User talk:Animum/Archives/2008/January

The user name RambutanKing

What's wrong with that username? Is ShadowpuppetKing better? עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:03, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Porcupine was formerly known as User:Rambutan. —Animum (talk) 17:43, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Coding

Animum, I need someone who is good at code to help me fix a portal. Could you help me? HarrisonB - Conributions 01:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I guess. :-) —Animum (talk) 01:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. Could you click this link and fix the table for me? Thankyou so much HarrisonB - Conributions 02:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm really sorry, but I'm terrible at coding tables. :-( —Animum (talk) 02:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, that is fine. Do you know who can help me by any chance? :) Thanks HarrisonB - Conributions 11:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Corey J

Hi there: Sorry, I'm not sure what happened with respect to the above-captioned article... I tagged it with db-bio but then noticed that you seemed to be putting it through AfD, which was fine with me -- I went to remove my tag and I think you had by then deleted the article. I'm fine whatever happens, I just wanted to apologize if I caused you extra trouble. Accounting4Taste:talk 22:35, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Heh no problems at all. I was simply a little dubious about speeding it, which I shouldn't have been seeing as there were no sources for the subject. :-P —Animum (talk) 22:36, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!

That was becoming an annoyance!
Compwhiz II 23:29, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! —Animum (talk) 00:20, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Good job!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For you hard work against vandalism. --Maxim(talk) 00:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! —Animum (talk) 01:32, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

My user page

Many thanks for your good work on 31 December to my user page, which seems to have become a playground for the retarded when I wasn't looking. I've only today noticed the changes, with witless IP numbers adding crap and a couple of good people (who should have spent their time partying or similar) clearing it up. -- Hoary (talk) 07:29, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Hehe thanks! —Animum (talk) 01:36, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of user page, is your user name, Animum, suppose to mean something? « ₣ullMetal ₣alcon » 01:47, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

It actually means the mind, but I don't speak Latin; I just got bored one day. :-P —Animum (talk) 01:50, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

It also means 'spirit' or 'soul' - in fact 'anima' in Italian is exactly that. -- Mentifisto 09:29, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Question

Can you make a handy script like count.js with a direct link to Special:Listusers for a user? That would be useful in easily detecting who's an admin and who's not. -- Mentifisto 09:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Add the following line to your monobook as it appears on the page:

importScript('User:Voice of All/History/monobook.js');

—Animum (talk) 16:53, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

It already existed?

It worked beautifully - by the way, why the change of mind from a snippet to an entire js? -- Mentifisto 17:19, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

The snippet refused to work for me when I tried it alone, so the entire script should do unless you want to talk to Voice of All to get a standalone script. Cheers! —Animum (talk) 17:30, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Nah, it's useful. Thanks. -- Mentifisto 18:31, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Jennifer Lewis1271

Hey, I found that you deleted this users talk page for being advertising. I can't access the pre-delete history, but I have the sinking suspicion that their userpage is also similar advertising. I only notice and wonder because everything after == See also == is a copy and paste from Web Design - I only caught this because this user copies the categories also. I was wondering if you'd mind taking a look? (I also find it odd that the only contribs from this user are their user page). Regardless, Thanks. --ShakataGaNai (talk) 06:47, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Shiny. Thx. --ShakataGaNai (talk) 22:57, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Anibot

I have received the MILHIST WikiProject newsletter for December twice with this bot. What's up? Dreamafter ^⇔ 23:21, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Me too --  jj137 ^♠ 23:40, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. I clicked the "remove duplicates" box in AWB and the text I chose for the "Skip page if contains" option was something in every newsletter. Strange... —Animum (talk) 01:21, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Link only delivery

Hi Animum: So far I have only subscribed to and received the link-only delivery of the military newsletter, yet yesterday I got the full version from your Anibot. Please make sure that I receive the "link only" version and please change the last one on my talk page to that. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 00:05, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

• Thank you for making the change. IZAK (talk) 02:38, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

MILHIST newsletter

Two questions, if I may:

1. Why are all the deliveries in full-text form rather than the normal link-only one?
2. Somewhat more broadly, why is Anibot delivering this newsletter to begin with? I'm not aware of anyone requesting it.

Thank you. Kirill 02:49, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I knew this question would be asked sometime. :-)

1. I wasn't aware of the procedure for MILHIST's delivery practices as I hadn't been asked to do it at any point in the past.
2. Cbrown1023 requested per e-mail that I deliver the newsletters as due to the note on his talk page since he was going on a vacation and wouldn't be back in a feasible amount of time to finish the job.

I hope those two answers are sufficient enough to answer the two questions well. Regards, —Animum (talk) 02:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah, yes, that explains it. A shame nobody told us that there was going to be a replacement bot, though; we could have explained the procedure if we'd known. I'll try to write up the instructions in more detail on the page itself, just in case.

As it is, you'll likely have a fair number of annoyed editors dropping by your talk page in the next few days. ;-)

Cheers! Kirill 03:05, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, done: Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Outreach#Delivery instructions. I'd appreciate your opinion on how well that would explain the procedure to someone setting up a bot run for it. Thanks! Kirill 03:22, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah yes, those directions are a bit more helpful to someone who is running a bot and not a member of MILHIST. ;-) Regards, —Animum (talk) 23:38, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Brian Larsen

You were the admin who reverted an edit made by 67.184.25.212 on the entry "Brian Larsen". Since your revert, user 67.184.25.212 has made two additional edits to the page that appear to be vandalism. Furthermore, another user, Truthserum1, has made similar edits to the page that appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. Furthermore, the page history shows numerous vandalisms from other users. Can you mark the page Semi-Protected? Thanks. Lsdevbarb (talk • contribs) 04:51, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected due to vandalism. —Animum (talk) 23:42, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

How to stop newsletter delivery?

Please stop delivering the Military History newsletter (and any other newsletters) to User talk:Catalyst in Society because the user has left the project (see the edit summary).

It would be convenient if you would put, on your bot page, a link to simple instructions how to remove oneself (or a user) from the delivery list. After some searching around, I found a list of names receiving the newsletter, but it isn't clear whether removing a name from the list will cause delivery to cease.

Thanks! --Coppertwig (talk) 13:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Is there any problems? The WesternArmenian and EasternArmenian spellings have little differences, so my addings were good. Andranikpasha (talk) 23:14, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, yes. Sorry for my revert of your additions. —Animum (talk) 23:16, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Its OK:)! Andranikpasha (talk) 23:19, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

—Animum (talk) 23:20, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

:O

		The da Vinci Barnstar
		For adding features/fixing my bugs while I'm away. GracenotesT § 00:37, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh my, you seem to be all over the place :P Gracenotes^T § 00:40, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Why thank you. Ceiling Animum is fixing your bugs. —Animum (talk) 00:54, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and ^[1][2] :-P —Animum (talk) 00:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Danke!

[3] :-) Scarian^{Call me Pat} 01:15, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem. —Animum (talk) 01:19, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

For you vandal fighting.

Since Barnstars aren't edible:

Compwhiz II^(Talk)_(Contribs) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching! Keep up the good work!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks! —Animum (talk) 18:31, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

saigon (page)

Eye have only a question...How is it deemed slander or vandalism to correct an error made in the depiction or interpretation of an event that happened?? Please answer whenever you have the thyme..--Eye was <<BuTT>>now Eye am Not (*_*) (talk) 18:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

This is not the way to add context and descriptions to articles. —Animum (talk) 19:04, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

69.158.17.177's edits to Guitar Hero (series)

I was just going to put the {{subst:Uw-pinfo}} template on 69.158.17.177's talk page about adding non-public personal information (such as phone numbers, home addresses, workplaces or identities of pseudonymous or anonymous individuals who have not made their identity public). I then noticed that you had already blocked him (rather quickly might I add), so I didn't add the template message.

I don't know if you had done this or not, but I went ahead and made a request for oversight to the email address provided at Wikipedia:Requests for oversight regarding the revision in question. Lightsup55 ( T | C ) 20:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Just got a reply back. The revision was deleted. Lightsup55 ( T | C ) 20:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Good, good. I had no net access until just now, so I'm glad to hear it. :-) —Animum (talk) 22:32, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

A Question

What tool do you use for vandal fighting. You are so fast! Compwhiz II^(Talk)_(Contribs) 19:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Rollback rights, User:Gracenotes/amelvand.js, and a custom tool I've made for blocking. —Animum (talk) 20:01, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Cool, I'm using twinkle and I've signed up for Vandal proof Compwhiz II^(Talk)_(Contribs) 20:15, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

First, thanks for blocking that guy. He was wearing on my patience. Second, what's this custom block script? I don't use a blocking script, and was wondering if it would make life easier for me :P. Best, Keilana^talk 23:57, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Firstly, no problem; secondly, I think it may make your life a bit easier if you took User:Animum/easyblock.js for a spin. —Animum (talk) 00:08, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll go do some RC patrol with it. Does the amelvand.js have sysop stuff? (I always love it when I find a helpful piece of .js. BTW- do you know what the script is that hides closed AFDs? It disappeared awhile ago. :S) Best, Keilana^talk 00:11, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Amelvand utilizes the admin rollback functionality if one has access to it, but does not have block functions yet, AFAIK. As for the AFD stuff, this code snippet should work:

 
/*** Make old AfD's appear or disappear - from AmiDaniel's monobook ***/
 
function hideafd()
{
	var divs = document.getElementsByTagName("div");
	for(var x = 0; x < divs.length; ++x)
		if(divs[x].className.indexOf("vfd") != -1)
		divs[x].style.display = "none";
	document.getElementById('footer').style.display = 'none';
}
 
function showafd()
{
	var divs = document.getElementsByTagName("div");
	for(var x = 0; x < divs.length; ++x)
		if(divs[x].className.indexOf("vfd") != -1)
		divs[x].style.display = "";
	document.getElementById('footer').style.display = '';
}
 
function morelinks() {
	var tabs = document.getElementById('p-cactions').getElementsByTagName('ul')[0];
	if(document.title.indexOf("Wikipedia:Articles for deletion") == 0 && location.href.indexOf('&action=') == -1) 
        {
		addlilink(tabs, 'javascript:hideafd()', 'hide closed', 'ca-hide');
		ta['ca-hide'] = ['', 'Hide closed AFDs'];
		addlilink(tabs, 'javascript:showafd()', 'show closed', 'ca-show');
		ta['ca-show'] = ['', 'Show closed AFDs'];
	} 
}

addOnloadHook(morelinks);

Regards, —Animum (talk) 00:16, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the unblock

Thanks for unblocking my account. I was surprised at how fast you blocked it, I was hoping to get a tag up on it before it got blocked but you beat me to it ;-). Thanks again!
Gonzo fan2007 ^{talk ♦ contribs} 23:51, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Better to be safe than sorry, right? —Animum (talk) 23:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Haha yeah I figured there was a good chance that it would be blocked before I could get a tag up. The account was blocked at the same time I put the tag up on the front page. But yeah, I would rather you be safe than sorry ;-) Good luck editing!
Gonzo fan2007 ^{talk ♦ contribs} 23:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry

I was mistaken, i thought the Country of France was a famous resident of Preston. Thankyou for correcting my mistake.

Yes, yes, just don't make such a mistake again. —Animum (talk) 03:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Therma-Tru Doors

You speedy deleted this article, but it was recreated by the same author. So I have now listed it at AfD. I guess this is the correct thing to do in this situation? MSGJ (talk) 16:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD was good, but it could have been tagged as {{db-spam}}. Regards, —Animum (talk) 16:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but then there was nothing to stop it happening all over again, was there? I don't want to play pingpong. MSGJ (talk) 16:43, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

PS seen that you've just speedy deleted it again. What's to stop the author creating it again? MSGJ (talk) 16:43, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Purplepoo44

Hey Animum, just wanted to tell you that this user's contribs are all vandalism or very close to it. I'd suggest a re-block, to be honest. I don't think a name change will help here. GlassCobra 18:01, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Y Re-blocked – And why aren't you on IRC? :-P —Animum (talk) 18:12, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Cause I'm at work. :P GlassCobra 18:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Laggy, but it'll suffice. :-P —Animum (talk) 19:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

I appreciate that. Jehochman ^Talk 18:26, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. —Animum (talk) 18:27, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

wheel war

I am concerned with your unblock of Jehochman because:
1. You haven't discussed your unblock.
2. Your quick unblock has resulted in Jehochman not contemplating his violation of policy. 3. Your reason is incompatible with the block reason. The block was not punitive but meant to encourage reflection and to prevent further damage to WP. See where I write "This block is done to prevent further damage to WP by preventing your edits"
4. Your quick action may lead to gloating (Jehochman notes that he has been unblocked) and empower him to violate even more WP policies.
5. If you would have discussed the matter with me, I may have shortened the period substantially.
6. This case was a prime case of showing that there is no cabal. Now this case can be cited by critics as evidence of cabal.
Archtransit (talk) 18:28, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

1. When normal users request to be unblocked, discussion with the blocking administrator is not mandatory, but it is always favorable; I apologize for not discussing the matter with you. However, administrators do not unblock themselves and Jehochman did not, for which I applaud him.
2. Users do not need to be blocked to contemplate their misdoings. A simple note on Jehochman's talk page would have sufficed.
3. Jehochman blocked Onequestion punitively, which should not have been done, however, I can not imagine why Jehochman would block punitively again. Your block served no purpose to aid dispute resolution; it only served to exacerbate the conflict.
4. Jehochman is one of the most respected sysops on the site and would not partake in a wheel war.
5. He did not need to be blocked in the first place; see the above points.
6. I learned of his request to be unblocked from #wikipedia-en-unblock, the non-private IRC channel to which a bot reports requests for unblocking, not because of "the cabal."

—Animum (talk) 19:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Archtransit and I are now involved in a dispute about his willful abuse of tools. I have admitted that my block was a technical violation, but it was motivated by desire to be lenient to the user who could have been blocked for two weeks instead of one minute. I have initiated an informal discussion and asked User:Alison and User:WJBscribe to mediate. Jehochman ^Talk 18:36, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree; dispute resolution is a very favorable recourse to seek at this time. —Animum (talk) 19:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

63.3.10.1

You may which to look at this, which was put on the IP talkpage after your warning. You may consider it a personal attack. D.M.N. (talk) 17:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

It just means I'm doing my job well. —Animum (talk) 17:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Not exactly.... D.M.N. (talk) 19:29, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

*poke*

↑ = self-explanatory. Hope you're doing well; say hi to people for me. I'll be back eventually... :) Nihiltres^{t.l} 19:21, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Y Spammed in ##Cremepuff222 – I'm doing well too. —Animum (talk) 19:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Animum/reset.js

This script is nice but, could you add support for the sandbox talk too. Its also something that would need resetting. Compwhiz II^(Talk)_(Contribs) 01:49, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

seemingly random usernames

Hi! Thanks for the unblock. I'm hardly the person to cite WP:AGF and WP:BITE, but may I offer a rule-of-thumb suggestion as a possible barometer of "seemingly random"? Compare lengths of usernames to other things folks memorise. Definitely we could agree that seven characters (the length of a North American phone number, for instance) is within that range. The question of course is--when does it become confusingly random? I can't be sure, but I think we have to send the shorter ones to WP:RFCN or just ignore them sometimes. Thanks again for your reconsideration. MKoltnow 03:58, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Rudget!

Dear Animum, my sincere thanks for your support in my second request for adminship, which ended with 113 supports, 11 opposes, and 4 neutral. I would especially like to thank my admin coach and nominator, Rlevse and Ryan Postlethwaite who in addition to Ioeth all inspired me to run for a second candidacy. I would also like to make a special mention to Phoenix-wiki, Dihyrdogen Monoxide and OhanaUnited who all offered to do co-nominations, but I unfortunately had to decline. I had all these funny ideas that it would fail again, and I was prepared for the worst, but at least it showed that the community really does have something other places don't. Who would have though Gmail would have been so effective? 32 emails in one week! (Even if it does classify some as junk :P) I'm glad that I've been appointed after a nail biting and some might call, decision changing RFA, but if you ever need anything, just get in touch. The very best of luck for 2008 and beyond, Rudget. 16:19, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Happy half birthday!

Happy Half-Birthday, Animum/Archives/2008/January, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! (In Wikipedia time, it is a bit late, but in my time zone, it is still the 16th.)

NHRHS2010 talk 01:33, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Danke! —Animum (talk) 01:33, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Swatjester

I don't know if the anon's comments one his talk page are vandalism or what - they seem somewhat stalker-esque. I don't think I'm going to revert them again even though it seems to be coming from multiple IP's. --Veritas (talk) 04:28, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Outermesh

Hello,

This article was speedily deleted. It was written in a very neutral voice (like Panther Express and Akamai Technologies). If it is not acceptable, then please edit or provide guidance on how best to post.

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffkim511 (talk • contribs) 17:58, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Please read over our notability guidelines and Wikipedia:Your first article. Best, —Animum (talk) 18:00, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

You (or your bots) comments on my Alcoholics Anonymous edits

What was wrong with them? Why did you make the comments? I would appreciate if you reverted what ever criticisms you have, unless you can recheck them and still find them to be valid.

Keep up the good work. 90.192.179.178 (talk) 20:34, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I did not see that it was a talk page. Apologies, —Animum (talk) 20:35, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

sorry

Sorry it happen accidently.I was in malayalam wikipedia accidently I saved it in the wrong window. Once again sorry

No problem. It seemed that you wouldn't just happen upon that template and save it. —Animum (talk) 01:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

PS

I like the automatic font on your talk page - how did you set it like that? --Veritas (talk) 04:30, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

<div style="font-family: Trebuchet MS; font-size: 97%"> with no closing </div> tag. —Animum (talk) 02:36, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

thanks animum much appreciated--Thevardonrushes (talk) 18:23, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem. —Animum (talk) 18:24, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

YouthLaw

You deleted the article on YouthLaw far too quickly. I had just started it.

YouthLaw is an excellent source of easy to understand information about law in NZ. I have no personal connection with YouthLaw.

Please reinstate what you deleted and let me finish the article. Romiben

It does not meet our notability requirements for websites. Apologies, —Animum (talk) 02:23, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Of couse it doesn't after one paragraph ! But once I had finished it it would be sufficiently "notable". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romiben (talk • contribs) 02:32, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

The length of an article does not constitute its notability. —Animum (talk) 02:34, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

NZ newspaper journalist's turn to Youthlaw for legal advice when they need it for their artices about issues of relevance to childen/youth in NZ.

Two examples of articles where YouthLaw's soliciters are quoted: http://www.stuff.co.nz/4236643a6442.html http://www.stuff.co.nz/4364664a6442.html

This meets Wikipedia' criteria for notability.

A company, corporation, organization, team, religion, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of coverage in secondary sources. Such sources must be reliable, and independent of the subject. The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. Once notability is established, primary sources may be used to add content. Ultimately, and most importantly, all content must be attributable.

The "secondary sources" in the criterion include reliable published works in all forms, such as (for example) newspaper articles, books, television documentaries, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romiben (talk • contribs) 02:49, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Animum, I've reviewed this page and, while you may be right that this page ultimately would not contain a sufficient assertion of notability, I'm concerned that the editor who created the article did not have a full opportunity to include relevant material establishing the importance of the site. It might be best to give him another chance to finish the article before making a final determination. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:03, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I didn't see this comment when I logged on earlier today, so apologies for Newyorkbrad the Mighty having to come by. I had not stumbled upon those independent news coverages when I searched for some, and now that I see there are some, by all means, recreate the article. Apologies, —Animum (talk) 22:10, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

E-mail.

I sent one at you just now. · AndonicO ^Hail! 02:23, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Y Replied —Animum (talk) 02:25, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Sent another. · AndonicO ^Hail! 01:55, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Paul Knight-Kirby is god

Could i also request you delete the talk page for the same reason? Simply south (talk) 03:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Y Deleted per CSD G8. —Animum (talk) 03:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Blocked user User talk:XxX-Janaye-XxX

I'm not sure this is a malicious vandalism only account - just someone who is lost a bit. I am not sure a permanent block is indicated here. --NrDg 04:13, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Warren S. Brown

Hi Animum. I see that on 14 January 2008 you deleted "Warren S. Brown" ‎ because "PROD left uncontested for 5 days". I'm the article's creator and I had no idea the PROD was on the article (I've been very busy and whoever placed it didn't inform me). The stub article said "Warren S. Brown is director of the Lee Edward Travis Research Institute at the Fuller Theological Seminary and Professor of Psychology in the School of Psychology. He also served as the principal editor and contributor to "Whatever Happened to the Soul?: Scientific and Theological Portraits of Human Nature" (1998) and was editor and contributor to "Understanding Wisdom: Sources, Science and Society" (2000)." He's a member of the International Society for Science and Religion which is strong prima facie evidence of notability, and in fact he has written 5 books and has over 190 published papers 3 some of which are cited over 50 times. Could you undelete please and I'd be happy to expand the stub? Many thanks NBeale (talk) 04:15, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I think my restoration summary sums up my reply quite well. —Animum (talk) 04:20, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I've improved the article a bit. NBeale (talk) 08:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Jules Vernes

Thank you for your patronizing comment but I suggest you review your opinion. 172.159.209.28 (talk) 01:58, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

That comment wasn't meant to be patronizing, but that section was not the proper place to discuss 20,000 Leagues under the Sea. Regards, —Animum (talk) 01:59, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree but that's its current content -pre my edit- only it originally applied the content of 20,000 leagues to Vernes whole works. I find it silly to call chauvinistic someone whose central characters were nearly all foreign. Also, I had corrected the reference to the father of sci fi which was wrongly quoted -check the linked citation-.172.159.209.28 (talk) 02:04, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Right; sorry. —Animum (talk) 18:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Master-slave (technology) article

I edited the article Master-slave (technology) from the IP address 87.116.176.242 (I forgot to login) and you immediately reverted the edit. It looks like it was reverted automatically for some reason, but I can't be certain. Was it accidental or did I make some mistake? BytEfLUSh (talk) 04:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I was going through the RC feed rather quickly and the edit went against my gut senses; I haven't studied the Master-slave system and I made a mistake. Apologies, —Animum (talk) 18:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Deleted Become Legendary

Why did you delete it. I just said its a commercial and the athletes who are in it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ee master (talk • contribs) 17:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Its subject wasn't notable, and though I sincerely believe your intentions were good, it, to the reader, advertised for the Air Jordan brand. Regards, —Animum (talk) 18:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:TSQUAD.

Nice to have you. · AndonicO ^Hail! 22:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and you're abusing (overusing) huggle. Someone might start an RFC against you. ;) · AndonicO ^Hail! 22:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Well my talk page is a bit more active than it has been in the past. :-P —Animum (talk) 22:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Same for me... not always good comments though. :P · AndonicO ^Hail! 22:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

hi

I wanted to know that should not there be a mention of the 1992 attack by muslim terorists on Karnak temple complex ? I guess you have worked on this page. Jon Ascton (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 02:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Userpage

What happened? Yours and mine are not displaying correctly. « ₣M₣ » 01:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Now, about your randomquote template... yeah, check that too. Actually, b/c of the new preprocessor, check everything. :P « ₣M₣ » 19:31, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

AAAAAAAAA! (Y Done) —Animum (talk) 00:17, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Another smile

NHRHS2010 (talk · contribs) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Danke! —Animum (talk) 00:50, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Fifth amendment privilege

I am extremely curious as to why you removed my corrections to the terminology in the article on the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution. The term "privilege" is the standard legal idiom, and is technically accurate. It is the standard term used in all of the major cases cited in the article, and is therefore properly sourced. For example, the first Supreme Court case listed, Malloy v. Hogan, begins "n this case we are asked to reconsider prior decisions holding that the privilege against self-incrimination is not safeguarded against state action by the Fourteenth Amendment." Brown v. Missippi refers to "the privilege against self-incrimination." Miranda v. Arizona begins with the statement that it deals with "the necessity for procedures which assure that the individual is accorded his privilege under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution." In general, rules of law which limit a person's obligation to provide testimony or evidence are referred to as "privileges" -- attorney-client privilege, priest-penitent privilege, spousal privilege, and so on (even "executive privilege" follows this practice). Rule 501 of the Federal Rules of Evidence is simply captioned "Privileges," [4] and the accompanying interpretive notes discuss "the privilege of a witness not to testify." Other encyclopedias follow this practice; note the britannica online entry here [5]. I would appreciate it if you allow me to again refine the text of the article to reflect standard usage in the legal field. I am quite certain that there are many less carefully written sources which use the term "right" in this context, but I would think Wikipedia strives to maximize technical accuracy. Minos P. Dautrieve (talk) 04:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I think Minos P. Dautrieve is correct about this. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:20, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Same here. I'm not one to correct a lawyer. —Animum (talk) 01:27, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for that unblock looks like I was caught in some crossfire! Æon ^{Insanity Now!} 00:35, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

*agrees* —Animum (talk) 00:39, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

AVT updated

Hi Animum, I believe you are using my AVT tool, it has been updated. Please place

var vspeed = 1000; 

on the top of your monobook.js to allow it to continue working. (If you could make the default 1000, unless otherwise declared, that would be great. Thedjatclubrock :) ^(T/C) 03:46, 31 January 2008 (UTC)