Is there any particular reason for removing references lists from talkpages? I find them convenient when discussing precise proposed wording and issues with sourcing. - Eldereft ~(s)talk~ 04:36, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That the talk page reference list is independent of the article is part of the point, really. Some of the sources under discussion might not be present in the article, and using the citation template allows proposals to display exactly as they would appear in the article. Besides, the article references might change or reorder during a long discussion, rendering a bulleted list obsolete. Using the templates ensures that everyone is talking about the same source and provides a handy reminder link when many sources are being weighed. - Eldereft ~(s)talk~ 05:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Wikipedia Bot Builder Award
		I'm not much for barnstars, especially for bots, but in this case I'll make an exception, as LemmeyBOT does exceptional work. What a great bot! Fanstastic job. MrPrada (talk) 08:55, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problem. There had been a vandalism, and the BOT restored info, but only a small part of what went missing. This is a problem because anyone watching the page may be misled into thinking that the vandalism had been corrected. Corrections by BOTs often miss whole sections, that can then not be noticed for months until an involved editor reads the entire article. Amandajm (talk) 13:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Resilient Barnstar
		For your consistent contributions to Wikipedia and resilience in the face of bureaucratic idiocy and wikilawyering. Madcoverboy (talk) 16:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your boot is making mistake. See article Operation Storm--Rjecina (talk) 17:36, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted. If you want to edit so that all references (deleted) are good you can do that. My thinking has been that editor which has made mistake will understand why his adding is deleted and will solve problem.--Rjecina (talk) 17:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to join everyone else in praising your bot work. I always found fixing those missing refs to be the most tedious and annoying work ever conceived of by man or machine. I never even considered the idea of getting a bot to do it automatically.

		The da Vinci Barnstar
		For LemmeyBot, a brilliant and well-implemented idea. Equazcion •✗/C • 21:43, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just because you are funny, doesn't mean you can make homophobic comments, please strike them and apologize for them on ITN/C. -- Grant.Alpaugh 04:24, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is seconded. Those comments are out-of-line, and further comments of the sort may result in a block. Wikipedia is neutral, and making one-sided comments does nothing to advance your case. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 11:15, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]