Questions, comments, thoughts, complaints? (last blanked 10/17/07)

Have you considered archiving instead of blanking? - CobaltBlueTony 16:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Everyking! - In my course of studies I am a fan of various art schools most notably Dadaism and Surrealism, and the more recent group Massurrealism. I've read the book of their essays and have been following this group for some time now. Please visit on wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massurrealism my knowledge of wiki standards may not be up to par, but this tag makes no sense. I've noticed you have also worked on this entry in the past. It seems to me that there are considerable references included from third parties. What gives? --LAgurl (talk) 11:39, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I noticed that you've taken an active interest in improving the Pokemon stuff on Wikipedia. I understand that you probably want the articles back, too. But while you're busy persuading the senior members of the project to undo the lists; I noticed that List of Pokémon (381-400) had some virtually empty sections on pokemon. If your up to it, we could expand on them a little and improve what Wikipedia has right now. If the list are ever un-merged, any useful information would just be put back into the articles anyway. Ageofe (talk) 03:29, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For longtime work on Wikipedia; improving this encyclopedia for over three and a half years. Acalamari 18:01, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, though you're the one who needs thanking for both quality and quantity! :) Acalamari 18:22, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• The Thriving Cult of Greed and Power, at Wikipedia:Peer review/The Thriving Cult of Greed and Power/archive1. You commented back when this article was up for deletion discussion, and I don't think you monitor the WikiProjects I posted this notice to. Your suggestions on any tips to get this article eventually to WP:FA, or if you think it is ready for WP:FAC or WP:GAC, would be most appreciated at the Peer Review. Thank you. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 19:45, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Everyking, I saw that you frequently contribute to African articles, and was wondering if you could look over an article about an Ugandan sect, the Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God, that I have expanded. I am working with the suggestions on the talk page and could use another eye. Thanks, --arkalochori ^|talk| 01:30, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any chance of finding out who won the seats for which the Republic of the Congo parliamentary election, 2007 results were annulled? Seen any info on by-elections yet? —Nightstallion 22:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing we lack now is the date of the by-election... —Nightstallion 10:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, great. I've tried to find info on that point, but I haven't been able to find *any* mention of a date up to now. —Nightstallion 11:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No luck yet, either, I suppose? —Nightstallion 23:08, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hah! They'll be held on 7 December 2007, confer http://www.afriquenligne.fr/actualites/politique/legislatives-partielles-en-decembre-au-congo-2007111511495/ —Nightstallion 13:48, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I managed to decypher most of the abbreviations from {{Togolese parliamentary election, 2007}}, but four are still missing. Any idea? —Nightstallion 12:28, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Everyking. I'm looking to archive some of these requests for clarification, so I'll note here that November 11 appears to be the set expiration date for your restrictions. This is the last revision relevant, where Kirill Lokshin agreed on Nov 11. Tell me if you'd like it restored, but I don't see any likelihood of a different day being selected as the expiration date. Picaroon (t) 21:49, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		For over 100,000 quality edits here on Wikipedia. Keep up the good work. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 03:10, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Without your efforts, very many articles would have degenerated into rumours and gossip. Yamla 20:55, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unless I'm much mistaken, today is the 11th. I believe your restrictions have expired? If so, here's some balloons for you! Good luck! Acalamari 17:49, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad I got the day right. :) Thanks again for your work and patience. Acalamari 18:02, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See here Raul654 23:16, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Could you confirm that the User:Everyking on en.Wiktionary is you (he says that he is, but I have my doubts). -- Jeff Knaggs (talk) 22:40, 16 November 2007 (UTC) (aka SemperBlotto on Wiktionary)[reply]

That is not me. Thank you for checking. Everyking (talk) 23:45, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK. He is now blocked (seems to be one of our long term sneaky vandals). Jeff Knaggs (talk) 10:01, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for any hard feelings at any time on this project. I'm still withdrawing from the Wikicrack, but yeah, I've decided to leave. - 211.30.71.131 (talk) 14:00, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Considering your interesting in elections and/or the EU, you may be interested in the ongoing deletion debate on Danish European Union opt-outs referendum -- if so, could you please voice your opinion in the AfD debate? Thanks! —Nightstallion 15:45, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

this page has been vandalized by the same user 8 times. do you think you can leave a message on their talk page. I'm also warning, you, it's not 1 ip address, but 2 in the same range. Tech43 (talk) 06:36, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have found where the IP's are located: Canberra, Australia. Looked on another wrestling page and have found several Canberra Ip's who have vandalized. Who should I go to? Tech43 (talk) 07:00, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i don't know the templates for warnings. i will also report it. thanks for the help. Tech43 (talk) 07:08, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I chose words carefully. I do not think you're wrong, and I do not think you're bad (although late in the game I think you were certainly the one, but you knew I thought so). The question, in that sentence, was merely "going to cause a lot of trouble," which you very much have done, and intentionally! You meant to cause problems when you caused problems, just as Giano has intended to cause trouble when he has caused trouble. If you believe that you are right and believe that it's time to cause problems, you have done.

If you want to go on to ask "What is my evaluation of Everyking," it's pretty nuanced. I think you didn't jump as much as you were pushed. I think you were as much victim as perpetrator. You reacted. At the same time, when the proximal causes were removed -- when the people who were pushing stopped pushing (or were stopped) -- you sort of did what they wanted by starting to see everyone through a filter of enmity. Begging your pardon, but looking at my edit and thinking I'm against you or that my judgment is bad for it is sort of still giving what those people wanted.

Finally, in that conversation, the question was "An administrator who will mistakenly or intentionally use administrative powers awry." Again, you knew exactly what you were doing, and I was addressing an audience who would never have stood for my mentioning the administrators who have done the most spectacularly troublesome acts (Kelly, Tony, Ed), so I used your troubles.

I apologize for offending, but I stand by my statement that you were troublesome, though never out of ignorance and not without legitimate cause. (Comparing you to one of my oldest on-Wikipedia friends, Giano, should tell you that no insult was intended.) Geogre (talk) 12:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Color Outside the Lines, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Color Outside the Lines is a redirect page resulting from an implausible typo (CSD R3).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Color Outside the Lines, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 18:30, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do I need to answer? Alright then. Therequiembellishere (talk) 19:44, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You've answered it. Therequiembellishere (talk) 19:48, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In fact, according to the edit histories the article with the correct spelling was created, albeit in abbreviated form, some three hours before you first created your article with the miss-spelled title. I have restored your version.--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 19:12, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to wish my fellow Wikipedians a Merry Christmas! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 01:58, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, firstly, I do not appreaciate the tone used in your message towards me. I've noticed your work on Wikipedia and believe me, it is appreaciated. However, it is not reply to blast me for such a trivial few words. I labeled those articles as former politicians because, to my knowledge at the time of writing them, they were former politicians (not current foreign ministers). Please adjust your tone next time you leave me or anyone else a message.--Thomas.macmillan (talk) 01:49, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uh... if he hasnt served "since 2007" then he hasnt served "as of 2007". How is there a difference? And why do you oppose cite web? Jose João (talk) 02:54, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really? Cause I created the article and used cite web which would make me think cite web would stay on the article. But that's just me. Personally though, I wish Wikipedians would just pick one reference style so this wouldnt be an issue. If possible try and find the exact date (although I assume by your previous edits that is your goal). Jose João (talk) 03:16, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I wondered if it is possible to see which articles have been deleted following a speedy tagging by the user who nominated Milton Jimenez for deletion. The reason I ask is that the Milton Jimenez article was originally speedy deleted (the deleting admin has refused to comment) and User:Mh29255 has nominated a number of articles for speedy deletion over the last few days that clearly didn't match the criteria [1]. My concern therefore is that more articles which should not have been tagged, may also have been deleted (I only noticed Milton Jimenez being deleted, because I went back to add the references section). Thanks HookOnTheWall (talk) 05:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. However, I was hoping to see which articles had been tagged by User:Mh29255 (and then subsequently deleted by various admins) rather than see the deletions made by a given admin (it is Mh29255's tagging, and possible mistaken deletion based upon that tagging, which concerns me). Is that possible? Thanks again HookOnTheWall (talk) 06:05, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, too bad. Thanks for taking the time to respond, and thanks also for your note of encouragement. HookOnTheWall (talk) 06:09, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. I wonder if you could please comment on what has been said here. Am I correct, or have I misinterpreted the criteria? Thanks HookOnTheWall (talk) 04:33, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have done what you suggested. Thanks again. HookOnTheWall (talk) 05:19, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Could you have a look at the discussion at Talk:Communist Party of India (Marxist)? I don't really know how to procede with this, and an outside comment would be very welcome. --Soman (talk) 01:55, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't always take one minute to grant the request: some users are known to be trustworthy enough to grant it immediately while others take more time to research them. In your case, I knew you were trustworthy to use rollback from both the fact that you were an effective admin during your time as a sysop, from my past observations of you, and because I don't believe you'll ever be abusive: I can trust you. Good luck, Everyking. :) Acalamari 19:06, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at your recent edits, I'm happy with my decision. :) Just one thing though, when warning a user for vandalism don't forget to add "subst" before the template. For example, in this edit, you should have put {{subst:test2}} rather than just {{test2}}. Apart from that, keep up the great work! :) Acalamari 19:48, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please file a new request for clarification in February. The current one is archived to the case talk page. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:34, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why done you expand it then!? Instead of crippling it... Ryan4314 (talk) 23:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you've been needlessly hard on him. He's just trying to do a good job here like everybody else including you and me. There was a big, big mess made by others and he plunged in to help with it. --A. B. ^(talk) 03:18, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just saying notable isn't a real reason to keep it. Next time you are part of a deletion debate: actually use a reason that is sentences and not just one word. Short comments (like the one you posted) in deletion debates will usually be ignored, and at times can be considered disruptive. RobJ1981 (talk) 12:21, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not everyone in deletion debates are "deletionists". Wikipedia simply isn't the guide to everything, so deletion debates are necessary. RobJ1981 (talk) 06:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Everyking, Rob does have a point. It is always worth giving some indication of the basis on which you are !voting. for one thing, it is more effective that way. I don't think short comments are disruptive, though, just unhelpful. It often does help reach compromise positions. DGG (talk) 05:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks to me like your user page, re controversial actions taken by Admins etc would make a nice start to an essay on Ethics. What do you think?Wjhonson (talk) 23:00, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, I'm writing to inform you that I have withdrawn my request for adminship, which was currently standing at 11 supports, 22 opposes and 6 neutrals. This count could have been so much better if I had understood policy, although I believe that 17 questions is a lot to ask of a user's first RfA. I will take on all comments given at the RfA and will endeavour to meet the high expectations of the RfA voters. _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN}^{play it cool.} 21:13, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which closed unsuccessfully with 25 support, 18 oppose, and 6 neutral. Thanks for the support and I'll look forward working with you. --BritandBeyonce (talk) 06:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

for the thoughtful reply on my user talk page. Also, if you have more time, could you please take a look at the survey on Talk:Burma? Take care, Maglev Power (talk) 00:39, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was just over two weeks ago when I granted you rollback. I wanted to ask, how has it been for you to revert vandalism more quickly again? Acalamari 23:54, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I was just asking because I was curious, that was all. I sometimes check up on people I've granted rollback to to see if they're happy with it. No problems here. Acalamari 00:15, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My effort to regain adminship was unsuccessful, But I wanted to thank you for taking some time out of your day to voice your opinion.--MONGO 19:18, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm willing to do all the cleanup and redirecting, although I would wish to say that two seperate articles on the Political stuff and the Violence would be a BAD THING. The aftermath section was getting too long anyway (almost half the size of the article) and it was much longer than the violence article so I decided it was the right thing to do. I didn't talk to you about this beforehand because I was stupid and didn't consult the edit summary to find that you added much of the content. Also, you do not own wikipedia articles and if you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others, do not submit it, as stated at the bottom of this edit box. Editorofthewiki (talk) 22:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please cool down. I didn't mean to insult you. I was just saying that Political stuff and Violence would look better in one article, rather than two. I did not destroy your work, I just merged it. Please stop almost yelling at me on my talk page. I will solve the problem real soon. Editorofthewiki (talk) 23:06, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your compliment. I see you have taken great interest in the article, so please update it when more information is available as I will be working on other pages in the meantime. Editorofthewiki (talk) 00:55, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WOW! You're good! Thanks for the info. Cheers, Basketballone10 01:31, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		I, Basketball110, hereby award you this barnstar for great work on Utoni Nujoma. Basketball110 Clinton, Obama, McCain, Huckabee, Romney, or Paul? 05:09, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Same, but I stuck that on my signature because I am the "co-founder" of a Wikipedia poll. Feel free to vote. Basketball110 Clinton, Obama, McCain, Huckabee, Romney, or Paul? 05:14, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:ASH060 (2).jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:10, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to your contributions, you made your first edit about four years ago, and have made some 105,000 edits since then. Congratulations!

It's also been about a year since your last RfA. Do you have any intention of running again? Acalamari 02:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. :) I'll be glad when you do get to run at RfA again once your sanctions are lifted; I think you'd make a great admin again. Acalamari 03:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome: I would have been disappointed if ArbCom hadn't done the appeal in the open, otherwise I may not have been able to write that. I was hoping to say something for you, and I'm glad I got the chance. Acalamari 17:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Basketball110 wishes you a happy Valentine's Day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Britney_Spears#You_guys_are_all_delusional.2C_face_the_facts_and_read_this_please. Radiohumor (talk) 00:20, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The following motion modifying the terms of the original Arbitration case has been adopted.

1. Remedy 2 of EK3 (prohibition against posting on AN/I) is terminated.
2. Remedy 3 of EK3 (commenting on admin's actions) is terminated.
3. Everyking's music article "parole" is terminated.
4. Remedy 5 of EK3 is continued (and indeed, is a common sense requirement for all editors.)
5. Remedy X of EK3 (non-interaction and non-commenting on Snowspinner/Phil Sandifer) is continued.
6. The harassment ban and terms of enforcement in the July 2006 amendment to EK3 is continued.
7. Upon request by Everyking, these terms will be reviewed, but no more often than once per year, starting the date this motion passes.

For the Arbitration committee, Thatcher 16:06, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This seems an unfair outcome to me. I have expressed my views on the matter here and contacted several Arbitrators by email asking for clarification. WjBscribe 21:12, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with WJBscribe: I don't think it was a fair outcome either. I don't see why any of your sanctions need to continue, and I voiced this in my statement on RFAR. Let's see how the case Avruch has filed turns out. Acalamari 02:51, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI Avruch ^T 01:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Everyking. I was doing a bit of tidying, when I noticed a red link species - joy! Actually, there is a lot of red link species, so my joy is potentially endless. Anyway, I plugged the genus into the search box and this came up: Wonambi. It seems the person creating that article forgot to create a redirect the only member of the group (genus), the species (extinct) with the unlikely sounding name of Wonambi naracoortensis. When I went ahead with this, I noticed that I was recreating a page. You had deleted this, some 3 years ago, somewhat justifiably from your quote of the text it contained. Despite this batty text, it is (was) a real species. A combination of curiosity and a strict interpretatation of GFDL has led me to make this request. [I'm getting to the point now!] Is it possible to have the earlier history restored? Sorry to bother you with this tiny matter. Cheers, cygnis insignis 16:50, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm peculiar, and I'm not assuming it was vandalism as such. I don't want to restore the text, it is now a redirect. Was it a one line history? If not, there may be some text on the species in the history. There was only one way to find out, I will ask someone else. Thanks anyway and regards. cygnis insignis 17:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't doubt it. Thanks for the help. cygnis insignis 17:38, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see an article from The Observer at http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2006/jun/18/wikipedia.news --Eastmain (talk) 07:53, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the comment that I posted tonight on the Requests for arbitration page and let me know if you would like me to proceed. It might be that motions terminating some of the remaining sanctions would have a stronger chance of passing at a later date, but under all the circumstances I will offer motions now if you want the matter reconsidered now. You may reply in the discussion section on WP:RfAr, or here. Newyorkbrad (talk) 04:38, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been invited to join the WikiProject Zimbabwe, a collaborative effort focused on improving Wikipedia's coverage of Zimbabwe. If you'd like to join, just add your name to the member list. Thanks for reading!

First I've heard of it. At least you had a source. WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 18:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		Thanks for the support
		Thanks for your support on my request for adminship. It passed 92/2/2, and so I look forward to proving myself to the community as a leader and mop-wielder. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:44, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
Firstly, great work on Zimbabwean parliamentary election, 2008. Secondly, I am from Wikipedia sister project Wikinews and I would like your permission to copy the text you added to the article onto Wikinews. Unfourtunately, Wikinews uses CC-BY but it would be great if you would agree to license your contributions to that seciton under CC-BY so we can use it on Wikinews. If you are OK with this please indicate on my talk pgae.

Thanks, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smallbig (talk • contribs) 07:02, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I really love and admire the fact that you contribute so much on Zimbabwe. I have considered on several times to give you an award.....i'm sure i will make time to give you one soon. If you check the news, the sixth parliament & cabinet were dissolved by the president yesterday (03/27/08). In accordance with that dissolution, i went ahead and made the changes. Samwise Gamgee 15:08, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

i didn't know that you went ahead and reversed the changes i had made. well, that's is sad. Of course, i won't go back and correct the changes you made. One of the things you should really check when reversing anything User:MacVivo has done, is whether you are justified in reversing my edit. To tell you the truth, i never do edits without justification, i mean i don't vandalize pages. I'm usually justified in all the changes that i make. In the same line, knowing that you Everyking are an honest, dedicated wikipedian, i have never considered reversing your edits because i know you are a good guy. I hope this helps. The thing i really want, is the complete coverage of Zimbabwe, and to that end, i wont create/edit/ect pages without solid reasons. I hope this makes sense.

Samwise Gamgee 15:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid you are bogging yourself down in technicalities that are kind not really relevant Samwise Gamgee 21:42, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

		The Current Events Barnstar
		I award Everyking the Current Events Barnstar for his incredible edits to articles on the Zimbabwe election. In addition his use of dual pd when adding several long paragraphs. This has helped the Wikimedia project Wikinews create this article on the presidential election. --Smaalbig (talk) 21:50, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Everyking - great job. Wizzy…☎ 06:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good work -- a thorough job, given that sources are so limited. Kahuzi (talk) 22:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Just want to commend you on your work on Zimbabwean presidential election, 2008. Thanks for improving my contributions. --Elliskev 01:11, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Your changes here states facts that rely on the ref names "Protest" and "Declared" but they are missing. I've checked some of the sources for the facts but was unable to find them. Rather than deleting the closing tags of the missing ref tags and adding a fact tag, I thought maybe you forgot to to include them in your edit? Thanks Louis waweru (talk) 00:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thank you for taking the time to fix it! Great job on the article, too. =) Louis waweru (talk) 04:13, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any idea when Raila Odinga is taking office? Therequiembellishere (talk) 15:56, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support in my RFA, that didn't quite make it and ended at 120/47/13. There was a ton of great advice there, that I'm going to go on. Maybe someday. If not, there are articles to write! Thanks for your support. Lawrence § t/e 17:51, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think -- shouldn't we split the article, now that the parliamentary and presidential elections will be held separately? Up to now, we've *never* had a single article if the elections were held on different dates... —Nightstallion 17:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tried to split it, Ivorian presidential election, 2008 and Ivorian parliamentary election, 2008. I've also tried to remove info not relevant to the parliamentary one from its article. —Nightstallion 17:15, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That AFP source I cite that reads "Haiti PM ousted over soaring food prices" is rather similar to what the rest of the media is saying about the dismissal, so rather than remove any mention, account for it using reliable sources. Correction through omission is a poor way to inform. El_C 11:20, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for supporting my recent request for adminship which was successful with 89 supports, 0 opposes, and 2 neutrals. Unfortunately all I can offer is this lame text thanks rather than some fancy-smancy thank-you spam template thingy. I was very pleased to receive such strong support and to hear so many nice comments from editors whom I respect. I’ll do my best with the tools, and if you ever see me going astray don’t hesitate to drop a note on my talk page. Thanks again for your support!--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 03:35, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just put what hte Prime Minister of Chad page has. Therequiembellishere (talk) 03:26, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Everyking, I thought you may want to know that I've sent you an E-mail. Best wishes. Acalamari 02:06, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 02:57, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to give you a Barnstar for your diligent reporting of the Zimbabwe election, but I see that somebody already beat me to it... --Legis (talk - contribs) 17:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind helping me sort out this page? The information is very cluttered on the net and information is hard to find and this one bloke is getting very difficult for me to get through to. Therequiembellishere (talk) 00:49, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Everyking. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 May 8.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I noticed you voted keep for: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Instant-runoff voting controversies (2nd nomination). Please keep in mind that although there should be both positive and negative comments included on the instant-runoff voting page that the article that has been nominated for deletion is a seperate page that talks only only arguments for and against instant-runoff voting, instead of just including the notable portions of this material in the main instant-runoff voting article. I hope you consider changing your vote. QuirkyAndSuch (talk) 08:33, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Political Parties invite --Soman (talk) 16:23, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page has been deleted, and can now be moved to that location. I'd do the move myself, but since I don't know the exact reason you want to move it, I left that to you, if that was okay. Acalamari 03:29, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome: I was happy to help. :) You caught me at the right time too; I was just going to log off in a couple of minutes. :) Acalamari 03:38, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just FYI, I moved your comment proposing a new vote to a separate heading, it didn't really follow the previous comment. Note that the ongoing RfC may be very similar to what you suggested, so feel free to jump in there if you want to be included in the discussion. I don't recommend a straight vote, sockpuppeting and meatpuppeting (and allegations of them, even if they don't happen) make votes.Somedumbyankee (talk) 17:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Everyking, in accordance with ArbCom rules, I'd better let you know about this. You'll want to comment and participate there. Acalamari 18:23, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]