User talk:ONUnicorn/archived talk 5

Haunted locations

Hi - My apologies about the Sunnyvale deletion. Somehow a poorly-dressed guy rooting around in the aisles doesn't strike me as a typical haunting! I'll be interested to see what you can find. Ken Gallager 19:30, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Ghost

Hi, I see you've been improving the Ghost article. I'm wondering though if you could say what book the Mo Tzu quote and Yi-pao Mei translations are from? I only deleted the quote in the first place for lacking citation. Martinphi 20:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll try to give it a better intro, that's also a definition. Yeah, Ghost had some good content, but I deleted it for no sources, after giving notice in the talk page. I don't always edit for sources really hard, but if it's paranormal, you have to protect against no-nothing knee-jerk skeptics, or true believers. I found it here (: http://www.cic.sfu.ca/nacc/articles/legalmohist/mozi_mei/wadegiles/momei_31wg1.html Martinphi 22:15, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, glad you like it (: —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Martinphi (talk • contribs) 03:57, 21 December 2006 (UTC).

I just couldn't resist ...

I've added a "speedy" tag to Siddarth Prakasam even though I normally try to be patient. I hope you don't mind too much that I've cut across your own gentle message to the author. Hopefully, no student feelings will be hurt. :) --Mereda 17:31, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Nyai Loro Kidul‎

Nice tagging teaming the Nyai Loro Kidul‎ entry on List of haunted locations with you. --mordicai. 18:11, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Deleted article

The author of the deleted article is Soundslikeamooseinthefrontyardclashing (talk · contribs). - Mike Rosoft 21:32, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Re Haunted locations

I would object to have to put a citation on a list - its is the provenance of the article itslef to be adequately refrenced. SatuSuro 05:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I have bothered you about this. The list cites an article - I would put the citation in the article. Not the list. so for example -

Alkimos - summary of story in list - no citation. Alkimos - citation in the article. I hope thats clear enough SatuSuro 15:39, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Apologies (and happy christmas) it looks fine as is - I can see the intent of how youre doing it - please accept my change of mind as a compliment to your hard work! SatuSuro 15:08, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Doctored photo on Ghost

You put a citation needed tag on the doctored photo, presumably wanting a citation that that photo was doctored? Look at the image description page. The person who uploaded it to Commons uploded it as self made. They say in the image description that it's photoshopped to show the ghost. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)} 15:43, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Wow! Great job on the image creation by the artist. It looked like a famous ghost photo I had seen before so I felt the doctoring statement should have a reference. Someone else might think like I did, so I added a "According to its description" pointer and removed the ref request.--Nealparr 16:08, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

You might be thinking of the image of the brown lady in Raynham Hall. It's very similar. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)} 16:11, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I knew it wasn't that one exactly, but they are so similar that I was thinking they were in the same genre. Cool pic though.--Nealparr 01:10, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Enter the Wu-Tang

Hello ONUnicorn. After consulting User:Tutmosis, I was wondering if you could copyedit an article for me. I want you to help me bring Enter the Wu-Tang (36 Chambers) to featured status. Apparently you are talented at copyediting (at least according to Tutmosis), and I hope that you can benefit the aforementioned article. Thanks.Noahdabomb3 19:19, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply

Thank you for your help. A&R guys scout artists for record labels and then try developing the artist and giving them an image. Also, I think that I will get rid of the album singles section, but keep the accolades section. In fact, I think that I should find a way to merge the accolades chart into the reception section. The personnel section sort of elaborates on the infobox and adds additional information of admittedly varied significance.

Once again, thanks for the help and I am open to your suggestions on the article.Noahdabomb3 21:59, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Reuben Singh

Hi I believe the irrelevant sycophantic text you questioned in the discussion page actually refers to the fact that early versions of the page seem to have been re-worded by someone close to Reuben or Reuben's companies, due to the scatty, quickly edited, censored nature of them. ~ Tobin: 82.10.33.113 12:23, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Basementalism

All I did was protect the redirect. The whole of the 'deleted' article remains in the history of the new redirect - see here. I figured it was easier than just deleting it. Hope that helps. Proto::► 16:32, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, ok. Thanks! ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:34, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Week

The best existing proposal I can, in my own limited way, think of for the previously discussed "appreciation week" can now be found at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week#Wikipedia Week. Any comments or responses would be more than welcome. Badbilltucker 15:03, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Original Research

I am having a problem figuring out how to get my theory on the Formation of the Sun and Planets out there where it can be critiqued. If Wikipedia doesn't allow Original thought, where can I go. I believe I've got a pretty good story that I can defend. I can't find anyone else who has thought of the same processes. Duke 21:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Super Auto Insurance Agnecy

Oops! Your right, I did use the wrong SD tag. Thanks so much for catching that ;-) Mystify85JEC 20:19, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Bridgeland Community

I moved it to "Bridgeland, Texas" and reverted the article to an earlier form.

The place is a new suburb of Houston under development. WhisperToMe 21:58, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

"Have these places been written about in local media? I might change my "vote" if they became referenced" Yes - There are links to the Houston Chronicle articles from the Bridgeland article.

Chronicle articles about Bridgeland:

• http://search.chron.com/chronicle/openDocument.do?docRef=12_13_2006_2_bridgeland16&selectedPath=
• http://search.chron.com/chronicle/openDocument.do?docRef=06_21_2006_2_towne-lake21&selectedPath=
• http://search.chron.com/chronicle/openDocument.do?docRef=03_07_2004_2_Rouse7&selectedPath=

WhisperToMe 23:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Angie's list

If you look at the history of the Angie's List article, it looks like it was originally written by Angie's PR department. I don't agree with your last edit and I think you should change it back. The point is that they accept advertising which reflects the integrity of the list. The article says advertisers need a "B" rating or better, but who controls that? Angie's List.

Their website states:

"It's honest: Companies don't pay to be on Angie's List, nor can they put themselves on the list. Only Angie's List members (the consumers) report on the companies they've hired. View the list of services rated in your area. Additionally, a real-live Angie's List employee reads all reports before they're posted. This ensures that ratings remain honest and unbiased."

https://www.angieslist.com/AngiesList/about.asp

That's an admission that they are not obligated use every report they get. Their statement that "nor can they put themselves on the list" is simply a lie since Angies knows full well that it can not tell the difference between a consumer that used the contractor's service and a company claiming to be one. If you parse the language, it says companies can't put themselves on the list, but it doesn't say anything about a company's representatives or surrogates.

If they want to incur the expense of attempting to confirm each and every report, it would quickly become a losing business model and is the reason none of those site do it.

Take a look at this review of Angie's List:

http://knaddison.com/public-policy/why-angies-list-sucks

Regardless of what you think of the source, tell me why that review is not right on the mark.

Now reread those earlier links you removed and bear in mind that your justification for removing them was just a guideline not a rule.

The problem with all the sites utilizing consumer reviews is that customers expect good service and most do not bother to write a reveiw unless they are upset with a service and all businesses have difficult customers from time to time. What's the incentive for a satisfied customer to submit reviews? Absolutely nothing. Some will do it anyway but most won't. As the New York Times article states, they all have had to pay for reviews. In Angie's case the paid charities to write reviews of local businesses.

You're going to law school right? You need to learn how to recognize a scam when you see one. Pyramid schemes sound great too, and they are if you operated one or are one of the suckers who got in early, rather than later. Those that operated them thrived for a long time before most states made them illegal. It doesn't mean they were any less a scam because the New York Times did a story about them or the government hadn't examined the problem. Both the government, and unfortunately the press, react to problems after they occur.

Read the September 6, 2006 version. That's what the article would look like if it were up to Angie

Hello, I am Hybridan I am sorry but I am a new to the talk thing on Wiki, but would like to learn, I would also like to make a bit of a contribution to the article on Angie's List. I found it to be helpful and pretty close to NPOV in terms of effort. I would only argue that what needs to happen is that the article should do a better job of explaining the ethos of Angie's list and other type of site. (Consumer review sites that take money for advertising, but also make a claim (which could, or could not be) valid that they are presenting a reasonably unbiased, or a consumer biased viewpoint. Thanks, those are my thoughts since you ask ONUnicorn

editor statistics

Preface: I am only asking you because you seem knowledgeable, and you once left a smiley on my Talk page. The question: I sometimes see people refer to the number of articles they have edited, or perhaps the number of edits they have made, sometimes comparing the number of their "Talk" edits to the number of their "article" edits. Can you tell me how I might discover this information about myself? -- BBlackmoor ^(talk) • 2007-01-11 22:29Z

Thank you! -- BBlackmoor ^(talk) • 2007-01-12 14:24Z

Hello, I am Hybridan I am sorry but I am a new to the talk thing on Wiki, but would like to learn, I would also like to make a bit of a contribution to the article on Angie's List. I found it to be helpful and pretty close to NPOV in terms of effort. I would only argue that what needs to happen is that the article should do a better job of explaining the ethos of Angie's list and other type of site. (Consumer review sites that take money for advertising, but also make a claim (which could, or could not be) valid that they are presenting a reasonably unbiased, or a consumer biased viewpoint. Thanks, those are my thoughts since you ask ONUnicorn

3O provided at Nik Sage's talk

Just so you know. Nice to see everyone staying so civil, by the way. Moreschi ^Deletion! 20:50, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Copyedit request

Since you've been so very, very good to me in the past, I was wondering if you might take a look at my new FA attempt over at The Turk? The only thing I have left to do that I'm blatantly aware of is the redlink situation, which I'll be addressing before I list it, but I know there's some awkward wording in there as well that might use a new set of eyes. Any help you can give me would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance! --badlydrawnjeff talk 04:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello again!

Sorry I haven't gotten back to you in a while. How's it going on your end of the world? -- K-9 LVR 04:52, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Completely false nonsense

It is indeed completely false nonsense, particularly this statement: "An administrator (Jayjg) involved in this revert war, is inappropriately threatening to remove any entry about this organization -- which would, in effect, censor it from Wikipedia." I've edited the article twice in the past two weeks, and I didn't do any of that; see here Talk:If_Americans_Knew#Vanity piece - AFD? for more detail about my "inappropriate threat". I left up this comment, but there no reason why people should be posting false and defamatory statements, and I certainly don't have to leave them up. Jayjg ^(talk) 20:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Cite: Precious Moments#Enesco

Hi, I'm the user that added the blurb about Enesco Corp's bankruptcy filings. Although bankruptcy filings are filed with the courts and for the sake of the creditors, public knowledge, do I need to cite it? Or should I mention which district it was filed with instead of citing a court document, so that whomever wants to check can do their own research? -- Emana 21:06, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

RfA of myself

Thats no reason not to try!:(Quatreryukami 20:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

THX:DQuatreryukami 20:43, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks for the barnstar, its my first and makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. - Ocatecir 17:15, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Tonimaree says Thanks

Thanks for the welcome! I will contact you for Q/A. Have a pleasant day o/ A Maree Johnson 15:10, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

57 Varieties of Bad Jokes and other Deleted Nonsense.

I have a question: what is the meaning of this page? Why was this [1] added? I don't quite understand why it was added, and it would be very helpful if you told me why it was. Was the Krune Talk Page humorous in a way that it deserved to go on a page like that one? Acalamari 17:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I agree, Krune was funny to a certain extent. I'd just like to know what the page you added his Talk Page to is about, but I guess it's a joke page. Anyway, how did you find out about Krune? Acalamari 19:33, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

• Seriously, I am glad someone find humor in the discussion. It makes things seem much better. Acalamari 19:45, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
• Fair enough. I asked Ryolong that question because I was curious to what Ryulong would do. I was impressed with the answer and gave a thank you. I am pleased to see that Ryulong is now an Administrator, and that Krune is now blocked. Acalamari 19:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

You might as well remove the link. The Talk Page has been changed, and the history is gone. Take a look an see for yourself. Acalamari 21:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Corey Duffel

Thank you for not deleting it, The reason I put a hangon tag on it was becuase I have tries 2 other times to make the page, and it got deleted, same as it is now. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Claytex (talk • contribs) 19:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC).

Propaganda

Someone already restored it. My mistake, sorry. NawlinWiki 18:51, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Angie's List

Hi! I'm new to this and I want to make some contributions to the Angie's List page. I see that you've made a lot of edits and contributions and I think you've done a good job on it so far. So I hope you don't mind if I ask you a few questions and seek your advice. Do you think it's necessary and appropriate to say Angie's List is "privately held and for profit?" Also, is it necessary to mention revenue sources - member fees and advertising? I'm not sure that information is really important to how Angie's List works and what it is. Your thoughts?

I also was thinking of adding some information based on what you can read on their website. Is the Angie's List website a good source to use? Or should I try to find the information in an article somewhere for citation purposes?

I was also wondering why this statement was deleted? "Members submit information about contractors and receive the magazine. Contractors are not allowed to post information about themselves directly, and each report submitted to Angie's List is screened by an internal data team." I think it could be revised a little but I think an important part of Angie's List is that companies aren't allowed to post about themselves and the screening process helps prevent that. I know some people are skeptical that this actually works but Angie's List is the only site like this doing any screening to prevent companies from increasing their ratings - at least that I'm aware of.

Also, the logos are incorrect as they are right now. The logo with the girl is an old one and is no longer used at all. The other one is the only one being used right now. I'm not sure where the old one came from since I couldn't find it anywhere on the website anymore. Do you think it's ok to switch them out and lable the old one as "previous logo" or take the old one out completely? I think I can figure out how to do it but if you have tips I'd appreciate it.--SarahER 20:39, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for being patient with me.

SarahER 20:39, 25 January 2007 (UTC)SarahER

Re [2]. I split up the source parameters to make it a bit easier to read, especially because the article originally had a very long first paragraph. Feel free to compact it again if you prefer. -- Jeandré, 2007-01-31t19:44z

Category:Wikipedia administrators

Because I hate userboxes and all of the unnecessary foofraw people put on their User pages. User:Zoe|(talk) 22:16, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Stupid?

Thanks - fair comment. I actually called the question stupid rather than its originator - but shouldn't have let it annoy me. Nmg20 00:10, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for taking the time to review the "United Auburn Indian Community" page. This is the first page I have created and am in the process of getting that information. I appreciate your advice and thank you also for updating the links and the content area. Tvwebmaster 19:08, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Canton of Berne

Thank you for your helpful improvements to this article. It should have occurred to me as well, actually, that there ought to be a better way to arrange the images. Let's hope that my fellow editor also sees it that way. Sandstein 21:55, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Template:Boardgamecover

Your merging of this template with the computer and video games template means that a large number of boardgames which have nothing to do with computers are now in the wrong category. This merge should probably be undone. Putting computer games and non-computer games all in the same cat (even if you rename it) is going to be messy. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

• I didn't object because I didn't notice it until you actually did it. Can you link me to one of those places you posted. I'd like to figure out why you thought merging the categories of two different types of games would be helpful. - Mgm|^(talk) 16:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
• Ah wait, I objected because your merge put boardgames in a videogame category. Now this is fixed I see no immediate reason to undo your edits anymore. - Mgm|^(talk) 16:49, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks and a question

Thanks for reverting the Angie's List page back. I was about to but you beat me to it. I also added some info I've found. Feel free to comment on it or help me develop it. You might notice that I added a citation where you put citation needed. I found it in an article that I also used earlier in this page. Is there a way to format it so the citation doesn't repeat itself in the references section? I just thought it looked weird like that.SarahER 18:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)SarahER —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SarahER (talk • contribs) 18:27, 29 January 2007 (UTC).

Your question from the Help Desk

Hello. I knocked together an example table in my sandbox which may be useful to you. I have included comments in the code to assist you. Regards, Adrian M. H. 22:14, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I found a freely-licensed photo on flickr, uploaded it to the Commons: at Commons:Image:Blümlisalp 2005-03-25.jpg, and added it to User:ONUnicorn/Sandbox. You may be able to find more photos by searching the Commons: as well. — coelacan talk — 00:12, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

On the chart

Hi there! gruezi voll! I do like your chart that u added to the bern canton page...yet i think it might be better moved to the bernese alps page and the berner oberland page...(im not exactly sure the codes to use to do that)...i think surely sandstein will agree and will remove it as soon as he sees it and likely a half dozen other pics as well for good measure in shock after seeing the bern canton page riddled with pics of mountain peaks...my personal feeling is it might be a few too many pics of peaks for the bern canton page...im restoring back to last version that just had one representative peak next to the peaks list...yet i do think ur chart has a place on the bernese oberland page...and the bernese alps page would be nice with it...and for the bernese alps page several other peaks could be added as the bernese alps extend into canton Valais and part of canton Vaud i think...the les diablerets group of peaks is in there at the far west of the bernese alps yet out of canton bern...and so is the bietschhorn and several peaks to the east of that in the canton Valais portion of the bernese alps...the Grunhorn? maybe...id need to look at a map to see them all...yet several very high noteworthy peaks could be added into the chart for the bernese alps page that arnt yet in that chart, and they likely have pics in wikipedia for their individual pages so u could easily access them...merci viel mal!!...and that pic of the cheese was perfect for the canton page...great addition...Benjiwolf 09:04, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

i think what im going to do is let u try and rearrange the top of the page to work with ur browser and then ill tell u what it looks like on mine...when i move that jungfrau pic anywhere else it crams all the rest of the pics halfway down the page...maybe we should move it to the gallery or move the mönch pic to the gallery if ur next try to keep it up there and rearrange the geography section doesnt work...id like to keep the pic of the simmental and the waterfall next to the text talking about the oberland as that pic of the simmental is very representative of what the oberland looks like...then one snowy peak (the jungfrau i guess is best for this page)...and there are so many many waterfalls that its good to have a waterfall pic...those three pics next to the oberland section as that text is longer than the rest of the geo section too...then the napf pic next to the mittelland text...and the lake biel pic next to the lake biel text...the rest only if they work...its nice to have a pic of one peak next to the peaks list...and one pic seems to fit about the same size as the whole list...while the text may be sandwiched in the middle some i dont see what else to do to get the pics next to the text talking of them???...anyways thanks for ur edits...its a pain these different browsers representations...when i edit i adjust my screen size in several ways to get an idea of what it will look like with different size screens...yet it seems even that doesnt capture what it will look like on some different browsers...anyways i think as soon as the page moves out of the geography section the pics work well and are layed out next to the article text they are relevant to...maybe what ill do is expand the text some as well to help...definately the mittelland and seenland text could be expanded...merci...Benjiwolf 09:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

good idea

I think it was a good idea to request peer review on the Angie's List article. Otherwise I think it will just keep being reverted. I tried to remain neutral in what I added but I guess not everyone saw it that way. I'm still not sure how it sounded like an advertisement though. I see that people in the past have had the same comment about previous versions. I think you did a good job with finding a more neutral point of view, but I would still like to see someone find a source for those negative claims. Without a source it just sounds like opinion to me. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SarahER (talk • contribs) 23:20, 30 January 2007 (UTC).

Transcendence (Band)‎

All I could find was a single MySpace profile [3] which shows that they are an unsigned band. IrishGuy ^talk 20:50, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Those albums and website are for another band, one from New York. IrishGuy ^talk 20:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Wanted to let you know...

Just wanted to let you know, since I'm affiliated with Angie's List I don't think I should be editing the article any more. It seems like things are getting a little controversial. I thought I was remaining neutral, but I guess others didn't think so. To avoid questions of conflicts of interest, I'll just contribute to the talk page. I think you've been doing a good job so far trying to keep the article neutral, even though others are fighting you on it. And thanks for helping me get started and understand Wikipedia better. I'll be checking on the article regularly. Keep up the fight for npov! SarahER 14:59, 1 February 2007 (UTC)SarahER

ONUnicorn, when an Angie's List employee checking out this article thinks you have a neutral point of view, perhaps it is time to reconsider whether you have a npov at all. With all due respect, considering some of your edits to this article and positions, it kinda looks like you may be affiliated with Angie's List too.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.163.255.34 (talk • contribs)

Dewey Burke

Thank you for cleaning up the Dewey Burke article. You made a good example of how one can turn a list into useful prose, instead of nominating the list for deletion. Cheers, - Gilliam 21:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi ONUnicorn,

Thanks for participating in my recent RfA. Even though it was ultimately successful (at 54-13-11), I value all of the feedback and have already benefited from the community's suggestions. Hope to see you around. - Gilliam 22:08, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

User talk:150.199.175.70

Hi ONUnicorn,

The reason I reverted the edit was that the user not only added the apology but also removed all the warning messages. That way the next time someone catches the user vandalizing they'll have to look through the edit history of the user talk page to find out that the user has vandalized in the past, or - that's the most likely case - will assume the user has never been warned and he/she will be able to vandalize quite a few more pages before getting blocked. --Carabinieri 19:47, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Criticism and response in parapsychology

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Criticism_and_response_in_parapsychology

Hi ONUnicorn, it would be great to have you opinion on the above. Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 01:25, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Removal for editing to user space sounds good to me. I don't have tons of time right now to do it. But, I also don't think I should do it to begin with. I have too much in it. Perhaps you, perfectblue, Dreadlocke, Nealparr, and some others can help with a re-write, and you guys start it before I get into it.

It's great you came up with a reason-even an unofficial one. It kills me when people have little reason, because I just tend to assume they are ideologues.

So, what do I do, just move the page, like move button --> /User:Martinphi/Controversy in Parapsychology (this is a rename to a better ?? title). Is that correct? Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 20:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I've been advised to create a sandbox for the Criticism and response in parapsychology article. It's here, renamed to Controversy in parapsychology. I'm not sure if people want to edit under my user page, or edit the main article. But, if it's decided to edit the sandbox, It would be great to have your input. I won't be editing in the beginning, while I see what format people want to use etc. I'm putting this on several talk pages. Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 05:26, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Questions not answered

The first three questions in the RfA form were not answered. They are required, and any nomination submitted without answers to them will fail before it even gets started. Removing the nomination was the right thing to do. Kafziel ^Talk 21:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes they were answered. That's why I restored it. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 21:14, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see what you mean. Tech Wiz probably made the mistake because the answers weren't in the right spot. Well, it's moot; he withdrew his nomination. Kafziel ^Talk 21:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your help, ive got most of the editing tecniques down, but if you dont mind ill let you know if i cant figure somthing out, i got your message a few weeks ago i just finally got around to writting my messages back. thanks again --Jay Menglass 22:07, 10 February 2007 (UTC)Jay Menglass

AfD

Yeah, I think I completely messed up that AfD. Probably better to relist it on the new one now.--Wizardman 22:14, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

American Christmas Tradition

Has been restored, I'm looking into whats going on as something seem to have gone astray with CSD process. The histroy of this article does indicate that there is a copyright violation, can you please clean the article up tonight thanks(sorry I'm UTC +8hours). Gnangarra 15:24, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Play

come play Sandbox on parapsychology as a science. Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 06:21, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Quest articles

Just to clarify, Quest was the first source for all but one of the articles that are copyvios. That one was Ghost tour and it existed as only a two sentence stub prior to the Quest material. Haunting was only a redirect. All others were started as Quest pieces. It is in the history of each one. Look at Quest being cited as the source from the beginning. --The Argonaut 01:48, 23 February 2007 (UTC)