User talk:WilliamThweatt/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

{{AustroAsiatic-lang-stub}}

I've created this, feeding into the same category as lang-stub for the time being, and tagged the four I'd found earlier. If this gets significantly larger -- or if "Wikiproject Austro-Asiatic langugages" springs into being -- the issue of a separate category can be revisited. Alai 03:40, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Sothea and Samouth

It was my pleasure to get the articles together. And it's great to know there's someone else out there who appreciates Khmer rock and roll. Wisekwai 21:14, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Kurds

Hey, no problem. I was going to fix it, but you beat me to it. :) Don't forget to check the article for neutrality. —Khoikhoi 03:04, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Hey William. Yes, it is a bit of a problem. Kurdistan is just a geographic region, and using the term in a political way wouldn't reflect a neutral point of view. There article was mostly written by Kurdish editors, so it seems that some of them have added their bias into the article.

As for the Counter Vandalism Unit, I revert vandalism on the (2,000) pages on my watchlist as well, but the main thing that I think people are referring to is RC (recent changes) patrolling. I do that also, it's sort of boring at first, but at least it's helping the project out. To join just add {{user CVU1-en}} or {{user CVU2-en}} to your user page. The main duty I guess is RC patrol, I don't know of any others. Basically, you just revert the vandals and give them the {{test}} templates. —Khoikhoi 04:16, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Immigration protests

Thanks for keeping the "scare" stuff out of the 2006 U.S. immigration reform protests article. By any chance have you taken a look at my comment about the terms "illegal", "unauthorized", and "undocumented"? I know I should have brought the issues up on the talk to illegal immigration, and perhaps I will copy them there...--Rockero 20:25, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I will be busy all day tomorrow. That's why I was hoping we could get it taken care of today, because if everything works out well, it should go on the front page tomorrow. Regardless, can I ask you to please keep an eye on it tomorrow? Thanks, --Rockero 03:05, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up...

But it looks like I was beaten to that welcome. Keep up the great work! Kukini 05:41, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Great American Boycott vulgarity and racist comments

Hello, I got your name from the list of Admins. I have a question. I don't like removing things from discussion pages but somebody has recently posted a very vulgar, racist comment with links to White Supremist websites at this talk page. Can these be deleted? If you could take a look, it's under the subsection "I Agree". Thanks.--WilliamThweatt 17:01, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Somebody already deleted the comments as "trolling". I didn't do it because I just wasn't sure if it was proper. If you can take a look at the edit history here and maybe leave a message on my talk page explaining under what circumstances comments can be deleted from talk pages, I'd appreciate the enlightenment and I won't have to bother admins in the future. Thanks.--WilliamThweatt 17:18, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

No problem, there are no hard rules about what should be deleted from talk pages, but I agree this is a pretty easy case of something being ok to revert [1]. The civility policy is probably worth reading to get a very general idea of what is acceptable behaviour on any page, but that includes talk pages as well. Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines might be helpful also, but most of those guidelines are more for resolution between people acting in good faith. That particular edit though, I would almost classify as vandalism, and of course that can be reverted wherever it shows up. If you have any other questions let me know. I doubt many people will yell at you for reverting people screaming racial slurs though, they shouldn't anyway. Your experiences may vary in practice though if you mainly work on more contentious articles, nevertheless, people should remain civil. :) - cohesion 18:44, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Adelle Davis

Hi Will :). I put this article up for peer review. I'd like your opinion, my friend. --RogerK 04:13, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Arbil Mon language Halang language Lampang Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iraq Adiabene Mon-Khmer languages Gary Valentine Ajam Victor Williams Cambodian New Year Kampuchean People's Revolutionary Party Dângrêk Mountains Khoy Mengrai Culture of Cambodia Sulaymaniyah Suphanburi The King of Queens

Cleanup Cambodian French Drug urban legends Alliance Defense Fund Merge English spelling done--WilliamThweatt 04:19, 14 July 2006 (UTC) Al-Anfal Campaign Islamic fundamentalism Add Sources Early history of Cambodia Kurdish culture Franco-American relations Wikify Choun Nath Howar Ziad Nawshirwan Mustafa Expand Demographic history of the United States Islamic art Yama Zatdaw

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 03:49, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Kurdish people

Hello William Thweatt. On the article itself page 19 but on the PDF-reader page 24. Also I think it is not only his own estimation but he mentions a source for that. Besides there are many scholars supporting this high growing population issue. Thanks. Wirya 15:47, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Jarai language

Hi, Jarai language is in need of an expert to check it (I've just created it). Thanks for your help! Badagnani 06:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Your Vandalism warning on my talk page

Hi, that wasn't vandalism. Just an edit conflict. :P -- Shizane ^talk_contribs 20:05, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I apologize, I realized that and meant to hit the "Rollback" button, but hit the "Rollback test1-n" button by mistake. I immediately removed the misplaced warning from your talk page. No offense, friend.--WilliamThweatt 20:12, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Edit Warriors girding for battle

You might be interested to note that Fellow-edit is assembling the troops to do edit war upon us "liberals" over at Ann Coulter. I'm of the opinion that this sort of behavior violates the spirit, if not the letter, of WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL. Kasreyn 23:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. You and lawyer2b have been absolutely impeccably polite and constructive at that article. Kasreyn 23:33, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Hilarious reply to Fellow-edit by Jchap, who points out the self-described "newbie" who mysteriously already knows how to use templates and vote in AfD's. :P Kasreyn 00:09, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Needed: Another Ann Coulter Fix

This time the first eight or so Notes are messed up. Looks like some more ref tag stuff, but I'm not yet skilled with the Wiki version of ref tags. Lou Sander 03:53, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Peer review for Myanmar

Hello, I have begun a peer review for Myanmar. Please express your opinions at Wikipedia:Peer review/Myanmar. Thank you. Hintha 21:41, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

RE Clan Morrison

Good on you for having a go at rewriting it. There were a couple of things which immediately stuck out when i read through it ; first of all the fact that the first two paragraphs are the same, repeated in different sections and secondly that there were statements sitting about which ended with exclamation marks! which really isnt encyclopedic at all. Anyway the article looks a lot better after your edits, well done.siarach 19:10, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Myanmar article

Hello. I've tried to condense the History section in the article, and I've added some more paragraphs about music and cuisine in the Culture section. Can you help copyedit the History section further, and perhaps add more information in the Geography section? I don't know what else to leave out from the History section, and I'm not that knowledgable in the Geography of Myanmar.

What else should be added to the lead section? WikiProject Countries advises the following:

The article should start with a good introduction, giving name of the country, location in the world, bordering countries, seas and the like. Also give other names by which the country may still be known (for example Holland, Persia). Also, add a few facts about the country, the things that it is known for (for example the mentioning of windmills in the Netherlands article).

If the etymology of a country's name is too long to explain in the lead section, split it out into a separate section (titled "Name" or similar). Naming disputes can also be handled in separate sections.

Should the most well-known Burmese figures (Aung San Suu Kyi, U Thant, Aung San) be mentioned here? Or should Myanmar's ethnic and linguistic diversity or Burmese culture be mentioned? Hintha 01:16, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Cambodian literature

I did a search for "Khmer literature" and also "Cambodian literature" and was amazed to find that no articles exist in Wikipedia. Do you know somebody who could work on this? --- Jakob Dempsey, YZU, Taiwan

Thanks

I'm still on my Wikibreak, just checking from a library computer, and I noticed that you reverted some vandalism to my userpage. I appreciate that. I noticed that the vandal was claiming both you and Scientizzle were my socks... any idea what that's all about? The only page I can think of that all three of us edit is Intelligent Design (and related pages). In any case, thanks.  :) Kasreyn 22:26, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi again. I should be online permanently soon, for now I'm still checking from the library occasionally. Thanks for continuing to keep an eye on my userpage. I appreciate it.  :) Kasreyn 18:36, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Cambodia FAR

The review for Cambodia is inches from completion, I think. Tony listed two small issues at the end. Any chance you could take care of those and give us an update? Cheers and good work on this one, Marskell 08:03, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups

Hi William, welcome to Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups. I saw your info. The page on Austronesian people is brand-new and fairly desperately in need of help, if you have the time. By the way, I'm working on Taiwanese Aborigines, Formosan languages and to a lesser extent Austronesian languages. Cheers --Ling.Nut 19:22, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh PS

I took another look at your user page and had a different thought. The Chamic languages (from my viewpoint, esp. Tsat) are particularly interesting among the Austronesian languages, as the ones that represent a sort of counter-migration back to the continent.. there's a little note about it on Austronesian languages (see Thurgood, Graham (1999), From Ancient Cham to Modern Dialects. Two Thousand Years of Language Contact and Change. Oceanic Linguistics Special Publications No. 28, University of Hawai'i Press, Honolulu.)--Ling.Nut 19:35, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Invitation

Hi, you are welcome to join WikiProject Burma/Myanmar, thanks! Chris 23:38, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Morocco mediation

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Morocco, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.

Oops!

Sorry, I forgot to reply to you! I blocked that IP about 10 seconds after your message :) Glen 12:53, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Re

Thanks! :-) —Khoikhoi 01:38, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Muchas gracias

Hey William, thanks a lot for supporting me in my recent RfA. It succeeded, and I am very grateful to all of you. If you ever need help with anything, please don't hesitate to ask. Also, feel free point out any mistakes I make! Thanks again, —Khoikhoi 04:57, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Great work

I wrote the article Indian influence on Chinese martial arts. Thanks for the extensive grammer cleanup and presentation work. Your work is well appreciated. Freedom skies 01:20, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Unreferenced?

Actually, Manchuria does have one reference at the bottom of the page, so it's not "entirely" unreferenced.--Niohe 21:03, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Burma/Myanmar

Hi! Please join us! Chris 22:48, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi William! Is there a Khmer-language request template, like we have made at {{Burmese}}? Chris 19:05, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no. It's been a long while since I tried to create a template but I will attempt one sometime today. Were you thinking of the new articles I created yesterday? If so, I've thought of that as well, but I've been trying to decide if I should use images or unicode fonts to show the Khmer spellings.--William Thweatt ^Talk | ^Contribs 19:12, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for adding those articles. Burmese has the same problem with unicode, so I used a graphic. If you want, just use the Burmese template and just make it Khmer-relevant. Thanks! Chris 20:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Cambodia . Cheers, Chris 08:25, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I left my comments there. By the way, I just created {{Khmer}} and a corresponding category.--William Thweatt ^Talk | ^Contribs 17:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Morocco Mediation

Given that no one has replied to the mediation within the last 17 days, I am closing it as being stale. From a cursory glance, it appears to me that mediation is no longer needed. However, if this is not the case, then you are more than welcome to file a new case. Thanks. On behalf of the Mediation Committee, ^demon^{[omg plz]} 16:21, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Jesse Jackson

Hm. I just re-read Talk:Jesse Jackson to remind myself of the disagreement we were involved in. I'm sorry you concluded that my motivations there were political; I'd have done the same thing if it had been (say) Rick Santorum. I thought we had had a good strong discussion of the quote in question as regards Wikipedia policy and encyclopedia writing, not politics -- my stance was, basically, "he says a lot of stupid stuff; what's so special about this incoherent one?" Otherwise, we've been doing about the same thing on that article: defending it from general vandalism. However, if you perceive I've been acting politically there, you're probably not alone; can you suggest how I might proceed in the future to diminish the appearance of political behavior? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

RE:Your post to KhoiKhoi

Users welcomed (ip welcome) and warned {{subst:test2|Iran}}. I'm sure KhoiKhoi will follow up if necessary. All the best with finals.NinaEliza (talk • contribs • count • logs • email) 16:42, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Nina. William, what probably happened is some user just added the {{sprotected}} template, and thought that by simply adding the tag that it would actually protect the page. Of course, only admins can protect pages, and if you see anons editing a page, it's not semi-protected. Here is a view of all the edits that occured from when Ryan Delaney unprotected the article at 18:49, 14 December 2006 to when Clevelander started editing it at 02:12, 16 December 2006. I took a look at it, and at a quick glance, I don't see any vandalism that hasn't already been reverted. Cheers, Khoikhoi 06:42, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Savage page

No, YOU are in danger of sanction as you have repeatedly disregarded the very rules to mention. (EnglishEfternamn 18:39, 21 December 2006 (UTC))

Actually according to official Wikipedia Policy WP:BLP removing material not in compliance with this policy is not subject to the 3RR rule: "In cases where the information is derogatory and poorly sourced or unsourced, this kind of edit is an exception to the three-revert rule."--WilliamThweatt 21:26, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Kudos on neatly nipping that "anti-homosexual" versus "homophobic" snit. Frotz661 01:48, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

yes, I dare say its close to being a decent article now, thanks to you two. On a slightly darker note, I saw that EnglishEfternamn plans on requesting adminship. Mbc362 16:44, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

A matter of honour

As a small matter of personal honour, your edit summary in the socialism article ("re-edited various grammar and punctuation fixes wiped out by Nikodemus' insistent blanket reversions") got things the wrong way around: I was not the one doing the blanket reversions - WGee and 172 were responsible for that. In fact, I had just restored your grammar corrections to the first paragraph a few minutes before you made your most recent edit. -- Nikodemos 00:58, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

If that's the case, my humblest and sincerest apologies. The edit history is so confusing it was hard to determine the culprit. Your innocence is duly noted, recognized and appreciated. I hope your honor is satisfied because I am not looking forward to being challanged to a duel. :-)--WilliamThweatt 01:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

My honor is satisfied, but I'm a bit disappointed about the lack of a duel. :-)

On another note, regarding an improvement of the socialism article, would you be interested in participating in an improvement drive a few weeks from now? ("a few weeks from now" rather than "today" because I don't have the time for a major undertaking like that right now) Most of all I will need someone to think of section titles. Yes, section titles. Every time I try to expand an article my biggest problem is that I have no idea what to write about - I need someone to think of subjects for me. -- Nikodemos 01:28, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

A comment on socialism

Upon reflection, I notice that this comment of mine was a little haughty, particularly the last sentence in light of your profession. I'm not sure whether or not you interpreted it that way, but I was quite impatient at the time and I apologize for that. -- WGee 05:05, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

About my comment

I see I worded myself poorly and as a result you misunderstood me here[2]. If the user's name was Terrorism101, I certainly would not have defended it. My comment was referring to the War on terror, which seems address a lot more than only terrorism. I felt much of the concern surrounding this name may have been due to the mis-use of the word terror as terrorism over the last few years. I hope I have clarified. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Tabs

Looking good! ++Lar: t/c 21:39, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Offer

Thanks for the offer, but I had a look at the page you mentioned and I would fail it because of the lack of in-line citations. You have five books in References, but very few page numbers in Notes. There is a reference for an external Pdf page which is very good, and can be quoted extensively (by paraphrasing, of course...) The whole article could be a lot more detailed, and the flow could be improved, BTW. Thanks again for your offer. andreasegde 06:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Effects of Hurricane Isabel in New York and New England

Isn't it a little harsh to fail the article, given that it passes 4 of the 5 criteria, with the last being simply due to not quite enough information. Wouldn't putting it on hold be a more appropriate action then failing it right away? Hurricanehink (talk) 05:32, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Maximus the Confessor

Responded on article talk page. -- Pastordavid 00:50, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Cambodia - sex tourism

William, I left a message in this section of the Cambodia talk page, but then added a minor point to a different section, with the ersult that you migbht not notice the more important one. Please have a look and let me know what you think of my latest comment. Regards PiCo 06:51, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

WPW newsletter

The Writing systems WikiProject Newsletter Issue I - December 2006
News Welcome to the newsletter of the Writing systems WikiProject, everyone. Our project currently has 29 members. Any questions or requests for assistance on writing system articles can be posted at WT:WPW. Our Article Assessment Project is currently underway. Feel free to contribute by assessing and improving all unassessed articles according to the assessment page. Any help is appreciated. We would like to bring all mid-, high-, and top-importance articles to at least B class by the end of the year. We are working on implementing writing systems templates into appropriate articles. Try to help out!	Writing system articles by quality and importance Quality Importance Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total FA 1 1 1 3 GA 3 3 3 3 12 B 16 83 93 186 18 396 C 17 79 99 230 29 454 Start 4 134 354 1,013 66 1,571 Stub 2 22 487 49 560 List 2 12 14 411 1 8 448 Category 324 324 Disambig 12 12 File 27 27 Portal 1 1 Project 6 6 Redirect 10 26 59 179 274 Template 424 424 NA 4 92 96 Other 6 6 Assessed 42 324 616 2,390 1,072 170 4,614 Unassessed 1 2 3 Total 42 324 616 2,390 1,073 172 4,617 WikiWork factors (?) ω = 14,253 Ω = 4.75
To subscribe or unsubscribe this newsletter, or if you would like to edit the next issue, please drop a message on the discussion page.

This is the project's first newsletter. If you have any questions, comments, or ideas about it, feel free to post it on WT:WPW. Thanks. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 23:22, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Justanother and WP:BLP

I saw that you had removed a section of an article talk page at the repeated request of Justanother at WP:BLPN. I wonder if you would care to examine his actions at Tilman Hausherr, where he seems to be following a quite surprisingly different interpretation of WP:BLP. -- Antaeus Feldspar 04:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Sigh. If you have any desire at all to continue your involvement then I, of course, welcome your comments. I would not blame you in the least, though, if you turned off the computer and went to watch Benny Hill reruns. --Justanother 04:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Feldspar, the complaint at WP:BLPN served to draw the comments to my attention, but I did not remove them on the basis of the complaint. As I stated in the edit summary (and also at WP:BLPN) my reasoning was more in line with yours in the response you gave to the comments. They were basically TROLLish comments, offering nothing constructive and with no intent to improve the article. I have taken a look at the Hausherr article and left my comments under the complaint you filed.--William Thweatt ^Talk | ^Contribs 16:44, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your input over at Antaeus' posting on Tilman. I had glanced at WP:NAM a few times but never long enough to truly appreciate it. I especially need to work on it as I allow myself to be "rightously provoked" and give myself permission to be as wickedly sardonic as I can manage in return. That is not especially a "class act". While that may have assisted me in the past, there were likely other approaches that I could have taken also and that would have served as well and that I might want to concentrate more on in the future. My only defense is that when you are being ganged up on and bullied in your first visit to the playground, you may not realize that the teachers are just on the other side of the door. Take care. --Justanother 03:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Cambodia

Hi William. Thanks for your message. I did have a look at the issue being discussed on the Cambodia talk page, and with the direction and tone the conversation is taking, for my own sanity's sake, I need to stay away from it for now. Perhaps the issue can be revisited at a later date? Thanks again! — WiseKwai 04:27, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!

... for your kind words! <bows> -- Ben 00:12, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Visual arts-related AfDs

Here's a template to use in an AfD, when it has been listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Visual arts (please do list appropriate AfDs there). I think it should go under the article details and above the nom statement, as it is a formal notice and not part of the debate. It will sign your name with date stamp automatically. Please pass on to others.

Mnemonic: List of Visual arts-related Deletions.

Template to use:

{{subst:LVD}}

Result:

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions. Tyrenius 00:14, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Tyrenius 00:14, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

AN/I on User:Antaeus Feldspar

Hi. Since you are tangentially involved in this, it is appropriate that I let you know about it and invite your comments. Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Attacks_and_disruption_of_noticeboards_by_User:Antaeus_Feldspar Thanks. --Justanother 14:48, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hi, i just finished reading your comment on the wikipedia proposal page for Cambodia and I'm glad to find someone else who wants to contribute to Cambodian related articles. I've also noticed many pages are very poorly written and while i may not be a college graduate i hope to contribute in any way i can. Out of curiosity, what is it that interests you in Cambodia?
LaNicoya 16:58, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Khmer

I've left a couple of comments on Talk:Khmer language. I know nothing about Khmer, so my remarks are from the point of view of an interested general reader. -- NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 17:59, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

PS How do you pronounce your surname? Just wondering. IPA will do just fine! --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 15:40, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

GA Review

Dear William,

It would be more than welcome - if you could find some time in order to review the Ante Starčević biography - which I nominated as a GA.

Best regards,

--BarryMar 12:33, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

User:AlexNewArtBot

Hi WilliamThweatt/Archive 2, as a WikiProject Scotland participant, please check out this this thread and consider adding the bot results page to your watchlist so we can manually update the New Articles page. There are some false results for the first batch, but I'm sure we can collectively tune the rules to improve the output.

If we get enough people watching the results page, we'll be cooking with gas as they say :)   This looks like a great helper in finding new Scotland related material. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 02:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

GAC backlog elimination drive

This form message is being sent to you either due to your membership with WikiProject Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Wikipedia:Good article candidates/List of reviewers. A new drive has been started requesting that all members review at least one article (or more, if you wish!) within the next two weeks at GAC to help in removing the large backlog. This message is being sent to all members, and even members who have been recently reviewing articles. There are almost 130 members in this project and about 180 articles that currently need to be reviewed. If each member helps to review just one or two articles, the majority of the backlog will be cleared. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :{{GAReview}} underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the GAC talk page. --Nehrams2020 00:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Re Clans of Scotland Project

Hi. You are listed as being a participant on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Clans_of_Scotland. I am trying to get some more direction into the project and was looking for some input if you are still interested. Nfras 03:04, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

July 2007 GAC backlog elimination drive

A new elimination drive of the backlog at Wikipedia:Good article candidates will take place from the month of July through August 12, 2007. There are currently about 130 articles that need to be reviewed right now. If you are interested in helping with the drive, then please visit Wikipedia:Good article candidates backlog elimination drive and record the articles that you have reviewed. Awards will be given based on the number of reviews completed. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :{{GAReview}} underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the drive's talk page. Please help to eradicate the backlog to cut down on the waiting time for articles to be reviewed.

You have received this message either due to your membership with WikiProject: Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Wikipedia:Good article candidates/List of reviewers. --Nehrams2020 03:34, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Arm&GettyPubPhoto.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Arm&GettyPubPhoto.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MER-C 09:53, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Khmer Krom

"Khmer Krom" usually means "Southern khmer" living in Vietnam, on their ancestrial territory, not very différent from the "Chicanos", living in now the US South-West.

From the original inhabitants of the Mekong delta, they became an "ethnic minority" after Vietnamese conquest and the Khmer village of "Prey Kor" turned to be "Saigon".

On April 1978, some Khmer Krom participated in the Phu lai Ba Chuc massacres with the "Khmer rouge" raiding in Vietnam from Cambodia. It's been an huge "pogrom" with only two survivors. On last november, I've been there for a study, as a retired political scientist, living with the populaion of Ba Chuc village.

Takima 18:05, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

external links on "Ba Chuc massacre":

http://vietnamnews.vnagency.com.vn/showarticle.php?num=01TRA080505.

http://khmercanada.site.voila.fr/racisme.htm

Takima 18:16, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Hank_Williams_at_13.jpg

I have tagged Image:Hank_Williams_at_13.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. Rettetast 10:13, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:David_Allen_Coe_Essential.jpg

I have tagged Image:David_Allen_Coe_Essential.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. BigrTex 17:28, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:CVU status

The Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to {{inactive}} and/or {{historical}} status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU#Inactive.3F and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 17:59, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Billycrashcraddock.jpg

I have tagged Image:Billycrashcraddock.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. Rettetast 17:54, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:NORODOM YUVANEATH.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:NORODOM YUVANEATH.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 03:24, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Request for comment on Category Redirect template

Because you are a member of WikiProject Categories, your input is invited on some proposed changes to the design of the {{Category redirect}} template. Please feel free to view the proposals and comment on the template talk page. --Russ (talk) 21:38, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Sam-Ang Sam.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sam-Ang Sam.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) 05:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Sam-Ang Sam.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Sam-Ang Sam.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. - AWeenieMan (talk) 04:16, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Vanemillon.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Vanemillon.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) 02:23, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

GAR for HRC

Moved from GAR per recommendation from outside editor

• In reviewing the contributions of the nominator to the actual article/talkpage in question, this nomination should be speedy-closed as an example of point-making. S/he has edited the HRC article only twice, both were in the last two days, and when this editor's changes were reverted, this nomination was made hours later. I don't find any contributions to the article prior to two days ago. This gives the appearance of a bad-faith, "I-didn't-get-my-way" nomination. Bellwether ^B_C 15:35, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

  Bellwether, please refrain from personal attacks and please assume good faith (I would wikilink, but I'm pretty sure you're familiar with those two policies). If you'll check my entire contribution history, you'll see that I have absolutely no history of "I-didn't-get-my-way" edits. You'll also find that I don't edit either current events or U.S. political articles anymore (specifically because I am of the wiki-philosophy that it is virtually impossible to maintain constantly "encyclopedic" content in these areas because of both blatant POV pushers and well-intending editors who are blind to their own biases). You will find, however, that I have worked on many GA and FA articles and primarily focus on Wikignomish editing to maintain articles with GA and FA status. I came to this article for the very first time last week to learn more about the Rodham family and I noticed that each time I refreshed my page over a few days, there were substantial differences (not in quantity, but in shades of meaning) in the article. Now it may have been coincidence, but when I checked the talk page, there are vehement differences of opinion in what the article should say, this makes for an inherently unstable article. This is a difference of opinion on what makes a GA, not on politics. I have an issue with the current quality of this article and I won't be sucked into your political debate. Is it any wonder that, even though we are trying to be an encyclopedia, I don't allow wikipedia to be used a source in my class and I'm not aware of any other professors that do?--William Thweatt ^Talk | ^Contribs 18:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

• What you do or do not do in your classes is beside the point. The only "instability" in this article is created by POV-warriors like M.ge that don't get there way, and try to slide changes in through attrition, using tags as weapons, and other various tactics. That you have never participated (before the last two days) in any discussions regarding the article, nor edited it at any length, raised legitimate suspicions about your quick-trigger nomination for review. As you state, though, the politics do not matter at all. In fact, I can't stand Sen. Clinton, and plan to vote for Obama, but that's beside the point. The article is and was a GA, and the only faux instability (and it is faux) comes from the POV-warriors who look to get their way in content matters. Fortunately, there are enough thoughtful editors who resist these warriors, that the article has maintained it's high quality. Next time you see an article like this, in which you have little or no experience editing, in lieu of nomming it for review, perhaps you can actually participate in discussions at the talkpage about your concerns. (addendum: How do you possibly see a "personal attack" in my post? I questioned your nomination, I didn't attack you personally. Sometimes people see a "personal attack" whenever their judgement is questioned.) Bellwether ^B_C 18:57, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

• I understand your position but I just have two points to get across. Firstly, I think you underestimate my umbrage regarding your accusations of bad faith (and make no mistake, both the accusation of bad faith and the tone implied by the use of "I-didn't-get-my-way edits" are personal attacks -- attacks on my motives, and therefore, my character, not my judgement). They were uncalled for and I ask that in the interest of harmonious editing, you retract those sentiments. Secondly, I purposely avoiding discussing the GA status on the articles talk page, because I wanted the opinions of editors who are not involved in the current content dispute(s). The fact that the vast majority of editors, including myself, "have little or no experience editing" this article does not preclude us from being able to distinguish between an article which deserves continued status as a GA and one that should be temporarily de-listed. As an admitted Obama supporter yourself, I'm sure you can appreciate the "outsider" arguement. The stability of the article should be judged by those familiar with evaluating GAs, not (only) by those who edit this article on a daily basis.--William Thweatt ^Talk | ^Contribs 19:27, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

• I'll not be retracting anything. I attacked the nomination (and, yes, your motives in bringing it), not you personally. I didn't say "WT is a Hillary-hating jerkweed" (which I don't believe, and which would have been a clear personal attack). I provided supporting evidence for my belief that this was a bad nomination, and perhaps even POINT-y. And I still firmly believe that a person with no experiences as to the nuances of the article shouldn't nominate it for review. You obviously disagree, as you yourself have no experience as to the nuances of the article, yet you have nominated it anyway, which is your right. It's also my right to call for a speedy close, based upon your misapprehension as to the "instability" of the article. "Instability" is not defined as POV-pushers being reverted. It's good faith disagreements as to basic content. There simply has not been major instances of that. Bellwether ^B_C 19:39, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

• Well it's obvious (and regretful) that you are not interested in maintaining cordial relationships with fellow editors and that we are getting off-topic here, so, barring any more inflammatory remarks on your part, this will be my last posting on the matter. You are trying to create a false dichotomy. A person's motives are indicative of their character, your admitted attack on my motives constitutes a besmirchment of my character and therefore amounts to a personal attack. A bad-faith or POINTy action would have been to simply de-list it myself unilaterally. However, although, it is my honest belief that this article does not, at present, meet criteria #5, I chose to bring it here for discussion by other uninvolved editors. You may have provided what you view as evidence that this was a "bad nomination" (although it's not even a "nomination", but simply a request for other editors' opinions as to it's GA status), but a bad idea does not equal bad faith or POINT, for both of which you provided no evidence.--William Thweatt ^Talk | ^Contribs 20:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

• I have responded at your talk. Would you be averse to moving these last two notes (one from each of us) to there, for purposes of keeping this nomination a bit cleaner, and easier to follow? Bellwether ^B_C 20:35, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

(←) I would very much like you to move these discussions to user talk. They are not part of this GAR: discussions about editor motivations and other "good faith" issues should take place on user talk pages. The GAR discussion is about whether the article meets the GA criteria. If this is done, I give permission that my own comment (this one) can also be removed. Thanks, Geometry guy 21:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

If my adjudging your nomination to have been badly done is a "personal attack", what then is what you said about me in the following statement:

Well it's obvious (and regretful) that you are not interested in maintaining cordial relationships with fellow editors and that we are getting off-topic here, so, barring any more inflammatory remarks on your part... (emphasis mine)

Now, I consider your attempt to read my mind with the first bolded statement, and your characterization of my remarks as "inflammatory" to be hyperbolic rhetoric, but not personal attacks. But according to your standards, they would qualify as PAs. I don't have ill-will towards you, but towards what I consider a poorly-thought out nomination. I harbor no resentment or anger towards you in the least for making the nomination. And nothing I've typed indicated otherwise. Bellwether ^B_C 20:33, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

LOL, I said that would be my last post on that topic and I meant it...you won't bait me into continuing this; my arguments will stand for themselves, as will your hollowness, arrogance and WP:OWN issues. Good luck with your life, pal, I have better things to do. (You seem like the sort of person that must always have the last word, so respond as you will no doubt will be compelled to do, I will not reply to you on any topic now).--William Thweatt ^Talk | ^Contribs 15:16, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

• Laugh out loud all you like. I did not "bait" you, nor did I attack you in any way. A "personal attack" attack has to, by definition, be about the person. I've continually kept my discussions focused on your nomination, and the quality thereof. In this last post, you have resorted to a clear personal attack, as you talk about me as a person, ("Hollowneess", "arrogance", et al), and refuse to even address the core of my argument: the nomination was a bad one. You may choose to respond or not, I don't care. Your clear personal attacks bring home an irony to your anger at challenging the basis and rationale of your nomination a "personal attack." You would do well to reread our discussion--especially your last post--and reassess your anger with me. Bellwether ^B_C 16:31, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Chalermpol Malakham.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Chalermpol Malakham.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) 20:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Resolved

_{I added a sentence to comply with BCBot's strict interpretation of NFCC#10C, and removed the deletion notice.Bellwether ^BC 16:37, 14 February 2008 (UTC)}

Disputed tag on Khmer page

As I wrote in User talk:N-true The reason why I removed the 'disputed' marker about the origin of the Brāhmi scripts, is that I think these pages are not the right . Of all the pages about the fifty or something Brāhmī scripts, only on these pages the disputedness of its origin is mentioned. I believe that either you should be consistent and either add this note to the infobox of all Brahmic languages, or leave it out altogether (after all, there is no reason why this snippet of information is more in place on the page about the Tibetan script than on e.g. the page on the Devanāgarī script). For now, I will revert your edits for consistency's sake. Personally I believe it's best to just leave the disputedness to the page on the Brāhmī script page (especially because that page claims it's 'agreed on' by most scholars that Brāhmī derives from Semitic scripts). If you disagree with my revert, please contact me.

Moreover, on the general Brāhmī page, there is a note that Brāhmī's origin in Aramaic is disputed, which links to a section of the same article (!!) in which it is mentioned that the general belief is that Brāhmī derives from Aramaic. This at least has to be fixed, too. Otherwise, my point in N-true's talk page still stands: either edit *all* infoboxes for the Brahmic scripts. I see no reason for such inconsistency as the one introduced by mentioning the dispute on one, or three, pages on Brahmic scripts. All in all, I believe there is too little reason to mention a minority view like this one on each and every page on the Brahmic scripts. Joost (talk) 17:29, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

"Minority view" or not, this is an encyclopedia and, in general, where there are disputes in the acedemic world, all competing theories with valid sources should be documented. In this case in particular, there are serious scholars who disagree with the theory (and that's all it is, a "theory"; it has not been proven) that Indic scripts were adapted from Semetic ones. By not mentioning it on "each and every page", but instead presenting as fact that these scripts stem from proto-Canaanite, we would be misrepresenting the current situation in acedemia. I agree that it should not be noted as disputed on just these three pages, it should be noted on all pages if we are to include the disuted information at all. However, the solution is not to remove mention of the dispute on these pages, but to include it on those that don't already mention it.--William Thweatt ^Talk | ^Contribs 17:55, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Either way, we need a source to confirm that there actually is a dispute, which is at the moment not present on Wikipedia. The current self-referential link on Brāhmī script is definitely insufficient, and moreover no sources at all are given for this claim. Wright/Daniels' The World's Writing Systems, which I have, also mentions a controversy, but fails to give any sources for the non-Semitic view other than the phrase while the indigenous origin is generally preferred in South Asia.

This brings to mind the case of Linear A, where a minority, largely consisting of Greeks, believes the language of the Linear A inscriptions to be an early variant of Greek. Despite there being a wide controversy among Greeks about this matter, there is little or no controversy in the academic world and it is generally agreed there that Linear A is written in a language linguistically unrelated to Greek. This controversy is not given much attention on Wikipedia -- and I believe rightfully so. Similarly, on the article on Humans, it is mentioned as a fact that humans descend from apes. This is a view that is controversial in many ways (see creationists), but not in the academic world or among biologists, and hence, it can (in my view) be rightfully presented as a fact on Wikipedia. Other encyclopedias, just like Wikipedia, also deal with these 'controversies' by gracefully ignoring them, and I definitely think something can be said for this position.

So I want to ascertain that there is, regarding this matter, a dispute or controversy in the academic world, and not one just among nationalistically minded people in South Asia. In the latter case, I think it might be better not to reflect the dispute, other than maybe a brief mention on the page about the Brāhmī script. Summarized: I need an academic or otherwise reliable source that makes the case for the indigenous hypothesis, or at least a source that gives some reasonable argumentation for such a hypothesis.) Joost (talk) 18:13, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

You are right in at least one point. The way in which the nature of the dispute is handled (self-referenced) in the Brāhmī script article is unacceptable. I will work on that in the coming days. In the meantime, if you feel like doing some reading, here are a few interesting sources regarding the subject:

• Hunter, G.R. The script of Harappa and Mohenjodaro and its connection with other scripts with an introduction by S. Langdon. (1993)

• Allchin, Raymond; The Rise of Civilization in India and Pakistan, 1982, (with Bridget Allchin in The Archaeology of Afghanistan)

• Salomon, Richard; Indian Epigraphy: A Guide to the Study of Inscriptions in Sanskrit, Prakrit, and Other Indo-Aryan Languages; 1998 (on p16 he states that the the idea that Indic stems from Semitic scripts is merely an assumption)

• an interesting (albeit lengthy) review of recent works by four acedemics in the field in which he holds that the idea that Brahmi was wholly adapted from Semitic scripts was put forth a century ago by Georg Bühler and has simply been relied upon and repeated by many modern writers who don't even specialize in the field: "Until recently, the received opinions on these issues, in the west at least, have mainly been based on or at least strongly affected by their explication by Georg Bühler fully one century ago in his highly influential, if somewhat controversial monograph On the Origin of the Indian Brahma Alphabet (Indian Studies No.III)".--William Thweatt ^Talk | ^Contribs 19:10, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Development of province articles

I started working on Koh Kong Province, then saw your post on the WikiProject Cambodia talk page. Please give me a shout when you get back from your wikibreak. I'll hold off on doing too much until you are back. I've run into some questions on population figures and a few other things. Plus, some continuity in the way the articles are organised, etc., would be good. Civilaffairs (talk) 22:06, 21 April 2008 (UTC)Civilaffairs

Invitation

Introducing WikiProject United States Government...
	Hello WilliamThweatt, Are you interested in Politics, Law or the United States? Do you enjoy expanding, creating or maintaining articles relating to those subjects? Or do you enjoy the small stuff? Or maybe you like learning about the United States Congress or the Commander in Chief. Well, wait no longer, because we have a project for you! WikiProject United States Government is where all the cool Wikipedians who watch C-SPAN hang out! Join the project today and help us get it off the ground and flying. Thanks in advance, « Diligent Terrier Bot (talk) 22:12, 3 August 2008 (UTC) This message has been delivered by Diligent Terrier Bot on behalf of WikiProject United States Government. You have received it because you are a member of a related WikiProject or you have said you are interested in your userspace. Message written by Leonard^Bloom and Diligent Terrier.	Help us get the project off the ground and flying.

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Chalermpol Malakham.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Chalermpol Malakham.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Aspects (talk) 06:23, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

To one of my favourite editors...

... for a hell of a long time I have meant to drop by your page and express my sincere appreciation for all the magnificent work you do on Cambodia articles. The quality of your writing, the thoughtful and relevant comments you leave on talk pages and your vigourous defense against vandals, clowns and POV pushers have made editing Cambodia articles that much more enjoyable. Despite my admiration, I've never dropped by to say gidday - my apologies. I've been off-wiki for about a year and lately I've been catching up on some unfinished WP:Cambodia work. On that note, I saw your message about the provincial articles and agree completely. It looks as though User:Civilaffairs is also interested. Today, I cleaned a load of spam off Kampot province, Kep and Sihanoukville province all of which are quite embarrassing for such important articles. I have a particular attachment for Pursat province as my Khmer family were all born there - but I'm happy to work on any of them. If you're interested perhaps we can rope-in Civilaffairs and make a start on one of the seaside provinces - they seem to be spam magnets for bar and guesthouse owners at the moment and currently tell us nothing about the province. Kampot and Kep in particular have a fascinating history. Let me know when/if you have time. Cheers, Paxse (talk) 12:25, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation

Hello, I hope you are doing well. I am sending you this message since you are listed as a GA reviewer. I would like to invite you to consider helping with the GA sweeps process. Sweeps helps to ensure that the oldest GAs still meet the criteria, and improve the quality of GAs overall. Unfortunately, last month only two articles were reviewed. This is definitely a low point after our peak at the beginning of the process when 163 articles were reviewed in September 2007. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. All exempt and previously reviewed articles have already been removed from the list. Instead of reviewing by topic, you can consider picking and choosing whichever articles interest you.

We are always looking for new members to assist with the remaining articles, so if you are interested or know of anybody that can assist, please visit the GA sweeps page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. If only 14 editors achieve this feat starting now, we would be done with Sweeps! Of course, having more people reviewing less articles would be better for all involved, so please consider asking others to help out. Feel free to stop by and only review a few articles, something's better than nothing! Take a look at the list, and see what articles interest you. Let's work to complete Sweeps so that efforts can be fully focused on the backlog at GAN. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 07:39, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Copyright problems with File:Macthomas-crest.jpg

Hello. Concerning your contribution, File:Macthomas-crest.jpg, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). As a copyright violation, File:Macthomas-crest.jpg appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. File:Macthomas-crest.jpg has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at File talk:Macthomas-crest.jpg and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) and CC-BY-SA, under CC-BY-SA, or released into the public domain leave a note at File talk:Macthomas-crest.jpg with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on File talk:Macthomas-crest.jpg.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Celtus (talk) 06:34, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Self-published book

I'm working on compiling a book containing information about almost all Non-indigenous ethnic groups living or working in Pakistan. The population of a particular ethnic group would be obtain respectively from their diplomatic missions in Pakistan including regions with significant populations, languages spoken and religious affiliations. I'm not very good with writing so it would be great, if you would like to collaborate with me.--116.71.53.25 (talk) 06:15, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Chalermpol Malakham

The article Chalermpol Malakham has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable singer; I can find no coverage by anybody (although this may be a language issues). References, even if non-English, are needed to prove the subject's significance.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mm40 (talk) 03:50, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Chalermpol Malakham

I have nominated Chalermpol Malakham, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chalermpol Malakham. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Mm40 (talk) 12:45, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Lao romanization vote

Hi there, I am throwing in a debate about the romanization of Lao on the Wikipedia and would appreciate your input. [[3]] Cheers, Rdavout (talk) 14:25, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello WilliamThweatt! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current 4 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Chalermpol Malakham - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 22:58, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Vane Millon

The article Vane Millon has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable model/actress; a google search resulted in no non-trivial mention in reliable sources that I could see; the most significant being part of a sentence in a large article about someone else: [4].

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 12:50, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Vane Millon for deletion

The article Vane Millon is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vane Millon until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 13:47, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

US National Archives collaboration

United States National Archives WikiProject

Would you like to help improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the National Archives and its incredible collection? This summer, the National Archives—which houses some of America's most important historical documents—is hosting me as its Wikipedian in Residence, and I have created WP:NARA to launch these efforts. There are all sorts of tasks available for any type of editor, whether you're a writer, organizer, gnome, coder, or image guru. The National Archives is making its resources available to Wikipedia, so help us forge this important relationship! Please sign up and introduce yourself. Dominic·t 15:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Moving Burma to Myanmar - ongoing poll

This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:48, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5