Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Article titles. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:15, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Mark Arsten (talk) 23:24, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

hay, thanks for the sources! Been a little busy lately but will read, digest, and help out! MathewTownsend (talk) 13:03, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

If you can't read an 'in use' tag when you see one, I'll let you save me the work then ;) I just thought that with me being bilingual I could translate it as fast as I type. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:29, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

ok, I'm sorry. It wasn't there when I started editing the page. Go ahead. Best, MathewTownsend (talk) 15:31, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

it was actually. I'll let you get on with it, the original is here. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:44, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry. It wasn't there when I opened the page, but then I spend some time looking for sources, so in that time the "in use" was probably put up. Since I didn't refresh the page, I didn't see it. Again, I'm very sorry. Best, MathewTownsend (talk) 15:48, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

p.s. I was translating the original, so I already knew where it was. That's what I was doing, plus rewriting it and cleaning it up. MathewTownsend (talk) 15:52, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

No worries. In any case, the creator appears to already have a translation that he was working on inserting. The problem was caused by a newbie 58-edit patroller who tagged the article CSD within 5 minutes. I've now asked him to stop patrolling pages until he has learned how to do it. I'll drop a note on the creator's page to let him know he can proceed with his translation now that I saved it from deletion. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:57, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, both of you, for taking such good care. It's true I had a translation, and was discouraged when it was deleted so fast. So thank you for letting me know. Today is an European meeting of BETH, and I want to show the Wikipedia pagesSubjectlibrarian (talk) 06:02, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Just noticed at GAN that you are planning to review Pyramid of Sahure. The same editor nominated Pyramid of Userkaf and as you can see from Talk:Pyramid of Userkaf/GA2 they have now gone on a break for an unspecified period. I am not quite sure what to make of this. English is not this individual's first language, but a possible implication is that they are expecting me to fail it - which I fear I may have to do if they do not return soon. Thought you'd appreciate knowing about this before you spend time on Sahure. Ben MacDui 19:41, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I've been hesitating completing the Pyramid of Sahure review because I can't verify that it's original work. The writing is unusually sophisticated, and especially so if English is not his first language. So, thanks again! I'll have to figure out what to do. MathewTownsend (talk) 20:17, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Matthew, hope you're doing well. I was wondering if you might have time to check out Chen Guangcheng, which is currently a GA nominee. The initial reviewing editor seems to be missing in action. Let me know if you're interested. Homunculus (duihua) 22:22, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

hey, Homunculus, I'll consider it. It's an interesting article. Right now I'm exhausted and about to collapse. Forgive me. MathewTownsend (talk) 22:41, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

No worries. Enjoy the weekend. I could ask someone else, if you've got too much on your plate. Homunculus (duihua) 13:28, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey, Mathew, sorry for reverting you! It was a misclick. You'd think I would've learned not to check my watchlist on a touchscreen, but apparently not... again, sorry! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 22:55, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

hey, that's ok. I'm not fussed! MathewTownsend (talk) 23:38, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Mathew, care to weigh in at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard#Editor repeatedly adding original research, poorly-sourced and/or irrelevant material to the Sexual intercourse article?[1]

This is definitely one of those times where I require your help. Flyer22 (talk) 02:56, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

As you can see, it was resolved. So no worries. Flyer22 (talk) 14:41, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

When an image passes flickr review, panoramio review, picasa review at Wikimedia Commons or has a license template that was created by an Administrator at Wikimedia Commons, it is considered passed for life as long as the person who took the images is the real author. I have stated above that the Egypt Archive images were copyright free at upload...and I didn't create the copyright free license template although I am trusted at Wikicommons to pass or fail images at Wikimedia Commons. A web site may go offline in the future--and people routinely delete images on flickr, panoramio and picasa that they licensed freely and notice have now passed flickr/panoramio/picasa review on a copyright free license on Wikimedia Commons--but as long as the owner of the images owns the rights, they cannot revoke permission for the use of their images on wikicommons--and therefore wikipedia or other web sites such as a newspaper web site, etc.

That being said Crisco's comments about the GA sound reasonable. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:05, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Tom Cruise. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey Mathew! I'm still waiting for the answers to the Test 3, although you told me you've been busy; it's okay, i can wait :) On another business, I have nominated the article above, System Shock 2 at FAC and would like to know if you can give me a hand at polishing a bit the prose. The article seems to be in pretty good shape but it may still need some tweaks and all help will be greatly appreciated. Thanks. — ΛΧΣ21™ 04:11, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

I'll try though I'm not good at editing video articles. Also, I will answer Test 3 - just been really busy and tired. But will do. MathewTownsend (talk) 17:03, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, please see:

• Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations#User:Lucky102 && Talk:Milan/GA1

The "review" at Talk:Milan/GA1 is lame; any article deserves better. I think the thing to do here is simply discard that review. You review a lot of GANs so I thought you might want to do a proper job of this one. Prolly best to wait for a few a few comments on the WTGAN page, but if that page is slow, then there's always WPBOLD. note; I also suggested as much to Malleus, so... Br'er Rabbit (talk) 11:48, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

sorry to answer so late. Been really busy. Will wait as you say and take a look at the article. Looks like the GA1 has been deleted. See if I can clear my plate - kinda tired lately. MathewTownsend (talk) 22:01, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we request your participation in the discussion to help find a resolution. The thread is "Dissociative identity disorder". Thank you! EarwigBot ^{operator / talk} 18:58, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

I had to manually fill it out, so the request may be messed up. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 19:02, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Signatures. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 20:15, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey Mathew! I just finished work on this article and—after System Shock 2 goes out of FAC—i will take it to FAC. So, I would like to ask you to take a look and give some copyedits to it if you can. I'd like it to pass at the first nom :) Thanks! — ΛΧΣ21™ 21:06, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh i saw you worte above you were busy and tired. I'm not hurried. You can take all the time you need :) — ΛΧΣ21™ 21:07, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

ok, i will. MathewTownsend (talk) 22:24, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

• I saw some of your comments over the past day, sorry to see that you're discouraged. A lot of people here just want to assert dominance over others. Br'er can explain it lord of the flies stuff better than me, but at times this places has a lot of bullies who want to make themselves feel important. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:12, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

  Such as administrators do you mean? Malleus Fatuorum 18:24, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

  It's an unpleasant reality that many admins here are bullies, yes. Hopefully I am not one of them (admin bullies), but it has been alleged. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:27, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

  Just for the sake of clarity, I don't regard you as one of the bullying admins, but there are certainly too many of them. Malleus Fatuorum 21:14, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm glad to hear that. I'll try my best to keep it that way. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:17, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me that. No, I didn't. I fixed it.--Jorfer (talk) 23:19, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

		The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia
		Your recognition for 72 GA reviews at the last June-July GAN Review Round. Regards. — Pyrotec (talk) 15:09, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

NB: well-deserved! Hchc2009 (talk) 10:59, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey Mathew; sorry to read that you're feeling a bit tired / down / overwhelmed / whatever. A nice bowl of fresh fruit certainly can't hurt ;P And a Granny Hug, of course, to go with it. Pesky (talk) 01:51, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks PeskyCommoner. Tis true and and I appreciate your message and most of all that you noticed and responded. It does help to receive your messages at times like these. True thanks! MathewTownsend (talk) 02:02, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

I invite you to discuss about a threatening message recieved from a registered user saying I have commited copyright violation and reverted his undo on my contribution twice. Infact i would tell you to do thorough research on how it became a copy and paste as i had done the work myself from the external written material resources not cyber and it took 5 days,discussing with users like Sphilbrick,not to disgust anyone but frankly saying is a waste of time and completely useless.you can point out extracts of what is written to show copyright similarities if you like. otherwise if u dont have time leave a yes or no comment on my talk page. --Johnyjohny294 (talk) 05:37, 15 September 2012 (UTC) or leave it completely--Johnyjohny294 (talk) 05:37, 15 September 2012 (UTC)Please keep an eye on Sphilbrick behaviour and asess him and his blocking policy if u dont mind--Johnyjohny294 (talk) 05:37, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:PC2012/RfC 1. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 05:14, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

(EDIT: The bot archived the test. I unarchived it so that you can answer the questions when you have the time.) Here is your third test; enjoy.

1. Why should new users be given level 1 warnings when possible?

   Good faith should be assumed. The edit may be a test edit, an accident, or mistakes made through a lack of knowledge of how to edit wikipedia. New users need to be educated and encouraged to make helpful contributions. Also, a polite and informative warning may dissuade a vandalizing editor from making more vandal edits.

2. What level(s), if vandalism persists after the warning, can cause a user be reported to AIV and blocked for disruptive editing for vandalizing above this warning(s)?

   After the first warning, three more warnings of increasing sternness for additional vandal edits are issued, the level four one being a "final" warning that the user may be blocked without further warning if such edits continue. Any vandal edits after that can cause the user to be reported to AIV.

3. What level warning(s) mention that an editor could be blocked?

   Level three warns that "further disruptive editing or vandalism may lead to a block."

4. A new user blanking sections.

   Since blanking or removing part of an article's content (especially of a BLP) may be done in good faith, {{uw-test1}} or {{uw-delete1}} should be used if examination of the removed content determines the removal was unwarranted.

5. Nonsense/Repeating characters.

   Adding nonsense or repeating characters is considered "silly vandalism" and patent nonsense. Care must be taken not to bite the newcomers, as such edits may be inadvertent. Users should be warned by using a series of {{uw-test}} or {{uw-vandalism}} warning templates and reported as vandals if they continue.

6. Replacing an article with obscenities.

   This is considered vandalism and the series of {{uw-vandalism}} should be used.

7. How should vandalism be reverted (without Rollback)?

   The "undo" button can be used and the edit can be marked as minor. The article history can be examined for additional vandalism.

8. Should section blanking-edits be reverted?

   Not automatically, unless the reverting editor is extremely familiar with the article, is following it closely, and is confident the removed content is legitimate. Otherwise, the the removed content should be examined to see if it's legitimate and returned to the article if it is.

9. Should test edits be reverted?

   yes. They need to be removed as soon as possible.

10. What is the difference between a test edit and vandalism?

    A test edit is usually a good faith edit made by a new user unfamiliar with editing wikipedia. Vandalism is a deliberate attempt to harm wikipedia.

Hope the best of luck. Cheers! — ΛΧΣ21™ 15:39, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

• I finished my third test. MathewTownsend (talk) 18:04, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

— ΛΧΣ21™ 18:21, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Addressed your last few concerns. Many thanks for the review. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 08:49, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

You're very welcome. I learned a lot from your article so it was my pleasure. MathewTownsend (talk) 13:12, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Good work; let's do it again next week! - Dank (push to talk) 14:05, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I appreciate knowing that what I'm doing is ok! MathewTownsend (talk) 14:10, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Some books helpful in Wikiproject Indian cinema would be:

• Rajadhyaksha, Ashish; Willemen, Paul (26 June 1999). Encyclopaedia of Indian cinema. British Film Institute. ISBN 978-1579581466.
• Thoraval, Yves (1 February 2000). The cinemas of India. Macmillan India. ISBN 978-0-333-93410-4.
• Ganti, Tejaswini (24 August 2004). Bollywood: A Guidebook to Popular Hindi Cinema. Psychology Press. ISBN 978-0-415-28854-5.
• Gokulsing, K. Moti; Dissanayake, Wimal (2004). Indian Popular Cinema: A Narrative of Cultural Change. Trentham Books. ISBN 978-1-85856-329-9.
• National Film Development Corporation of India (1998). Indian cinema: a visual voyage. Publication Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Govt. of India. ISBN 978-81-230-0646-8.
• Ramachandran, T. M.; Rukmini, S. (June 1985). 70 years of Indian cinema, 1913-1983. CINEMA India-International. ISBN 978-0-86132-090-5.
• Rishi, Tilak (1 June 2012). Bless You Bollywood!: A Tribute to Hindi Cinema on Completing 100 Years. Trafford Publishing. ISBN 978-1-4669-3963-9.

There should be some more. I remember my family used to have an encyclopedia of Indian films when I was a child (in 1980s)-- but I can not remember the name of the book. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:08, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm going to look into seeing these books. MathewTownsend (talk) 01:31, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Meth mouth is now a good article, thanks for your help on that! Mark Arsten (talk) 17:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (geographic features). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 05:15, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

This Month in Education – Volume 1, Issue 2, September 2012 Headlines EduWiki Conference 5-6 September 2012 Leicester, UK Next year of cooperation between WikiProject Protected areas on Czech Wikipedia and Charles University International Baccalaureate students in Mexico begin working on Fall 2012 project ASA Annual Meeting features Wikipedia initiative Journal article shows four case studies Blog post highlights U.S. student's contributions Media coverage of program grows in Arabic, English Communicate OER project getting underway To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Odeon Cinemas. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 05:15, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey MathewTownsend. This will be, if not our final newsletter, one of the final ones :). After months of churning away at this project, our final version (apart from a few tweaks and bugfixes) is now live. Changes between this and the last release include deletion tag logging, a centralised log, and fixes to things like edit summaries.

Hopefully you like what we've done with the place; suggestions for future work on it, complaints and bugs to the usual address :). We'll be holding a couple of office hours sessions, which I hope you'll all attend. Many thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 11:02, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 05:16, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello,

I see you are single handedly bearing a good deal of the backlog in GAN. Fairplay. This is just a quick reminder about the above article. Going away for a few days later in the week so any comments left after then will be responded to in a week or so. Keep up the good work! Best wishes, --Ktlynch (talk) 09:11, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

don't worry. I just suddenly burned out but I'll complete your review, and give you plenty of time to reply if you're away! MathewTownsend (talk) 23:11, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello Methew!! Greetings!!! I am happy to tell you that my college exams are over and now I am back on wikipedia and also I completed my second wikipedia article Gajar ka Halwa. You please see it and give your suggestions. However some pictures are remaining but I will upload them soon. So please see it and tell me about my mistakes. Thank you.ARUN SHARMA ¹⁰¹Talk | Email 18:18, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Very good! I copy edited the opening paragraph and put a space in the title of the article. Let me know if I made any mistakes. MathewTownsend (talk) 18:56, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello Mathew, Thank You for copy edit this article. I have a problem that the article named Gajar ka Halwa is redirected to the article Carrot pudding. But the Carrot Pudding is actually very different from the Gajar Ka Halwa. You can easily find it on the internet. So I want that the gajar ka halwa is redirect to Gajar Ka Halwa instead of carrot pudding. So Please change the page name to Gajar ka Halwa so that people can find exact information easily.--ARUN SHARMA ¹⁰¹Talk | Email 12:42, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Arum, I agree with you and I changed it. Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 21:51, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank You Mathew for fixing the page names and redirects. But can you change page name Gajar ka Halwa only instead of Gajar ka Halwa (Indian carrot Halwa). I think it may be perfect for this article. --ARUN SHARMA ¹⁰¹Talk | Email 11:18, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Is it ok now? MathewTownsend (talk) 15:26, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, Now it seems perfect. Thank you for change the page name and thank you again for copy edit the article.--ARUN SHARMA ¹⁰¹Talk | Email 08:39, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Dispute resolution noticeboard. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 06:15, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Where do you feel that your reviews have been ridiculed? I won't deny that I get a little nervous about some new GA reviewers (I've contributed to a good few threads about problem reviewers in the last few months...) but by no means do I personally feel it should be an old boy's club only. In any case, looking at the number of GACs you've reviewed, you're hard a newbie. J Milburn (talk) 10:10, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

yes, Malleus Fatuorum personally attacked me and ridiculed everything I've done, except the Signpost! I made apparently misguided comments on a policy talk page, not understanding that only veteran editors can express opinions there. Although I tried to redact and apologized repeatedly and profusely, and tried to explain what I meant, Malleus Fatuorum continued ridiculed me personally and my contributions.

Along with many other put downs, Malleus Fatuorum said to me "if you took the trouble to look you'd see that I've done more than 500 GA reviews"[2] He said "you've never written anything worth spit".[3]

Since GA is Malleus Fatuorum's territory, I'm not risking exposing myself to him again by continuing to review GAs. It'll be only a matter of time before he finds a stupid mistake I make and specifically starts in on my work there. It's not worth the chance of being ridiculed, though I enjoyed the reviewing immensely and always tried to do the right thing. But I'm not competent enough. I started out wanting to help wikipedia but my work isn't worth anything really, as Malleus Fatuorum rightly points out. I've found the Commons more pleasant and will probably put more of my energy there and at places on wikipedia where Malleus Factuorum isn't a major voice so I don't have to be scared about making a mistake. GA isn't one of those places. It's not worth the risk. Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 15:21, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/City population templates. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 07:15, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Mathew! Can you tell me about assessed and unassessed class articles. Thank you.--ARUN SHARMA ¹⁰¹Talk | Email 09:08, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi there!

I think the different projects, like Project India and Project Food and Drink, assess the articles according to their criteria. I'm not sure who in the projects does it. Perhaps you could ask them. And you could ask at the Village Pump how to get someone to do it. (You could go to the projects and find out what their criteria are.) Seems to me that your articles are at least "Start" class. MathewTownsend (talk) 10:09, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey, Matthew. Considering that you heavily objected to asexuality being listed as a sexual orientation because it is not sufficiently defined as one, you might also want to weigh in with regard to the above linked discussion. Flyer22 (talk) 18:42, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm really a medical person and not into the socio-cultural stuff. So I've no opinion on the direction "sexual orientation" is taking here and haven't been following it. Sorry! MathewTownsend (talk) 00:38, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, as stated at WP:MED, this has to do with how the medical community defines sexual orientation vs. social terms that have been created to describe sexual preferences/feelings and/or gender. But I understand if you're just not interested in weighing in on this; it just seemed like something that you would be interested in weighing in on, given your objection to listing asexuality as a sexual orientation due to, as noted above, it not being sufficiently defined as one by experts in these fields. Flyer22 (talk) 06:57, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

well, I gave up on asexuality, since there was no definition and could include just not having a partner, a physical condition such as an illness or a hormonal imbalance, a religious orientation or any number of things. It seemed the people weighing in were really taking political stances rather than seeking to understand. I'm not interested in those kind of causes on wikipedia. But thanks for asking. MathewTownsend (talk) 10:16, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

There is a definition, Matthew. As the article states, "in its broadest sense, [asexuality] is the lack of sexual attraction to others or the lack of interest in sex" and "Researchers have varied in their attempts to define asexuality, but the term is usually defined to mean the lack or absence of sexual attraction or sexual interest." It's considered distinct from sexual abstinence/celibacy because it is not based on health, religious or other social factors, at least as defined by some researchers. But, yeah, as you've read, other researchers consider it to be "not a meaningful category to add to the continuum of sexual orientations, and say that it is instead the lack of a sexual orientation or sexuality" or "that it is the denial of one's natural sexuality, and that it is a disorder caused by shame of sexuality or anxiety, sometimes basing this belief on asexuals who masturbate or occasionally engage in sexual activity simply to please a romantic partner."

But like I stated, I understand your not being interested in weighing in on the pansexuality/polysexuality topic. Thank you for your time. Flyer22 (talk) 16:30, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Mathew for your helping efforts. ARUN SHARMA 101Talk | Email 14:01, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

		The Good Article Reviewer's Medal of Merit
		Well, I just read the discussion over at the good article wiki project talk page and I'm pretty disgusted. Editors like Malleus Fatuorum don't belong on Wikipedia if they are going to act like that, we are supposed to work all together, not rip each other apart. Either way, I see that you will no longer be reviewing nominations and because of that, with all your great reviews, you deserve more then just the Good Article Barnstar. Thank-you for all your contributions to the WikiProject/review process. :) --Dom497 (talk) 19:24, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks so much, Dom497, for recognizing the work I did put into GAN. It means a lot to me. I appreciate your thoughtfulness is awarding me this honor. Takes away some of the feelings of loss I have, as I did enjoy doing the reviews. MathewTownsend (talk) 01:39, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps the real problem is know-it-all schoolkids like you, who in reality can't even tell their arses from their elbows. Malleus Fatuorum 19:52, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

No Matthew, the "real problem" is an editor who "knows everything" and insults everyone, but especially less experienced editors. 86.140.45.88 (talk) 22:55, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps the real "real problem" is something more sinister? Mark Arsten (talk) 01:16, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

very kind of you Mark, as your characteristically are. but what about Malleus_Fatuorum's bad-faith waiting of three days after an apology and then going to ANI to complain about you? You must be an actually good person! MathewTownsend (talk) 01:25, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, "some argue" that we're all good people at heart. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:45, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Editing policy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 07:15, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: AustralianRupert on artillery in South Australia, and Nick-D on Venice's empire Op-ed: Nick-D on the "Kokoda: Beyond the Legend" conference

There are a lot of problems with certain processes on Wikipedia see my comments here.

As to your question on "Diva" see here "I would have thought that the level of civility we should expect here ought set at a higher level that that which would trigger a bar room brawl in parts of England." (you will need to read the full posting for the context). The point being that I strongly suggest that you never use language that you think may give offence, it diverts conversation from the content issue, and gives people who disagree with you a way to divert the conversation away from content, In the long term such comments will be used as a stick to beat you -- pattern of incivility patters of disruption etc. I would not call another editor a diva (it is particularly insulting to female editors) and it encourages a retort in a similar vein which is unlikely to be constructive. As the say in soccer [sic] play the ball not the man.

Not that polite conversation will necessarily protect you from such accusations.

"I'm afraid to continue reviewing GAN's because that will open me up for more attacks. And I have a very poor way of handling attacks." Then edit in another area (there are literally millions of articles to choose from). I don't get mixed up in FA or GAs very often as I think that articles don't need a star -- but I have no objections to those who do.

Also, my "rollback" feature doesn't let me leave an edit summary. I am surprised that you have a rollback feature (I did not get that until I was an admin). Simple don't use it just click on the version you want to revert to start with "rv:" and add an appropriate comment.

-- PBS (talk) 17:41, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

ok, thanks! It's hard to understand what will and what won't trigger a bar room fight. I see others using the same language as I do and so it seems ok. But it isn't. I guess I just have to grow a thick skin, as others have suggested. MathewTownsend (talk) 18:24, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jimmy Savile. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 25 October 2012 (UTC)