text:
User talk:Gzornenplatz

(Old stuff cleared out.)

Czechia vs. Czech Republic
Why are you against Czechia? It is a legal English word. People around me commonly use it and it begins to be used even in the official papers. You are right that the Czech Republic used to be used more often but it is changing.

[] Miraceti 20:36, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Which official papers? If you check Google News, you'll find 5,060 hits for "Czech Republic" and - count them - 3 (three) for "Czechia". Gzornenplatz 20:40, Dec 1, 2004 (UTC)
 * For examples official papers of Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic (this is a political name of the ministry). The Czech Republic is a successor of political name Czechoslovak feerative republic. Czechia is a successor of Czechoslovakia.
 * It is not a problem of the name that journalists across the world are so lazy to go to the nearest Czech embassy and ask what is the name of the country. Wikipedia should come with a correct information. It is an advantage of Wikipedia that everybody can correct anybody else. Even when the majority is not right. Miraceti 18:22, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * It is not official. Search Google for "czech republic" site:vlada.cz and you get 737 hits, "czechia" site:vlada.cz finds it only in the URL of an external link to www.czechia.com. Also, the word is in no English dictionary. Gzornenplatz 20:07, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)
 * It is official since 1993.
 * Of course, you don't get good results on the official site of the Czech government.
 * Dictionaries are very conservative media. Try dict.cc (ENG-GER), Online-translator(ENG-RUS), Oxford Reference and Free ENG-CZ. Wikipedia also knows Czechia and this page is used even by some dictionaries, try Webster's online dictionary.
 * Result? You are wrong. It is a quite newly used word but it is a common word spreading more and more. Please, do not try to stop progress. Have you forgot? WikiWiki! Wikipedia can be very up-to-date if Wikipedians are up-to-date. Miraceti 22:40, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I don't think Centauri is Gene Poole
I personally do not think that Centauri is Gene Poole. For one, he does not have Gene Poole's attitude. For another, Atlantium is the only micronation page he has touched so far; he doesn't share Gene Poole's obsession with micronations.

Even if he is Gene Poole, I am willing to give him a second chance. As long as this user doesn't handle user who disagree with him by resorting to petty insults and name calling, and as long as this user doesn't handle disagreements via revert wars, everything should be OK. Samboy 09:46, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * OK, I retract my position. I have reason to believe, based on an argumentive paragraph posted by Centauri on this page, that this may be Gene Poole after all.  See the linked page for my reasoning.  Samboy 00:46, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

please take a look at the diffs on this page.
Requests_for_comment/Carrp. Kevin Baas | talk 22:51, 2004 Dec 14 (UTC)

Britannica 16th edition
How is the 32-volume version that replaced the 28-volume 15th edition not the 16th edition?--L.E./le@put.com/12.144.5.2 03:52, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * It still calls itself 15th edition, despite the increase in volumes. Even within the period 1974-85, it was revised every year, and likewise the 32-volume version was revised annually at first (only in the 1990s this was interrupted). So there are many different "15th editions". Gzornenplatz 05:02, Dec 19, 2004 (UTC)

Arbcom case decided
Your arbitration case has been decided. You have been banned for one week, following which you will be subject to several paroles. →Raul654 10:28, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

Potential block against you for violation of arbcom ruling
Hi Gzornenplatz, I left a comment on WP:RFPP to the effect that you may be banned for up to 56 days due to separate infractions of the arbcom ruling against you. You are welcome to comment. silsor 01:32, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC)

Welcome back
Welcome back! Let me know when other admins are applying the Arbcom ruling inappropriately. Some of us do appreciate the scope of your contributions. 172 08:31, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * They were doing it just now and will probably continue it. According to the ruling I have every right to do one revert per day, which I intend to use in cases where discussion is hopeless because someone is trying to push a POV rather than editing in good faith. There is no issue where I have "refused to discuss" as the Arbcom wrongly claims (that was the whole basis of the ruling), so I would appreciate if you could unblock me if I'm blocked again. What makes it worse is that currently blocks don't expire automatically after the set time, and people like Silsor fail to remove their blocks in time when they are expired. (It seems the developers are more busy voting themselves money from Wikipedia funds while keeping their own numbers artificially low by not reaching out for volunteers which would surely be in abundance if they would actually ask or provide a method for requesting developership that does not involve licking the asses of the existing developers in the IRC channel etc. - leading to the abysmal performance of Wikipedia and the persistence of such simple bugs.) Gzornenplatz 06:19, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * Gz, if you were the one querying me about the blocks, I don't usually use the blocking feature (one way or the other). I saw a lot of blocks that were really old with a yesterday expiration, and didn't want to begin mucking around until I found out why this was so. OTOH, if you weren't the one asking me, never mind. :) -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 06:30, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, it was me. Silsor finally unblocked me some three hours after I first notified him (although he was present). But it's not only me; I noted that the ipblocklist is full of other blocks that should have long expired but are still active. Any short block is currently de facto a permanent one. Gzornenplatz 06:54, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)

 * You've been unblocked. It seems like the scheme to get you blocked for several months lost steam... BTW, send me an email at sokolov47@yahoo.com so that we can communicate off Wiki, if you want. 172 06:32, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, Silsor just threatened a permanent ban, speaking no doubt for certain arbcom members... well, I guess that goes with the territory when you're (a) fighting POV pushers and (b) not respecting the cabal. Gzornenplatz 06:54, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)

 * You feel harmed, don't you. Anyway, welcome back.
 * Also, I noticed you reverted the changes to country articles that moved the infoboxes from the main body of the article to a template. Why did you do so? It was a way to avoid the bug that enabled the images to cover the text below them. I believe there was still no update to the MediaWiki that corrected this problem and articles like, for instance, Belarus look strange after your reverts. Care to explain? Halibutt 08:28, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)

 * Looks good on my screen. Where is an image covering the text? Moving the infoboxes out just makes it harder to edit them. Gzornenplatz 08:39, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)

 * Please stop doing this because I will revert you every time. I will go through List of countries everyday to convert all country tables into templates until I finish, and then I will closely check those pages if anybody removes the templates. —Cantus…  ☎   09:39, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, I'll do the same, and the majority agrees with me on this question . Gzornenplatz 17:25, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)

When you are barred from making a necessary revert, please feel free to post a note on my talk page. Also, I have something to propose if you care to send me an email. 172 09:44, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Bah, gentlemen, if the harder to edit the infobox is the only problem Gzornenplatz has, it's not a problem at all. Take a look at how I handled the infoboxes for Poland and Belarus - there's an easy way to add the editing option for all the tables and templates - just use the parameter and place it inside of the template. And please, stop reverting - unless of course that's your favourite sport. Halibutt 11:00, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)

 * Meta stuff like edit links has no business in the article proper unless it's optional like the section edit links. Gzornenplatz 17:02, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)

 * And why is that? If you don't like it - you can create your own .css sheet with disabled template (or any other MediaWiki feature, be that your will) and use it. Other than that - there's no Wikipedia policy of not using templates. Do not force others to adopt your views or style. Halibutt 17:54, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)

 * My view is in the majority (shared by at least Uriber, fvw, Golbez, mav), so it's rather you forcing others to adopt your views (shared, as far as I can see, only by Cantus and Jerryseinfeld). Gzornenplatz 19:10, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)

Will you please stop removing the country templates? Acknowlegde all the work that went behind making these templates and updating them to the newest format. And please try to see the usefulness in having these templates in the first place. You want Wikipedia to be easy to edit. To a lot of people it is not very inviting to see a bunch of alien code when they're trying to edit an article. Also take a look at WikiProject_Countries and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countries. —Cantus… ☎   04:49, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm not removing anything. I just paste the boxes directly into the article. Templates exist for a specific reason, which doesn't apply here. The "alien code" is what anyone who wants to edit the infobox will have to deal with anyway, what difference does it make whether it's in the main article or in a separate template page? And I don't see anything relevant to this issue in your two links, and certainly no consensus to use templates. Gzornenplatz 05:23, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)

Done. I just wish I were allowed to type "infinite" instead of 24 hrs. 172 12:00, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I just blocked Lazyfair for 24 hours. Danny 04:48, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks. He already has a new sockpuppet, User:Ground0. Gzornenplatz 04:53, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC)

 * Blocked for 6 months. Danny 04:55, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Cantus
Cantus's use of sockpuppets has caused Danny and I to find find his ISP and block his IP range for six months. After that, if he returns, he is liable to appear before Arbcom again about his abuse of sockpuppets. Warmest regards --Neutralitytalk 07:20, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC)

Country Infoboxes
I would like to know why you reverted all the changes to the country pages by manually adding the info table into them instead of using a template which is the current trend. If you cannot explain this to me, I am going to revert the versions back because you made no comments about why you were doing this. Páll 00:08, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * What kind of argument is "it's the current trend"? Maybe the trend is changing. A few users started creating templates without establishing a consensus first. Others oppose it.  I think it's up to you to give a good reason for using templates here. The point of templates is to allow the use of the same text in multiple articles, but a country infobox is needed only in the  respective country article. Gzornenplatz 00:37, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, but you went on a personal crusade and reverted the changes without asking anyone. Many users have since reverted your changes. You even reverted changes on pages that had been using formats for a long time without asking anyone. You need to generate concensus just as much as anyone. I'm watching you, if you continue to change this without seeking further concesus, I have no fear of protecting pages. Páll 00:54, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * You have it quite backwards. It's you who needs to establish consensus, not me. There are only a few pages which had templates for a somewhat longer time, you can keep those if you insist. But the others were changed by a personal crusade of Cantus (and now you), without asking anyone. I'm reverting to the status quo ante. Gzornenplatz 00:58, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * I quote from Revert: "Note that reverts are not appropriate if a newer version is no better than the older version. You should save reverts for cases where the new version is actively worse." You're going to have to justify why you think the new version is actively worse before you revert. Páll 03:46, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * It says nothing about consensus there. It is actively worse in my opinion, and that's enough to justify me reverting it. Gzornenplatz 03:59, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

A solution
Instead of continuing this revert war, I think we should start a poll to solve this within the community. What do you think of this? Páll 04:03, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, that's what you can do to try to establish a consensus. Until then, however, the articles should return to the established version that was undisputed for months if not years. Gzornenplatz 04:09, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * Actually, Croatia with an external infotable was undisputed for more than half a year. --denny vrandečić (hp) (talk) 23:02, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * I disagree. First of all, it is you who has to proove concesus here because I have not heard one single person support your reverts enough to say they should continue. And just because your own opinion is that the current revisions is significantly worse than the current version is not enough to warrant your mass reverts. Páll 04:11, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Plenty of people spoke out against the templates on the Village Pump. They certainly don't want your reverts to continue. Gzornenplatz 04:20, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

Hi, just wanted to make sure that everything was okay with Cantus. We blocked his ISP for 6 months. I don't know if the block will last that long, but at least it will send a serious message. If there are any problems please let me know, and I will do what I can to try and help. Danny 05:11, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Please keep an eye out for Páll (User:PZFUN), who is about to block me. The arbcom has assured me I do not need to use the talk page for each page in a series when the issue is one and the same. Also, could you block Cantus' latest proxy 80.237.206.93? Gzornenplatz 05:17, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

A Final Statement
User:Gzornenplatz was blocked today for violations of the arbitration decision (Requests for arbitration/Gzornenplatz, Kevin Baas, Shorne, VeryVerily/Proposed decision), which says "2) If Gzornenplatz, Shorne, or VeryVerily should revert a page without discussing it on the relevant talk page, an administrator may ban him for up to 24 hours."

As can be seen in the table, Gzornenplatz has been repeatedly removing the country infobox template link, and replacing it with the full text. This has been done carefully at just over 24 hour increments (so as not to break that Arbitration ruling), but he has not discussed these edits on the relevant pages, nor abided by the consensus from many editors that his edits are not wanted, and this effort is creating an extra burden on other users. Rather than being constructive, he continues to push this particular agenda. As such, he is being blocked for one day for each offence listed here, for a total of 56 days. In reality, this only represents a portion of the edits, specifically only those articles he has reverted 2, 3, or 4 times. Many articles have been only reverted once by him in this way. Páll 06:42, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Ridiculous. I have obviously discussed the issue at various places, including right here, and don't have to repeat it on the talk page for each country article. Nor do I have to "abide" by the wishes of individual editors who have a different opinion on an issue. PZFUN has definitely not established a consensus for his view which goes counter to established tradition and is objected to by various people. He is also abusing his adminship position by blocking me for an edit war he was himself involved in. I trust reasonable admins will keep unblocking me. As they did (thanks!). Gzornenplatz 12:35, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * You don't have to post it to all talk pages, simple explanation in edit summary would be enough. If you just silently rv without slightest note, don't be surprised that your edits are treated as vandalism; you can't expect people to read all your talk pages, and 'various places'. - JohnyDog 03:47, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Australia
is there a difference worth reverting?? doesnt seem like it to me. Xtra 12:27, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Some people want to move all country infoboxes to templates and are trying to force this without establishing a consensus first. See . And this particular edit was made by a blocked user using a sockpuppet, and as such should be reverted in any case. Gzornenplatz 12:35, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

This stuff should never be in a template. If editors are "frightened" of HTML, they probably shouldn't leave home.Dr Zen 07:45, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Indian maps
I am concerned with the growing edits regarding maps of Indian states. You have reverted many state maps which depict a biased and incorrect map. The maps which depict the accuracy of the Kashmir territory administration should be depicted rather than the biased one. Please do not revert to the biased maps. Regards, Nichalp 20:36, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm reverting the biased (Indian POV) maps to the neutral ones. It's Simonides who's doing the opposite. Gzornenplatz 22:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * No, I'm afraid you are wrong. The maps are not Indian POV. They are the most factually accurate maps present on wikipedia at this instant. The maps which you have reverted are biased and are not endorsed by the United Nations to be called a POV. Your maps depict the Line of Control to be the international border between India and Pakistan/China. This is totally incorrect. If needed I can point you to some references in this regard. But please do not revert images based on unreliable information. Nichalp 19:56, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)

 * Simonides' maps are biased, representing simply the Indian view by showing an international border between western Kashmir and Pakistan, but none between eastern Kashmir and India. The United Nations does not endorse either side's claims. Gzornenplatz 20:01, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Simon's maps at least make an effort to paint the areas of Kashmir administered by India/Pakistan/China. The maps that you reverted to as I mention depict the LoC as the International Boundary which is far from the truth. Nichalp 20:52, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)

 * The line of control is obviously neutral. Nothing against painting those areas, but you can't put a one-sided boundary there which reflects only the Indian POV. I don't think the maps I revert to imply that the LoC is an undisputed international boundary. There are many boundary disputes in the world (e.g. Guyana/Venezuela), but they are not normally explicated in detail on small maps like this; it is good enough if the borders shown reflect the de facto situation. Gzornenplatz 21:10, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)

 * Gzornenplatz, I don't know why you being so disputatious on this matter. This is not simply a boundary dispute. It involves thousands of square kilometres administered by countries hostile to each other. The magnitude of such a predicament cannot be compared to a border dispute such as Guyana/Venezuela or Russia/China. I would like to disabuse your myth as to why to the map is not an "Indian POV". The status quo of the state of Jammu and Kashmir is clearly defined with the border region and administered territory. This map is modelled on the one used by the BBC, which has maintained a strictly neutral viewpoint on the issue. The map depicts the truth and the current ground situation in Kashmir. It is factually accurate and is not misleading as compared to the reverted ones. The matter has been thoroughly debated here. Reverting the images solely based on argumentum ad homniem goes against the wikipedia spirit. I hope you are open to ratiocination as clearly your reverts go against the encyclopaedic information that wikipedia strives to achieve. Nichalp 19:06, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

 * I am ratiocinating all the time. You have not yet explained why the map should show an international border according to the Indian claim and none according to the Pakistani claim. Which BBC map are you talking about? Here is a BBC map that we can gladly take as a model. It clearly does not show a one-sided international border. It just shows the line of control and colours the disputed area. Gzornenplatz 19:16, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

 * So you only have a problem with the borders not the area under administration? incredulous! Why didn't you make it clear in the relavent talk pages or edit summaries? Give me a couple of days, I'll try and ask someone for some templates of the Indian states with the LoC made, modelled on the BBC map. Nichalp 20:53, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)

 * I said all the time the one-sided border is the problem. But it's not the only thing. It's also unacceptable to just label the areas "administered by Pakistan" and "administered by China" while not labeling the remaining area as "administered by India" (giving the impression that the Indian-administered part is undisputed). Gzornenplatz 21:15, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * The "adminstered by India" is clearly implied as it is the states of India, I don't why you want it labelled so. AND NO it is not a tacit endorsement of the "Indian part is undisputed" as you fear. What if I present you a map sans "Administered by India"; and the Loc/LoaC in a red or dotted line next week? Nichalp 20:47, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, that it's administered by India is implied, but not that it's disputed by Pakistan. If you want to show the Indian claim to an area administered by Pakistan, you also have to show the Pakistani claim to an area administered by India. If you present a map sans "administered by India", it should be sans "administered by Pakistan" too. Just show the LoC as a dotted line. Gzornenplatz 20:52, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Please tell me how is it a POV if "administered by India" is absent? The map is related to Indian states (an Indian theme), and it is ludicrous to print "administered by India" just for Jammu & Kaskmir, as it is clearly implied. The "administered by China/ Pakistan" tags serves as information that the area inside the original state boundaries are not governed by India although the territory is "claimed as a whole" as a part of India. The Loc strengthens this point. Nichalp 20:26, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * I just answered this already. It gives the impression that the Indian-administered part is not disputed. The point is that it is only administered by India, but not universally recognized as being part of India. Gzornenplatz 21:46, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * On what basis is the ludicrous claim that territory which is governed by India not "universally recognised"? Only elements in the Pakistani army and the political establishment refuse to believe that the above mentioned area is not under the jurisdiction of India. This claim of yours is absurd. 20:19, Jan 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * It is administered by India, but Indian sovereignty over it is disputed by Pakistan, just as Pakistani sovereignty over the other part is disputed by India (or, to use your language, "only by elements in the Indian army and the political establishment of India"). The world generally does not take either side's position, which is why maps are drawn using the LoC as boundary or designating both areas as "administered by India" and "administered by Pakistan", respectively. Gzornenplatz 20:56, Jan 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Maps drawn depicting the LoC are false and biased. With the exception of a few cartographers, most depict the region with its unbiased boundaries and have an LoC to delineate India from Pakistan. Even the BBC when showing an India themed news item does not depict "Administered by India" for Kashmir if a Tamil Nadu news story is being aired. It shows the shaded regions of Pak-a-K; AC; and I-a-K as a part of India. The map which you showed was exclusive to Kashmir alone when aired on TV. Nichalp 20:38, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * If it doesn't have "administered by India", it doesn't have "administered by Pakistan" either. BBC treats the two sides equally, with a colouring based on LoC, sometimes with additional dotted lines for the outer borders on both sides   . Gzornenplatz 20:58, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * The BBC isn't so callous regarding the maps when they air it on TV. Map 1 is unfit as it would seem the Aksai Chin region to be a separate nation. Map 2 is fine. Map 3 is a POV and Map 4 would be odd to colour Kashmir differently. I made a map of Sikkim ([IndiaSikkim.png]), which marks the LoC in red, the boundary of Kashmir in Pakistan and China in green and the IB in black. I stress that it is not a POV map as it doesn't colour the region as a part of India, but in a greyish shade. It is as good as the second image you provided me, so you shouldn't be having any problems. Nichalp 19:02, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)
 * No, it isn't as good. Your map has a thick international boundary on the Pakistani side and a thin state boundary on the Indian side. The BBC map has dotted lines on both sides. (Also, I don't think the word "Sikkim" should appear twice in the map.) Gzornenplatz 19:55, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)
 * You're being too exacting. The map is good enough for a state map, the coloured boundaries convey the necessary information. Why don't you propose a vote on the NPOV of the map in a forum? That way we can both be satisfied and the reverting madness will hopefully cease. Sikkim on top is the title of the image. Nichalp 20:50, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)
 * If NPOV is too exacting for you, it is nevertheless policy. The map is not good enough, since the international boundary shown reflects simply the Indian POV and goes against the Pakistani one. Facts are not decided by votes. (Regarding the title, I don't think there should be a title of the image on the image itself. The word "India" should also be removed to maintain consistency with all the other country-subdivisional maps - I don't suppose you want to change hundreds of other maps to match your new style?) Gzornenplatz 21:58, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)
 * The IB is coloured black: Kashmir's borders are coloured green. The map is less of a POV than what you chose to revert to. I'm not stating that this is a total NPOV map; I'm saying for the time being it is much more NPOV that the ones you flaunt to be as "NPOV" on the basis of "Ground Situation". How can you say that the BBC's map is a 100% NPOV just because the boundary is marked as dotted; why can't it be coloured green as the map 1 you showed me, signifying that this is not the international boundary? Had the 1948 ceasefire not taken place it would have been the IB; as the UN resolution goes (Part IIB), in order for a plebescite to take place, Pakistan must withdraw from all areas under its occupation. India just has to reduce its forces. Voting would decide if you are being too exacting; when it is the most NPOV map we have. As for the title, I did not know that it was out of convention; your last remark was made in jest, was it? Catch up on Friday. Nichalp 17:43, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * A map is NPOV if the two sides are treated equally, which all the BBC maps I showed you as well as Morwen's maps do, and which yours and Simonides' maps don't. Simple as that. Feel free to signify in whatever way you want that the LoC is not a recognized international boundary. The point is that the outer borders are marked in the same way (both thick or both dotted or both green or whatever), and that the Indian- and Pakistani-administered parts are labeled the same way (either "administered by India" and "administered by Pakistan", or both unlabeled). Gzornenplatz 19:15, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)

Hello again. Given the vigilante tendency to disregard whatever you are saying just because you are saying it, when someone starts botherning you about the country infobox templates, it may be a good idea to direct that person to Mav's comments, since is is generally regarded as someone who speaks with a great deal of authority on these matters. 172 23:04, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hi. Regarding the template v. infobox debate, a compromise seems to have been worked out at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countries. It has already been applied to Netherlands. Please let me know what you think of it. It is a variable template, in which the information itself will reside in each country article. Danny 06:56, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * That's OK with me. What matters is that the information remains within the article. Gzornenplatz 07:50, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)

Revert war over infobox template
Would you please settle the issue with infobox template first, instead of reverting articles back and forth? --Gene s 10:41, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * The issue is settled. There's only a blocked user (Cantus) who keeps reverting with sockpuppets. Gzornenplatz 10:43, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * The summary field is a good place to provide a link to a page where it is settled or discussed. All I see is a bunch of people reverting Russia and Estonia without giving any meaningful reasons in the summary. Silent reverts are bad. --Gene s 10:54, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * With the volume of reverts in this case, it's not very practical to fill the summary field every time. Please refer to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countries. Gzornenplatz 11:03, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * i have read up and i now support your actions. Xtra 13:46, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Edit summaries
Hi, Edit summary says "Always fill the summary field." (emphasis in the original). Please fill in the Edit Summary when you edit an article, so the rest of us don't have to resort to a "diff" to see what you did. Thanks! Noel (talk) 12:48, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Nationalist POV-pushers
I know that you have a lot of experience dealing with nationalist editors. Could you take a look at Polish-Soviet War? I've used my three reverts in attempting to deal with them. Thanks. 172 22:03, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting those additional mistakes, especially the wrong date for the founding of the Soviet Union. I must've overlooked that. 172 22:37, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

country infoboxes
Hi, there's a new Solution E that's been proposed for the country infoboxes; I've changed my vote from the Solution D that I proposed, earlier. The new option, proposed by User:Zocky, transcludes a subpage instead of using the template mechanism for this.

See: Nepal's infobox is implemented at Nepal/infobox using Template:Infobox_Country; Tuvalu's is implemented at Tuvalu/infobox as a wiki table.

Discussion is at: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countries

voting: Country_infobox_vote

Thanks. — Davenbelle 02:28, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)

Polish cities and German names
What is the reason you mass-removed German names for Polish cities (like Glog%F3w)? I am very curious as let Czech name still in. Pavel Vozenilek 21:33, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Those "German names" are not generally used any more in German, however when I previously tried to call them "former German names" this was endlessly reverted by a group of people with an axe to grind, and Jimbo himself proposed this unwieldy explanatory paragraph (which I have put into a template) as a compromise. I assume the Czech names are still common in Czech usage, so I'm not changing them. Gzornenplatz 21:41, Jan 16, 2005 (UTC)

 * So you need to rip off more. Hlohov (Glog%F3w) is old name, not in current usage. It is only used in historical texts and novels about history. Probably the only Czech name widely used is Kladsko (Klodzko) (+ big cities not in vicinity of Czech Republic).

 * It is quite common to add German or Polish names to Czech cities Wiki, where known. It helps a lot with search and hyperlinking.

 * OK, I'll take that into account. Gzornenplatz 22:12, Jan 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Not really, I've also seen roadmarks mentioning Vratislav. Halibutt 03:51, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)

 * The guy said non-major cities. Wroclaw is a major city, like Krakov. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.0.53.133 (talk) 03:25, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

 * Could you take a look at Template talk:Polishcity? Halibutt 07:33, Jan 18, 2005 (UTC)

Einstein
Reverting the addition of a disambiguation link, marking it as minor, giving a wrong edit summary (format), and not commenting on it on the talk page is a violation of your parole (see Requests for arbitration/Gzornenplatz, Kevin Baas, Shorne, VeryVerily). Please don't do that again, or you may be blocked. -- Chris 73 Talk 01:09, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)

 * Not any removal is a revert, it was a minor edit, and it was a formatting edit, and it was not worthy of commenting on the talk page; someone was manifestly misunderstanding how disambiguation works (someone who goes to an article like "Einstein on the Beach" is obviously looking for just that article, and not for "Albert Einstein"; the disambiguation is only needed on Albert Einstein, because Einstein redirects there). Gzornenplatz 11:06, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)

Indian map again
Did you see my comments on the admin board? What do you think about this version of the map? OneGuy 07:35, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * OK with me. (Only the number for Sikkim seems to be lost under the China colouring.) Gzornenplatz 19:45, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)

 * I fixed the number in Image:IndiaNumbered.png OneGuy 20:44, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Temp injuction
Gz - the arbitration committee has issued a temp injuction, instructing admins not to block you as a reincarnation of Wik, while we sort the case out (your other paroles still apply, however). →Raul654 21:34, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)

New ArbCom case opened
"This case is to determine whether Gzornenplatz is Wik and if the ban that applies to the latter should be applied to the former."

See Requests for arbitration/Gzornenplatz. Present evidence at Requests for arbitration/Gzornenplatz/Evidence. --mav 23:02, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * If you could make a personal statement on the Arbitration case, I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you. Neutralitytalk 05:53, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

formatting
I dont understand what are you doing ??

why are you writing "German" form capital letter.....????!! its not a Germany !!!...

and why you removing BRs?Vorash 08:01, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

And why you removing link to Michael Cretu ??

 * If you don't know proper English, don't edit the English Wikipedia, or at least don't revert those who know. Also, familiarize yourself with Wikipedia conventions like "link only once". Gzornenplatz 08:08, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * Well i didnt find any "Wikipedia convention "link only once".There is no such a convention !! There is a guidance about "avoiding excessive repeating of the same link", but no such a rule "link only once".Vorash 09:53, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * and why you removing BRs?Vorash 10:02, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * YOu intenionally want make an article to look ugly ??? If this is the case i will complain to the admimistration !!!!Vorash 10:14, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Dictionaries/encyclopaedias
Hi, I have just noticed on the encyclopaedia page an entry described a dictionary. There is a great overlap of content between books having either word in their titles, so I have in mind to re-work the dictionary pages to the same format we have for the encyclopaedia pages namely with lists of them sorted by centuries and within each century sorted by type. As usual I am so busy I have not had time to do anything about it. Do you have a view please about this proposal, which is meant to make a user-friendly layout between the two pages. I got the idea from the Architecture pages. Cheers Apwoolrich 11:00, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, I think "dictionaries" that are encyclopedic in nature should be listed under encyclopedia (or List of encyclopedias), while the dictionary article should treat with dictionaries in the narrower sense, i.e. books that mainly explain words rather than facts. Gzornenplatz 11:13, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

Your User page
I've protected your User page because it's being repeatedly vandalized tonight. If you want me or some other sysop to unprotect it, you can leave a message on my Talk page, or ask any other sysop and they'll do it for you. RickK 07:18, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration Committee ruling
The case against you has closed. It is the decision of the Arbitration Committee that the hard ban previously applied to your account, Wik, also applies to this account. You are reminded that you may appeal the ban to Jimbo Wales or to the Arbitration Committee, via e-mail, IRC, or other means of contact outside of Wikipedia. Please see the final decision for details. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 00:32, 2005 Feb 7 (UTC)

Please see also List of banned_users where the ban has been fully listed -- sannse (talk) 02:22, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I just read about the ruling and I'm very disappointed by it. It reflects the unfortunate punitive mentality of some users, who apply that even against users who do such good work as yourself. I hope you will try to appeal the ruling. Everyking 10:06, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

List of colonial governors in 2005
I just copied the info from List of colonial governors in 2004 to List of colonial governors in 2005 but haven't verified or updated any of the information (except I removed a 2005 leader that had creeped into the 2004 list -- see page history). Would you like to work on the new page? (Rhetorical question.) - dcljr (talk) 20:19, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Request for adminship
I just realised I never thanked you for your vote on my Request for Adminship. Thank you. Dmn / Դմն 12:37, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Template talk:Infobox Biography
I'm having some issues on John Vanbrugh. People keep removing the infobox! I think it's quite useful as it does take some hunting to find information about birth places, birth dates and death dates/places in many of the articles. Could you comment on the talk page? - Ta bu shi da yu 02:53, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Science pearls
Hello,

Since you contributed in the past to the publications’ lists, I thought that you might be interested in this new project. I’ll be glad if you will continue contributing. Thanks,APH 11:11, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Why?
Why care enough to burn but not enough to play the game? If you read this, email me at freddyvessant AT gmail DOT com. I'd be interested to know. -- Grace Note

Image:Sea of ice.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Sea of ice.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 02:10, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Chilean edits
Hello,, since you have made several edits to articles about Chile, you may be interested in looking at the Chile-related regional notice board to pick up on other topics that need attention, or to express needs which you perceive pertaining to Chile. J A X HERE | T a l k 01:30, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm nominating "Kerosene (disambig)" for deletion
Please note: I am nominating Kerosene (disambig) for deletion. You are shown in the history as having edited this page. If you wish to object, check the details by clicking the link above.

Regards, JohnI 10:15, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Gnu/communism Afd
FWIW, the Gnu/communism article is proposed for deletion. Gronky 17:29, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Sébastien Briat
A "" template has been added to the article Sébastien Briat, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Haemo 01:03, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Redirect of The Legend of Zelda:Ocarina of Time places
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on The Legend of Zelda:Ocarina of Time places, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because The Legend of Zelda:Ocarina of Time places is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting The Legend of Zelda:Ocarina of Time places, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 17:37, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Where did you learn about Banyan VINES?
I used to be a VINES engineer. I've expanded the article to talk about early adoption - multi-nationals and US DOD. SimonATL (talk) 04:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Redirect of Jeff Wilson (Cartoonist)
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Jeff Wilson (Cartoonist), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Jeff Wilson (Cartoonist) is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Jeff Wilson (Cartoonist), please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 08:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Wassily de Basil
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Wassily de Basil, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? B.Wind (talk) 06:43, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Jose Torres
A tag has been placed on Jose Torres requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Fabrictramp |  talk to me  00:08, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Frank Honeywell
A tag has been placed on Frank Honeywell requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Steve CarlsonTalk 16:15, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

roque now
Hi, I noticed you edited the roque article. Any chance you're actually a roque player? I've just started the project of restoring a roque court, and wondered if you happened to have any information on where I could find court maintanance tools, balls, mallets... anything, really. — eitch 23:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Gzornenplatz! 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. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 18:21, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Péter Kiss -

Deletion discussion about Meralda Warren
Hello, Gzornenplatz, and thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!

I wanted to let you know that some editors are discussing at Articles for deletion/Meralda Warren whether the article Meralda Warren should be in Wikipedia. I encourage you to comment there if you think the article should be kept in the encyclopedia.

The deletion discussion doesn't mean you did something wrong. In fact, other editors may have useful suggestions on how you can continue editing and improving Meralda Warren, which I encourage you to do. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Help Desk.

Thanks again for your contributions! --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:01, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of James Hatfield for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article James Hatfield is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/James Hatfield 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. -- LWG talk 01:29, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Napoleão Laureano

A tag has been placed on Napoleão Laureano requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. Natureium (talk) 14:09, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Napoleão Laureano

A tag has been placed on Napoleão Laureano requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:49, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

title: User talk:Gzornenplatz


text:
User talk:Lukepeterson

Welcome
Hello, welcome to Wikipedia.

You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump, or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!
 * You can introduce yourself on the new users page.
 * If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: . If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
 * If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

Again, welcome! Chris Roy 17:52, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:Lukepeterson


text:
User talk:Steven jones

Welcome
Hello, welcome to Wikipedia.

You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump, or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!
 * You can introduce yourself on the new users page.
 * If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: . If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
 * If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

Again, welcome! Chris Roy 17:52, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hi. It's great to have another contributor on doggy stuff. Many welcomes. If you haven't seen them, you might want to explore WikiProject Dog breeds and the related pages - there is a bit of discussion there about ideas for the section. Give me a shout if I can help in any way. Regards -- sannse (talk) 10:41, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I just wanted to echo this. Actually I was pretty excited to see your pages on the Terrier Groups--someone else who's interested in this stuff and takes the time to pursue it. Which got me thinking more about it, too.  Hope to see more of your work.  Elf | Talk 18:02, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hi Steve. Nice edits on Lazy evaluation, but I have a tip for you - please begin headers at ==, and add subheaders from that level. Thanks Dysprosia 09:45, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Please consider reading this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Snowspinner/Avala_Evidence

and then voting here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship#User:Snowspinner_.2854.2F6.2F2.29_Ends_17:06.2C_31_July_2004 -- orthogonal 18:07, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hello
Is this the same Steven Jones who went to WS at one point and worked at MPX? - Ta bu shi da yu 13:39, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)

"Terrorist" policy and wider NPOV
No problem. I probably over-reacted a little, from an accumulation of worse examples. Thanks. Maurreen 16:19, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Steven jones


text:
User talk:DryGrain

Hi, if you want to drop me a note please leave it under a new heading at the bottom.

Welcome
Hi there. Welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your note at the new user log. I hope you like it here and stick around.

If you need editing help, visit How does one edit a page. For format questions, visit our manual of style. You can use the Show preview button before you save, to make sure your edits do what you intended.

You can sign your name on talk pages by using " " for your username and " ~ " for your username and a timestamp.

Some time when you're bored, you can read through our policies and guidelines. If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.

If you have any other questions about the project then check out Help or add a question to the Village pump. You can also drop me a question on my talk page.

Happy editing, Isomorphic 21:38, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Recreational drug use
Hi, I'm leaving a message here because I'm not sure if you'll see the note I put at Talk:Recreational drug use (if you don't know how to use a watchlist, leave me a note on my talk page and I can help). There is an article on entheogens, and I will make a redirect from Spiritual drug use and, I suppose, Religious drug use to make it easier to find. Tuf-Kat 05:04, Mar 12, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you, I appreciate it. DryGrain 17:42, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Reverting edits
You need to be a administrator in order for that. If you stick around long enough, and become a trusted user, then you can nominate yourself for adminship, or someone else would nominate you. (I'm sure you understand that we can't let just any user delete articles for good! :) Dysprosia 10:17, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)

PETA link on Hamburger
Your concern was addressed on Talk:Hamburger. I would like to ask you to reply there and justify adding the link in the first place. Philwelch 00:19, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

User bio does not mention or discuss: contested validity of the residence of English-speaking people in California, the details of how the user was created and produced, and other needed information. Okay, this is a joke to illustrate the point I am making on Talk:Hamburger. Philwelch 01:00, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. I admire how principled you are, despite my disagreement with your principles. Philwelch 13:11, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Body piercing
On the piercing talk page you asked:

''What the hell is a Jacob's Ladder? It's under the Genital Piercing section. I followed the link and all it says is that it "is also a type of body piercing". That sure helps. If anyone knows, drop a note on my talk page or i'll just watch this page.''

If you haven't found out yet, it's a row of frenum piercings (usually with barbells) on the under-side of the penis, so that it resembles a ladder. So it's not really one piercing, but a bunch of piercings millerc 00:52, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * They're commonly referred to as a "frenum ladder" as well. -- tooki 02:58, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

...and on the nose piercing page you asked:

''I was wondering if there is any information on piercing the bridge of the nose? I have seen people with it and am considering it myself. Put your thumb and index finger between your eyes like you are adjusting eyeglasses, and then move down your nose until you feel the bone stop and the cartilage begin. Thats where I'm talking about. If you know anything about this, please leave a note on my talk page''

It's just like an eye-brow piercing, just in a different location (almost no sensation while getting it done). Any competent piercer can do this piercing easily. millerc 00:59, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

A Jacob's Ladder is a series of piercings on the underside of the penis, which can extend from the base to the frenum, or the part where the head connects to the shaft. They're usually done with barbells, though some people wear rings. Exploding Boy 00:37, Sep 3, 2004 (UTC)

I have a little bit more information on the Jacob's Ladder or Frenum Piercing. No one has addressed the reason for this piercing. This piercing has some nice benefits for both partners. The stimulation of the balls of the barbells is fantastic according to my wife. The slightly increased sensitivity in the area of the piercing feels great when lightly stroked by either fingers or a tongue for example. Humming during oral while the tongue is laid against the ladder sends waves of pleasure through the shaft. My wife thinks it's funny to push this magic button during oral stimulation. Lastly, at least in my case, there was the unexpected benefit of a slightly altered concentration of blood flow to the area that had the same effect as a ring and made me a bit thicker than before. I hope this info is beneficial in understanding this particular form of body modification. DD 09:18, Dec 3, 2004

well, this was the most helpful information iv'e read so far, thank you for the more personal description of actual feelings and differences.

Captain Planet
Hi, I noticed your edits to the Captain Planet and the Planeteers page. While some are good (I thought the "seemingly endless supply of puns and cliches" had a nice bite to it) I'd just like to emphasise that links should be used only where the linked page is highly relevent, which generally means sparingly.

For example, linking the "Greek" in "Greek goddess" to "Greece" is unlikely to mention much about Ancient Greece, and the goddess article is highly generic as well, unlike the page for Gaia, which was already linked. The water article just talks about water in general, not in the context of the classical elements, which were already linked. Criminal is similarly too generic, as are ring and communication. The heart article is almost completely unrelated to its use in Captain Planet.

More debatably, I think giving a page to each eco-villain is overkill, since there's precious little to say about each one, no more than is already said, unless someone really wanted to discuss their roles in detail throughout the series. Also, the Duke Nukem page already exists and is unrelated. I also think the reference to George Orwell, besides being unqualified (ie Animal Farm) is also unjustified; greed was associated with pigs long before that novel was published.

On the other hand, some links I thought were pretty good to leave in were: continent, love, villain, mutant, mad scientist, and industrialization. In general, if in doubt, look at the page you're linking and ask yourself how relevent it is.

I don't mean to complain; I hope this is helpful to you. If it makes you feel better, I'm a vegetarian too.

Derrick Coetzee 15:35, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

South Beach Beverage Company
(To Falcon Kirtaran)

What is the purpose of you removing information from South Beach Beverage Company and then asking what can possibly be written about it? And might I ask what was POV about that article? Your addition of 'marketed toward neo-hippie' or some such is more POV that the article was to begin with. I thought I'd ask here before I reverted your edits. Also, if you hadn't noticed, some of the beverage links already pointed to articles before you dewikified them. DryGrain 04:41, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * (1) It was apparent from reading the article and attempting to take relevant notes on the topic of history that the article was comprised primarily of hype and was very short, subtracting lists.
 * (2) It is clear enough that the company does not have any significant history, or historical significance, or political significance. Therefore very little can be written about it in an encyclopædic fashion.
 * (3) As I believe was stated quite clearly in a summary, the deleted "content" was comprised of a list which is not useful in anything except the original form and is already readily available verbatim on a website which is linked to directly from the page.
 * (4) The links pointed to pages listed on VfD and looked, from a reading standpoint, to be excessive.
 * Falcon 04:51, Apr 26, 2004 (UTC)

The article was not composed of hype. The company may not have political or historical significance, but that is not a criteria for having an article on the Wikipedia. It is, however, a common enough part of popular culture to warrant mention. The list is useful, it provided information on the products of the company and did not require one to go off-site for this information. And just because a page is listed on VfD does not mean it will be deleted, and therefore removing links to it is premature. DryGrain 05:07, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Once again: The links were removed because of clutter, and because they did not seem useful. The list was removed because it was large and was not actually encyclopædic information.  Also, everywhere else, people have to go off-site for product-specific information and specifications because they are not encyclopædic, nor actual knowledge.  Falcon 05:15, Apr 26, 2004 (UTC)

Clutter? Now the article is stub-length with messy format. And what may not seem useful to you may be useful to someone else. I would also like you to define encyclopedic information and tell me how a list of a company's products does not meet your criteria. You still have not defended removing links to articles on specific beverages that would otherwise not be linked to from anywhere. DryGrain 05:29, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * The article was stub-length before, excepting the list which does not actually count toward length because it is a list without additional information on the entries. It is not half so much whether or not it is useful so much as that it is general practice to not include such lists.  Also, the links were removed because they were not necessary in the context of the article.  Why must I continue repeating this?  And as for encyclopædic information, it is constituted by history and public fact.  Public fact is constituted as facts which are either key information about a private entity which is famous (history, locale, dates of birth/creation and death/destruction), or nonsemantic general facts about a public entity, or facts pretaining directly to a concept or location, or general facts about a publication or other media.  Falcon 05:40, Apr 26, 2004 (UTC)

The list did provide additional information to the products, as they were all links to articles of potential articles about said beverages. Articles are not supposed to be as short and condensed as one can make them, they should include all information relating to that subject as possible. Perhaps the list is not 'nessecary', but it was good information to include and helped provide validartion for the article itself. And as for your definition, it excludes about half of the Wikipedia. DryGrain 05:50, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * It includes about 85% or more of it, actually. Please reference an article which is excluded but actually worthwhile, preferably on the "featured" page.  Further, the links were excessive by most standards.  Articles are not supposed to be cole's notes, agreed, however verbatim lists do not formally count as conduct.  If you want, we could re-include the list and then list the article on cleanup or VfD (preferably te latter) and let someone else decide.  Falcon 16:45, Apr 26, 2004 (UTC)

The links are not excessive, they provide good information about the products. I would like an explanation as to why you are editing articles directly from my "My Contributions" heading. My opinion is that you are miffed about my edits to Vampire lifestyle, in which case you need to grow up and realize that once something is on the wiki, it is there for anyone to edit. DryGrain 21:34, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * You have no idea how I got to the articles. One of your articles composed purely of nutritional information caught my eye in VfD (which is on my watchlist); I decided to have a look at some of your other contributions which I occasionally do for users who get their pages added to VfD.  I really couldn't care less about your edits to that page; it will be discussed there if there is actually something wrong with it.  Falcon 03:04, Apr 27, 2004 (UTC)

So you admit to trolling articles listed on my user page? Either you didn't mean to, or you've become sorrowful of your actions and would like to confess. The Wikipedia doesn't need trolls. And having VfD on your watchlist is a horrible thing to do. Deletionism doesn't help the 'pedia at all. Looking at user pages for people who get thier pages added to VfD so that you can edit the other articles that that person has made is against Wikipedia policy and considered very rude. Somehow or another, I've ended up on your shitlist, whether it be from my edits at your beloved Vampire lifestyle or your deletionism obsession. I'd like to let you know that vengeance and turf wars are not what the Wikipedia is about. DryGrain 05:21, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * I disagree, DryGrain, with your second point. I for have VfD on my watch list, because it is is a useful page, and I like to know when it is edited (particularly when I inspect Special:Recentchanges for anonymous edits). Deletionism, meanwhile, is relative, and may or may not have its uses; this is an abstract issue whose merits are best discussed in a broader context. - Fennec 05:31, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * It's not trolling, simply looking at certain articles and editing them as strictly as I would edit any other work. There is about as much applicability for trolling there as would be found in doing the same with "random page".  VfD is also good to have on the watchlist; that way I know when new pages are added so that I can vote on the entries.  And I look at recent created articles, primarily, of those users just to make sure no other nonsense and garbage has been added.  As much is hardly rude, and please quote the said policy.  I'm hardly mad at you and don't keep a "shitlist"; it is just that I have noticed and found some articles you have written/proposed via link (and that others have written/proposed, as well, not just you) to be irrelevant or unsuited.  I am hardly a deletionist, just sensitive to even a hint of a pro-corporate POV.  Falcon 05:24, Apr 28, 2004 (UTC)

Wikiproject on Alternative Medicine
Thank you for deciding to participate in the Wikiproject on Alternative Medicine.

To simplify the communication process, I strongly suggest that you should add the announcement project page on alternative medicine to your watchlist. This is the only project page that you really need to keep on your watchlist. This is where the open tasks needed to be done in our project will be announced.

Rather than correspond individually to each participant, I will simply update this one project announcement page. The respective talk page will be used for private announcements, such as requests for participating in VfDs, Quickpolls, and Comments. It is way too time consuming to try to communicate individually with everybody in this place. So, this concept should make it quite easy to notify a large block of people about important CAM issues. So, pass the word along to your friends. The more people we get to add our announcement page to their watchlist, the more effective this announcement page concept will become.

For, the time being I would advise that you simply read through the various project pages and ask questions and make comments or suggestions on what we should change.

See talk on the main project page for our future goals by phases I to V. We just completed phase I.  Work still needs to be done on finding lost articles. And, the branches of alternative medicine could still use some more work on organizing the various branches by subgroupings. Not all the various branches have been put in at least one sub-grouping. I need to develop a few more things before we begin the compliance audits of the major branches of alternative medicine which would be our next Phase II project. I also would like to slow the project down a bit, as I am getting burn out working on it. -- John Gohde 07:39, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Hi DryGrain, and welcome to the Wikiproject on Alternative Medicine! heidimo  15:40, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

Hi there. I've made some changes to the Alternative Medicine Wikiproject. As a participant, you may want to have a look at the page and at its talk page. --   ALargeElk | Talk 14:07, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Your DXM reply to my comment
''Also, in regards to (diff) (hist). . m Dextromethorphan; 04:05:31. . Arm (Talk) (Theres no way you could take 2grams of DXM and live.), I must disagree. Through personal research and intimate knowledge of the drug dextromethorphan, I have ascertained that for average body weight, 3-4g is in the potentially lethal range, while 2g is actually a rather normal (if high) dose. I know many people, albeit with high tolerances, who ingest this amount on an almost daily basis, and I assure you that they are still alive. DryGrain 15:39, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)''

I'm talking about 3000 mg of pure dextromethorphan. Now I dont really have much experience with the drug. Just read around dextroverse.org and William Whites DXM Faq which I hope you read. According to them taking over 2 grams is not recommended and people died from taking 3g.

Unless your friends have very high tolerence I dont see how they can take so much Or if they do, how well do they function? Or where do they get so much DXM?Arm

3000mg == 3g. 3g is in the potentially lethal range. I am a former active member of the Dextroverse and have read William White's FAQ a few times, and I have quite a bit of expierience with the drug. (I'm 'not' trying to give you the message that "I have more knowledge, so your opinion is worthless", and if it comes off like that to you, then I apologize.) The Dextroverse and the FAQ have both padded the lethal dose ranges in order to avoid liability. Hypothetically, if I had ever abused DXM recreationally (wink) the highest dose I would have ever taken is 2.2g (or 2200mg). I know some people who have gone as high as 3g (3000mg). As far as I know, there has 'never' been a death from an overdose of dextromethorphan. (However, if it's taken in the form of Coricidin, there is also an antihistamine in the pill called chlorpheniramine maleate which 'can' cause overdoses in excessive quantites.) In answer to your question about where one comes across such amounts of DXM, there are many online chemical supply houses which sell DXM in bulk quantities. Omega Fine Chemicals and American Chemical Supply are two popular ones. Usually, 20 grams of DXM powder, bought in bulk, costs only about $40-$60, making it relatively cheap compared to many street drugs, considering that 20 grams is at a minimum, about 7-10 (very) large doses, and at a maximum about 40-50 small doses.

Hope that answers your questions, if not, let me know what I can clarify. DryGrain 08:11, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Yeah that covers it all. Thanks. But just because nobody has died from a DXM overdose doesn't mean it's not possible. --Arm

Happy Birthday! Hope you are having a good day, keep up the good work!

Jacob's Ladder
A Jacob's Ladder is a series of piercings on the underside of the penis, which can extend from the base to the frenum, or the part where the head connects to the shaft. They're usually done with barbells, though some people wear rings. Exploding Boy 00:37, Sep 3, 2004 (UTC)

burger
I just stumbled across one of your comments on the Hamburger talk page, and though it might be helpful for me to explain why the meat eaters act in ways that might seem like ignorance or denial to you.

There is a very different worldview here. Being a different worldview, it will be quite alien to you. It is no surprise if you assume that the meat eaters are ignorant or in denial, because they would have to be... if they shared your worldview.

In particular, you wrote: "If you want to lie to yourselves about what's in your sandwich, go ahead, but don't limit the Wikipedia to your euphemisms."

Thing is, most people aren't lying to themselves. They just don't see animals as being equivalent to humans. Many people see animals as being like objects. (most would put animals in an in-between category though) Chopping up an animal is a lot like chopping up a plant. If this were somehow wrong, then what of the cats that kill and eat mice?

I visited my wife's uncles and great-uncle recently. In those 3 houses, I think I saw about a dozen deer-like animals that were stuffed and mounted on the walls. Photo albums revealed hundreds more. These people are perfectly normal and well-adjusted members of society. They shoot animals, chop the animals up, and eat them. These people certainly aren't lying to themselves. They do the same with birds.

Much of the difficulty that some people have with meat has to do with animals being cute or not. Few people care about killing pigs, while many people are bothered by eating horses. Horses are cute. Pigs are gross. Horses have big brown eyes and soft fur. Pigs have beady little eyes, bodies that look obese, and an offensive smell. The strange thing is that pigs are smarter than horses. Pigs are even smarter than dogs.

See, humans tend to protect animals that tug at the heartstrings. Wild cats hiss and growl, while domesticated cats have evolved to make noises like human babies. Giving in to such feelings is to allow yourself to be manipulated.

History has shown that most people would willingly chop up an animal for food, even when starvation isn't an issue. Meat eaters don't usually do this today, but they would if neither meat nor vegetables were available at the supermarket. (obviously, if supermarkets only stocked one type of food, most people would be too lazy to get the other type) One problem with killing your own steer is that a steer is just too damn big and heavy, but people commonly kill fish. Hardly anybody feels bad about whacking a live fish on the deck of a boat.

So, no lying or euphemisms! Normal people are more-or-less completely OK with killing non-human creatures to eat. They obviously do feel rather irritated, with justification, if you assert that you are somehow morally superior for not eating meat.

AlbertCahalan 02:56, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

 * PETA has proven themself to not be a neutral source for Wikipedia.

 * Believe whatever you want to believe and shut up about it. I believe moral vegetarians (and their even more extreme counterparts, vegans) are self-righteous assholes who need a kick in the face. But you dont see me going onto the vegetarian page and saying that or posting Maddoxes little anti-vegetarian rant.Arm 12:00, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Birthday
--User:Jenmoa 06:15, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

wikipedians
Hello, i saw you made contributions to the recreational drug use page (or its talk page, and i invite you to read this and add your name or something else if you want. You may also want to put your name here: category:wikipedians by fields of interest under drugs/drug addiction. cheers! --Ballchef 13:24, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Classic Rock
Hello. I was wondering if you would like to participate in my classic rock survey. I'm trying to find the most liked classic rock song. There is more information on my user page. Hope you participate! 02:59, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Zoe7
I have added a "" template to the article Zoe7, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at its talk page. Removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, but the article may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. Matt 08:18, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week
WikiProject Pharmacology is currently organizing a new Collaboration of the Week program, designed to bring drug and medication related articles up to featured status. We're currently soliciting nominations and/or voting on nominations for the first WP:RxCOTW, to begin on September 5, 2007. Please stop by the Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week page to participate! Thanks! Dr. Cash 17:48, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week
Aspirin has been selected as this week's Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week! Please help us bring this article up to featured standards during the week. The goal is to nominate this at WP:FAC on September 10, 2007.

Also, please visitWP:RxCOTW to support other articles for the next COTW. Articles that have been nominated thus far include Doxorubicin, Paracetamol (in the lead with 4 support votes so far), Muscle relaxant, Ethanol, and Bufotenin.

In other news:

 * Bupropion has been promoted to featured status on August 31, 2007.

 * The WikiProject Pharmacology main page has been updated and overhauled, to make it easier to find things, as well as to highlight other goals and announcements for the project.

 * Garrondo is asking for individuals to help review Therapies for multiple sclerosis, as he is considering nominating this article for GA status.

 * Fvasconcellos notes that discussion is ongoing regarding the current wording of MEDMOS on including dosage information in drug articles. All input is welcome.

Dr. Cash 00:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Pharmacology Update
Here's a brief update in some of the recent developments of WikiProject Pharmacology!

 * Aspirin has just completed its two week run as the first Collaboration of the Week! Many thanks to those editors that contributed; the article got a lot of good work accomplished, and in particular, much work was done in fixing up the history section. It's still not quite "done" yet (is a wikipedia article really ever done?), but after two weeks I think it's more important to push onwards with the development of the new collaboration of the week program. I will be fixing up Aspirin in the next few days and possibly nominating it for either GA or FA status.

 * Muscle relaxant has been selected as the new Collaboration of the week until October 2, 2007! This article is currently rated as a "stub", so it's got quite a bit of work cut out for collaborators! Admittedly, featured status could be a long way off,... but still attainable! At the least, maybe we could at least get it up to meeting the Good article criteria? Please stop by the article and help improve it.

 * Resveratrol, having recently achieved GA status on August 16, 2007, is now making a run for featured status. This is quite a fascinating compound. If you can, please stop by its discussion page and leave comments in support of it.

 * Please remember that Wikipedia is not a forum for discussing or dispensing medical advice amongst users. Specifically, talk pages of articles should only be used to discuss improving the actual article in question. To help alleviate this situation, the template talkheader may be added to the top of talk pages, reminding users of the purpose of such pages. Additionally, unsigned comments and comments by anonymous users that are inappropriate may be removed from talk pages without being considered vandalism.

 * There was an interesting article on ZDNet last week about Hewlett Packard licensing its patented microneedle technology used in common inkjet printers to be used in transdermal patches to deliver a time-controlled release of drugs to patients. This information could be added to articles such as route of administration or drug delivery.

You are receiving this message because you are listed as one of the participants of WikiProject Pharmacology.

Dr. Cash 05:01, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Pharmacology Update
Here are a few updates in the realm of WikiProject Pharmacology:

 * The Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week has been changed to Collaboration of the Month, based on current participation levels. It is also more likely that articles collaborated on for one month are more likely to achieve featured quality than articles worked on for only a week or two.

 * The current Collaboration of the Month for November is Receptor antagonist. Please take a look at that article and contribute to it if you get a chance. Ideally, the article should adhere to the featured article criteria.

 * Therapies for multiple sclerosis is currently a featured article candidate. If you are familiar with the featured article criteria, please visit WP:FAC and review the article.

 * Anabolic steroid is the wikiproject's newest Featured Article, having been promoted on October 8, 2007.

 * Theobromine was delisted as a Good Article. The Peer review and GA reassessment discussions provide suggestions on improvement. Muscle relaxant was recently reviewed for Good Article status, but not promoted. Please see the full review full review here for details.

Dr. Cash 22:10, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Medicine
You have listed yourself as a participant of this project. The project has had a minimum of activity. Hopefully this can be changed. I am posting this notice on the user talk pages of those participants that are still active Wikipedians. If you are still interested in getting the project into gear, make yourself heard on the project talk page! Cheers! __meco 09:38, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:DryGrain/resume
User:DryGrain/resume, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:DryGrain/resume and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:DryGrain/resume during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Elucidate (parlez à moi) Ici pour humor 16:12, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

File:UUchalice.gif listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:UUchalice.gif, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Calliopejen1 (talk) 12:41, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Cardiology task force
-- Addbot (talk) 00:06, 7 January 2013 (UTC) T.F.AlHammouri (talk) 12:41, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Responsible drug use
I have nominated Responsible drug use, 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 Articles for deletion/Responsible drug use&. 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. ⟳ ausa کui × 18:38, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Imidazopyridine.gif listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Imidazopyridine.gif, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. MGA73 (talk) 00:23, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Files missing description details
Dear uploader: The media files you uploaded as: are missing a description and/or other details on their image description pages. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the images, and they will be more informative to readers.
 * File:Drygrain1.jpg
 * File:Drygrain2.jpg

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 16:01, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library now offering accounts from Cochrane Collaboration (sign up!)
Cochrane Collaboration is an independent medical nonprofit organization consisting of over 28,000 volunteers in more than 100 countries. The collaboration was formed to organize medical scholarship in a systematic way in the interests of evidence-based research: the group conducts systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health-care interventions, which it then publishes in the Cochrane Library.

Cochrane has generously agreed to give free, full-access accounts to 100 medical editors. Individual access would otherwise cost between $300 and $800 per account. Thank you Cochrane!

If you are stil active as a medical editor, come and sign up :)

Cheers, Ocaasit | c 20:01, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library now offering accounts from Cochrane Collaboration (sign up!)
The Wikipedia Library gets Wikipedia editors free access to reliable sources that are behind paywalls. Because you are signed on as a medical editor, I thought you'd want to know about our most recent donation from Cochrane Collaboration. Cheers, Ocaasit | c 20:31, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Cochrane Collaboration is an independent medical nonprofit organization that conducts systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health-care interventions, which it then publishes in the Cochrane Library.
 * Cochrane has generously agreed to give free, full-access accounts to 100 medical editors. Individual access would otherwise cost between $300 and $800 per account.
 * If you are still active as a medical editor, come and sign up :)

File source problem with File:Drygrain2.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Drygrain2.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:09, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Drygrain1.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Drygrain1.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:09, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!
 Happy Birthday! Have a very happy birthday on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:53, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

title: User talk:DryGrain