had been changed to "Pakistani Nationalism." I think the new title unfairly tilts the balance in favor of the initiator, Rama's arrow. I am not sure if everyone knows that the RfArb was initiated by Rama's arrow at 16:59, 12 February 2007 (UTC), a full 16 minutes after (and therefore likely in reaction to) an incident at WP:ANI, against Rama's arrow (See here:"Admin abusing his privileges") filed at 16:43, 12 February 2007, by the other editors (Pakistani) now involved in this RfArb. As a neutral editor who has battled both sides in this dispute at different times and occasions, my own view is that nationalism exists on both sides of the Pakistan-India border and both sides are equally prolific in edit-wars on Wikipedia. In my perspective, Rama's arrow has been selectively aggressive towards Pakistani editors and, correspondingly, selectively benign towards Indian editors. I think the way that this RfArb is framed, Rama's arrow comes out looking as a concerned, but, perhaps, neutral administrator and his "interlocutors" as somewhat rabid nationalists. Regards, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 20:46, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Motion to revoke remedy of Kosovo arbcom (October 2006)

Dear Simon, on 21 October 2006 the Kosovo arbcom found that I had been given 96 hours probation for edit warring on the Srebrenica massacre article and based on this (presumably) gave me one years probation and revert parole. I have raised some questions regarding this remedy (see below), and Fred Bauder has initiated a motion to revoke these remedies. Since you were one of the members of the arbitration committee I respectfully ask you to consider my case. I have also posted some comments regarding Dmcdevit's reply, here. The questions I raised regarding the decision of the Kosovo arbcom were:

why did the Kosovo arbcom consider my misconduct on the Srebrenica massacre article? Nowehere is the Srebrenica massacre article names as a 'related article'. Nowhere is the reasoning for linking the two articles given.
it seems a rather harsh remedy to give me one years probation and revert parole for a 'crime' which I had already served time for (so to say).
is it possible to appeal the Kosovo arbcom's decision?

Sincere regards Osli73 10:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

using diffs

FYI regarding the diffs I am required to use as evidence,I'd just like to mention that I have used diffs for most of the evidence I have posted. Other evidence which I am posting or will post not using diffs are for the reason that the specific peice of evidence is from an archieved page and a history cannot be checked since it's archived.

I hope that's okay with you guys.Regards.--Nadirali نادرالی

I never posted that comment on Hkelkar's talkpage

FYI I am extremely upset at the false "evidence" RA is posting against me.I never posted that comment in Urdu on Hkelkar's talkpage.Please check the history of that page.

And another thing that I "attacked" muhajirs is so wrong.I AM PART Muhajir from my father's side.My father is Muhajir born in India of Azeri ancestry from his mother's side. Many Muhajirs despise this Muhajir nationalistic belif that cooked up by the MQM that Muhajirs are the only "educated" people in Pakistan.Does that mean they become anti-Muhajir?No.

I'm sorry but it cannot allowed as evidence.Those are simply unproven assersions which RA usually posts.--Nadirali نادرالی

Yes, I am in error about that Urdu comment on user talk:Hkelkar. The comment was actually made by MirzaGhalib (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and tagged {{unsigned}} by user:Bakasuprman. I should have double-checked this - I apologize. As for the anti-Muhajir comments, the diffs are perfectly clear and Nadirali is responsible for it. Rama's arrow 22:51, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How can you accuse me of attacking Muhajirs when I AM a Muhajir from my father's side.My father is a Muhajir of Azerbaijani ancestry from his mother's side.Therefor he is of Azerbaijani descent born in what is today india. I still stand by my claims that I dislike their mentality of being too conservitive.I once had a Greek tutor who would repeatidly attack his people because he felt they were too arrogant.Does that make him an "anti-Greek".

If you think my comments were attacking Muhajirs,then atleast you can call me a "self-hating Muhajir" rather than an "anti-Muhajir" which is quite ridiculous and somewhat quite laughable :-)--Nadirali نادرالی

I saw nadirali at the top of page history, the urdu text at the bottom and assumed it was nadirali. After learning it was another user, I promptly changed it. I cannot make it look like anyone edited anything, since I cant hack mediawiki software.Baka man 02:51, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS matter

Hi, Simon

I wanted to contact you privately regarding an OTRS matter, but your email is not set up. So I couldn't. So let's figure out another way to handle this. Bastiq▼e ^demandez 20:20, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Election promise

There is a user who is currently deleting a section of Election Promise which you originally created when you created this article. Can you watch the page too? Travb (talk) 02:17, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Don Jail" is an unofficial nickname.

The Toronto Jail is named just that; the Toronto Jail. "Don Jail" is only a slang term or nickname. It's my opinion that posting the article under the nickname would be like posting an article about Frank Sinatra under the heading of "Old blue eyes" without disambiguation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jc128842 (talk • contribs) 18:29, 28 February 2007 (UTC). --Jc128842 18:31, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SimonP wrote:

Wikipedia has a policy of using common names. It is standard policy to use nicknames when they are what a person or thing is commonly know by. e.g. Jimmy Carter and Tony Blair. Don Jail is pretty much the standard name for the facility, used by most books, newspapers, and websites. - SimonP 21:54, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, if we are to use the nickname, then the more common usage is not "The Don Jail" but "The Don". During my 17 years as a correctional officer I don't believe I have ever heard anyone (staff, inmates, etc.) actually say "The Don Jail". So the article, if we are to follow the standard, should be titled "The Don". As for references in newspapers, etc. the names of facilities are often mis-stated. I have often seen the Mimico Correctional Centre referred to as the Mimico Jail, Mimico Correctional Institute, etc. --Jc128842 14:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I back up SimonP on this one. Living in Toronto, I've heard of it many times, but only ever as the Don Jail. I've never heard either The Don, nor Toronto jail. Hope this helps. -Oreo Priest 00:53, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Woodbine Avenue at Deletion Review

Your undeletion of Woodbine Avenue over the AFD close has been brought to deletion review for discussion. Please come offer your explanation and opinion. GRBerry 18:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prechter

Hi Simon. I've made an amended version of the FoF on this arb case. Please take a look. Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom status

At your convenience, could you kindly clarify whether you wish to be considered "active" or "inactive" for now on pending ArbCom cases. Obviously, you can vote on any case you want to, but at the moment we were not counting you in calculating the majority in a few pending cases, and if you are active again I will want to adjust that. Thanks and regards, Newyorkbrad 03:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. I believe another arbitrator had previously marked you as inactive on the list at WP:AC. I will go through and fix all the majorities for pending cases. Regards, Newyorkbrad 16:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CityNews

Hello, you might already be aware of this, but your interview on CityNews was broadcasted a few minutes ago. —LOL 03:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again?

"... Eventually I managed to get most of these biographies reinstated by waiting several months and then trying again, when Louis Blair was not looking. ..." - Sam Sloan (Mon Mar 12, 2007 6:12 pm)

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.chess.politics/browse_frm/thread/7d8fd30b87dcbe95?scoring=d&hl=en

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration&oldid=68693060#Sam_Sloan

(This is posted here by Louis Blair (March 13, 2007))

Engoish reformation question.

I have only recently started editing articles on the English reformation, so I am somewhat uncertain about the inclusion of attributing cause and effect. For example, English Reformation recently had "Many factors contributed to the ferment: the invention of the printing press, the rise of nationalism, the transmission of new knowledge and ideas; but the story of how the different states of Europe adhered to different forms of Protestantism, or remained faithful to Rome or allowed different regions within states to come to different conclusions (as they did) is specific to each state." added to its lead. There are similar later statements and discussions on the talkpage about what historiography to go with. I've always been under the impression that Wikipedia reports the facts as far as possible without getting into historical disputes (unless it is to report on them), so this struck me as being irrelevant. However, I am not familiar with the style of history articles and was hoping you, as the author of so many FAs in this area, could tell me whether this is normal or not. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:14, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Starwood RfAr case

User:Kathryn NicDhàna has given another statement (I think it's semi-evidence, but it's placed on the main case page) at here. Please advise action. - Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 03:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother you, but I noticed that Penwhale posted a link to a statement that Kathryn made about this case that did not include my response. I hope you will consider it as well. [18] Rosencomet 05:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rosencomet has written a rebuttal at Kathryn's comment. I've subsequently moved it back into his/her section here. - Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 05:39, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Related to anthroposophy

Is it possible that you could check Talk:Anthroposophy#About anthroposophical sources, please? I'm sorry that I was first unaware what ”arbitration” means. Erdanion 14:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto ravine system

On 23 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Toronto ravine system, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 06:21, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Simon!

I live in Ontario too. Keep up the good work! ^^

Wikisofia has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

undid Brian O'dea edit

although the statement is opinion(imho). I decided to put up a citation needed there to see if it could be verified. If it isn't in about a week or so I'll remove it.

AfD nomination of List of university libraries

I've nominated List of university libraries, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that List of university libraries satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of university libraries and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of List of university libraries during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -- Seed 2.0 13:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Falun Gong arbitration

Hi Simon. I don't know if it might be useful for strengthening the FoF or not, or if you may want to reconsider any of your positions, but I compiled some more info on the edit warring on the main Falun Gong page on the workshop. I'm recused since I locked the page frequently and blocked Samuel once, so I'm not going to edit the FoF. As well, I made two edits to the page; once when I saw Samuel add his own website, I removed it, and another time there was this unsourced info about a scientific study on six people which said that FLG caused health benefits. In any case, I haven't finished yet, but if you look in the bit about the June 2006 edit warring, there are clearly some guys there who did 20-30+ reverts in the three weeks that the page was open to editing. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My reverts: HappyInGeneral

Hello Simon. Could you please answer the question I posted here: [19]?

Basically I would like to ask you to comment if you think these changes were legitimate and in accordance with the Wikipedia Spirit.

Thank You and Best Regards, --HappyInGeneral 09:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

roll back?

[re: Blacksburg, VA] I sourced these images from an archive of photo content that I maintained from work that I did (website design) for some of the local business in Blacksburg (e.g. Gillies, Bollos, the Cellar). I believe they are all taken by me, using a Ricoh KR-10 35mm, and a little cheapo Alaris Digital Camera around spring of 1997. However, I also have an archive that includes photos provided by the clients. I will review to see if I have any images mixed in from between the two archives.

I noticed the page had been rolled back to prior any changes --- are you suggesting that none of these images are mine? Also, I added relevant Geography text with internal links back to other Wikipedia references. Has this information also been deleted?

- LmL6 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.160.36.56 (talk) 16:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

RFArb Transnistria

Hi, Simon. As you are an arbitrator in the case regarding Transnistria, please take a look at [20] and also at the talk page. I think we should checkuser the suspected socks not with their recent contributions but with their old ones, before suspected sockpuppeteer knows about the suspicions. Losing time can mean losing evidence. Thanks.--MariusM 18:57, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Queen Square.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Queen Square.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. hfx_chris 23:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Architecture of Ottawa

On 3 May, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Architecture of Ottawa, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 19:05, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clickable map on Ottawa

Do you know of a reason why the clickable map you added to the Ottawa page would be invisible to me (on IE 6). When I go directly to the template page itself ([[Template:Ottawa map]]), the map appears in all its glory. Thanks. — Grstain | Talk 20:39, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

McConn on revert parol for a year?

I've just noticed that this is the conclusion you've come to, and I'm quite surprised. I doubt that there is anything that I can do about your decision, but I still feel the need to defend myself. It's true that I've engaged in edit warring, but rarely have I ever reverted without discussion (in fact using the talk pages to explain each of my edits is something I make a priority of), and rarely have I ever participated in a revert war that wasn't over edits that were quite clearly inappropriate. I believe that I've also been regarded by most other users as very reasonable, including by those that are on the opposing side, such as Firestar and Tomananda. It's rare that people rationally complain about my editing behavior. I also make a point of using the talk pages to discuss content without pushing my opinion about Falun Gong. And because of these things, I haven't felt any warning or threat that some action might be taken against me. I appologize for the fact that I haven't been following the arbitration case or participating in it. This is mostly because I was away from wikipedia for about two months, and only really came back after the pages were opened up to make some edits that I thought were rather straightforward. (I understand now that this was probably wrong and that I should have waited for the arbcom case to finish before making such content changes). Anyway, were I to know or have been warned that my editing behavior has been a problem I would change immediately; you don't need to put me on any kind of restricting parol to do that. I respect your position and understand that you've done your homework, but from my perspective this kind of decision without any warning seems like jumping the gun. Thanks for listening. Mcconn 16:53, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Rules applied inconsistently? Seeking clarification

Note about this query in this section: This is more of a question seeking clarification from arbitrators / similar ranked persons on Wiki about Wiki rules rather than a complaint. I wanted to keep the query to the ArbCom decision talk page but if I can't get an answer there, please give me a reply either here on your talk page, or preferably, my talk page, thanks!

1. I notice that Samuel has been deemed incapable of promoting a viewpoint outside his activism and has an obvious conflict of interest in that sense, but don't Falun Gong practitioners also have a similar COI? Many of the pro-FGers did not even want to see a Criticism section. Now, they are only willing to see one that is heavily truncated and has been responded to by their Leader or Master. Isn't this an inconsistent application of the Conflict of Interest rule? (If not, pls explain)

2. Moreover, if users like Asdfg (pro-FG) are given a second chance and commended for turning over a new leaf and now appears to conform to Wiki rules, why shouldn't Tomananda be given that chance, and Samuel (who had 3, not 7 blocks btw, if overturned blocks are not to be counted)? I find it once again an inconsistent application of Wikipedia rules that anti-FGers must be banned yet pro-FGers have, at the very most, only been given a year's parole (except McConn). I also note with amusement that despite User:HappyInGeneral having declared a POV war previously on the FG discussion page, he can be found not to merit even a revert parole.

3. Arbitrator Fred Bauder also mentioned that the real flamers have not been sanctioned (e.g. User:Omido) so far so should this ArbCom decision be expanded to include these users? Or are arbitrators bound to only consider the users involved and mentioned in the ArbCom case?

4. I note from Fred Bauder that NPOV does not require excision of POV language. I accept that, but hope that he would expand on this point further, preferably by giving examples in this FG case. Moreover, if that edit I made was objectionable then does that mean Fire_Star's one (the version I reverted to) was also objectionable, or is it my edit in itself that was objectionable?

5. How exactly do we deal with unregistered users who vandalize Wikipedia + Wiki user pages? Note that there have been a series of anti-FG vandalism actions recently, which is curiously well-timed as they hardly existed before this ArbCom case, as well as the fact that there have only been numerous pro-FG vandalism actions before. See also the numerous times anti-FG and '3rd-party' users had their talk pages vandalized. So how do we prevent abuse of this, especially when banning IP addresses does little good to an organization that exploits the weaknesses of Wikipedia? (If you cannot answer this one, that is understandable, but if you have an answer that would be of great use)

Now just one suggestion:

1. Instead of revert parole-ing numerous users, how about simply revert parole-ing entire Wiki entries, namely the FG-related ones here? This would be the best way of preventing edit wars ESPECIALLY by unregistered users (or users exploiting this Wiki weakness), as has been supported by my relatively limited number of edits on the main Wiki FG-related entries (compare the edits I made + content I wrote on the pages' talk pages, compared to the actual entries themselves). Jsw663 19:46, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:OSGOlogo.png

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:OSGOlogo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:05, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:OCDSBlogo.png

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:OCDSBlogo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:12, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Transnistria arbitration

I would like to express my surprise concerning the probable outcome of the Transnistrian arbitration.

On one side you have an astroturfing network, proved media manipulation, and sockpuppet farms. On the other, you have guys that uncovered this large-scale manipulation and are now calm and reasonable (once the main manipulators are gone, that is). And what this ArbCom does is to inflict similar bans on both sides.

How is this ethical? Do you mean that fighting manipulation attempts is punishable? The only way of bringing down a manipulator being to accept the same punishment? And how about balancing punishment with evidence? Dpotop 12:08, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

your pro censorship ruling

Is it ok to have in the User:Tobias Conradi page the following

The orginal version of this page contained admin right abuse listing and was deleted. The deletion is not shown in the deletion log.

This user thinks Wikipedia should be more tranparent with respect to admin actions. All users should be allowed to have annotated listings of admin actions, e.g. listings of admin right abuses.

Unfortunatly the ArbCom ruled that "Tobias Conradi is prohibited from maintaining laundry lists of grievances." and referring here to a simple listing of annotated diffs. User_talk:Tobias Conradi/RfA

Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Tobias_Conradi/Proposed_decision#Laundry_lists_of_grievances

So User:Tobias Conradi is denied the right to collect evidences of admin right abuses.

It reminds me on people committing crime and when the victim wants to change things by making the crime public he is additionally abused by being censored.

http://transparency.org

Tobias Conradi (Talk) 12:40, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:BetacommandBot

Please unblock this bot. It's doing very necessary work. Of course people are complaining about it--they upload non-free artwork without providing as rationale, and it follows policy in tagging that artwork, obliging them in turn to follow policy. --Tony Sidaway 15:02, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also recommend unblocking this bot, it is keeping Wikipedia out of legal trouble. The complaints against it are not based in policy and it is only doing what it is approved to do. FU have suffered 2 years of neglect and we need to get them back in line. ^(H) 15:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded, the bot should not have been going so fast, but if the operator agrees to run it at a managable pace of 2-3 edits per minute, I think things would be fine. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 15:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2-3 per minute? That is a crawl, at least 10-15. ^(H) 15:40, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are enough issues here that I think a break before restarting the bot is still a good idea. The rate of edits, whether speedy deletion of these images should be suspended, and the exact demands of our fair use policies, all seem to currently be subject of debate. A day long pause will not harm the encyclopedia, and some time to discuss these issues could be useful. I'm not going to lift the block, but I am also not going to impose any limitations once it expires. - SimonP 15:46, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really? I thought policy was rather clear in this area. I guess Wikipedia will just hold onto its copyright violations for 24 hours longer. ^(H) 15:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Copied from User talk:Tony Sidaway) There seem to be two very different discussions happening on this issue. At Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) there is a near consensus that these edits should stop, while at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard there is a near consensus to just the opposite. There does seem to be a debate about whether current policy demands a non generic fair use rational for certain images. To me this seems to be a legitimate argument, the fair use rational at Image:BizarreRideIIthePharcyde.jpg has been presented as an exemplary rational for fair use of an album cover, but it still seems to be to be totally generic.

I'm thus going to leave this bot blocked. There is a problem with fair use, but it is not a crisis. 24 hours of discussion and debate on this issue will do no harm to the encyclopedia, and could help clarify some of these issues. - SimonP 15:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the debate has to take place on the fair use guidelines page. Permitting ad hoc consensus to overrule established policy isn't good. On the blocking issue, well I think a brief block was enough to clarify things. He can be unblocked now that we've established that he's been executing an important part of Wikipedia policy. Blocking him for longer would, I think, tend to pre-empt policy. --Tony Sidaway 15:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed that discussion at the village pump seems to not be based on either policy or the law of the land our servers sit in. They should be discussing this at WT:FU, where we have a long standing existing policy. Brief discussion at the village pump do not override policy. ^(H) 15:57, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The village pump has confusion between WP:FUC (policy) and WP:FURG (guideline). The argument there is that they conflict. Policy trumps guidelines last time I checked. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 15:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SimonP, you must remember what Wikipedia is all about — a free content, freely redistributable encyclopedia. The non-free images make it less of one. BetacommandBot has done the best work in making Wikipedia more free in recent memory. The people complaining about it are newbies who don't understand what Wikipedia is all about; they just want their images that are non-compliant with the fair use policy to not be deleted rather than doing the necessary work to make them compliant. I don't think their complaining is justifiable reason to block the bot. Yes, the bot is going to ruffle feathers, but such is life. The work is necessary, and if it pisses fair use zealots off so much they leave, that's an added bonus. --Cyde Weys 00:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that you do not wish to reverse this block. However, given the general consensus against this block, how do you feel about another admin reversing this block? ^(H) 01:02, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The block is about to expire, but I agree it should have not been done. Fair use rationales (detailed, individualized ones) are a requirement, not a nicety. Wikipedia is, first and foremost, intended to be free-content. If someone wishes to claim they have a valid exception to that requirement, they are and should be required to provide a very good reason why they think so, not just a boilerplate. Exceptions are made on an article-by-article basis, not an "all X are fine" basis. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 10:01, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lisgar

You went to lisgar collegiate in ottawa? --Adam Wang 21:48, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i'm in the class of 09. --Adam Wang 02:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gary, from mesh conference

Hey Simon, it's me, Gary King from the mesh conference (I told you that I recognized you from the TIME magazine article?) Anyways, could you modify the Cleanup template so that the text that says "a more specific message. points to a section that actually exists?

Also, do you have an IM address that I could contact you at? ;)

--Gary King 02:33, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Published

I was told to get my stuff published. It has been! I think you failed to read the Talk:Republic page where I point out that I have been published in Sparta, Journal of Spartan and Greek History 5 May 2007. A peer review journal. The title is: The Spartan Republic. Please read up! I can be accomodating. How about a return to the Classical definition of republic? Or will you just be constantly reverting?WHEELER 04:42, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dominant estate

Thanks for editing the capital letters for style. I usually post the stubs, and return later to edit them for style and typos. I appreciate your handiwork. Bearian 16:38, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1RR per week

why did you vote for putting me on 1RR per week? I never even violated 3RR. Even if one admin claimed so in the block log - my first block I received. And the first in a long row of false blocks. Pls tell what I did you think to cure with 1RR per week. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 22:48, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Harvard National Model United Nations

A "{{prod}}" template has been added to the article Harvard National Model United Nations, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Mystache 23:26, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from user page

Hey simon.. i've noticed recently that the OLHP pages (order of the left handed path) have been deleted. aka 'ordo sinstra vivendi' i ask that u check into it.. or have someone you trust check it out :P - honorablepassion (—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.111.56.48 (talk • contribs).)

List of films by gory death scene AfD

Hi. I'm doing a heroic last stand at the moment and I've been underwhelmed by the participation of people who have worked on the article for a long time. Is there any particular reason why you haven't been around? --Kizor 14:58, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget...

Please don't forget to add [[21]] and [[22]] to the "Proposed decision" area for arbitrators to vote on. This area [[23]]. Martinphi and Davkal are the main focus of this arbitration and the person who initiated it. I would hate to see their frequent violations of policy be overlooked because it was never nominated to be voted for by the arbitrators. Also please add [[24]] and [[25]]. to the "Proposed decisions" area. Thanks.Wikidudeman ^(talk) 00:38, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

El-Chantiry on AfD

Hi, your article on Eli El-Chantiry is on AfD. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eli El-Chantiry -- Earl Andrew - talk 19:58, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

City fathers at BIO

Hi.

I don't dispute the notability of city leaders. i would like to generally see broader inclusion. However, I thnk that the criteria at WP:N is sufficient in seeking to include those who have been recognized as notable ny credible sources. Unfortunately AfD has become WP:ILIKEIT. --Kevin Murray 21:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:First Toronto Post Office.JPG

Hi can you please only upload photos on [Wikimedia Commons http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page] and not on Wikipedia, thanks for your contributions WayneRay 13:01, 22 June 2007 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

Res publica

A "{{prod}}" template has been added to the article Res publica, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. WHEELER 02:55, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discrimination template

Hi. FYI I've asked for a smaller version of the template that might work. Benjiboi 02:44, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edmonton election articles

I wanted to belatedly thank you for your supportive words at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Edmonton Election Pages and also tell you that the articles are now completed (you'd said that you were looking forward to the series being completed). If you have any suggestions, especially around formatting (I'm both very unaesthetic and not as familiar with the things that can be done with wiki-markup as I should be), I'm all ears; I'd be happy to do the legwork myself. Sarcasticidealist 08:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Economic history of Canada

I'm sorry, but what's wrong with putting a tag requesting footnotes on a page that doesn't have any footnotes? It's really too bad that it will "mar" the page, but it still needs footnotes so a reader can check the facts. Information on the page has been added slowly over time since you created it in 2004, but not everyone has added a reference at the bottom when they added information, therefore, some of it is uncited. Furthermore, I'd rather not read all the books listed at the bottom in their entirety to check the other information included. - TheMightyQuill 17:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto's FA Nomination

Hi SimonP,

Thank you for offering your comment to the article Toronto in its FA nomination. I have partially fixed your suggestion about downsizing the article. Though my first stage of downsizing is not working very well (the article only shrinked by 5 kb or so, or even less), but I will keep on working on it. View my reply here. Thank you.

Smcafirst 21:54, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Arbitration

Hello, I've decided it's time to ask the Arbitration Committee to help out with the problems around articles such as List of republics, which you've been involved in editing or discussing. There's an opportunity for you to add your comment on whether the case should be heard by the ArbCom, and they'll decide if they want to take it up. --Nema Fakei 23:58, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

College Building (Saskatchewan)

Thank you for adding College Building (Saskatchewan) to the Gothic Revival architecture in Canada list. The University of Saskatchewan is celebrating its centennial Anniversary in 2007 and there is a drive to push the University of Saskatchewan article to feature status as part of the celebration. Thanks for your help as the addition makes it easier to link to page. Would you consider adding your vote to help push the article to feature status? See: Wikipedia:Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive#University of Saskatchewan Thank you again for your assistance. Dbiel ^(Talk) 14:31, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

reverse on national policy

Talk:National Policy Jackzhp 14:08, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List_of_songs_about_masturbation is in it's 5th AfD

List_of_songs_about_masturbation is up for it's fifth AfD. You participated in an earlier one. If you wish to participate again, please go to Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_songs_about_masturbation_(5th_nomination) -- Lentower 03:41, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Advice please

I’m one of the parties involved in the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Great Irish Famine. With SirF on wiki break and despite continuing to report ongoing [26] harassment nothing is being done. This harassment has escalated with the absence of SirF, [27]., in my opinion. It is now set to escalate with no sign of any intervention. Your advice assistance or opinion would be grateful.--Domer48 13:26, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Munter map

Nice map, Simon but I have found one error (so far).

Poll 7-6 voted 40%+ for Alex, you have it as less than 10%. -- Earl Andrew - talk 17:24, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Poll 11-10 also voted 40%+ -- Earl Andrew - talk 20:37, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto for 12-12. (exactly 40%) -- Earl Andrew - talk 04:08, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

None of your maps show poll 13-17 which is the Governor's Walk Retirement Homes in New Edinburgh. -- Earl Andrew - talk 04:33, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

16-4 is also 40%+ -- Earl Andrew - talk 04:57, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

16-15 isn't labelled. -- Earl Andrew - talk 05:04, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/List of Republics

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/List of Republics. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/List of Republics/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/List of Republics/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, David Mestel^(Talk) 19:31, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

== SOME QUESTION MORE:== Did you analise the very first block Tobias Conradi received and how this was out of policy? And when he complained he got out of policy blocked again? And then he got blocked for moving a town article to the correct name, but the admin without any grasp of the topic thought this was vandalism and blocked Tobias, protected even his talk? Did you see this?

A finding to consider

Dear Simon, you wrote on my ArbCom that "Everything that should pass has". Yet I find it curious that an ArbCom so related to my person has no finding on that person. Do you think there is no need for a finding similar to this one proposed by Fred some time ago? Or its opposite along the lines of "Piotrus is guilty of violating BLP, V and RS, intimidation and threatening, mocking, baiting, stalking, disruptive editing, rudely presenting misleading evidence, wheel-warring, canvassing, forum and block shopping, blocking his opponents, black books composing and leading a cabal"? After months of being told by certain editors I am a menace and danger to this project, and after years of contributions (from 20 FAs through WP:RW to [28]), I'd like to think I (and others) at least deserve a clear ruling on whether I am am doing good or bad here.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 13:02, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Piotrus, exaggerations are not helpful, really. I'm not aware of an editor who seriously regards you as "a menace and danger" to the entire project, as you put it. If I recall correctly, the ArbCom set out to examine the behaviour of all involved parties. The title of the case is arbitrary and is not expected to accurately reflect its scope. I don't see why we should single out any particular editor in this far-flung case in order to commend or condemn his behaviour. This will have the effect of giving him a carte blanche for self-indulgence in editing techniques that by no means should be encouraged.

There is no need to adopt an overly legalistic view of the situation. We both know certain patterns of behaviour that, while being consistent with our policies, are not constructive either and are instrumental in escalating the conflicts by involving a number of new participants to divert the attention of one's opponents from productive mainspace editing. It is not reasonable to expect the ArbCom ruling on such exceptional cases as this one in that it will set an unwelcome precedent for future arbitrations. In the absence of a ruling to the contrary, the presumption of innocence will apply to every involved editor. --Ghirla^-трёп- 16:11, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ghirlandajo - preaching for corruption (We both know ... that, while being consistent with our policies ...)

Income splitting

Hey, regarding the article you started (income splitting), I thought that it wasn't referenced because I couldn't see what information came from where. When I see an article such as the one you started, I think that any external links are for more information. Please respond to the comment I made on the article talk page. Thanks, -- I ate jelly -- 14:55, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your W article

I have been working to clean up your article and add some perspective to it. If you do not want to deal with the reactions of less mature W's who still cannot get over Jimbo's edits to his own article a few years ago, please feel free to supply corrections/balance issues on the article's talk page or on my user talk page.--SallyForth123 04:25, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Allegations_of_apartheid

I understand that arbcom deals with member conduct most of the time, but there are several examples of WP:Point violations being pointed out in this request by multiple parties. I ask that you please reconsider your decision to deny reviewing this request for arbitration. Thank you. 128.122.253.229 19:17, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Olive (disambigaution)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Olive (disambigaution), by JohnI (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Olive (disambigaution) fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason:

Housekeeping. Non-controversial maintenance task performing a non-controversial page move like reversing a redirect.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Olive (disambigaution), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 05:37, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Sears Canada Building.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Sears Canada Building.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 22:35, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About some Users

Some Users have been Harassing my Pages and deleting content on it and removing tags i put on it

Here are the Names

Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry
DZComposer
81.106.79.56
Blinkstale
Ds.mt

[29] [30] [31] [32] [33]

What's so objectionable about noting that controlled demolitions are often termed "pull" ?

Re: Demolition It's one sentence for clarity in an article that once did succinctly convey this knowledge but now, thanks to your reversion, obscures it. I'm curious to know your reasoning?

Mostly that it isn't a very common term. It doesn't appear in any of the major dictionaries I checked, and is pretty much only referenced in 9/11 conspiracy literature. - SimonP 13:43, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

= Polling graph

What software do you use to create the election polling graph? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Canadian_pre-40th_election_polling.PNG jlam 20:18, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of proposal: Guideline/policy governing lists

Dear editor:

Given your extensive experience here on Wikipedia, I would greatly appreciate your input on the following topic:

Wikipedia: Village pump (policy)#Proposal to make a policy or guideline for lists

Thank you in advance for any thoughts you may have on the topic.

Regards,

Sidatio 15:30, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ottawa Citizen article

Your opinion piece in Thursday's Citizen ("Wikipedia's strength is openness") is duly noted at WP:PRESS. Thanks for this - good press for WP. Dl2000 03:24, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/List of Republics

This arbitration case has now closed and the decision may be found at the link above. WHEELER is banned for one year. For the arbitration committee, David Mestel^(Talk) 21:02, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Attachment Therapy arbitration

Hi Simon. Could you please give your input on Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Attachment Therapy/Proposed decision#Sockpuppetry 2 and #Sockpuppetry 3? Thanks. Picaroon (t) 21:49, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Triangle trade.png

Thank you for uploading images/media such as Image:Triangle trade.png to Wikipedia! There is however another Wikimedia foundation project called Wikimedia Commons, a central media repository for all free media. In the future, please consider creating an account and uploading media there instead. That way, all the other language Wikipedias can use them too, as well as our many sister projects. This will also allow our visitors to search for, view and use our media in one central location. If you wish to move previous uploads to Commons, see Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons (you may view images you have previously uploaded by going to your user contributions on the left and choosing the 'image' namespace from the drop down box). Please note that non-free content, such as images claimed as fair use, cannot be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons. Help us spread the word about Commons by informing other users, and please continue uploading!

Richard001 02:14, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Huanwei motion

You might want to know that per this edit by Jdforrester, your abstain vote was moved to oppose on the basis of your vote. You may wish to clarify your vote, since abstain will affect majority. - Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 00:13, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification

Are you sure that you meant to that there was nothing problematic with this deletion log? You don't think there's a case, fine - I disagree but I accept that. But it concerns me for an Arb to say that there is nothing wrong with undeleting a page three times (a clear wheel war) just because the page ended up being kept. Surely this is one area where the ends do not justify the means... WjBscribe 00:31, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Mark Warner (Canadian politician)

An article that you have been involved in commenting on in a speedy deletion process, Mark Warner (Canadian politician), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Warner (Canadian politician). Thank you. --Canam1 11:18, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative solution to the Dalmatia issue

My first impulse upon seeing the proposed decision by the Arbitration Committee, was to protest by saying it is unfair to simplify matters thusly and equate User:Giovanni Giove with myself (because of my being on the "defensive" in the edit-warring, because of my numerous attempts at dicussion). I realised, though, that that kind of stuff is probably often heard in such situations, and that my protests will be disregarded (due to my obvious personal interest). This is why I tried a different approach.
User:Giovanni Giove and I have reached an agreement that should do the trick to first stop, and then finally "dismantle" the conflict (see Giovanni Giove's talkpage). Such attempts at discussion have been made before and have proven effective in resolving several issues with Users PIO and Brunodam (on the Albania Veneta, Istrian exodus and Foibe massacres articles, for example). Even though our previous record may lead someone to question the credibility of this effort, one must remeber that thanks to the Arbitration, we now face a very real possibility of severe restrictions lasting an entire year. This finally changed the overall situation in a way that finally lead to a lasting agreement. The question, of course, is would you support such a solution to the problem at hand? I, for one, truly hope so, since the proposed restriction would effectively put an end to my work on Wiki, something I'll do my best to prevent. DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 18:11, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dominion on Canada page (again)

I'd like this settled one way or another. Click here to comment. Thanks. --Soulscanner 09:36, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration

Hi Simon. I see that you haven't made any arbitration-related edits in a while. Shall we move you to inactive on all cases you have not voted on? Picaroon (t) 20:58, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:RogueVfD

Hi, I just noticed that a template you created, Template:RogueVfD, is unused and appears to be abandoned. I've marked it as deprecated, meaning it'll be deleted in two weeks' time if nobody objects. If there's a reason to keep it please leave a note at Wikipedia talk:Deprecated and orphaned templates and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the template. Thanks. Bryan Derksen 03:26, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Editor's Barnstar

		The Editor's Barnstar
		I noticed that your edits were impressive and so I've decided to award you this Editor's Barnstar! Wikidudeman ^(talk) 19:47, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About your Armenia-Azerbaijan2 RfA remedy two decision

Thatcher131 has created a template that seems to have substantially changed the wording and the extent of the remedy you voted for at [[34]]. I am currently discussing this at [[35]] and I would welcome you input. I have posted this same message on the talk pages of the other 5 arbritrators who voted for remedy 2. Meowy 16:41, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:War

Hello, I noticed you participated on the talk page previously, I created a new template and I am attempting to build a consensus for it's use, would you mind taking a look at the talk page Chessy999 17:23, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ARBCOM Dalmatia decision breach

Hi Simon, I hope you won't mind if I turn your attention to the final decision of the Dalmatia ARBCOM, with respect to recent events.
Now, snitching isn't my game, but I think that in this case I really ought to make an exception. With the final decision not one week old, User:Giovanni Giove has already made, not one or two, but a little under two dozen reverts of varying size in the Marco Polo (history page: [36]) and Dalmatian Italians articles (history page [37]).
In the Dalmatian Italians article (besides reverting more than once) he also made no attempt whatsoever to discuss his edits, and the discussion page does not have a single explanation of these numerous reverts and provocative edits ([38]).
In the Marco Polo article he quite flagrantly ignored the instructions of the ARBCOM and reverted on several occasions this week (on the same article).

I edited as well on a few occasions myself, but (as per instructions) you will find only one revert per week per article, and a thorough and honest discussion each time ([39], [40], [41]).

I will post this to your fellow arbitrators as well, hope none of you mind... DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 08:24, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mentors on Great Irish Famine?

Hello Simon--I see you that you were one of the arbitrators on this article's case. Do you know whether the prescribed mentors have been assigned? Some other editors and I need a person who's familiar with the case to review recent activity on the article. Dppowell 18:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re-election?

Do you intend to run for re-election to the arbitration committee (as your term expires on December 31)? Picaroon (t) 23:47, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great work

I know you've received a lot of congratulations, but I believe no one can ever have too much praise. I came across your userpage after looking at the December 07 Arbitration Committee nominations, and recognized your last name. Last week, I did a presentation at the Royal Military College of Canada that included an article by your father on Raymond Brutinel and 1 CMMGB. I found it interesting how small this world really is, and just thought I'd say great job for all your contributions and hard work to expand Wikipedia. Knowledge should be free and universal and thanks to people such as yourself, it's happening! Andrew⁶⁴⁷ 16:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Map of Ottawa

Your map of Ottawa/Hull is great, I stumbled across it, is it almost ready? Epson291 11:12, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BOBCATSSS

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article BOBCATSSS, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of BOBCATSSS. Mdbrownmsw 21:07, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kherli

You were a member of the arb committee for the case Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kehrli. Recent anon edits appear to be likely edits by the user formerly known as Kherli (Likely a sock thereof). The general ban (finding #1) has expired. Some of these edits if they are in fact Kherli are violating finding #2 "Kehrli is prohibited for two years from changing the notation m/z, wherever found, to any other notation." E.g. [42], [43]. In addition these edits are generally disruptive (as we determined with very challenging arb com case) and should therefore be prevented based solely on the broad basis of preventing disruption. I also believe that it was not the intention of the arb com to allow unmitigated disruption after the ban had passed but to give Kherli the opportunity to cool down and choose to become a productive editor. A new ban should be put in place if Kherli has not decided to change his/her ways as we have established an intention to disrupt wikipedia, however subtle the disruption may be. Subtle disruptions are in fact the hardest to catch and pose the greatest threat to the project through propagation of false or misleading but seemingly reasonable information. I request that you warn the anon user about disruptive behavior, investigate their identity and if disruption continues after a warning of the user is found to be Kherli then enforce an immediate ban either based on violating arb com findings or based on disruptive behavior after being warned.--Nick Y. 21:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Articles requested for more than two years

Wikipedia:Articles requested for more than two years, a page you created, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles requested for more than two years and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Articles requested for more than two years during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Wizardman 20:01, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No content in Category:Charmed episodes

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Charmed episodes, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Charmed episodes has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Charmed episodes, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 01:30, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Duotang

I notice that you have edited Duotang. I'd be grateful if you could keep an eye on it because there is an anon IP address that keeps adding nonsensical unreferenced stories into it. Thanks. Hu (talk) 23:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

5 Blackburn

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article 5 Blackburn, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 16:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Dark Barnstar of Reversion
		For dealing with vandalism on your userpage and always standing up to vandals I User Swirlex award you this Dark Barnstar of Reversion, you really deserve it.

Inspired

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Inspired, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Inspired. Mdsummermsw (talk) 20:15, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Prince of Kiev

I see you have a history of working on the article Grand Prince of Kiev. I am looking at it from the project Wikipedia:Unreferenced articles where it is one of the longest {{unreferenced}} tagged articles that does not meet at least the barest minimum of verifiability. It has been tagged and completely without references since June 2006. It would be extremely helpful if you had some references you could add to the article to help support its verifiability and notability. Thanks for any help you can give. BirgitteSB 19:53, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photoret

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Photoret, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Photoret. Bearian (talk) 22:36, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Old Ottawa Flag.png

Thank you for uploading Image:Old Ottawa Flag.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 15:41, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:OCDSBlogo.png

Thank you for uploading Image:OCDSBlogo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:40, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Foreign film

I have nominated Foreign film, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Foreign film. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. DearPrudence (talk) 23:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question on old Edit of Apoc. of Adam

Do you have a source for the comment that the thirteen explanations the birth of the Illuminator are false but only the "generation without a king" proclaims the truth? It's certainly different from what I've gathered in classes and I would love a source with that idea to show my professor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kmg42 (talk • contribs) 05:20, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:Canadian History box

A tag has been placed on Template:Canadian History box requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:09, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:Canadian elections/parties

A tag has been placed on Template:Canadian elections/parties requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:11, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect

You created Template:History of Italy. I think, like other templates, you should redirect it to Template:History of Italy. And you don't have to write on my talk page about this Mamenchisaurus (talk) 04:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison articles and WP:SYN

SimonP, you have provided perspective before on comparison articles at Talk:Canadian and American health care systems compared‎. Might I request that you take a look at a current discussion going on there? Please see here, especially this statement at the bottom of the discussion, "Unless a fact advances a position that is cited from a source that compares US and Canadian health care, it is a POV and WP:SYN". Thanks, --Sfmammamia (talk) 16:51, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for oversight on Mosto Mostapha Bousmina

The current version of Mosto Mostapha Bousmina is inoffensive, but some previous revisions of the page should probably be oversight-deleted as attack pages. I am not connected with the subject, but I noticed the attacks in the old revisions when I was trying to expand the article after it was nominated for AfD. Please look at the following pages and consider what if anything should be done.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mosto_Mostapha_Bousmina&direction=next&oldid=97835211

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mosto_Mostapha_Bousmina&direction=next&oldid=111832397

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mosto_Mostapha_Bousmina&direction=next&oldid=111833055

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mosto_Mostapha_Bousmina&direction=next&oldid=111833472

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mosto_Mostapha_Bousmina&direction=next&oldid=111833613

--Eastmain (talk) 21:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photos

Hello SimonP,

We are translating in french from english version of the article about Genealogy of Jesus. And I would like to transfer your photos on common:

Do you remember to this informations (Author ?, Description ?, Date ?) about this photos ? I need them to transfert this photo. Thanks. --Pixeltoo (talk) 22:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Image:Trudeau, Turner, Chretien, and Pearson.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Trudeau, Turner, Chretien, and Pearson.jpg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

{{{2}}}

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on [[Talk:Image:Trudeau, Turner, Chretien, and Pearson.jpg|the article's talk page]] explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. --Padraic 20:09, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfD nomination of India, (Asia)

Hi, if you have time, I'd like that you clarify the reason you created this redirect. Thanks in advance, Cenarium (talk) 20:52, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dec smith

Just so you know, I did not mean to tag that as advertising. I clicked the wrong option in Twinkle's CSD thingy. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 16:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I jumped to quickly to the delete button, I should have changed the tag before I canned it. - SimonP (talk) 16:45, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Braidwood Inquiry

Can you take a look at the article on the Braidwood Inquiry into the death of Robert Dziekanski? It's very substandard and I'd like to work on improving it with a few editors. Thanks. Reggie Perrin (talk) 16:48, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete foreign language articles

Please do not delete foreign language articles, as you've done with Ξύλινα σπίτια. Foreign language articles have to be listed on WP:PNT and, if they won't be translated in 2 weeks, they have to be deleted. So, please restore the article to original title (Ξύλινα σπίτια) or to User:Kubek15/Ξύλινα σπίτια. Kubek15^{(Sign!) (Contribs) (UBX)} 17:15, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of India, (Asia)

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. SF007 (talk) 12:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

German-American Citizens League deletion

As the webmaster for this organization responsible for it's infomation throught the internet, I was curious why this article was deleted for copywrite.

Thank You

Dennis

americanchronicler@yahoo.com

Webmeister dennis (talk) 13:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why was I deleted?

I had my assistant contribute to Wiki for me. I am a well known speaker in my area and expertise in sales and business coaching. You have football coaches for high schools on Wiki. More people search for me online in my area(s) than they do for old football coaches. Please re-review Nicholas Alan Fletcher.

I've reviewed it, and I'm afraid I stand by my original decision. The article contained no links to credible third party sources, such as books or newspaper articles, about you. A quick Google search also turns up virtually no web sites that mention you. - SimonP (talk) 22:23, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting Jack Blood

You said that you get annoyed that when Wiki deletes your articles. Do you think that when you delete other people's articles that people won't feel the same way? I thought Wiki was supposed to be user based encyclopedia, yet you delete articles and that is censorship. Jack Blood is a well known radio host that is broadcast in sixty countries and has a large following on the internet. Every article that mentions Jack Blood on Wiki is deleted or threatened with deletion.I am one of Jack Blood's volunteer webmasters and he wants to know why Wikipedia hates him so much. On behalf of Jack Blood and his loyal listeners, I challenge you to come on his show Deadline Live. You can contact Jack Blood at jackblood@hotmail.com. (Rebel lonedog (talk) 22:39, 26 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]

To ensure that our articles are accurate and neutral, Wikipedia requires that all information in our pages can be verified by reference to reliable third party sources. When others looked at the Jack Blood article, they found that he wasn't notable enough to have such references. Thus, after a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Blood the page was deleted. The only way to reverse such decisions is to go to Wikipedia:Deletion review, and there demonstrate that the source exist to write a neutral and verifiable article. - SimonP (talk) 23:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for q without u (band)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of q without u (band). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. RMHED (talk) 21:35, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of The DOORKICK

Hi Simon. My name is Dionna Mustybrook. I posted The DOORKICK page last night. I was attempting to copy the POST-IT article currently on WIKIPEDIA. The POST-IT article gives a thorough explanation of the POST-IT (with similar description to my DOORKICK article) and I was trying to do the same for The DOORKICK. Any advice on how I can write an acceptable but similar type article? If you take a look at the POST-IT article, you will see I tried to follow the same format. Was the POST-IT article not the appropriate type of article to try and follow for The DOORKICK? :) I really need your help. From what I can tell you really know your stuff when it comes to Wikipedia content. I'm sorry to bother you. And I just want you to know that I feel really sorry about my attempt to follow the POST-IT article if that was not the appropriate route I should have taken. Please let me know what would be the best. Thank you... DRM (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 23:50, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

krakow-tourism.com deletion

Hi SimonP!

Web content; doesn't indicate importance/significance

Why? This accommodation booking system is the only The City of Krakow Official one. So isn't it important/significant enough? If tourists will use it, they can be sure of not losing their money, legality, etc. They can find on that website some usefull tourist information.

Besides importance/significance is similar in case of other pages in Travel websites category.

Interaktywny (talk) 07:29, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Back On The Track Pt. 2

A bit of leeway in that speedy there; careful, it could come back to bite you. ;-) - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 18:28, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hans Kammerlander

I see you removed the page I just created. I fact I do not know this person but he is mentionned on others wiki (fr, it, de at least). So I created it in view to get iw pages updated by robots. Wasnt it the good way of working ? (sorry, but I'm quite more active on french wikipedia, please inform if rules are differents here). Pi ku (talk) 18:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment. Anyway, should be french or german wikipedia pages as references ? fr:Hans Kammerlander is quite new, but de:Hans Kammerlander and nl:Hans Kammerlander seem more complete (althrought I do not understand german). So my opinion is that en: may have a stub, hoping someone will update it. Pi ku (talk) 19:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Energy (Spirituality) (Please do not split..}

The page blanking you corrected is just the latest of a flurry of recent unannounced and radical changes to this page. I am a new editor and have been busy writing bios of 20thC morphogenetic biologists. Some of the data overlaps with pages like the above, parapsychology and other "new age" subjects. Some of those pages seemed abandoned, messy and lacking in rigour. I put notices and, after a while, restructured one or two, including the above, since there was no editor answering. But as soon as I did so I found changes like the above were made. The editors evinced a strong hostility to aspects of the subject-matter, will not discuss changes, co-operate with one another across pages, do not make any appreciable constructive contributions to the pages but simply destroy whatsoever is done.

While I recognise that rational scepticism is an important pov when dealing with these matters, in my opinion this pov is riding all over any attempt at an accurate social-historical presentation of material that is "on the list", does not appear to have any grounding in objective scholarship, and is carried out in an inappropriately unpleasant way, I am wondering what steps to take that users may be best able to inform themselves about these matters, since I am apparently encountering a co-ordinated campaign, not only at a text level but by means of, as above, repeated renaming of pages, destruction of links and so forth. Redheylin (talk) 22:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

abominable sugar beasts

You deleted the article using A7 as jurisdiction, When, if you read the article, it clearly states that they are an up-coming band, having played numerous festivals and scoring a top 100 album in the UK charts. Having a glance at some of the other bands with articles on wikipedia who achieved little success in their heyday that deletion was somewhat ridiculous Robertothealmighty (talk) 16:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Atricle Deleted - William Bongiorno

Yesterday I created the article William Bongiorno, profiling a man who has been very significant and important
to the people he's worked with. This morning I see that you've deleted the page with the note
"A7 (bio): Real person; doesn't indicate importance/significance".

I made sure to include links to articles which he has written. I was going to also list feature articles for others
in which he was the main contact and reason that the person was featured in the publication
but I thought that would be considered "self serving".

While you may have never heard of him, he is well known in his area of expertise and deserves recgonition.
Please reconsider the deletion, or tell me what I need to change or add in order to
repost it and not have it deleted again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vera714 (talk • contribs) 15:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marish Puri

Why did you delete this? "Very famous actor" is a clear assertion of notability. ~~ N (t/c) 16:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can Lollipop be semi-protected or something?

The article history for the past few months has been one long stream of vandalism and reversion. Amongst the last 75 edits, all that has changed is the word variety to number. Now I know a lot of the people vandalizing it are registered users just having fun, but I think a semi-protection would at least help a little. Or would they just go vandalize somewhere else? Soap ^Talk/_{Contributions} 21:22, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dany Brisebois

Hi SimonP,

Would just like to let you know. This article IS an Hoax. I had a school project to do on Wikipedia, and I created that article in the middle of the class, just to demonstrate how someone could create a hoax article that seems valid, just like the Seigenthaler incident. Thanks for your help. If you are still administrator, you may delete the article! I will also notify it for speedy. Thanks! --Deenoe 02:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Statistic Removal from Brain Drain

I notice that you removed some data about Canadian immigrant unemployment (which was given as 34%). I wouldn't gripe, but that fact had a reference: Labour Participation by immigration class, Statistics Canada, URL accessed 2 July 2006.

I couldn't find the table manually by navigating the website. Also, I see the statistics are relatively (7 years) old. So I concede you may well be right, but I feel a referenced fact should be properly dismissed. Is there a source showing that the table given is unreliable? Warrickball (talk) 10:10, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aha. All clear now. I had no idea in what context that table was intended, but I see why the given figure was wrong. Warrickball (talk) 13:22, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles requested for more than a year

Hi Simon. With the year almost up, we're making an effort to reduce the number of listings at Wikipedia:Articles requested for more than a year. You've been a big help in the past with that project page and I am hoping that you can knock out a few to contribute to the effort. Thanks. Bebestbe (talk) 20:25, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added Discussion at The Brunswick House article

I added discussion at Talk:The Brunswick House. I added this note here, in case you're not watching it.--SportWagon (talk) 04:27, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bot request for AR1

Hi Simon. Thanks for the manual updates to WP:AR1. There is a pending bot request here for the bot to do the updates to WP:AR1. Please comment at that bot request post (or with User talk:Betacommand) if there is a need. Thanks. Bebestbe (talk) 22:42, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I revised the Wikipedia:Articles requested for more than a year page. Please read over and change as needed. Thanks. Bebestbe (talk) 23:13, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom decision

In February 2006, I began a wikibreak that lasted 15 months. When I returned, I found this decision had been made in my absence, by you and others. While I have worked around this ban since then, I have recently been given two blocks by administrators who believe your reference to the "Northern Ireland conflict" (which I took to refer to the Troubles) also includes events as far back as the 1920s during the Irish War for Independence, to my mind a very liberal interpretation of the phrase you used. Can you clarify which conflict you were referring to?

Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 18:30, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Larry O'Brien

Hi, I remember you once told me that Larry O'Brien was Protestant, but he just got married in a Catholic Church. Of course, this doesn't prove anything, as his bride is more than likely Catholic. I was wondering if you could put your two cents in. -- Earl Andrew - talk 04:39, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Military history of Canada

Military history of Canada has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

Clarification needed on past Arbcom vote

As a member of the Arbitration Committee that in August and September of 2007 heard the the this case, you assented to the following finding of fact:

6) Seven editors (Gzuckier (talk · contribs), Humus sapiens (talk · contribs), IronDuke (talk · contribs), Jayjg (talk · contribs), JoshuaZ (talk · contribs), Leifern (talk · contribs), and Tickle me (talk · contribs)) voted to delete the allegations of Israeli apartheid article, largely on principle, after having earlier voted to keep the allegations of Brazilian apartheid article. Given the circumstances, the only reasonable explanation for this voting pattern is that the editors in question were attempting to prove a point regarding the allegations of Israeli apartheid article.

I took great exception to this assertion at the time, but decided not to vigorously defend myself, as it seemed clear to me that the finding would not get the needed majority to be established by the Arbcom; and that my scarce time was better spent on other issues, on the arbcom case and elsewhere on Wikipedia.

However, your vote for this finding has now been used as an argument to discount my vote on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allegations of apartheid (fifth nomination).:

This case eventually collapsed due to unresolvable divisions among the arbitrators, but the fact that four committee members were willing to endorse the aforementioned statement suggests that it wasn't a completely arbitrary charge. It's probably also worth noting that nine arbitrators agreed that "Allegations of Israeli apartheid" was the locus of the dispute. I would tend to think that these matters bear some relevance to the present discussion. CJCurrie (talk) 23:27, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Other editors have similarly raised this proposed finding of fact as a basis to question mine and others' vote on the AFD in question.

I am obviously not asking you to get involved in the AFD, but would like you to clear up the following:

If your vote in this Arbcom case can properly be construed as a legitimate argument for discounting my vote on any article that is related to Israel or apartheid, then I would like the chance to properly defend my votes on the articles in question and see if I can change your mind.

Conversely, if your vote fails to give the closing admin the grounds to discount my vote, then I would appreciate this clarification.

Just to be clear, this is the first time I have gotten involved in any "apartheid" related article since the Arbcom case. My apologies for having to drag you into this messy business again, and with thanks in advance for your consideration. --Leifern (talk) 00:11, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Zhang Xin entry - urgent!

Hi Simon,

I could use your help as I am new to Wikipedia. I noticed that you created a redirect page for Zhang Xin. I would like to have it so that when people search for 'Zhang Xin' they get results for both the artist and the businesswoman. Actually, I would argue that the businesswoman is actually more prominent. I created a page for her, but was not able to move her current page 'Zhang Xin (businesswoman)' to just simple 'Zhang Xin'. I guess it must seem I don't know what I am doing so I really appreciate your expert advice and help. Chinafundman Chinafundman (talk) 06:23, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:IECI Logo.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:IECI Logo.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I need a favor!

I'm going for FA on the Toronto Magnetic and Meteorological Observatory and someone pointed out that the tag you used on one of your images is now outdated. Would you mind clicking here and updating it? It has been suggested that it should use {{GFDL-user-en-with-disclaimers}} or {{GFDL-user-en-no-disclaimers}}. Thanks! Maury (talk) 12:25, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WinBot article

Hi Simon

I noticed today that the article 'WinBot' was deleted by yourself back in 2004. I am trying to find the list of votes for this as in AfD to see what happened to it, i used to contribute to this page a long time ago, and im curious as to the outcome. Is VfD different to AfD, is this process documented anywhere? :-)

Thanks! Braindigitalis (talk) 13:03, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Joseph Chamberlain (disambiguation)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Joseph Chamberlain (disambiguation), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Tassedethe (talk) 11:05, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: Image:Slocum.jpg

Image:Slocum.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:Joshua Slocum.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:Joshua Slocum.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 19:46, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Lesotho, Washington.JPG is now available as Commons:Image:Embassy of Lesotho, Washington.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 14:49, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Next to Union Station.JPG is now available as Commons:Image:Dominion Public Building Toronto.JPG. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 21:08, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Egypt, Ottawa.JPG is now available as Commons:File:Egypt, Ottawa.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 18:00, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Montfort.JPG is now available as Commons:File:Montfort hospital.JPG. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 12:34, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bay Adelaide Centre.JPG is now available as Commons:File:Bay Adelaide Centre stump 2005.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 21:45, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:St Andrew's, Toronto.JPG is now available as Commons:File:St Andrew's, Toronto.JPG. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 12:45, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of oldest buildings and structures in Toronto

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of oldest buildings and structures in Toronto, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of oldest buildings and structures in Toronto. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 00:52, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Burial of Jennifer Rosanne States

An article that you have been involved in editing, Burial of Jennifer Rosanne States, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jennifer Rosanne States. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Eastmain (talk) 04:18, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Training (meteorology)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Training (meteorology), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Bongomatic (talk) 03:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Methodist Rome

Do you have any references you can provide for this article? I went looking for some--JStor search, Google Books, etc--and came up empty. There are a couple mentions of the term, but referring to places other than Toronto--I actually wasn't able to find any that referred to Toronto. Can you help? Thanks. Chick Bowen 20:27, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keith Fountain

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Keith Fountain, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? raven1977 (talk) 04:54, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mercantilism

Mercantilism has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. -- SRE.K.A~~nnoyomous~~.L.24_[c] 05:29, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfD nomination of Prominent marxists

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Requests for expansion

Wikipedia:Requests for expansion, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Requests for expansion and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Requests for expansion during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 20:43, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for Image:Herod - Pasolini.JPG

Thank you for uploading Image:Herod - Pasolini.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. —An gr 22:26, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Beginnings Programme

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_New_Beginnings_Programme#cite_note-unicef-1

i noticed that you edited this article and it needs more work. its says "A number of boy soldiers were conscripted for the sexual gratification of Mujaheddin and Taliban commanders" and cites some website but the website doesnt conform that notion at all. Wikid00d88 (talk) 00:45, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ottawa map - B4.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ottawa map - B4.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:59, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Just read the Wikipedia article about you. Awesome, indeed! So, I just wish to peep in wich my acknowledgement and appreciation of your efforts Ravichandar _{My coffee shop} 14:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Bilateral

A tag has been placed on Bilateral requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article consists of a dictionary definition or other article that has been transwikied to another project and the author information recorded.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. ²wenty³ (talk) 19:13, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Oxshott Woods

An article that you have been involved in editing, Oxshott Woods, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oxshott Woods. Thank you.

Happy SimonP/Archive 7's Day!

User:SimonP/Archive 7 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as SimonP/Archive 7's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear SimonP/Archive 7!

Peace,
Rlevse
~

A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:08, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Functionaries-en

Hi Simon,

Following the announcement by ArbCom at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#New mailing list structure, a new mailing list, functionaries-en, has been created to include former arbitrators in good standing. Please subscribe at [44] if you would like to be included. Thanks. Dmcdevit·t 17:44, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reg Hartt

I noticed that you undeleted this article, without any discussion with me in June.

I deleted the original article, in response to a legitimate OTRS complaint, under the WP:BLP policy (and clearly recorded this in the log). If you'd wanted to recreate a new BLP compliant article, that would have been one thing, but I'm rather surprised that you simply restored the entire history without any discussion, or even recording a reason in the log.

The current state of the article does not seem to me to be problematic (although it remains an orphan), and as I'm no longer on OTRS I can't access the original complaint (I will ask another member of the OTRS team to review that). However, please don't restore an article deleted by another admin without discussion, and particularly not one deleted citing WP:BLP. I know deletions can be bad (and maybe this one was) but a little discussion usually sorts things. --Scott Mac (Doc) 09:56, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I should have spoken to you. I didn't know it was anything to do with an OTRS complaint. I saw the article had vanished, and when I looked at it it mostly seemed to be a problem with an unencyclopedic tone and poor sources, both of which I knew I could fix pretty easily. - SimonP (talk) 16:12, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Canada Life Building

I disagree that this building is Beaux Art, it is clearly more Art Deco with little Beaux art architecture, considering the builders of the building also made Art deco

I'd even say Princess_Margaret_Hospital,_Toronto is Art Deco (the older parts of the building) based on hits cubic look and was architected by the same person.

Where did you get your information stating the Canada Life building is Beaux Art?

http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=2916 either says this because of what Wikipedia says or somewhere else you got this :-)

It just not look Beaux Art enough to classify the whole building as such.

--72.136.202.63 (talk) 10:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Gregory Wm. Gunn

Gregory Wm. Gunn, an article that you contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. The nominator does not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gregory Wm. Gunn. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns.

Origins of Libertas

Simon hi!

Regarding your merge flag on Origins of Libertas. The Libertas (political movement) page is itself scheduled to be merged into Libertas (European movement) and all the contents of Libertas (political movement) are being moved off that page preparatory to the merge. Which is why Origins of Libertas was created in the first place. See Talk:Libertas (political movement) for confirmation. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 02:50, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply here. The problem will be not "will the article grow", but "how do we stop it growing too much" <grin>. Libertas is spawning parties left, right and center and the wikiarticles are growing to match: the larger project has to cover the origins (2003-2006), lobby group (2006-2008), pan-European political party (2008-date), 27 articles for the political party/coalitions built in each member state (2009), and numerous other articles. In terms of pan-European politics it's not that exceptional in concept but certainly exceptional in timescale: Ganley is trying to do in months what normally takes years, and nobody was expecting a new pan-European party this close to the elections. So we're writing articles at full speed just to keep up. Thank you for your forbearance during this process. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 03:11, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Baile de Máscaras

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Baile de Máscaras, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Unreferenced. Serves more as a directory than an encyclopedia article without references.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. ORBuster (talk) 19:03, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Temple:Slovak presidential election, 2009

thank you for removing that "article". can you tell me how to label articles for removing? we have an template in slovak wiki but i don't know anything like that here. ..Dubhe.sk (talk) 20:52, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why My Article Was Deleted?

Why The Article Oxi Tech Is Deleted? Please Email Me @ vivekpatil32@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.74.153 (talk) 08:56, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

deletion of moonview sanctuary page

Hi Simon,

I saw that you deleted the Moonview Sanctuary page I created due to blantant advertising. I'd really like to resubmit a page, I'm hoping you can give me a few pointers so the page isn't considered advertising.

Please find below the revised content, would you mind reviewing? I'd love to hear your feedback, thanks in advance!

Moonview Sanctuary is a holistic treatment and optimal performance center which specializes in combining Eastern and Western approaches. It is located in Los Angeles, CA. Gerald Levin, former CEO and Chairman of Time Warner, is the Presiding Director.

Moonview Model In May 2008, the center released a case study of a patient treated using the Moonview Model, a trademarked method utilizing a novel team approach and a combination of mind, body and spirit modalities. The case study examined intensive outpatient treatment of a 42-year old man suffering from multiple mental and physical complaints who was abusing alcohol, presumably to self-medicate emotional distress. The idiographic (individual-centered) study protocol employed the Moonview Model to reduce the client’s substance abuse and emotional distress while improving his self-reported social functioning and quality of life.

The initial assessment and subsequent treatment incorporated the perspectives of multiple therapeutic approaches, including cognitive behavioral therapy, neurofeedback, mind/body approaches, sobriety education, neuro-emotional technique (NET), meditation and traditional Chinese medicine. The report defines the rationale of the various modalities used in the protocol and how the Moonview Model was applied to address the client’s clinical issues. The case demonstrates how the novel treatment protocol strategically combines conventional and holistic treatment techniques to produce positive results.

In the Moonview Model, 10 therapists are selected from a roster of more than 70 treatment professionals, representing over 25 different modalities, to create a team wholly engaged in treating one individual. The program begins with a comprehensive assessment from multiple therapeutic perspectives to develop a positively-framed treatment plan that is not based solely on DSM-IV categories. During the treatments, the client experiences three to five individual therapies daily. A team leader oversees the continuity of each successive treatment and relays relevant information about each session to the next practitioner.

In the case study, the client participated in a four-day intensive outpatient treatment program every six to eight weeks for six months. The client received three to five, 60 to 90 minute individual therapy sessions per day focusing on addiction recovery, coping skills, interpersonal relationships, physiological self-regulation, mind/body integration, and stress management. To augment individual treatment sessions, the client also participated in couples’ therapy with his wife to explore how childhood family patterns and destructive coping skills had been recreated in their marriage. The Moonview Model utilizes an integrative family systems approach to include family members and other significant relationships in the therapeutic process.

Upon completion of treatment, the client had achieved and sustained abstinence from alcohol or any other mind-altering substance for six months. He reported much greater energy and sense of well-being, along with a decrease in social anxiety and depression. Additionally, he reported an improved relationship with his wife and daughter and a greater amount of time spent together in both business and recreational activities. Follow-up interviews 30 days and 60 days post-treatment indicated that the client has been able to maintain sobriety and positive emotional outcomes and continues to follow treatment recommendations.

References

1. ^ Vaccaro, Gaetano. “The Moonview Model: The Next Step in Comprehensive Treatment,” Counselor Magazine, February, 2009.

2. ^ Bartiromo, Maria. “Jerry Levin On What He’s Learned In His Second Life,” BusinessWeek, July, 2008.

3. ^ Lotozo, Eils. “From Deal Maker to Healer,” Haverford College Alumni Magazine, Winter, 2009.

JS2COMM (talk) 16:23, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

moonview sanctuary

thanks for your feedback, i understand. the first references listed is an article written by a third party source, would this help to justify? also what other type of information should be included? possibly more information on the moonview model? please advise.

JS2COMM (talk) 16:37, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

moonview sanctuary

hi simon,

i'm following up with you regarding the moonview sanctuary page. i had sent to you a revised draft for the page and you said it was still problematic, i appreciate your tips but again, would like further information so i can create the page and have it meet wikipedia's standards to not be immediately deleted.

the moonview sanctuary is a treatment center located in california, and has very similar values to the promises treatment centers, which happens to have a wikipedia page up and running. how can promises' page not be considered blantant advertising, though moonview sanctuary's is? please advise.

JS2COMM (talk) 20:16, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Were the Stanley Barracks really demolished recently?

That's disappointing news.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 08:53, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto neighbourhoods

Thanks for the note on my talk page. I see your post stating you intend to restructure the article, and I agree with your proposal. (See also the suggestion I made about changing the infobox at the bottom of articles.) BUT, I'm guessing this change is going to be controversial, and perhaps it would be an idea to re-order the article on a personal sandbox page, then ask for comment before changing the live article. I do realize this invites people to shoot down the idea, but I've used this method myself to overhaul articles, and it has worked. It's better than getting into a fight. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 17:00, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image gallery at Errol Sawyer article

Hallo Simon, I found your name in the discussion in image gallery and I wonder if you can take a look at the present state of the Errol sawyer article. Are there too many pictures shown? How can I let them start next to Career and not next to Biography?1027E (talk) 03:51, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of "satisfaction" does not make consensus.

;) --Francis Schonken (talk) 20:57, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moses of Chorene

Hi. Thanks for your comment at talk of the above article, it is much appreciated. Could you please comment once again with regard to my comment in response to yours about the general presentation of facts in the article? Thanks again. Regards, Grandmaster 11:07, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Greater_Los_Angeles_Area#Inland_Empire_Cities_moved_from_the_LA_template

I have contributed to the talk page above, see my point of view of why the template was correct as I had it, Thank-You. itzzHouse1090duhh (talk) 23:50, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto neighbourhoods

The articles I've written were about the areas defined by the demographics articles. Not some nebulous definition of real estate groups or business groups. By using the City's definition, we can cite a reliable source about the characteristics of the area. The map you reference uses the words business improvement areas, you should have noticed that. Where can we go for info about those? In the neighbourhoods articles, we have defunct villages, BIAs and City neighbourhoods as defined by the demographics map. It is not only about common usage. Some of the areas defined probably don't have names. E.g. Woodbine Corridor. Alaney2k (talk) 20:44, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What are you using for the basis for the map drawings? E.g. in the Beaches article. It's tedious to recreate from scratch. Ideally, I think neighbourhoods need both locator and area maps. What you are doing is good for areas, and accurate area maps need accuracy. Alaney2k (talk) 21:15, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration

Hi. Please be aware of this request for arbitration: [45] Unfortunately, I had to take it to the arbitration, as any attempts at dispute resolution were unsuccessful. Regards, Grandmaster 06:17, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Historical tallest buildings in Canada

Hi. You seem to have added the historically tallest buildings in Canada, but you didn't cite a source. What source did you use, and could you use it to straighten out this issue on one of the buildings' talk page? Thanks. Oreo Priest ^talk 00:39, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Riverdale map

Added South Riverdale to your map for Riverdale. As discussed, we should show areas where boundaries overlap. South Riverdale and Leslieville overlap and we should include that area, as it is known as that, at least traditionally. Leslieville, I believe is a bit of an artificial name, though people do adopt these names, just like Bloor West Village, making them real. If you have a way of showing the inclusion better than I, than by all means do so. My attempt was intended to 'improve', not dispute. Alaney2k (talk) 15:58, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A study on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies

Hi. I have emailed you to ask whether you would agree to participate in a short survey on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies in articles pertaining to global warming and climate change. If interested, please email me Encyclopaedia21 (talk) 18:54, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Late 2000s recession in Australasia has been moved to Late 2000s recession in Oceania

Hi I saw that you created the late 2000s recession in australasia article and thought I would just tell you it has been move to late recession in Oceania.

I was just wondering how you would change the link in the main article box to say oceania instead of Australasia.

thanks Digmores (talk) 06:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you help me?

I have an argument with others on disambiguation. I want to add some useful information to ACE, NME and PMF, but other people always delete them. The link is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#need_help_on_ACE_and_NME Could you please have a look? Thanks.--141.89.77.122 (talk) 20:53, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Saint Mary's Academy (Pasay City, Philippines)

A tag has been placed on Saint Mary's Academy (Pasay City, Philippines) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. OlYeller^Talktome 14:54, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Birchmount Road

I've G4d the above article, because it didn't go through DRV. Remember that you can't just restore AFDd articles as an admin; there is a process, and the process must be followed. It's also polite to notify the closing admin if you do think it's a mistake, but you can't just override AFDs - I'm sure it was a mistake, but please be more careful in future. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 01:50, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moses of Chorene

Hi. Since you have previously provided a third opinion in this article, and took the time to read the sources, could you please comment on another disputed matter? It concerns the reliability of historians David Marshall Lang and Ronald Grigor Suny, and inclusion of their opinion in the article. Please see [46]. Thank you. Grandmaster 05:56, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, your comment is welcomed

Your cvomment is really needed in the following page: Template talk:Greater Los Angeles Area about a too long template please go and share your thoughts! Thank-You itzzHouse1090duhh (talk) 23:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Central_Ottawa.PNG

Hi Simon, would you update this image (and the clickable map at Ottawa#Landmarks and notable institutions) with the location of the Delegation of the Ismaili Imamat, next-door to the Saudi embassy? If you haven't seen it yet (reccomended!), it is located here. Cheers, -M.Nelson (talk) 21:47, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Monkeyshine on Ambigram

I reverted your removal of Monkeyshine as this issue was previously discussed and resolved on the Talk page. The results are at the top of the Talk page and the discussion is probably archived by now (see links to archive at top). If you disagree, I suggest reopening it on the Talk page. RoyLeban (talk) 23:32, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of Canadian historians

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article List of Canadian historians, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

This article has less entries than Category:Canadian historians, isn't automatically alphabetized like the category, has no subdivisions like the subcategories, had red links unlike the category.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. -- Jeandré (talk), 2009-06-25t12:42z 12:42, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

e-mail from ArbCom

Hi, Simon. The ArbCom has been trying to reach you about something. You should have received an e-mail from Carcharoth a few days ago, but it occurred to me that perhaps you've changed your e-mail address. Could you please respond to the e-mail message if you received it, or send a note to him or me promptly with your current e-mail address if you haven't. Thanks and regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 17:53, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, I didn't actually send any e-mail, but I had been intending to. Brad took the quicker route of leaving you the above message. The original e-mail message had been from FloNight (see her comment on my talk page in reply to the note you left there), and, as she said, the e-mail can be resent. Thanks for the speedy response. Carcharoth (talk) 19:25, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about messing up the chronology. In any event, the point is that we can now be in touch. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 19:58, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

State

Hello again! I'm glad to see you around! By the way, during my extended break from Wikipedia, I've seen the stories about you in the news. Keep up the great work! ... I'd appreciate your input on the articles on state and "sovereign state." Wikipedia's articles on the state are an absolute mess now. 172 | Talk 19:56, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Voter turnout FAR

I have nominated Voter turnout for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.– DroEsperanto^{(t / c)} 15:17, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kensington Mark

I would imagine most people searching Kensington Market were actually looking for the market in London - the area of Toronto shouldn't be the main article and should therefore be a disambiguous page. I am unable to move pages (which would include edit histories), so would appreciate it if yo ucould do this to correct the situation, instead of just reverting my changes.

Thanks Manylevel881 (talk) 14:36, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]