User talk:Alyo/Archive 9

What is suitable ?

• Hi mentor,I reverted edit which was corrected by you here, and you again changed this. I am confused a bit,though article must and should alwaye be improved.There is no problem,however please explain to teach me more.Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 17:06, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Well, I did do the first copyedit, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be better. Honestly, I'm not a very good copyeditor and that IP had a slightly better wording than I did; in this case he was right (or better at expressing himself, either way). Also Justice, remember that just because an edit is unexplained doesn't mean it's bad. I've seen you revert a couple of ok edits with that summary, and I think I may have given you the wrong idea before. As a general rule, try not to just undo an edit unless it actually hurts the article. If part of their edit is good, just go in and fix the other parts up. We were all newbies once, and of course no one likes to have their work reverted, especially if they're acting in good faith. In fact, if you have any questions about an edit or aren't sure, just ask on the talk page. Hope that helped :) Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 21:14, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: Yes,your opinion is valid,but it is also reality,where ten editors contribute,they think their edits are accurated. It is the serious confusion in the wikipedia.The changing of the wording or any passage in own words should be in the exact concept of the meaning,otherwise,based on inappropriate content can mislead the readers. My editing was as,

"Iqbal's first recognition is a poet but his admirers also have regarded him as "Muslim philosophical thinker of modern times."

Your copyedit was,

"Although most well-known as a poet,he has also been acclaimed as a modern Muslim philosopher."

And then IP contributed as,

"Though best known for his poetry, he is also an acclaimed modern philosopher."

In my mind your copyedit and IP contribution does not satisfy.There should be more done in the exact concept of the meaning,that "Muslim philosophical thinker of modern times" and simply "modern Muslim philosopher" does not match each other. Because "Muslim philosophical thinker of modern times" has deep meaning than "Muslim philosopher".

I suggest that,

"Though Iqbal is best known as an eminent poet, he is also acclaimed as a "Muslim philosophical thinker of modern times."

Rest you know better than I.Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 23:41, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

The problem with using that quote is that the place we took it from, here, doesn't have a source and since it is allamaiqbal.com, a reviewer might think it's promotional. Now, if we had another source for that quote, we could probably use it, but since it comes from the official website, and they don't have a source, it's probably not the best. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 21:58, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

• Hi mentor,I find and feel it nice discussing with a mentor to learn more things.It is good for me or for both of us.

As you said that quote might be problem or promotional, I do not think so. Allama Iqbal Academy is established by the government of Pakistan,and it is very reliable source and most of the article's content is cited with its references. The preface is written by two different editors,of course reading many articles written on Iqbal by various writers of the world. These two sources here and here,when you read it, and figure them out then we are right to use or mention that quote,or without inverted comma, in own words, is possible.It is not necessary to find exact quote,may be it is in Urdu,which is translated into English.We will be right to read some sources and figure them out and put into our own words.As you have already done in the article some passages in your own words. I do not think that any reviewer will think it as a promotional quote.While source or sources are there and reliable,but I do not know about wiki editors opinion,may be they think it is promotional. Anyhow,there is no problems relating that quote,should be used or not.Thanks for your time and conversation.Justice007 (talk) 15:12, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

• • Yes, I enjoy these too...although if I ever get too heated warn me so I can stop :) Now, you say that allamaiqbal.com is published by the government? If so, then that would make a difference...hmm. I don't know...I'm sure somebody will always think something is too promotional. It doesn't really make a difference in the end though...if you do want to add it back in, that's fine with me. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 00:03, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for all about,please take a look at Iqbal Academy here, I do not know that the page what I want to show here will appear,if not,I try again.Justice007 (talk) 10:12, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

• No that does not,but you click on "Iqbal Academy Pakistan",the page will appear,you can see academy belongs to government of Pakistan.Justice007 (talk) 10:19, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Ok...that's good to know for the future, just in case someone wants to know, since we use that website as a reference a lot. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 15:36, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Yo

Yo i am an a american teen to want to catch up and talk. Nickerss (talk) 03:36, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, if you have any questions about Wikipedia I would be happy to help you out, but I have to agree with what Charlie said on your talk page; we are here to build an encyclopedia...socializing comes way after that. Hope you're enjoying this place :) Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 13:46, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Nolelover Im nickerss i am An american teen to. want to chat on your talk page. Nickerss (talk) 15:58, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Please see above...I'm not much for 'just chatting'. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 16:41, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Contravening WP:NOTSOCIALNETWORK can lead to the loss of being able to edit Wikipedia. --Bmusician 05:38, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Break

Hi Nolelover i will be away from saturday to monday so i won't be able to do anything at WP:WWF during that period. However i'll be back into action monday onwards and so will be able to do whatever's needed for the march mini, also if nobody has given the awards/invitations by then i'm happy to oblige :-) Best— benzband (talk) 16:05, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Alright...I'm a little busy too, so I can't get the awards out..might be able to over the weekend, but I don't know. Enjoy your break :) Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 16:42, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Doon School

Apologies for bringing the subject to your talk page. But it is, indeed, The Doon School instead of merely Doon School. That 'The' is the part of school's proper/official name though it suggests otherwise. It is not used for emphasising that this is THE real Doon School but, in fact, all the documents/memorandums are signed off as The Doon School. You are free to check on the Internet. In the coffee-table book I have on Doon School, there are sacns of 75 year-old documents (the first official paperwork for the establishment of the school) and it all says The Doon School. So just to elucidate my point, check this:- http://www.doonschool.com/images/document/admission_form.pdf It says The Doon School. If you're making it Doon School from The Doon School, you might as well turn the new Oscar-winning movie The Artist (film) into Artist(film). Once again, with all humility, it should be The Doon School, my friend and -to some extent- my Wiki teacher :) Don't let this happen! [[User:Merlaysamuel|Merlaysamuel]] (talk) 18:16, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Also, observe all the posts http://www.doonschool.com/the-school-and-campus/school-codes-a-policies and the Doon School's website. Merlay

No, I don't mind at all...in fact, is it ok if I just copy this to the article's talk page? I'd prefer to respond there. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 18:30, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Nevermind, I won't copy it. If you do want to voice your thoughts though, you can copy or just respond again on the talk page...I'll continue there. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 18:39, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

have copied to the talk page. [[User:Merlaysamuel|Merlaysamuel]] (talk) 19:07, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Alyo. You have new messages at Nashtam's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nashtam (talk) 10:25, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Nolelover, I just got another "last warning" that I am to be banned without further notice. Keep in mind I have been waiting to have a fair discussion on the talk page for more than 4 days now.Nashtam (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:00, 5 March 2012 (UTC).

Thank you!

Thank you for your kind words and assurance. I have already made two pages Arthur Foot and Gulab Ramchandani. My first reaction was disappointment when I found out that Mr. Foot does not have a page but, anyway, it's all set now. Now, I'll be making pages of rest of the headmasters. Thank you for accepting me Mr. Nole!

DoscoinDoon (talk) 17:23, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh drop the "Mister". If grades are anything to go on, I'm only a couple years older than you. :) Glad you're enjoying yourself and doing well...you seem to have a pretty good grasp on what you are doing. Am going to be pretty busy for a few days, but I'll try to help you if you need anything. Cheers, Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 17:26, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Ichthus: January 2012

ICHTHUS

January 2012

In this issue...

• From the Editor
• What are You doing For Lent?
• Fun and Exciting Contest Launched
• Spotlight on WikiProject Catholicism

---

Ichthus is the newsletter of Christianity on Wikipedia • It is published by WikiProject Christianity
For submissions contact the Newsroom • To unsubscribe add yourself to the list here

Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Goha.ru

Hey Nolelover,

You mentioned that there is not enough emphasis on the importance of the article. However, I feel like the importance is self-stated. As a forumn that caters to thousands of users, it holds a high place in MMORPG community, especially for the Russian players. These facts are referenced. What more could I add to make the article approved?

Thanks, Tataxfn (talk) 19:09, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, I read the submission again, and I don't quite see the notability you say is self-stated. Honestly, what makes Goha different from other websites? I don't see anything in the submission right now that makes it unique. Maybe I'm missing something? Also look at WP:WEB#Criteria - I don't see multiple reviews of the site, or any awards won. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 14:48, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

MOTDs (This space for rent)

You may have noticed over the past few days that the MOTD that you link to on your user page has simply displayed a red link. This is due to the fact that not enough people are reviewing pending MOTDs here. Please help us keep the MOTD template alive and simply go and review a few of the MOTDs in the list. That way we can have a real MOTD in the future rather than re-using (This space for rent). Any help would be appreciated! ·Add§hore· ^{Talk To Me!} 14:09, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

What do you think?.

• Hi Nole,can you make me a bit wiser,but first look at this and then here 1, 2.Now can you figure out what does he mean?.And second in the start lead's content is not sourced according to reference 1.I think references citation is not accurate in the whole article?,and I have no time for this to check it thoroughly.Justice007 (talk) 15:15, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
  • You are referring to his undoing of your copyedits, yes? If so, I'd be willing to bet that he had the edit page open for so long that he edit conflicted with you, and since he didn't know how to fix it just went ahead and saved he page without adding in your edits. Probably accidental. I'm not quite sure what you mean with the second comment. Can you elaborate? Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 15:48, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

• My be accidental?,other I mean that references citation to content is not revelant?,as reference (1).Please check my copyedits.Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 17:33, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Yes, his edits were definitely accidental. He didn't know that he was undoing your edits when he saved his own. Now I don't see anything wrong with reference one... Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 18:54, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

• Ok.no problem.Justice007 (talk) 19:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Shay Stone

What are you playing at?? The article is a clearcut DB-A7. Stop wasting time by opening unnecessary AFDs. Get some sense!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:32, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Of course I know it's an A7. I'm not playing at anything. The faster you !vote delete at AfD, the faster we can invoke SNOW. Or just IAR right now. Seriously, go ahead. I hate week-long AfD's like this as much as you do, but unless you have a better idea...? Maybe call an admin to block yonder editor for disruption, since I'm sure someone could rationalize that. Or change WP:CSD so that we can re-add CSDs after they've been removed by IPs, 'cause that would be easy. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 18:38, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

All it would take is for a reasonable admin to come across the speedy tag and delete it, a AFD will likely take a few days. I will restore the speedy tag but you'll have to promise to not to keep removing it! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:40, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

"...keep removing it"? Geez...you make me sound like an SPA, hehe. If you wanna take that route, fine by me. (Heh...watch some GFNoob come along and scream at you for CSDing an article that has already been declined by the logged-out author.) Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 18:44, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

February 2012 wikification drive!

For outstanding service to WikiProject Wikify and more specifically for wikifying 6 articles during the February Drive, i hereby award you the WikiProject Wikify Ribbon. Keep it up! ;) ~ benzband (talk) 21:19, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

• I have given out the barnstars and will do the invitations tomorrow evening (as the Mini Drive starts the following morn). Currently am pressed for time (i'm a teenager like you, FWIW ;) but —COM— i will stick with the project as promised. Cheers, benzband (talk) 21:19, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

• Aw! Look at this (you've probably already noticed):

Backlog

1,482.7% complete Backlog: All articles that need to be wikified Goal: 18,500 articles Current: 0 articles Initial: 19,838 articles

benzband (talk) 21:32, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

• • Thanks(!), sounds good, and yup...we finished with -39% on the Feb drive :( Oh well... Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 21:50, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
    •  Done i have distributed the invitations using AWB and the list you compiled. it wasn't too difficult —just scary how fast you can edit with the program :P benzband (talk) 18:50, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Doon School template talk

Hello Nole, I am looking forward to your comments on the template deletion discussion page. thanks! [[User:Merlaysamuel|Merlaysamuel]] (talk) 11:35, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, that's about the most I can say...I really don't know rules about templates and such. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 12:38, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Take a look.

• Hi Nole, please take a look at Sarah Kazemy,and an editor and his behaviour,it's twice,he is self explaining here.I cannot beyond WP:3RR. He is giving me this,instead.He is going to not understand,and a kind of WP:Own.Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 14:52, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Not exactly a truthful picture. I have clashed with the above user twice, on the Fatima Bhutto article and just gave up as I am reverted shortly after (no discussion). It was too much of a WP:OWN issue. But, the above user has now stalked my recent edit not even 1 day, after I started working on it. He followed me there and continues disruptive editing, no discussion. Aside from the hounding, many of his edits are problematic on more than one level. The blind reverts appears to be a pattern with him. It's unfortunate as it seriously inhibits the work of serious editors like myself. I have sought to explain him the problem and invite him to discuss, but in vain. I also don't appreciated being hounded. Nimom0 (talk) 15:09, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Just to say that I've seen this, and am looking into it. However, I don't have as much time on WP as I would like so replies may be a few hours (9 PM my time right now, so at least next morning-ish) coming if this is lengthy. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 01:57, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok guys, first thing I want to point out. See this page? It's empty. No discussion. Now, both of you tell the other to discuss, but someone actually has to start the discussion! That is the most important thing, and a lot of reverts and emotions could have been saved if either one of you had just stopped, realized that Wikipedia won't die if the article isn't perfect (as you see it) for a couple days, and hashed things out there. Each of you is trying to improve the article, although the styles are clashing. Now Nimom0, very nice expansion. Excellent work...I know how hard it can be to kick start an article. After that, Justice makes five edits. I won't go through everything he did, but again, he's trying to improve the article as well. After this we get to the three edits that caused the minor edit war. Here's where the discussion really would have come in handy. Justice is right that external links generally don't need (access) dates. Maybe it should have been moved to the References section? Then Justice makes this revert, which was just as unexplained as the original edit? Justice, just because someone doesn't leave an edit summary doesn't mean that it should be reverted...that was a sticking point for Nimom0. But where's the discussion? Neither of you attempted to figure out what the other person was up to. Same with the copyvio...neither you volunteered or asked for the actual site that Justice though the content was copied from. These three edits (pretty much) were than reverted back and forth...and there doesn't appear to be any interaction besides the edit summaries and a couple user talk page messages that weren't responded to, partly because of the accusatory tone. I don't know any prior history, and it isn't really my place to judge any hounding, but cmon guys...yall can work together, right? :) I'm available if you come to any more stalemates, but again, both of you are trying to improve the article. That's the key thing...Hope this helped somewhat. Cheers, Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 02:31, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your input though though it is regretable you don't consider the hounding as a particular issue (I understand your concern there). I do appreciate you trying to see it from both sides, but the issue is not that. The prior history is pertinent to this case. I disengaged myself from the Fatima Bhutto article because of his behaviour and so to avoid conflict. He then followed at the Sarah Kazemi article hours after I started work there repeating his aggressive revert/editwar there WP:HOUND. He must respond to the talk messages irrespective of the any percieved tone. He doesn't discuss despite repeated requests. He IS hounding me. No accussation, just fact. He is inhibiting my editing work and causing unneeded annoyance and disruption and I obviously can't accept that. So the actual issue stands unaddressed which allows him to continue his disruptive behaviour. The decent thing for him to do is to disengage considering the above. Nimom0 (talk) 09:42, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

My reply

• My contribution to the wikipedia is based on good faith,I follow the wiki rules.I am not an editor to WP:hound or WP:Own.I am a registered user for global account,thus I have the right to contribute everywhere,where I want??.Your behaviour is visible everywhere,you blame same thing to others too,look at here.My answer is same,I am not following you.I am patrolling the articles and I have that right.At Sarah Kazemy,there was obvious WP:Copyvio,which I indicated with changing,later you somewhat change the content.Look that reference 1,and 4,especially this sentence-"The Paris-based Kazemy visited relatives in Tehran to experience it firsthand,".You can check your edits,you will know yourself?.Please do not try to be a "dictator".This is Wikipedia for all who want to contribute,not only for you.Follow the rules,that's the main thing.Justice007 (talk) 11:20, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

There can be little doubt that you ARE stalking my contributions edits which you also also took the liberty to enter unrelated posts here when it serves no purpose. But this proves your hounding without a shred of doubt. You need to stick to yourself. You are hounding me and you can not explain how you arrived at the Sarah Kazemy article shortly after I got there. It is no coincidence. But you have been going through my contributions list and you have been stalking it which explains you above and other referenced hounding behaviour. You have NO right to stalk me. This is a policy breach and seeing as you are adamant on pursuing your disruptive and hounding behaviour, you leave me no choice. I am not the dictator here. So you can save the namecalling. You don't follow the rules. You stalked and followed me to Sarah Kazemy. And you relentless intention and behaviour to continue in this pattern is problematic which must be addressed. You are seeking out conflicts which is not conducive to editing or WP. Nimom0 (talk) 11:30, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Nolelover, I request that you delete the escalation of the conflict in terms of his posting my unrelated edit to an unrelated case to an unrelated talkpage of an unrelated user. Now you can see what I have put up with. Justice007 while claiming innocence and good faith continues hounding and going through my edits posting them here as if that relieves him of his hounding and bad faith disruptive behaviour. I ask that you delete as it serves no purpose than to escalate matters. I think I should disengage from here as this is not a solution rather an escalation and he is conscisouly seeking it out. I hope you can knock some sense into him regarding his behaviour and above on your talkpage. I certainly can't. Nimom0 (talk) 11:44, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

• I have replied on my talk page.Justice007 (talk) 13:50, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

• Well, I'm sorry you guys can't work together then. In that case, since I am an unrelated editor and the actual content doesn't seem to be the issue here, I'll just say a couple things briefly. First, Justice was right that that was a copyvio. I didn't see it the first time, but yes, that sentence was to close for comfort. It was fixed by Nimom0 here, but that was definitely problematic language. Now, as to wikihounding. WP:HOUND says that hounding is "the singling out of one or more editors, and joining discussions on multiple pages or topics they may edit or multiple debates where they contribute, in order to repeatedly confront or inhibit their work. This is with an apparent aim of creating irritation, annoyance or distress to the other editor." I don't see that here. You two have interacted on just two articles, and as I stated before, each of you is trying to improve the article. Justice, if he did see your edits to Sarah Kazemy, was not trying to "confront or inhibit [your] work". Hence, I don't think that this is really hounding. Now, I will ask both of you to make a conscious effort not to edit pages that you see the other person active on. If both of you are agreeable, I'll serve as an intermediary to whom you can bring concerns you may have about the other's work. If that is not agreeable, then I can't help, and as much as I hate to say it, you need to take this somewhere else. I really hope it doesn't go there, since neither of you are really doing anything wrong. Nimom0, I don't know if you are as new as your account suggests you are, but you can't accuse everyone you disagree with on a couple articles of hounding you. Things just aren't that clear-cut, and yes, coincidences are very possible. I'm not saying that's what happened here, but you just can't automatically assume the worst. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 14:56, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Nolelover, there is no doubt that this is a case of hounding. Absolutely. It is unfortunate you don't see it. Naturally I am fully entitled to accuse him of hounding, when he does so and continuously. Just look at 1) the unrelated edit from an unrelated talk on unrelated article between unrelated users, he brought on to your talkpage (unfortunately you decided to not remove despite my request). The intent is very clear here. He had to stalk my edits to find it. That is how 2) he arrived at Sarah Kazemy shortly after me. No coincidence. He saw my edits alright, at the top of my contributionslist that day and followed me there. By defending his hounding as harmless and coincidental editing is encouraging further hounding. It has nothing to do with being new (?) or disagreeing. It's about hounding and being disruptive - also the result of his interaction with me on both Fatima Bhutto and Sarah Kazemy. Perhaps your neutrality is unintentionally compromised in this matter. But I agree with you that he should disengage on Kazemy just like I did on Fatima Bhutto to avoid further conflicts. I did that for that very purpose and have done my part. It doesn't help when I am then stalked into a new article. "The singling out of one or more editors, and joining discussions on multiple pages or topics they may edit or multiple debates where they contribute, in order to repeatedly confront or inhibit their work. This is with an apparent aim of creating irritation, annoyance or distress to the other editor." is exactly what is going on here. My work is inhibited and this is causing annoyance and disruption - see above. I can no longer respond here due to before mentioned reasons. Nimom0 (talk) 15:48, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

There is doubt, because the more I read the less I think that you fully understand WP:HOUND. You are not "fully entitled" to do anything here. I'll address your two points. 1) Going through your contributions to see if situations like this have happened is not stalking. It is very common practice in disputes. Does that mean that if you make a bad edit, no one is ever allowed to bring those edits up if you begin doing again later because that would be stalking? 2) Yes, I agree with you that Justice probably was looking at your contribs and followed you to the article. However, he was not doing it with malicious intent, which is the difference between hounding and just trying to be helpful. Plus, as I already explained, he was right to remove the copyvio, although I don't think he realized that he could have removed it without undoing your entire edit. Yes, my neutrality is probably "compromised" here, with all the work I've done with Justice. That why I said that unless both of you agreed, I really can't help. You need to take this to dispute resolution or a similar project if you want closure, although I really hope that you can just agree to disagree and stay away from any articles the other is editing...or maybe only bring things up on the talk page. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 17:55, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

NB: And I will respect your decision to remove yourself from this page. Unless you continue to reply, I'll do my best not to say or ask anything that would require your input. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 17:56, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

I obviously agree. Yes, neutrality here does appear compromised. We are only human. But I do believe his intent is malicious. He followed me there hours after our last clash and his disruptuve edit warring which is not constructive or advised on WP. Following somebody around when you clash with them and the repeating the disruptive stunt, is not good faith, well intended or conducive. He should know better and discuss. He doesn't. he still thinks edit summaries are to discuss. I fully understand the policy. You may want to advise him to read it and understand. Secondly yes, bringing up the whole of an unrelated discussion out of context is escalating the conflict. It's aggrevating and clearly indicative of malicious intent with the prospect of resolution moving further away when such low tactics are employed. I am quite shocked that you can contemplatye the validity of such an action. I have watch many and never anything come of that. As for copyedit - not an issue. Its dealt with. I just want to edit without him breathing down my neck. If he won't disengage then yes unfortunately it will to go further because I can't edit like this. I feel we have both said what we had. So just leave it at that. Nimom0 (talk) 18:17, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

PS: And yes, hopefully we can meet some day under better and more pleasent circumstances. Take care Nimom0 (talk) 18:28, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

In that case, the next steps are up to Justice. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 21:38, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

• My reply is on my talk page.Justice007 (talk) 17:49, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
• Thanks Nolelover. Some day someone should buy you a beer for your peacemaking efforts. Drmies (talk) 18:41, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Ahh well, thanks. I try, although I'm sure others could have done better here. Appreciate the thought, though that beer may need to be swapped for a sweet tea or the like for a few years yet :) Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 04:20, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikify March Mini Drive

Delivered by benzband (talk) on behalf of WikiProject Wikify 18:41, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I have had quite some difficulty enforcing the dates for the MM drive; i think a full-on drive would have been simpler to explain (most users don't even read the big bold title that says "MARCH 8 2012 (00:00 AM UTC)", or for that matter the dates on their invite… oh well, just my thoughts. Best regards, benzband (talk) 20:11, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Quite understandable...no one ever reads as much of the instructions as we would wish. :P Anyway, was that drive setup hard enough? Have we scared you away yet? If not, then congratulations on a job well done...and my personal thanks for helping out :) Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 01:55, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue One - Recent news from the Teahouse

Hi! Welcome to the first edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!

Spring has sprung! Stop by the Teahouse for a cup of tea under the cherry blossoms.

• Metrics are out from week one. Week one showed that the need for Teahouse hosts to invite new editors to the Teahouse is urgent for this pilot period. It also showed that emailing new users invitations is a powerful tool, with new editors responding more to emails than to talk page templates. We also learned that the customized database reports created for the Teahouse have the highest return rate of participation by invitees. Check out the metrics here and see how you can help with inviting in our Invitation Guide.
• A refreshed "Your hosts" page encourages experienced Wikipedians to learn about the Teahouse and participate. With community input, the Teahouse has updated the Your hosts page which details the host roles within the Teahouse pilot and the importance that hosts play in providing a friendly, special experience not always found on other welcome/help spaces on Wikipedia. It also explains how Teahouse hosts are important regarding metrics reporting during this pilot. Are you an experienced editor who wants to help out? Take a look at the new page today and start learning about the hosts tasks and how you can participate!
• Introduce yourself and meet new guests at the Teahouse. Take the time to welcome and get to know the latest guests at the Teahouse. New & experienced editors to Wikipedia can add a brief infobox about themselves and get to know one another with direct links to userpages. Drop off some wikilove to these editors today, they'll surely be happy to feel the wikilove!

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. Sarah (talk) 16:07, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Re: March Drive (word count)

Hi Nolelover, hope you are fine. Well, it is not necessary because I know how to use User:Dr pda/prosesize and the script is installed and running, but thank you very much for your kindness. All the best. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:27, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

A note about word counting

I'm not sure but I think that it does not work properly for a wikifying task or dirve. Let me explain by example: In Mining industry of Ghana, the wikify template on top of the page was misplaced, "I did almost nothing" just producing a very little change of +7 characters (by removing the template and disambiguating a wlink or by fixing a bare reference), but it had 5935 words prior to my "rapid" intervention, while on the contrary on Stephen Gilson, I spent about half an hour producing a difference of +3,297 characters (which is not correct because it does not take into account that negative values should also be added to the total)‎, but it only had 522 words prior to my intervention. In my opinion, "wikify" is more related to charcater than word count. Anyhow, this is just a general consideration about the wordcount stuff, which is something that I've already thought of, at the time when we were using it (about a year and a half ago, if I remember correctly). In any case... it does not matter. Cheers. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:11, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Well...it does matter :) It's just that...bleh. Well, about Mining industry of Ghana, note that when the wikify template was added in October 2010, it was needed. However, in the years since then article has been gradually improved but since no one quite understands what the {{wikify}} template means, no one removed it. I mean using character count instead of wordcount sounds great...but it's just that a) both methods have ways that people can game the system b) I already see ediors that have enough trouble figuring out wordcount...character count is yet another change that someone won't like or get or...anyway, if you wanna bring this idea up at the WWF talk page you might be able to test support for it. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 19:02, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Association of University Centers on Disabilities/University Center for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities

May I ask you why you have restored the previous version of University Center for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities and (I now got it in my eyes) who has deleted Association of University Centers on Disabilities? And, the Talk page for the latter is still active. Before my changes there were an article: University Center for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities; and 3 redirects:

1. AUCD
2. UCEDD
3. Association of University Centers on Disabilities.

But, when I was adding an infobox for organizations to University Center for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities, I noticed that it was part of Association of University Centers on Disabilities. So, I decided to add some info about the AUCD and move University Center for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities to Association of University Centers on Disabilities, and to redirct all other pages properly. IMHO this is the best solution (the article about UCEDD was and still is a stub, and by aggregating them it has better chances to live and then improve its quality. Maybe one day, it will be split into 2 articles! Who knows? All the best. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:11, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

It is the best solution, however you had done a WP:copy and paste move (which doesn't preserve the history) instead of a clean page move. When those (c&p moves) are done, I generally CSD the new page and undo the redirect on the old page, and then when the new title is deleted I WP:move the old article content to the new title...does that make sense? PamD has since moved the article, so I think everything is fixed. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 19:14, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh YES! You are totally right, I forgot about the revision history (probably because I do not have the rights to move a page to an existing page). Thank you! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:30, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Please assist me

• Hi Nole, under criteria for speedy deletion,falls old articles too or not,if those were never suggested for-?Justice007 (talk) 20:03, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Hmm...not sure...which article are we talking about? Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 20:06, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

• Today I nominated new created (just today) article Gerry Gogna for speedy deletion,it's done.But there are many articles without references,like this Samina Raja and so on.Justice007 (talk) 20:22, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
  • The thing is that speedy deletion is completely different from normal notability discussions or WP:AfDs. Quite honestly, I'd advise you to stay away from speedy deletion unless you really study or see a very obvious new article. Samina Raja would not be eligible for CSD because at least an assertion of importance (not notability) is made. I can help you in CSD if you wish, but again speedy deletions are a tricky area that even very experienced editors still can have trouble with. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 20:41, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

• That's why I asked your assistance,I will stay away.Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 22:11, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Duplicated links

One useful tool for locating duplicated links is User:Ucucha/duplinks, BTW - I use it myself. Allens (talk | contribs) 21:09, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Ahh, thanks. Imported :) Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 21:19, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Quite welcome; happy to help! Some links to other useful scripts are at my talk page. Allens (talk | contribs) 21:44, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Ahh yes, I vaguely remember those...At that time I really wasn't experienced enough to know about or need any of them..thanks for the links! Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 21:49, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Road trip

So will be gone for at least a day or two, starting in the morning (12 hours from now)...unless I find a hotspot out there, etc. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 01:21, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

And back. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 13:13, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

My article on Bernadette Davis

Hi Nolelover, just a quick note to say that I am going to re-submit my article on Bernadette Davis. I have trawled the net looking for articles, quotes, reviews etc. from sources considered valid, but one of the problems I have found is that she was actively writing in the mid- to late-90s when there wasn't the same amount of information available on the internet - I guess most of the articles and reviews back then would have been paper based. She then retired for a while to have a family but is now back with a new upcoming comedy series on BBC 3 (see my links!) The sitcom 'Game On' was a huge hit at the end of the 90s (described as part of the zeitgeist that came to define a generation" and as a "sitcom that was so of its time, that it took its name from a catchphrase of the decade" (Yorkshire Post, Interview with Matthew Cottle, one of the 3 main stars, along with Sam Janus, now on Eastenders, and Ben Chaplin, now in Hollywood) - and it rightly has its own page on Wikipedia. However, all the acclaim and attention seems to have gone to Andrew Davies, and hardly any to Bernadette Davis (no relation) - the most heinous example of which is on the BBC Comedy website itself (http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/gameon/) which says Andrew Davies co-wrote it - but doesn't say who the other co-writer is!! So I thought it was only right to reset the balance, so to speak, by at least giving her her due on Wikipedia. I have tried to post as many links and references as I can to her output, but because of the times (just before the internet really took off info-wise) there just isn't that much available. And actually the article's references are now longer than the article! My main arguments for her deserving of a page of her own are that, as "Game On" is very famous, and has a place on Wikipedia, she deserves to be on it too, as the co-writer (and the sole writer for the 3rd series!) After all, you couldn't have just a page on Jagger without one about Richards, or Ant without Dec, or Mitchell without Webb, or, er, Rod Hull without Emu! :-) Please let me know what you think. Yours, PaukiPKKPaukiPKK (talk) 22:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, I agree with you that she sounds notable (award nominations, different shows, etc.), but you really have to prove this with the sources that editors go on and on about. Many of your sources contain a very minimal amount of text about her (maybe a sentence of clause) and this won't really help you. Also, adding info about the cultural impact of the show won't do much either - we don't really care if the show was "part of a zeitgeist", as long as a source verifies her work there. Does that make sense? Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 19:40, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Nolelover, thanks for getting back to me - as I said, the main problem is that most of her work was 'pre-internet reviews' - hence I'm going for the "significant by being partly responsible for something significant argument". The line about the show being "part of a zeitgeist" was to try to make it sound all the more significant, and in answer to your comment: "as long as a source verifies her work there" - do all the other references citing that she was the (co-)author of the article not do that? =Verify that it was her work? Yours, PaukiPKK (talk) 10:40, 19 March 2012 (UTC)PaukiPKK.

Yes, I understand how you would try to use that to establish notability. However, let's call those sources (about the importance of the show) exhibit A. The generally short/small/brief sources that say she was the co-creator are exhibit C. What you want is the missing exhibit B, the one (or two) source(s) that talk about the show's importance, and say that she had a major hand in that. Credits, which is what exhibit C is mainly, don't really establish notability. Does that make sense? Honestly, Cerebellum makes some great (and much clearer) points on your talk page, so I encourage you to listen to them and not me :) I do agree with them that I hope you stay, regardless of how this article turns out - you could be a very valuable contributor if you remain. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 15:17, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

GOCE March drive newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 backlog elimination drive update GOCE March 2012 Backlog Elimination progress graphs Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 Backlog elimination drive! Here's the mid-drive newsletter. Participation: We have had 58 people sign up for this drive so far, which compares favorably with our last drive, and 27 have copy-edited at least one article. If you have signed up but have not yet copy-edited any articles, please consider doing so. Every bit helps! If you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us! Progress report: Our target of completing the 2010 articles has almost been reached, with only 56 remaining of the 194 we had at the start of the drive. The last ones are always the most difficult, so thank you if you are able to help copy-edit any of the remaining articles. We have reduced the total backlog by 163 articles so far. Special thanks: Special thanks to Stfg, who has been going through the backlog and doing some preliminary vetting of the articles—removing copyright violations, doing initial clean-up, and nominating some for deletion. This work has helped make the drive a more pleasant experience for all our volunteers. Your drive coordinators – Dianna (talk), Stfg (talk), and Dank (talk) To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

New messages

Hello. You have a new message at yasht101's talk page. Yasht101 06:18, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

There is a question at the Teahouse you might have interest in...

Dear Alyo, I just asked a question at the Teahouse that you might have interest in! I hope you'll stop by and participate! Sarah (talk) 01:32, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Did you really want this award?

	The Have-A-Heart Award
	For your speedy decline of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/a poem i wrote. Drmies (talk) 00:39, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

In my defense, I must plead extenuating circumstances. Between a lovely outing this afternoon (that taste, oh that taste...) and a final project rough draft on which I am royally stuck, I really needed a pick-me-up. The newest AfC's/NPP always do that, and between that poem, this lovely image (is that really what a heart looks like?) and a great dinner, I fell much better. My grateful thanks to you for this :-) Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 01:21, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

My daughter hated the poem, but that may have had something to do with the way I read it. She was fascinated by the heart--yes, it's a real one, apparently. We're so beautiful on the outside...My favorite Dutch author would reiterate that we're nothing but a bag of skin filled with shit and bones. Anyway, glad to have been of service. Keep your fingers crossed for me, because tomorrow I have to take both my girls to that place you went to today. All the best, and keep the good work coming. Drmies (talk) 01:47, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Honestly, it is actually a rather pretty piece. Meter is odd in places, but still better than anything I could put together...Sh*t and bones (and hot air, if Wikipedia has taught me anything)....yup, sounds about right. First time I'd been in years, and passed...passably. Here's to hoping yours exceed (and they can stand perfectly still long enough for the durn x-ray machine to go all the way around their heads). Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 01:59, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

DS

Hi, can we use block quotes for the arthur foot quote in founding ethos? It's not looking right as of now... Merlaysamuel :  Chat  04:40, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it already is in block quotes :( I see what you mean though, that it looks a little odd, but take a look at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Block_quotations. Using {{quote}} is the same as using <blockquote>...</blockquote>. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 13:16, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I had no idea!

Seriously, i never thought that i was violating rules by asking age. I m sorry, i wont ask any personal info to anyone. Yasht101 16:44, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks :) Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 16:47, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	This i wanted to award you for helping me out in few issues. I hope that u dont mind if i kept ur name in this list: [1] Yasht101 :) 03:56, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

That's no problem at all, and if you need anything else, or have any other questions, I'll try to help the best I can. :-) Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 11:19, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

WB

Hello. You have a new message at benzband's talk page. Message added 13:23, 24 March 2012 (UTC).

Politics Re:Talk:Lyonnais (band)

I knew this place was political.  I have always stayed away from politics.  But, I wanted to give it to someone up the ass tonight, not that that is new, but...  Am I bad?   :- ) DCS 04:32, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh gosh no....I'm going to get in trouble later for saying this I'm sure, but it is amazing how many idiots, morons, stuck-up twerps, SPA's, trolls, good-faith idiots, non-english speaking 'geniuses' and RiBs there are, <joke>and that's just last week's AfCs</joke>. This place is one giant minefield, and you can only hope that the ones you step on (because you will eventually step on a few) don't hurt you too much. One day we'll all go to be with the great sysop in the sky, but until that blissful day when you can put up the {{retired}} template and actually live out there in that real world we hear about, you will have to deal with some of the most obnoxious people on the _______. They will tick you off - a comment I saw just earlier this evening was one of the most outrageous I think I've ever seen on this site - but in the words of a poem recently submitted, "Feelings will come and it will go". Sometimes it gets better, then there are days like today. Just keep trucking...try to ignore the really bad ones, and if worse really comes to worst remember that there's always the red X in the corner...and sometimes hitting that is the best thing you can do. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 04:57, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

BLP Prods

There were no sources at the time of the nominations. [2] & [3]. Hence why they were nominated. Obviously there is now.Edinburgh Wanderer 11:48, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Ahh, didn't look at the history. Thanks then, Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 13:33, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

March Mini Wikification Awards!

The (umpteenth) WikiProject Wikify Ribbon is given to Nolelover for participation in the March Mini 2012 Drive. Keep it up! benzband (talk) 13:39, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Note: am distributing have distributed the awards for the March mini drive. Are there any plans for an April one? benzband (talk) 13:39, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Heheh, thanks for the ribbon! And, as the new unofficial most-important-coordinator, there will be if you want one :P I can help to set up the drive pages tomorrow if we do decide to. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 13:43, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome :-) I'm happy to help, and i'm sure there are plenty of editors willing to give the backlog a beating. Cheers, benzband (talk) 14:09, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Great! The one thing we should make sure to do is get the invite out on time this drive (last drive I submitted a request to MessageDeliveryBot and...nothing happened). If the drive pages are set up by tomorrow, we can AWB the invite out about five days ahead of time. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 14:14, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Also must stress that any articles wikified before beginning shouldn't be logged :P benzband (talk) 15:11, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Userpage Rate?

Hey, was wondering if you would please rate my userpage, does it look ok? Anything I should add, remove, etc? Thanks! WheresTristan (talk) 23:53, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm really quite terrible at objectively grading anything, but I do think your userpage is very nice. The real question is if you like it. :) I see you put the teenager userbox on your page and I just want to say that while that one is fine, please be careful in adding any personal info, from exact age to contact info, name or even just a very precise description of yourself. It's really easy to go overboard there, not that you have right now. Cheers, Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 21:06, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedia for World Heritage

I need your assistance in developing and spreading a wikiproject. Can you help me in developing and spreading this page in wikipedia: Wikipedia:Wikipedia for World Heritage

Thank you and Happy editing! Yasht101 :) 06:55, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

That is a very interesting petition...I'm not sure that it is really a "wikiproject" in the generally accepted sense of the term, but I'll try to help spread the word when I can. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 21:14, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

When you visisted the page, it wasnt properly developed but now it is better and looks like wikiproject. Yasht101 :) 23:10, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh yes, the page certainly looks like a wikiproject, it's just the scope I was wondering about. Generally wikiprojects have more to do with editing or other work on this wikipedia, rather than an external movement. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 23:25, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

There are few editors who are helping me out in making the page look like that. As it was created yesterday by me, it isnt like other projects. Yasht101 :) 23:34, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

The Legal History of Chinese Americans

Hi. Thanks for spotting that and pointing it out on the GOCE requests page. I'm removing the request as you suggested, and have left notes on the requester's and the article's talk pages. --Stfg (talk) 12:26, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

You are more then welcome. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 20:32, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Alyo. You have new messages at Yasht101's talk page.
Message added 18:47, 29 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ÐℬigXЯaɣ 18:47, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of The Doon School alumni/archive1

Hello sir, I believe there is some very unfair review being done by an editor named Fowler of the list. I have given my explanation and I'm wondering if you have anything to say over there. thank you! (being one of the major editors of doon school, i thought it prudent to inform you) DoscoinDoon (talk) 01:17, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Commented, and will watch the page. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 02:01, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Review

Sir, I just left this message to inform that I wrote a review for you. Yasht101 :) 01:25, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Yasht, I appreciate it :) Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 02:02, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

A Class Status for Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri

I was looking at the standards for A class. It doesn't seem to involve much over GA status. Are you interested in trying to get A class for Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri? It has been a year since the article got GA status. I'm planning to archive the sections on the talk page that did not see any comments in 2011 or 2012. Is that alright with you" Vyeh (talk) 10:28, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like a great idea...quite honestly, that article probably needs a touch-up from the last year alone, and A-class sounds like fun. Archiving is fine by me as well. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 14:12, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I left a message on Guyinblack25's talk page. Since he is semi-retired, it might be awhile before he gets back. In the meantime, it would probably be useful if you could read through the article and note any impressions on the talk page. Vyeh (talk) 19:27, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

 Done, err... Doing..., err...{{will do sometime over the weekend}}... grr... Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 20:19, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I went ahead and archived. Vyeh (talk) 11:59, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Not sure if I am a maintainer. There use to be two C - class articles ... Not sure if it is good politics to remove DF. Did he put himself in as a maintainer? He is pretty passionate about the subject and he probably keeps me from cutting out too much ... Vyeh (talk) 20:03, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I had put him in, and I don't think that SMAC is really high on his agenda right now...there's been a lot of politicking about the Article Rescue project lately, and I've seen his name in various other places I would prefer to stay out of. If he wants to join us again, that's fine, but I don't think I see that happening. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 21:46, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

OK. Vyeh (talk) 04:11, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

I am glad Eric F is getting involved, although it is funny to see the combination of name and numbers. I am also pleased with the encouragement you are providing. Could you list here what questions you would like me to address on the article's talk page? Vyeh (talk) 02:54, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

It looks like you got everything except this one. This is the diff/hidden note I refer to in my last comment in that section. Can you confirm/reject his edit? I wasn't sure what the hidden note meant. Other then that, I really don't have anything... Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 12:24, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Did I answer your question about the hidden note?Vyeh (talk) 13:23, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Yup, thanks :) Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 16:31, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

On Drmies talk page

• Hi mentor Nole,I have left messag on Drmies talk page.Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 19:58, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Replied there. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 20:20, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Sounds vaguely familiar

All you hafta do is add {{subst:submit}} to the top.

— Nolelover, Wikipedia Help Desk

 :- ) DCS 02:17, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

You'd think, but is the guy gonna follow directions? Probably not...and it may be just as well...I see textbook WP:NOTDIRECTORY here...oh well...This submission/Q&A is pretty good though, if I say so myself. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 13:46, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Helping Hand Barnstar
		This barnstar is for your work at the Wikipedia Teahose. I'm sure everybody is grateful of your work, especially me. Thanks! -- Luke (Talk) 14:45, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Well thank you :) I do appreciate it, although I can't say that I do any more than any other host. I just enjoy this kind of work. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 15:18, 31 March 2012 (UTC)