User talk:Bedford/Archive11

Thank you

Thank you very much indeed for your help with and commitment to Tag & Assess 2008. May I please trouble you to comment at the post-drive workshop? Your feedback will help us to improve the next drive. Thanks in advance, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 10:06, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

W Will and DYK

At the end of that long AN/I thread, you and Ottava Rima proposed dialogue with WW and control of her actions on DYK, and OR left a message on WW's talk page inviting discussion. WW did not edit for several days, but today has returned when her first action, ominously, was to archive her talk page. It seems that OR is out of action at present; would it perhaps be useful for you to take up the baton and leave WW a message outlining your proposals and inviting her to discuss them? JohnCD (talk) 11:17, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

August 1 DYKs

On 1 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Wicks n' More, 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.

--Wafulz (talk) 14:47, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

On 1 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cheonhado, 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.

--Wafulz (talk) 14:48, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Penguin?

• ... oh you mean the waddling guy with the umbrella who never gets the Dark Knight...Victuallers (talk) 23:42, 1 August 2008 (UTC) ..

DYK - Union Monument in Perryville

On 2 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Union Monument in Perryville, 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.

Rudget 19:33, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

A bit premature, but thanks anyways.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 21:17, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXIX (July 2008)
Project news The criteria for Military history A-Class reviews have been overhauled. The new standard is deliberately set higher than before, and is much closer to featured article quality. The new criteria are: A1. The article is consistently referenced with an appropriate citation style, and all claims are verifiable against reputable sources, accurately represent the relevant body of published knowledge, and are supported with specific evidence and external citations as appropriate. A2. The article is comprehensive, factually accurate, neutral and focused on the main topic; it neglects no major facts or details, presents views fairly and without bias, and does not go into unnecessary detail. A3. The article has an appropriate structure of hierarchical headings, including a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections, and a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents. A4. The article is written in concise and articulate English; its prose is clear, is in line with style guidelines, and does not require substantial copy-editing to be fully MoS-compliant. A5. The article contains supporting visual materials, such as images or diagrams with succinct captions, and other media, where appropriate. The timescale for A-Class articles has also been changed to give more editors an opportunity to participate. The six-monthly Coordinators' election has been moved back a month to avoid clashes with the holiday period. The sign-up period will run from 1–15 September and the elections themselves from 16–30 September. The military land vehicles task force has been created.	Articles of note New featured articles: Battle of Concepción Battle of Mount Austen, the Galloping Horse, and the Sea Horse Battle of Tory Island Early life and military career of John McCain Grass Fight Leopard 2E Operation Varsity Roman–Persian Wars Uriel Sebree USS Princess Matoika (ID-2290) New featured portals: Portal:World War II New A-Class articles: 11th Airborne Division (United States) 2007–2008 Ethiopian crackdown in Ogaden 2008 invasion of Anjouan Auxiliaries (Roman military) Citadel of Saigon HMS Ark Royal (91)
Current proposals and discussions Input wanted from people who didn't participate in Tag & Assess '08. Please comment at the Tag & Assess workshop so we can improve future drives.
Awards and honors The Contest department has completed its sixteenth month of competition, which saw 22 entries. The top scorer this month is new entrant Bellhalla with 41 points, followed by Blnguyen with 33 points. Cam, Ed!, David Underdown, and Ferbess also fielded entries. Blnguyen remains the overall leader, with 226 points in total. The Chevrons go to Bellhalla and Blnguyen gets the Writer's Barnstar. You are encouraged to submit any articles you are working on as entries.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:20, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Cheers

Nice job! /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 00:51, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. The two related monuments concerning Perryville will be up in the next day or two.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 00:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK nom

On 3 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Floating Battery of Charleston Harbor, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 07:06, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter

A new newsletter has been released; Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Newsletter/Issue 022.

Delivered: 14:37, 3 August 2008 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

Could I get your opinion.

Would you take a look at the discussion on Let_Freedom_Ring:_Winning_the_War_of_Liberty_over_Liberalism and see if you have an opinion on the matter. I believe there is an issue with undue wieght. I'd like your view as a former admin. Thanks. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:45, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Besides, I've learned that "former admin" is a more prestigious title anyways. It shows I have both integrity and fame. *smiles*--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 16:54, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Was getting that Lone Ranger feeling there for a while. Niteshift36 (talk) 17:18, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Hannity's book

You have removed material from the article while the discussion is still going on. Dock^Hi 17:24, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh really? I hadn't noticed. *smirk* It has no place in an encyclopedia; it was only there to smear Hannity, and thus removed per WP:LIBEL and WP:BOLD.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 17:27, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Funny Dock, you insist on leaving it there during this "discussion". Why not leave it off until the discussion is over? Niteshift36 (talk) 17:30, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Custom user box requested

Your highness, I have retrieved as you have commanded the box you desired. Several choices can be found at "Category:Edit user templates". By your leave--«Marylandstater» ^«reply» 20:21, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

You have pleased me. I will cancel the beheading.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 20:32, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK? nom

On 4 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Confederate Monument in Perryville, 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.

-- CB (ö) 03:54, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK question

Bedford, can you think of a suitable DYK hook for this article? Kelly ^hi! 13:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Unknown Confederate Dead Monument in Perryville DYK

On 4 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Unknown Confederate Dead Monument in Perryville, 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.

--Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:08, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Messages about Krimpet

Bedford, why are you leaving all these messages to people [1]? It looks much like talk page spamming and trying to stir up trouble with someone you've recently had a dispute with. I acknowledge I'm not assuming good faith here, but it's hard to read that message any other way. I suggest shortening it to just the notification that the template's been deleted. If you want to dispute template deletion, deletion review is the way to go.--chaser - t 23:33, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I wanted to let people know that one of their userboxes was no good; I know I would appreciate if someone told me. In fact, since she deleted at least 3, maybe more, there is a pattern. Krimpet also didn't bother discussing it before she deleted them wholesale. There is a pattern there. I was just giving people a friendly notice. As I already told all the brunette people, and I didn't use the blonde or redhead, I chose to stop now.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 23:37, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

If you have a problem with her, spamming uninvolved editors won't help. Please don't do it again.--chaser - t 23:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Like I said, all I did was let people know one (or more) of their userboxes got deleted.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 23:48, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

For those that want to comment on this controversy, CLICK HERE.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 00:57, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I, for one, appreciate the heads-up. Thanks, Bedford. Hope someone can stop her before she deletes the pornography one (I do love that picture). --PlasmaTwa2 01:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

We should definitely "gauge" the popularity of that one. You might want to check the above link.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 01:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I also appreciated the heads up as it allowed me to notice the redlinked text along with an explanation of why it was redlinked on my userpage. --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 02:05, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Perryville picture

I thought you might like to know that one of your pictures is now on the front page of Wikipedia.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 22:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I almost never look at the front page so I would have missed it. Hal Jespersen (talk) 23:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

No problem; I like to let people know when things they might want to know happen.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 23:48, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

So much for staying under the radar...

but thanks for the star.  :) --UsaSatsui (talk) 04:02, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

you're welcome. That one userbox of yours was just asking for it. *laughs demonicly*--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 04:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

haha

Haha. You lost just like the south. Haha. IvoShandor (talk) 04:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I haven't. Now I can use the term "War of Northern Aggression" as much as I like, and I don't have to bother to update DYK or pursue vandals or try to get along. Plus, I now have time to do something I didn't before.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 05:00, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Get over yourself

It was your own fault you got desysopped. Sceptre ^(talk) 16:51, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it wasn't. You are just mad that you helped create another Kurt Weber, but one that is even more liked than him. Like the Japanese, you thought you could get away with your Pearl Harbor job on the sleeping giant, not recognizing that eventually he'll meet you midway.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 16:56, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Kurt may have an overinflated sense of himself, but at least isn't a sexist pig. Sceptre ^(talk) 17:05, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

And really, being the new Kurt isn't something you should be proud of. Kurt willingly prides himself on being annoying. Sceptre ^(talk) 17:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Sceptre, please quit that. This is not helping matters at all - Alison ^❤ 21:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• Ahaha, seems like someone really needs to listen to their own advice. naerii 17:17, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Sexist Pig? OMG! Theres the freaking smoking gun! Your the name caller, what makes you better than anyone else? Who do you think you are? Charles Edward 17:50, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I have left a message for Sceptre about this. Let's please not have back-and-forth on this continue from different parties. Jonathunder (talk) 17:58, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Please stop canvassing

Your contributions history shows that you have been aggressively cross-posting in order to influence Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_August_4#User:Bluedenim/Blondes. Although the Arbitration Committee has ruled that "[t]he occasional light use of cross-posting to talk pages is part of Wikipedia's common practice"¹, such cross-posting should adhere to specific guidelines. In the past, aggressively worded cross-posting has contributed towards an Arbitration Committee ruling of disruptive behavior that resulted in blocking². It is best not to game the system, and instead respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building, by ceasing to further crosspost, and instead allowing the process to reflect the opinions of editors that were already actively involved in the matter at hand. Thank you. KillerChihuahua^?!? 22:02, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I did not link to the discussion on their talk pages; I simply let them know that one of their userboxes was deleted and why. If there is a lot of votes of the dleetion review, its because they are interested (I don't remember seeing anyone I PMed actually vote in the deletion, although I have not done a careful count.) Plus, anyone who had the userboxes in question are involved. Why be afraid of the light; if someone tinkered with a userbox I used, I'd want to know.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 22:05, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the objection is to notifying them that their userbox had been deleted, but rather the shots at User:Krimpet. If you had said "Hi, I thought I would let you know that the brunettes userbox has been deleted", or something, that would be fine. But rather, you say "I just thought I'd let you know that Krimpet (talk · contribs) took it on herself to delete the brunettes userbox you were using. This follows other subjects about women she has chosen to take on herself whether or not they should be on Wikipedia the past two weeks, including starting an "edit war" on the DYK section of the main page". I think that's primarily where the objection lies. Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 22:32, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

And what part was incorrect?--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 22:34, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

You were focusing on the person (Krimpet) and not the userboxes. This gives a strong impression that you have less interest in the boxes and more in dealing with Krimpet - Alison ^❤ 22:37, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

My interest is correcting the problem.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 07:16, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 7 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Benjamin Anderson (soldier), 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.

--Gatoclass (talk) 14:05, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Pittsburgh in the American Civil War DYK

On 7 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pittsburgh in the American Civil War, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Thanks for nominating, PeterSymonds (talk) 20:26, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 8 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Thomas Hines, 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.

--Gatoclass (talk) 08:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Adding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Montana in the American Civil War

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. I don't see any reason to keep this AFD going any longer, especially since nobody other than the nominator has brought up any reasons to delete the article. I doubt this AFD even would have been filed if the article had been started by someone other than Bedford (talk · contribs), whom Doncram (talk · contribs) has been having a dispute with. AFDs aren't a way of resolving disputes between editors. Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 22:22, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Montana in the American Civil War

Montana in the American Civil War (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)

Reason doncram (talk) 19:05, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Article does not meet basic criteria for Wikipedia notability. Author is a self-professed DYK medal seeker and Civil War enthusiast, but it does not follow that GEOGRAPHIC REGION x CIVIL WAR = notable. Article shows little/no notability. doncram (talk) 19:03, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I just deleted from article far-fetched claim that Confederate soldiers were mining for gold. doncram (talk) 19:11, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

But you didn't check the references first. You even say so in your edit summary. Joeblow179350 (talk) 20:38, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

The sentence i deleted was "In Broadwater County, Montana, in the central portion of the state, Confederate soldiers found a vein of gold eight miles west of Townsend, Montana. The immediate area was named Confederate Gulch in their honor. It was said to be among the "largest and richest of the placer diggings" within the state." That is correct, i did not check the reference as I noted in my edit summary. However, the circumstances are that the article is composed and put up for DYK by a self-professed DYK medal-seeker who I have found to have overstated claims in numerous other nominations. And I strongly believe that the claim that it was Confederate soldiers is wildly overstated. It implies that there was a Confederate army unit operating in Montana. Possibly there were persons who deserted the Confederate army to go mining came here, or possibly there were persons who later joined the Confederate army. But it is nonsense to imply that currently enlisted Confederate soldiers were there to mine, suggesting they were there to gather riches to be shipped to the CSA to fight the war. It was so obviously a misstatement that I deleted it rather than add a "fact" tag to the statement. doncram (talk) 20:50, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

• Keep - First off, if you have a problem with an editors actions take it up with them instead of using AFD's to make your point. 2nd of all, nothing wrong with trying to get DYK's, it encourages article writing and expansion of this project. 3rd, the article is cited and is not without precedence as there are many other similar articles. I see no reason to delete this article.Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:19, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Responding: point 1, AFD is the right place to argue notability of this article. Point 2, fine, trying to get DYK's is okay, but that does not justify the notability of this article. Point 3: "there are many similar articles": it is the author's own template or modifications to template that create GEOGRAPHIC REGION x CIVIL WARa . It is entirely appropriate to discuss the notability of this geographic region x civil war article here. Have you read the article? It is falling all over itself to explain that, factually, there is no importance to the article, i believe because there is none. doncram (talk) 19:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

First off, you are welcomne to dispute notability here, that is good. It is bad when half of your reasoning is attcking the editor who created it vs. making your case about notability. AFD should be about the content, no tthe editor. 2nd of all Yes, I have read the article and sure it might be lacking in sveral areas. However the fact remains that it has a fairly large number of seemingly reliable sources (which in general can be a good sign of a subjects notability). I also believe breakout articles like this allow massive topics (for example the american civil war) to be broken down into smaller areas whereby deatiled information can be provided instead of having one unmaintainable massive article. The content may be questionable and I do not agree with all break out articles (I.E. if articles started popping up about every city in montanta in the civil war or alaska/hawaii in the civil war, that would be problematic). Based on my reading of the article I dont see a reason for deletion. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:02, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

• Keep Article has notable content, worst case this should be merged with and redirected to History of Montana or renamed Montana Territory in the American Civil War- not deleted. Should we also delete Indiana in the American Civil War? Charles Edward 20:28, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't know if the Indiana one should be deleted, there may be a larger legitimate role for an article on that topic. The claims about Montana seem to be especially far-fetched, hence my nomination for this deletion. The author put into this article "Still, valiant Confederate soldiers did have a presence in what is now present-day Montana." with no source, which appears to me to be nonsense. That statement was amended by two other editors to drop "valiant" and then to move it into another paragraph which ends in a reference, so it mistakenly appears to be sourced. doncram (talk) 20:34, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

• Keep I can't find any notability guidelines for historic events, except for the generic ones, and I think this article meets them. It has independent sources, though I haven't checked them for reliability. Joeblow179350 (talk) 20:51, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

• Speedy Keep Doncram spent much of July trying to torpedo many of my DYKs, even through they were sourced by sources he normally demands of articles. This is just him being petty as I do not listen to whatever demands he requests. The ACW task force is trying to have as many state articles concerning the war as possible. For consistency, this article should not be merged with the History of Montana article.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 21:23, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

• Keep per the ACW task force rationale expressed by King Bedford I. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 21:30, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

• Speedy Keep Apparently the nominator is either unaware that article sourced to second and third parties meets notability or was aware fo that fact and choose to ignore it, but whatever the case may be this certainly does not deserve the axe. TomStar81 (Talk) 22:58, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Respond: All the "Keep" votes notwithstanding, it seemed to me obvious that the topic does not deserve to be an article and a front-page DYK mention. Others can (and apparently do) disagree. The infobox now in the article stating Confederate soldiers supplied = 0, Union soldiers supplied = 0 is telling. Others here are agreeing that they question some points in the article. doncram (talk) 01:16, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

• Keep per ACW task force discussion, which I initiated myself. I requested this article from the task force, and as the editor who maintains the Portal:American Civil War and assists in the maintenance of Template:American Civil War, I have an interest in even the most trivial encyclopedic details related to the subject matter, if approved by consensus. I agree with Charles Edward above that the page should be moved to Montana Territory in the American Civil War. Montana Territory was created during the ACW, so it could be reasonably argued that the war was a factor in its creation. IMHO, bad faith statements made in nomination say much about nominator, unfortunately. I don't understand why an active DYK editor should be labeled negatively for such mild and well-respected wiki-ambition. BusterD (talk) 23:10, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

  Comment I should point out that the nominator posted this AfD in ACW TF talk, an act demonstrating respect for consensus process, this sort of notice unlikely to draw an approving crowd. BusterD (talk) 23:24, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

  Note that Doncram did it after there were 5 keeps and no other opposes.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 23:38, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. —BusterD (talk) 23:36, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep This seems to be a perfectly viable topic for a short article. I'm a bit confused about who the 'Confederate soldiers' were - was this a formed unit sent to Montana? Nick Dowling (talk) 00:12, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Keep - the reason for deletion is not applicable because the article is of a notable topic and is sourced appropriately, also per the ACW task force reasons stated above. This also seems to look and smell like a pointy nom. -MBK₀₀₄ 01:08, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

• I concede that my nomination of the article, given some running dispute with Bedford, can "smell" that way if you choose to view it that way. My nomination language should have made some sort of issue along those lines clear. However, the DYK nomination put the article forward for quick review, and I do question the article's accuracy. Having several references in an article that asserts the world is flat, does not suffice to justify an article on the flat world. I note with concern that the sentences which I removed (quoted above) got added back into the article without clarification. The article still strongly implies that there were Confederate soldiers, not mere sympathizers or deserters, in Montana and that gold was mined for the CSA.
• Perhaps there is some way I should have tagged the article instead of putting it up for AfD, but I thought AfD was a fair route to go and would draw objective others' views. doncram (talk) 01:24, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Valid concept for an article. --harej 02:53, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment Note, Bedford has now created an article Idaho in the American Civil War and nominated it for DYK. That's wp:POINTY in my view, given this AfD in progress, and/or I imagine he is trying to taunt me. BusterD's call for ACW articles, that he refered to above, was: "While clicking through template links, I realized we still haven't covered these states/territories. Perhaps wikipedia doesn't need an Idaho in ACW article, but I'm requesting we fill out the series." So I gather Idaho is one of the least deserving GEOGRAPHIC AREA x CIVIL WAR articles to create. I haven't reviewed that article yet. I don't mind if someone wants to close this AfD in favor of keeping the article, as i do seem to be outnumbered considerably here. But I would appreciate if other ACW-interested editors would review this Montana article and the new Idaho one for factual accuracy. doncram (talk) 02:59, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I don't think he's trying to taunt you, I think he's just continuing on with his encyclopedia writing as long as it hasn't been officially condemned by the community (at this rate, it's not). --harej 03:34, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment That also looks like a perfectly legitimate article. Given that it's pretty clear that this article is going to be kept, why should Bedford stop working on these articles? Nick Dowling (talk) 05:00, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • The AFD process is not something that is designed to stop other legitimate Wikipedia work, including the ongoing factual evaluation of the Montana and Idaho articles. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 13:31, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep: this article has significant content, good sources, and is improving nicely in exposition. Jonathunder (talk) 12:50, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment Isn't it time to close this as a overwhelming keep? Eleven keeps, and the only one who wants this deleted proved it wasn't done in good faith?--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 22:07, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

doncram (talk) 19:14, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Southern Bivouac DYK

On 8 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Southern Bivouac, 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.

--Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 20:53, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK

FYI, I tried an additional hook and citations on media coverage on the John Edwards DYK nom. Do you think it will any good? It's also up at "In the News". Kelly ^hi! 02:45, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

It's a race. If it makes ITN, it will be disqualified from DYK. It should be good enough, but some are squeamish abut political DYKs.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 02:47, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Cool, thanks for the inside track. This is only my second experience with DYK and first with ITN. Kelly ^hi! 03:10, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK

Bedford, I hope you understand that the current situation involves one DYK swapped out for another without a penalty to the contributor, whereas your concern has many different (and deeper) ramifications. If you would like to talk about it, you know how to contact me. Thanks. Ottava Rima (talk) 01:13, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Rape comparison

You used the word "gangrape" in a recent ANI discussion. That was, in my opinion, an extremely poor choice of analogy. To compare the situation that resulted in your being deadminned to the forcible rape by multiple individuals of a woman (or man) is incredibly insensitive. There are those on this project who have suffered greatly from actual rape. Comparing the loss of a few buttons to that experience is not fair to them in any way. Regards, ^S._D.Jameson 01:55, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Would you prefer "internet gangrape" as a term? It was, after, a group of people getting a sense of power on another's expense.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 02:16, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• As Lar says, it would be better if you simply discontinued use of the analogy. What happened then is nothing like a rape. ^S._D.Jameson 04:26, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I'd prefer you not use the term at all. It's inappropriate. ++Lar: t/c 04:10, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

(after ec) I'm with the others. Same with "lynched". They're strong terms, and a bit inappropriate. Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 04:27, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I concur. There is absolutely no valid comparison to be made between rape and being de-sysopped. Doing so only trivializes the horror that is rape and sexual violence. I'm sure that's not your intent here, right? - Alison ^❤ 04:47, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Consult a decent dictionary. Heck, even dictionary.com says "4. an act of plunder, violent seizure, or abuse; despoliation; violation: the rape of the countryside. " What can I say; I have an awesome vocabulary (helps when writing prose and devising new puns).--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 15:07, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Consult some common sense. You said "gangrape", which has no such definition. Trying to play semantical games in a vain attempt to justify your vulgarity is quite unbecoming. ^S._D.Jameson 23:56, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Bedford, do you understand that using rape to describe your being desysopped for something viewed as sexist would just cause the same people to become upset? It may be fair or it may be not. I am not one to decide. I just wanted to point out this. I hope you understand. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:26, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• My brother, when playing Halo this morning: "Ah fuck, we're getting raped here". Funny. The people above remind me of vultures. From anyone else nobody would notice, but as you're the current hate figure of the moment I guess it's OK to harass you over trivialities. Hang in there. naerii 15:32, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

  Three things: First, I have at no point been a part of any disagreement with Bedford. I saw what happened, and that's all. Second, what your brother said was said in private, between buddies. That's a very different thing. If I'd have been one of the buddies, I would have said something, but I wasn't. Third, referring to a deadminning as being raped is offensive, whoever says it. I would have called anyone I saw making that vulgar and offensive comparison on it. I have no "dog in the hunt" as far as Bedford is concerned. The only concern I have is for the completely inappropriate nature of the analogy. I think anyone who either loves someone who has been a victim of an actual rape, or has been a victim of one themselves would have found it equally so. ^S._D.Jameson 20:57, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

You are forgetting certain things. It was not just a deadminning, but a group assault on one individual, smearing him, demanding he resign (some of whom won't resign now when asked, but I should have willingly do so), and having him then get deadmin without due process before calmer heads could prevail.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 21:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Your internet experience last week (all the varying parts of it) in no way resembled a rape. Continuing to defend that analogy is not only poor form, but really quite offensive. ^S._D.Jameson 21:05, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Continuing to defend censorship, "Jameson", is just as stupid. LFOD (talk) 00:58, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm asking Bedford to have a certain level of decency that seemed lacking in comparing his relatively minor Wikipedian dustup to a "gangrape." A bit of self-censorship is often required to maintain a basic level of social graces, wouldn't you agree? ^S._D.Jameson 22:57, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

If there was decency, I would have never been desysoped. If what happened to me ever happens to you, you will feel the same way. That is all I will say on this.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 23:07, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

No, I can honestly say that if I ever decide to stand for RfA, am fortunate enough to pass, and unfortunate enough to lose +sysop (whatever the circumstances), I would never describe how I felt as being "gangraped." I've known someone who was raped, Bedford. There's just no comparison, and it's completely insensitive to not self-censor that kind of inflammatory rhetoric. I truly wish you would simply retract it, and that would be that. ^S._D.Jameson 03:36, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Jameson is not asking (from what I can tell) that Bedford be censorsed here. He/she is asking that Bedford refrain from using a word in a way which many editors feel is inappropriate and unnecessarily inflames the situation. An editor who doesn't understand that working with other wikipedians means it's wise to frame your comments in such a way that you get your point across effectively and don't inflame others for no good reason is not a very good wikipedian. If you were talking about the saga which started the whole thing, then that seems completely irrelevant and so I suggest you bring it up elsewhere Nil Einne (talk) 22:54, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Conservatism project

Yes, I'd be interested in being involved if such a project ever got started. Niteshift36 (talk) 04:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

The article

It was the article. I could barely follow the storyline - so much so that I couldn't risk giving it a quick copyedit without reading the reference first, which I didn't have time to do. Any chance you could polish it up a bit? Gatoclass (talk) 10:56, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Much better, I can understand it now, thanks :) Gatoclass (talk) 11:10, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK: John Milton Elliott

On 10 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article John Milton Elliott, 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.

--PFHLai (talk) 20:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Infoboxes for ACW states

I created two infoboxes for the states (Template:Infobox U.S. State/Terr. ACW for the yanks, Template:Infobox Confederate State ACW for the rebs) for consideration. If used, your nav templates already on the pages in the infobox position could be horizontalled and placed lower.

What is His Majesty's opinion? Kresock (talk) 22:47, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

We'll just have to test them for appearance. WHatever looks better for the majority, especially those closer to GA status.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 22:55, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Applied new template to Florida page with some tweaks. Will not to others until I get some feedback. Any of the numbers I cited in it would make good DYK material. Kresock (talk) 04:00, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

There's not 5x expansion in prose, so it would not qualify for DYK. Looks good, otherwise.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 08:14, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK 12/8

On 12 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article New York in the American Civil War, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

On 12 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Rob Morris Home, 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.

weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 21:38, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

On 13 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article D. W. Griffith House, 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.

--Daniel Case (talk) 04:24, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

blonds and brown hair

Hello. I would just like u to explain me better the whole "blonds and brown hair" userboxes issue, and what is exactly the problem. Thank u in advance.--Vule91 (talk) 23:05, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Some women seem to think that if there is male interest on female beauty, then females are reduced. If I made the accurate analysis of the real though processes of the women who object to these userboxes, I'd receive more excrement thrown my way. I did chuckle what someone said someplace about this fiasco and the 19th Amendment.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 23:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 14 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Montana in the American Civil War, 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.

--Gatoclass (talk) 03:36, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Message

I've sent you an email. Masterpiece2000 (talk) 04:26, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou

Just a little note to say thankyou for participating in my successful RFA candidacy, which passed with 96 supports, 0 opposes, and 1 neutral. I am pleasantly taken aback by the amount of support for me to contribute in an administrative role and look forward to demonstrating that such faith is well placed. Regards, WilliamH (talk) 09:07, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Baseball Talk

Hi, I'm not really sure how to add sources into the Baseball Talk page when many of them come off the checklist card or from the audio of the actual cards. Thanks. OddibeKerfeld (talk) 13:19, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK: John S. Preston

On 14 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article John S. Preston, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--PFHLai (talk) 23:41, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 15 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hampton-Preston House, 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.

--Gatoclass (talk) 04:47, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK nom

On 15 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Island raccoons, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 04:51, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Could you please explain more fully...

You placed a neutrality tag on Camp Iguana a few months ago. That tag, when instantiated, tells readers to look to Talk:Camp Iguana for the discussion of why the tag was placed.

Did you mean to leave an explanation -- but got called away, and distracted, and never got around to it?

I don't mean to belittle your efforts. Quality control is important. But, since you are an experience contributor I am sure you must be aware that some irresponsible contributors go around adding bogus and inappropriate tags to articles simply because they don't agree with the neutrally expressed referenced material those articles contain. I am sure you are aware that these drive-by taggers never bother to explain why they placed those tags. I am sure you must have come across inappropriately placed tags, which are simply disruptive and a disservice to readers.

A couple of years ago I decided to try to resolve tags placed on some articles I contributed to. I started leaving notes, asking for explanations from the tag placers -- with mixed results.

I asked on WP:AN/I how much responsibility I had to advise tag placers of the questions I had about their tag placement. I asked how long I should wait after asking for clarification before I removed an apparently abandoned tag. I thought I might be advised to wait a week.

I was surprised at the reply my question received. One administrator said I had no obligation to ask for clarification. This administrator replied, on WP:AN/I, that if the tag placer didn't leave their explanation for their tag placement within 24 hours, I should feel free to remove it without warning.

I see you are an administrator. So I am going to assume you meant to explain yourself, and got called away first.

On the off chance that you do routinely place the neutrality tag, without explanation, I will repeat the points I used to point out to tag placers that the rest of us aren't mind-readers. That, without an explanation, other readers can't even tell in which direction the tag placer thought the article violated neutrality. And, if the tag placer doesn't record their concern, the rest of us can't know when their concern has been adequately addressed.

Some other wikipedia contributors have drafted little essays. And some of those have proven popular enough that other contributors quote them as if they were policies or guidelines. I wrote one on "obviousness". I wrote: "nothing is obvious". On the off chance you thought you didn't need to explain why you placed the tag because you assumed the explanation was "obvious" let me assure you it absolutely is not obvious.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 07:26, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

It's been so long, I forgot what the problem was. We are talking April, after all.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 07:43, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Doncram

Hi, I've realized that you had a conflict with Doncram; have you talk to him and discussed? I urge you to do so, H2H (talk) 07:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

There have been discussions, but it is fruitless. He thinks he can order me around, which I refuse to let happen. He's on DYK just to harass me, and he gets encouraged by Gatoclass. Good writers like me getting abused for trying to add to WP is quite sad.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 08:03, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Missing hooks

I am on the verge of proposing a DYK topic ban for you because I am tired of the unco-operative attitude and the bad faith accusations. I would therefore like you to find those missing hooks and add them to the archive. If you are unwilling to do so, I feel I will have little choice but to go ahead with the above proposal. Try doing the right thing for once. Regards, Gatoclass (talk) 08:25, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Re:Kay Chorao

Thank you for the nomination and the talk page notification. I'll have a look. Best, --PeaceNT (talk) 10:30, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

On 16 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kay Chorao, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Daniel Case (talk) 03:43, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

On 16 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Christabel Leighton-Porter, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Daniel Case (talk) 03:54, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Idaho in the American Civil War

On 15 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Idaho in the American Civil War, 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.

--Mifter (talk) 19:52, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 16 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Indian Territory in the American Civil War, 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.

--Gatoclass (talk) 12:04, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

RFC

Hi Bedford -- I just saw your comment on FloNight's talk page and thought I should comment. I think your complaint is unwise. You make accusations of broken policies, but the evidence to substantiate this is not strong. Wikipedia does not consider it prohibited for editors to ensure that other editors are keeping within policy -- harassment is a serious accusation and requires strong evidence to substantiate it. What you provide is, I think, a long way short of what is necessary. I strongly advise that you do not go ahead with this RFC -- it will only reflect badly upon you and you will not achieve the objectives that you seek. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 12:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

So, in other words, let someone continue to harass me and make a nuisance of himself?--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 12:12, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I am suggesting that what you are perceiving as harassment is, in fact, not. My suggestion to you is that the mere fact of a user repeatedly disagreeing with you specifically does not in itself constitute harassment or a breach of Wikipedia etiquette and that any attempt by you to pursue him over it is not going to be to your advantage. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 13:15, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Indianapolis/On this day...

Hello again, Bedford. We have a minor issue with the "On this day" feature at Portal:Indianapolis. It seems that the ... within the titles are making the pages un-editable to anyone who is not an admin. So I made an inquiry at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard and found out that the ... were the problem. Well I'm considering moving all the pages so that they do not have the ... in the title. Just thought I'd check with you first to make sure it's a good idea and if you have any better ideas. Also if you want you can go ahead with the moves because I will be gone for most of the day (Saturday, August 16th). Thanks and have a great day! :) HoosierState^Talk 15:24, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK Beefsteak Raid

On 16 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Beefsteak Raid , 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.

--Mitico (talk) 20:03, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I bet you'll see a problem here

Take a look at Southern culture of honor and tell me if you see the same POV pushing that I do. Niteshift36 (talk) 09:03, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 17 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cherokee in the American Civil War, 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.

--Gatoclass (talk) 11:50, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Re:Mayor Ballard pic

Hmmm looks exactly like the image from a Howey Politics Indiana article.

By the way, what you think about my Portal:Indianapolis/On this day... proposal? If you approve, I'll get started. HoosierState^Talk 04:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

DYKs

On 18 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article International reaction to 2008 Tibetan unrest, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

-- RyRy (talk) 04:58, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

On 18 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bahamas in the American Civil War, 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.

--RyRy (talk) 05:03, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Nizar Qabbany and Disaster Response Route DYKs

On 18 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with facts from the articles Nizar Qabbany, and Disaster Response Route, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Thanks for nominating, PeterSymonds (talk) 10:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK nom

On 18 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jolimont Workshops, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 16:32, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

On 19 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Delta, Minas Gerais, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Victuallers (talk) 12:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

On 20 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with facts from the articles Theft of Quedlinburg medieval art, and Inuit diet, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--JayHenry (talk) 05:50, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

200

		The 200 DYK Medal
		Hi, well done. Its a lot of effort to create these articles and there are so many. A nice range of subjects centred on the subject of civil war. Well done. Victuallers (talk) 08:56, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Thats all the awards given out and up to date. Could you give out a few when the spaces develop? You'll have to be quick or I'll beat you (again :-) ). Its a good way to gain support and make friends. Cheers Victuallers (talk) 08:56, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

here

On 20 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Conquista, Minas Gerais, 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.

--Victuallers (talk) 13:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Inamuragasaki DYK

On 20 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Inamuragasaki, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Dan1980 (talk ♦ stalk) 19:31, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 21 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Biblical archaeology school, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--–Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 22:59, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On August 21, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dengeki Gakuen RPG: Cross of Venus, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

DYK

On 22 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dughlats, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:41, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

James Whitcomb

Hey Bedford! I know you have been working on masonry stuff and I came across some info you might find interesting - Governor James Whitcomb was the first person knighted in Indiana, I added that to his article with the source if you want to check it out. He did some other stuff too. Charles Edward 18:01, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK!

On 22 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Operation Strikeback, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 22:53, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 28, August 9, 11 and 18, 2008.

Sorry I haven't been sending this over the past few weeks. Ralbot (talk) 05:34, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 31	28 July 2008	About the Signpost

Wikimania 2008 wrap-up	WikiWorld: "Terry Gross"
News and notes: Unblocked in China	Dispatches: Find reliable sources online
WikiProject Report: Military history	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 32	9 August 2008	About the Signpost

Anthrax suspect reportedly edit-warred on Wikipedia	WikiWorld: "Fall Out Boy"
Dispatches: Style guide and policy changes, July	WikiProject Report: WikiProject New York State routes
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 33	11 August 2008	About the Signpost

Study: Wikipedia's growth may indicate unlimited potential	Board of Trustees fills Nominating Committee for new members
Greenspun illustration project moves to first phase	WikiWorld: "George Stroumboulopoulos"
News and notes: Wikipedian dies	Dispatches: Reviewing free images
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 34	18 August 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: Help wanted
WikiWorld: "Cashew"	Dispatches: Choosing Today's Featured Article
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 05:34, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter

A new newsletter has been released; Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Newsletter/Issue 023.

Delivered: 22:16, 23 August 2008 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

Hey Bedford

Just to let you know that I believe you should never have had your sysop powers removed. You were the one following policy, not the prudes who objected to your perfectly encyclopedic DYK nomination.--Candyflipping Platypus (talk) 22:31, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

GA Review of Thomas Hines

Hi! I have completed the GA review of Thomas Hines, with the full review being located at Talk:Thomas Hines/GA1. I have put the article on hold to allow you time to deal with a few minor concerns. If you have any questions, you can ask on the review page or on my talk page. Dana boomer (talk) 18:54, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Trolling

Trolling like this is not helpful in any way. Please refrain from such activities. KillerChihuahua^?!? 23:39, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

It's not trolling; it's called setting the record straight. Anyways, the point is made, so I'll just sit back here, playing Final Fantasy X, and enjoying the show. Wish I had some popcorn.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 23:41, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't call it trolling myself either - but it is essentially the same behavior as what Sceptre was caught using an IP to do. So given the consequences he is currently experiencing it ought to be sort of obvious that you should cut it out yourself. Please do cease and desist, as I think you promised to do in that last statement. GRBerry 20:33, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Not really; I didn't vandalize his page, which is something he did to mine a month ago. Quite frankly, I am just reveling in schadenfreude, and am planning to enjoy some nachos if this keeps up. (Never could find any popcorn in the house, sigh.)--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 20:36, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Confession

I shamelessly steal userboxes from your page. Wonder if we could get one that has the old Georgia Flag and the new one crossed out with Sonny Lied and link to the new georgia flag controversy [2]?--Die4Dixie (talk) 13:12, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

We probably have the old Georgia flag somewhere on Wikipedia. Shouldn't be hard to do.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 15:50, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks.--Die4Dixie (talk) 13:36, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 29 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bell Ford Bridge, 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.

--Mangojuice^talk 18:24, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

		The WikiProject Barnstar
		For your help with improving future Milhist drives at the 2008 Tag & Assess workshop, please accept this WikiProject Barnstar. --ROGER DAVIES talk 07:31, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Incidentally, if you're keen to keep your assessing skills honed, we are currently very short of reviewers for Milhist A-Class reviews. Broadly, the five A-Class criteria are just beefed up versions of the B-Class criteria and anyone with B-Class experience should have no trouble with them. Also, as a reminder, in the wide-ranging A-Class review, it is not necessary to comment on all five criteria: if you're short of time, you can simply focus on the aspects that interest you (sources, comprehensiveness, prose, graphic content or whatever). You can track which articles are up for A-Class using this template: {{:Template:WPMILHIST A-Class Review alerts}}

All the best, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 07:31, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I am not sure if I am ready for assessing if something is A, as I'm not that interesting in picking nits. But I think I can do mass assessing, which is why I'm throwing my hat into the ring.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 03:00, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Love the sig

"seek his grace" -- marvelous. -- Yellowdesk (talk) 20:05, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter

A new newsletter has been released; Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Newsletter/Issue 024.

Delivered: 15:19, 31 August 2008 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)