Archived round about 30K. I will respond on your user talk page. I don't watch user talk pages, so I may or may not respond if you don't reply to me here.

My user talk has slowly become my user page; my actual user page I just find frustrating and I think I'll stick with the poems. I throw extra stuff here. For the record: Tim Marskell, a Canadian living in the United Arab Emirates (though often found elsewhere).

Wikipedia:Babel

en This user is a native speaker of the English language.

fr-1 Cet utilisateur peut contribuer avec un niveau élémentaire de français.

This user is a member of WikiProject for writing a featured article per quarter.

This user is an administrator on the English Wikipedia. (verify)

• Archives 1 to 21, 2005-2007
• Jan 1 - Jan 25 2008
• Jan 26 - Mar 3 2008
• Mar 4 - May 5 2008

• Dornin, Rusty (2008-05-05). "Border-fence dispute snares rare jaguars". CNN. Retrieved 2008-05-05. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:59, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  LOL :-) Geometry guy 21:05, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  Why's it funny (what did I miss)? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:09, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the nice note; well, you are, after all, the Big Cat Man on Wiki (with all due respect to Cas and Yomangani :-) And I still remember the thrill of seeing one in my yard (haven't seen it again). Border fence: fiasco on every level. Let me know when you have a citations article to the point that I can help with the little stuff. Monarchy of the United Kingdom should be close now. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:48, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marskell, this reminder that you're one of the cat people on WP prompts me to mention that my sister works at ZSL and is a tiger expert. If you decide one day to work on Tiger I may be able to help with anything that needs citing; she may be able to point me to sources that would be useful. The only sources I own myself are some European studbooks she managed, and Riding the Tiger, which she edited along with Seidensticker and Jackson. Mike Christie (talk) 02:38, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose it was inevitable ... I just got burned out on doing so much for it and other people still bringing up issues that in some cases I consider rather picayune. But I'm addressing them, and I think the project can bring it back through the process in time to have it as the Main Page FA on 9/27 when the fifth season starts. It was probably too much to ask to fix an article that needed so much done for it and was difficult to keep stable during a season (and with so many fan unsourced additions to it ... I think we will just have to institute a revert-on-sight policy, block-if-they-do-it-regularly, to keep it stable).

For now I'm trying to address all the issues raised in the FARC. Current goal is peer review by the end of the month. Feel free to help. Daniel Case (talk) 14:55, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

... <cough> ... some of us who raised the "picayune" issues also spent hours fixing them. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:17, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mean you ... you raised good points which I also tried to fix. I meant things like "too many pictures, even if they're free" and the complaint about using Jenna Fischer's blog as a source because it's on MySpace and we don't allow xlinks there anymore. Daniel Case (talk) 18:16, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Both of you put in a lot of work. And as we often say, improving the article is all that matters, with or without the star. So don't feel you wasted your time, Daniel. I'd like to promise to help but I'm not editing much. You should look for a prose specialist to give it a once over. Marskell (talk) 18:20, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, with two degrees in English and a background in journalism, I tend to consider myself a prose specialist. I did the original copy edit back in April. I do agree that the article still needs to be cleansed of all the language that sounds more appropriate to Entertainment Weekly than an encyclopedia. But right now I'm putting in the citations for the writers and directors that it was missing. Then, I'm trimming up the season synopses (which should be easier to do once the season finale has aired Thursday and people don't feel the need to add trivial details about this week's episode). Daniel Case (talk) 18:26, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someone unfamiliar with the prose is critical on FAs; we miss our own mistakes, more than anything. And those stub sections need working on. Marskell (talk) 18:33, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, certainly. I'll ask you for a referral once I'm done with everything I see that needs to be done. Including the stub sections. Daniel Case (talk) 20:23, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#ant-Americanism —Preceding unsigned comment added by Life.temp (talk • contribs) 08:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure this was the correct approach to take. This request has been added on- and off-, several times. In my experience, requests are removed by the Committee as they decide is necessary, and until such times, they remain in place.

After all, the request for arbitration called for a full desysopping. That has not yet been delivered (this has been suggested to be a temporary measure, with no current, specified bar to resysopping, other than the Committee being "consulted"). Would you take great objection if I re-added it a final time?

Anthøny 21:47, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Since you were on the receiving end of quite a few of her personal attacks, you might want to weigh in on it here. --130.127.3.249 (talk) 05:34, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[1] - Don't worry about doing anything at 3RR, I quite like having my own little section ;-) Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 21:28, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for undoing your edit on Anti-Americanism ([2]), I would have preferred to wait until you were online again, but the situation was escalating (again) and I thought it best to not wait. henrik•talk 11:59, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please respond: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Anti-Americanism#Truce Life.temp (talk) 22:38, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We are allowed to bring up criteria that you did not specifically highlight in FARC segmentation are we not? I do believe that the rewrite of the article has brought up a pile of 1a issues as well as more peacock issues. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:57, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes; Marskell's segmentation contains only suggestions. You can bring up anything related to WP:WIAFA. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You've reverted 3 times in 24 hours, all without explanation in Talk. [3] [4] [5] You have also, in general, engaged in a revert war over a period of days, weeks, and months. Please make an effort to achieve consensus on the article. Life.temp (talk) 07:19, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]