text:
Talk:Chicago Sun-Times

Older comments
did a sun-times fanboy write this? my impression is it's not that well respected, relative to the trib
 * Sounds like the text was taken from a press release or something. Better now? --Dhartung | Talk 18:22, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Political Leanings
It says that it is a liberal/centrist paper. Is this true? Isn't this owned by Rupert Murdoch (No, but he owned it briefly in the 1980s) of Fox News Lore? Nick Catalano (Talk) 23:55, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I would say it is centrist, it is not as liberal as the Chicago Tribune.

 * As far as I know, News Corp has never owned the Sun-Times. The Sun-Time's editorial slant is suposed to be Liberal, but the Chicago Tribune's editoral board is Conservative. —Linnwood 05:15, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * In Template_talk:Infobox newspaper, the political (leaning) field -- which is optional -- is considered less useful for American newspapers as compared with European newspapers, which retain strong party or political identifications in most cases. It's much more difficult with American newspapers because the editorials, the op-eds, and the reporting can all reflect different biases. In the case of the S-T, which successively endorsed Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Kerry, it's editorially basically centrist. In the case of the Trib, which is old-line Republican and continues to endorse GOP candidates for the WH, it's only slightly easier -- their op-eds lean a tad right but their reporting is often progressive. The S-T's reporting is populist but not progressive. So I endorse NO affiliation, as it's very dependent on point of view thus original research. --Dhartung | Talk 20:14, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with Dhartung for the same reasons listed on the newspaper infobox template's talk page. For these reasons, I also propose no affiliation and that the "political" parameter be removed for this article. Squideshi (talk) 19:15, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Removed the political parameter from the infobox for the reasons listed on the newspaper infobox template's talk page. Squideshi (talk) 20:19, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Compact (newspaper) leads here, yet the article says urban tabloid
Is there a difference? I don't know what an "urban tabloid" is, a compact is a tabloid sized paper of broadsheet quality. GracieLizzie 21:39, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Writers
I deleted the unsourced claim that it is best known internationally as the employer of Ebert. I would guess Novak is much better known, maybe even internationally, than Ebert. Especially after his prominent role in the Plame "media event" which was covered incessantly until it was discovered that none of W's underlings were on the chopping block. But it could well be that American movies are in fact more well-known than White House purge attempts. In any event, the prominent Novak can hardly be ignored. Walter Nissen 2006-10-25 00:44 UTC ( Note use of ISO-8601-format date & time )

I bet Ms. Sneed will soon be the best known journalist, internationally, in this current list. (NC_Lao_Wan 15:22 PM, April 19 2007)

pop culture
The second to last paragraph ("The movie Continental Divide...") should be in a "Sun-Times in Popular Culture" section - 65.24.127.241 06:35, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

chicago innovation awards
This has nothing to do with the credibility of the Sun Times as a paper relative to the Tribune. The Chicago Innovation Awards was simply co-founded by the Sun Times. The Awards itself is an endeavor seperate from either the Chicago Sun Times or Kuczmarski & Associates. Merging into either of those two articles would not make sense.

The Chicago Innovation Awards, while co-founded by the Sun-Times, Chicago's second largest paper, in 2002, is a distinct awards ceremony, recognized on a national stage and counting amongst its honorees Motorola, Sara Lee, Millenium Park, Abbott Labs, and other Fortune 500 companies. It is a major economic and innovation initiative both in terms of the City of Chicago and in terms of American business innovation. To merge it with the Sun-Times entry would be incorrect.

The independence of the CIAs from the Sun-Times is important, as this independence acknowledges the growing authority of the CIAs as a distinctive organization and venture dedicated to the celebratration and recognition of innovation. Though the CIAs may have been born from a marriage between the Sun-Times and Kuczmarski & Associates, the CIAs now stand on their own as a distinguished ceremony. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cdoyle07 (talk • contribs).

Why the newspaper is criticized
Shortly after the VT Massacre, the newspaper published an article, which contained incredibly detailed information on the identity of the gunman like the age, nationality, legal status, origin, port of entry, and date of entry. All the information later turned out to be totally wrong, not even remotely close to the truth. The reporter and the newspaper should have run a credibility check, to the standard journalism stands by, before publishing the article at such a sensitive time as the whole world is eager to learn. The more detailed and sensitive the report is, the more careful the newspaper should be. Failing to do this and to meet reader's expectation will ensure people's criticism on the quality of the report and the professionalism of the newspaper.

This is the reason why people are critical of the newspaper on this particular incident. The criticism was written in a neutral, factual, and objective way and should be kept as is. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dongdongdog (talk • contribs).
 * No, it was not. It contained arguments and speculation that were unsupported by any published sources.  That is forbidden here.  See our No original research policy.  If you want to present your own new arguments on this subject, a tertiary source such as Wikipedia is not the place. This is an encyclopaedia, not a soapbox. Uncle G 23:16, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I respectfully disagree with you. My edit contains only facts, which are supported by all the sources in the main article. I am in the process of improving the article by adding those sources to this section. There is criticism on the report. Describing the people's criticism in a wiki article doesn't necessarily make wikipedia a soapbox. Dongdongdog 05:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * They aren't supported by the sources that are actually cited. Where's your source that supports the analysis that you are giving that it was "highly unlikely" that the source was credible, for example?  That appears to be your own analysis, and thus contrary to the No original research policy. Uncle G 08:50, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * If you care to read my latest edition, which is currently banned by MhKing, you will find I already removed those you believed unsupported by the sources. Dongdongdog 18:12, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

The VT Reporting Section should be kept
First, this section is about how a controversial news report was hastily published at an urgent event and later found erroneous. This section is strongly related with the subject of the article.

Second, the spirit of the wiki is based on democracy. There are many people showing interests in editing this section to make it meet wiki standard. This section should be kept in the article to reflect people's choice.Dongdongdog 05:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a democracy. Uncle G 08:52, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * You are exactly right. It says "Wikipedia is not an experiment in democracy or any other political system. Its primary method of determining consensus is discussion, not voting." What I found is a consensus is forming by lots of people's editing on the section. Nobody is asking for a vote. Dongdongdog 16:23, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

If Los Angeles Times, Fox News, and CNN, to name a few, all have a section of controversy, why can't this article? Dongdongdog 00:59, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

 * In addition to the other guidelines that the section violates, there is also a guideline that discourages "me too" reasoning for an article or section of an article as well. --Mhking 01:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * This section has been edited and revised many many time by many editors holding different views. There are currently NO disputes on it except for this one. There are NO "other guidelines that the section violates" as you alleged. You have strong objections to Michael Sneed, Michael Sneed Rumors, and Inaccurate media reports of the Virginia Tech massacre. Now you want to get the controversy section on the same incident removed from a news paper article. Your bias is so very obvious. I've had a good faith in communicating with you. Now enough is enough. If you remove this section without consensus, I will sure roll it back. If you ban my ID as you threatened me to, I will sure appeal and get it back. I will do whatever I can to bring the case along the Wikipedia management hierarchy to deprive your privilege as you are now obviously abusing your right to censor other's viewpoints based on your personal bias. Dongdongdog 01:44, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I am doing no such thing. The entire Sneed incident is inconsequential, and non-notable. In addition, its presence violates existing Wikipedia guidelines. I have worked in good faith here, and will continue to do so. The only way I would ask that your posting capabilities be revoked is if you continually violate the guidelines. Outside of that, I am happy for you to continue to post here, and encourage it. --Mhking 01:49, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Mhking, what right do you have to say the entire Sneed incident is inconsequential, and non-notable? For more than 12 hours the whole country of China was disturbed by this false news from Michael Sneed. If it's the case why Fox news made such a big fuss about it on the night of the shooting?It's obvious you are abusing your power. What happened on Wikipedia about this incident simply show some of you guys are quite embarrassed about this accident and don't want to see it.

 * I Agree with Dongdongdog and the previous poster. In the heat of the reporting on the VT Massacre, the Sun-Times' Michael Sneed misidentified the nationality, age and residency status of the gunman.  The erroneous report was picked up and reported as fact by all the major news outlets, including CNN, for several hours.  The public and media reaction in China was huge.  The entire Sneed/Sun-Times incident is highly notable. Ronstock 19:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Change the section title to controversy
Like in many articles on media, there is a controversy section. The title of this section should be in this norm and be changed to controversy. The verbatim of "Erroneous Reporting of the Virginia Tech Massacre" is too specific as a section title. Dongdongdog 22:28, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

 * This is about that singular event; in addition, it still borders on violations of WP:POINT and WP:POV. I have reverted teh section back commensurately. And to be perfectly honest, it truly has no place in the article. I am leaving it in place pending the outcome of the AfD on the article on the VT reporting in and of itself. --Mhking 22:50, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

 * This is your personal view. Let's see what the arbitration board would say. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dongdongdog (talk • contribs) 23:10, 21 April 2007 (UTC).

 * I have reverted to your version, but only to prevent my violation of WP:3RR (which you are currently in violation of). Please refrain from falling into edit wars. A violation of WP:3RR can result in a prohibition from editing on Wikipedia. --Mhking 23:16, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

RfC
I have requested comment from outside editors and/or administrators via a formal Request For Comment regarding the presence and structure of the VT content here. --Mhking 23:45, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Controversy sections shouldn't be controversial at all. Controversy over VT content, if verifiable, should have a presence in the article. WP:POV acknowledges that not all the information in an entry will consist of statistics and hard fact - Wikipedia is building an encyclopedia, not a fact book - and perspectives should be acknowledged (and identified as such). Orphic 08:31, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I am closing this RfC. The controversial material has been removed entirely from the article at this point and it appears that there is no current disagreement over the version.   Douglasmtaylor   T / C  22:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Unsourced material
The following is unsourced information:

While this is interesting, we can't use it unless you provide a source. Also, none of this is really trivia, as trivia by its definition is "unimportant information" - it therefore shouldn't be in a trivia section but instead the information should be incorporated into the main article. - Tbsdy lives (talk) 03:46, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * To enable the construction of the Trump International Hotel and Tower, the newspaper moved to the Apparel Center expansion of the Merchandise Mart.

Jeremy Halbreich
There is no mention here of Jeremy Halbreich taking the Sun Times out of bankeuptcy and now heading the paper for the new owners. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.20.234.11 (talk) 22:07, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Early Edition
isn't it noteworthy that the paper was featured prominently in the TV series "Early Edition"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.115.37.75 (talk) 11:45, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Chicago Sun-Times. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111116040508/http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=ed061cd1-563f-446a-9f32-295bdac75759&k=72843 to http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=ed061cd1-563f-446a-9f32-295bdac75759&k=72843

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:42, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Chicago Sun-Times. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070223092324/http://www.thechicagofire.com/exoneration.php to http://www.thechicagofire.com/exoneration.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070916101255/http://chicago.about.com/cs/history/a/05_great_fire.htm to http://chicago.about.com/cs/history/a/05_great_fire.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930154810/http://www.medialifemagazine.com/news2004/Jul04/Jul12/2_tues/news1tuesday.html to http://www.medialifemagazine.com/news2004/Jul04/Jul12/2_tues/news1tuesday.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131109003328/http://www.triblocal.com/elmhurst/community/galleries/2010/01/ichs-welcomes-pulitzer-prize-winner-jack-higgins/index.html to http://www.triblocal.com/elmhurst/community/galleries/2010/01/ichs-welcomes-pulitzer-prize-winner-jack-higgins/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:54, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Michael Sacks
Is the Michael Sacks mentioned here also this person? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Sacks Dgndenver (talk) 03:54, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Digital
On 6 October 2022, the newspaper announced that its digital content would be free: The Sun-Times’ new chapter: Our digital content is now free for everyone - Chicago Sun-Times (suntimes.com) chicago.suntimes.com/news/2022/10/6/23389729/paywall-sun-times-dropping-news-journalism-nykia-wright-jennifer-kho-celeste-lecompte2600:6C67:1C00:5F7E:2C52:C3AF:FEAF:5B1F (talk) 19:40, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Chicago Sun-Times


text:
User talk:Ghent

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Tznkai 15:46, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Wow! You're fast!
I just read about OGLE-2005-BLG-390Lb on the news and went to start a new article - you beat me to it!! :) - Beowulf314159 23:18, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * ;D Ghent 06:58, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Have you ever started a page before? I'm amazed how fast, furiously, and acrimoniously pages evolve! :o - Beowulf314159 02:05, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I think I have twice; once here, and once on the Danish Wiki. Ghent 19:41, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

STL umpteen lines
Is there a consensus to name new linebox templates after the system where they were first needed? I would think it would make it harder for others to find them if and when they are needed for another purpose. Henning Makholm 14:03, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Can you give an example for a name, because I'm not sure what you mean. Ghent 14:06, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * E.g. STL nine lines. If I were to look for it I would have tried LUL nine lines by analogy with the single-line templates. Henning Makholm 14:26, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * You are right. Moving started... Ghent 14:28, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Oops, hold it... I see now there is a family of neutrally-named templates in Category:Rail transport templates. We should probably try to align with their naming instead (and add to the category). Henning Makholm 14:34, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Too late. I think that we want to move them there, anyway though. Maybe you can do it? Ghent 14:37, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * On further inspection, the ones starting with Template:Rail are not compatible with the LUL ones; they don't use sub-templates to specify service links and colors. For the moment I'll do nothing. Henning Makholm 14:46, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Template:B (Copenhagen) link
A template you created, Template:B (Copenhagen) link, has been marked for deletion as a deprecated and orphaned template. If, after 14 days, there has been no objection, the template will be deleted. If you wish to object to its deletion, please list your objection here and feel free to remove the   tag from the template. If you feel the deletion is appropriate, no further action is necessary. Thanks for your attention. --MZMcBride 04:39, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Template:M2 (Copenhagen) link
A you created, Template:M2 (Copenhagen) link,  been marked for deletion as  deprecated and orphaned template. If, after 14 days, there been no objection, the template will be deleted. If you wish to object to deletion, please list your objection here and feel free to remove the  tag from the template. If you feel the deletion appropriate, no further action is necessary. Thanks for your attention. Bryan Derksen (talk) 01:53, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:E (Copenhagen) link
A tag has been placed on Template:E (Copenhagen) link requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:49, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Ex (Copenhagen) link
A tag has been placed on Template:Ex (Copenhagen) link requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:07, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:F+ (Copenhagen) link
A tag has been placed on Template:F+ (Copenhagen) link requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:F (Copenhagen) colour
A tag has been placed on Template:F (Copenhagen) colour requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:49, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:F (Copenhagen) link
A tag has been placed on Template:F (Copenhagen) link requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:51, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:H+ (Copenhagen) link
A tag has been placed on Template:H+ (Copenhagen) link requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 06:19, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:H (Copenhagen) link
A tag has been placed on Template:H (Copenhagen) link requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 06:27, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:M1 (Copenhagen) link
A tag has been placed on Template:M1 (Copenhagen) link requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 16:04, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:C (Copenhagen) link
A tag has been placed on Template:C (Copenhagen) link requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:03, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:06, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Start CML box
Template:Start CML box has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 20:08, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Ghent


text: User talk:70.179.184.227

title: User talk:70.179.184.227


text:
UTC+03:00

UTC+03:00 is an identifier for a time offset from UTC of +03:00. In areas using this time offset, the time is three hours ahead of the Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). Following the ISO 8601 standard, a time with this offset would be written as, for example, 2019-02-08T23:36:06+03:00.

As standard time (year-round)
Principal cities: Istanbul, Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Doha, Riyadh, Baghdad, Nairobi, Dire Dawa, Addis Ababa, Manama, Sanaa, Aden, Minsk, Kuwait City, Asmara, Antananarivo, Kampala, Amman, Damascus

East Africa

 * Comoros
 * Djibouti
 * Eritrea
 * Ethiopia
 * France
 * French Southern and Antarctic Lands
 * Scattered Islands in the Indian Ocean
 * Bassas da India, Europa Island and Juan de Nova Island
 * Mayotte
 * Kenya
 * Madagascar
 * Somalia
 * Somaliland
 * South Africa
 * Prince Edward Islands
 * Tanzania
 * Uganda

Antarctica

 * Some bases in Antarctica. See also Time in Antarctica.
 * Japan
 * Showa Station

Arabia Standard Time
Arabia Standard Time, or AST (indicated by KSA on some Arabic TV stations), is used by some of the countries in the Middle East. As this time zone is predominantly in the equatorial region, there is no significant change in day length throughout the year, so daylight saving time is not observed. Between 1982 and 2007, Iraq observed Arabia Daylight Time (UTC+04:00) but the government abolished DST in March 2008.

Arabia Standard Time is used by the following countries:

 * Bahrain
 * Iraq
 * Jordan
 * Kuwait
 * Qatar
 * Saudi Arabia
 * Syria
 * Yemen

Europe
Most of European Russia, including Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Rostov-on-Don, Novaya Zemlya, Franz Josef Land. From October 26, 2014 Moscow and most other parts of European Russia started using UTC+03:00 again, year-round. Also on September 7, 2016, Turkey started using UTC+03:00 year-round. Besides the names mentioned above, the name "Eastern Europe Forward Time"' (EEFT) is sometimes used.
 * Belarus
 * Russia – Moscow Time
 * Central Federal District
 * North Caucasian Federal District
 * Northwestern Federal District
 * Except Kaliningrad Oblast
 * Southern Federal District
 * Except Astrakhan Oblast
 * Volga Federal District
 * Except Samara Oblast, Saratov Oblast, Udmurtia, Ulyanovsk Oblast, Bashkortostan, Orenburg Oblast and Perm Krai
 * Turkey – Time in Turkey
 * Ukraine
 * Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine - Crimea (Crimea Peninsula) or Republic of Crimea, part of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions

Caucasus region

 * Georgia (while Georgia remains within UTC+04:00, its two breakaway regions have opted to use UTC+03:00) this includes:
 * Abkhazia
 * South Ossetia

As daylight saving time (Northern Hemisphere summer only)
Principal cities: Kyiv, Bucharest, Athens, Jerusalem, Sofia

Europe

 * Bulgaria
 * Cyprus
 * Estonia
 * Finland
 * Åland
 * Greece
 * Latvia
 * Lithuania
 * Moldova
 * Transnistria
 * Romania
 * Ukraine
 * Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine
 * United Kingdom
 * Akrotiri and Dhekelia

Asia

 * Israel
 * Lebanon

Africa

 * Egypt

Areas in UTC+03:00 longitudes using other time zones
Using UTC+04:00:
 * Caucasus region:
 * Georgia, excluding Abkhazia and South Ossetia
 * Armenia
 * Azerbaijan
 * Russia, with parts of its territories:
 * Astrakhan, Samara, Saratov and Ulyanovsk (with an exception of the very east)
 * Western half of Udmurtia
 * United Arab Emirates
 * The westernmost region of the Emirate of Abu Dhabi
 * Seychelles
 * Aldabra Group
 * Cosmoledo Atoll
 * Farquhar Group
 * French Southern and Antarctic Lands
 * Crozet Islands

Using UTC+03:30:
 * Iran
 * The western part, including Tehran

Using UTC+02:00:
 * Ukraine (standard time)
 * The easternmost part, including Luhansk (the territories under Ukrainian control)
 * Sudan
 * The very easternmost part in the country
 * Mozambique
 * Most of the northeast, including Montepuez and Nampula

Areas between 67°30′ E and 82°30′ E ("physical" UTC+05:00)

 * Russia
 * The very east of Severny Island with 69°2' E as the easternmost point

Areas between 52°30' E and 67°30' E ("physical" UTC+04:00)

 * Yemen
 * Socotra, the largest island in the Socotra Archipelago
 * The very easternmost part of Al-Mahrah
 * Saudi Arabia
 * The easternmost part of Sharqiyah
 * Russia
 * Most of Franz Josef Land, Yuzhny Island, and most of Severny Island (with an exception of the very east)
 * Some parts of the Russian mainland (Komi Republic, Nenets Autonomous Okrug, east of Kirov Oblast and Tatarstan)

Areas between 22°30' E and 37°30' E ("physical" UTC+02:00)

 * Tanzania
 * The western part, including Mwanza and Mbeya
 * Uganda
 * Kenya
 * The western part, including nation's capital Nairobi
 * Ethiopia
 * The western part, including Nekemte and Jimma
 * Saudi Arabia
 * The northwesternmost part, including Tabuk
 * Turkey
 * Most parts of the country, including Istanbul and nation's capital Ankara
 * Ukraine
 * Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine
 * Belarus
 * Russia
 * The western part, including Saint Petersburg and half of Moscow

title: UTC+03:00


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colorado v Missouri, 1990 football game

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Keep. Redwolf24 23:12, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Colorado v Missouri, 1990 football game
It does not appear this nomination by User:The Killer was ever completed, so I am posting it here. I vote keep myself and it seems this could be closed as a speedy keep. Christopher Parham (talk) 07:08, 2005 August 16 (UTC)

Keep, agree with MysteryDog. Xaa 20:10, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - I just dont think this article is vary encyclopedic. The Time Killer
 * Keep - Apparently this is one of only two times a fifth down has been played in American Football. As such, I think it's worthy of mention.  Bollar 15:50, July 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - notable game. --Badlydrawnjeff 19:13, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep This is pretty much the American football equivalent of the Hand of God goal. The Literate Engineer 21:02, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - A significant historical event, which needs to be documented for future reference User:Goldtime'''r
 * Keep - Not many individual football games are notable enough to deserve articles, but this is one of them; every college football fan knows about it. But I think it should be renamed to something less clumsy, such as 1990 Colorado-Missouri football game. MysteryDog 19:28, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * ysteryDog's name is much better. If someone doesn't beat me to it, I will move it as soon as I see that the VfD has cleared, Dsmdgold 04:34, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - There are many instances of memorable sporting events that would make for good articles. --Cholmes75 21:14, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. As a rule I think that individual matches are non encyclopedic, but this looks like an exception to that. Nabla 18:18, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Very strong keep. The 5th down is one of the worst blown calls in sports history. --OntarioQuizzer 05:19, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep- a very famous game, still notable. Also redirect items such as "5th down game" here.  Sensation002 14:48, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Obvious Keep - Think about it, it's a Hall of Shame instance that hapened 15 years ago, and it's still creating a controversy....--CrazyTalk 06:49, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Send to cleanup. This page does not explain how this game or a "fifth down" is special. If the page is to be kept, the page needs to undergo some cleanup first. Martg76 15:12, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I see that the information has been added. So keep. Martg76 23:21, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
UEL

UEL can refer to:

 * UEFA Europa League, the second tier of European club football
 * United Envirotech, a company based in Singapore
 * University of East London, a public University in London, UK
 * Universidade Estadual de Londrina (State University of Londrina), a state university in Londrina, Brazil
 * United Empire Loyalists, pro-British colonists who left the United States for Canada after the Revolutionary War
 * University Endowment Lands, a suburb adjacent to Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
 * Upper explosive limit, maximum concentration in air that will burn
 * Unified Expression Language, part of Java EE 6

title: UEL


text:
Category:Professional wrestling referees

The people in this category have all been referees or special match enforcers in professional wrestling.


text:
User talk:Guettarda/Archive7

Fauna of Australia
I saw your comments, thanks. I've been putting any chnages off unitl I look up freshwater fish taxonomy, and til I can think of a better way to describe the origins of the fauna section, I'll work it out when I least expect it :) If you have more criticisms, please tear it up, getting it really ready before it goes on FAC, saves from a whole lot of scurrying around. --nixie 01:19, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Mervyn M. Dymally
Hi Guettarda, I moved Mervyn Dymally to Mervyn M. Dymally, as it was the most common name for him. Dymally's own web site, the State Assembly site, and the Lieutenant Governor's web site all referred to him as Mervyn M. Dymally. Also, at the time, more articles pointed to Mervyn M. Dymally than to Mervyn Dymally (I have since changed many of the links to Mervyn M. Dymally to minimize the use of redirects). Thanks, GoCardinal 03:58, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Sorry about not bringing this to the talk page first. Thanks for the tip, and I'll make sure to do that in the future. GoCardinal 06:12, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

"Effect" and "affect"
Jeeze. What a pain. (People and their egos. Me and my principle. :p)  This guy "HugoRabson" says it's not a big deal -- but then goes on and on and on ad nauseam -- and incorrectly, and for several reverts -- about how he's right and I'm wrong. And then when he realizes he's wrong, he sayys it should be changed, anyway. Kinda funny, though, that the biggest dispute regarding an article on a subject as potentially fractious as blackface comes down to the use of "effect" and "affect." Wikipedia is absolutely insane. And we're still here. What does that make us? (Don't answer that.) deeceevoice 09:06, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

prove a negative
You are asking for a near impossible... proof that someone 'lurking in the shadows', is not there. This proof you are asking for, is little one can depend upon. The west is in Iraq, because Bush demanded that Hussein prove he did not have something, (prove a negative, the west demanded). The same line of reasoning being used to place a topic (with reference) in a false category. Done, in the absence of proof that something is false. You may not wish to have the scowl of fellow wikipedians should you choose to unlock a page, nor for fairly reconsidering a category dictate, yet with the utmost respect Guettarda, (and I could care less who you really are) but your refusal to act when you can so easily, is tantamount to intellectual sloth. TTLightningRod 18:01, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

User talk:Ed Poor
According to Tim Starling, the servers of all Wikimedia projects switched to read-only for five minutes while VfD was being undeleted. I'm sure Ed didn't intend that, but someone of his experience might at least have guessed. Or asked around a bit. Anything, you know? Ed has a history of being "audacious", consequences be damned, but this was a bit much.

I realized your comment probably ended up at the wrong place, but I went ahead and posted a snarky comment anyway, instead of checking with you first. Sorry. Last thing I want is to antagonize people over something stupid like this. JRM · Talk 21:26, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Professional societies
Hey,

Not really well-placed to answer that... I'm in a much younger and less traditional crowd (mostly bioinformaticists) doing comparative genome stuff. You want the guys across the river from me like Daniel Hartl. That's a separate universe, nearly, as these things go (even though the work is so closely related). Sorry... Graft 19:11, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Help
I need your help. It seems that someone wants to delete my article on Carlos Lozada, one of four Puerto Ricans to have been awarded the Medal of Honor. You can help fight this injustice by voting against deletion here: | VfD. Please participate. Your friend Tony the Marine 05:24, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you my friend I knew that I could count on you against that nutcase. Tony the Marine 07:15, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

Re: My request for un-protection for Mezmerize
Hello, Guettarda. The reason why I wanted the Mezmerize article to be un-protected again because I want to wiki-link the eighth track "Question!", the upcoming single off the album. As I said at the talk page. -- Mike Garcia | talk 13:13, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the un-protection, anyway. -- Mike Garcia | talk 13:42, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

WikiStress
Sorry about your Wikistress level. Maybe a barnstar could help you

Take care, D. J. Bracey (talk) 22:02, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Hey check out this news article, bud. - Web's Wikipedia to tighten editorial rules-founder Hopefully, that will help make sure things remain on the up-and-up around the wiki-community. :-) P.S. Sorry to tack this on here but I didn't want to clutter up your talk page. I *too*, hope your able to shed some of your wiki-stress.  Feeling better soon, eh? ;-) CaribDigita 17:29, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Mezmerize
How long are admins going to sit back and tolerate Mike Garcia vandalizing Mezmerize with chart information that goes contrary to billboard.com? He is inciting an edit war yet again without giving a source. 66.36.148.32 17:49, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

RfA
Thank you for supporting my RfA. I will do my best to serve the Wikipedia community as an administrator. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 20:18, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Many Thanks
Thanks for supporting my RFA. It couldn't have happened without your effort. FeloniousMonk 17:53, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Adminship
Hey. Again. :) Just a quick note to say thanks for your kind words and support (in principle) a while back for my adminship.  ''Ll never happen.  Peace 2 u. deeceevoice 22:11, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

69.47.159.58, welcoming new people
(Cross posted to User_talk:69.47.159.58 and regarding your comments there.) Guettarda, adding discussion to a user's talk page is not vandalism. Additionally, your contribution :"Please familarise yourself with ideas like `facts` and `reality`." sounds much like a personal attack. This new contributor may not be adhering to all wikipedia policies, but that does not by itself constitute vandalism. Stay calm, stay friends, we can talk about it. TomCerul 12:39, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Jguk for admin?
You may be interested in this: Requests for adminship/jguk CDThieme 20:31, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

HappyCamper's RFA - Thanks for your support! :-)
Hi Guettarda! Thanks for your support on my recent RFA. I'm now an administrator, and I wanted to thank you for your vote of confidence in me. If you ever need an extra helping hand, please let me know and I'll try to help out as much as I can. Thanks again for everything, and I'll see you around the Wiki! :D --HappyCamper 02:00, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

SLAC
I have no objection to adding a note at the top of Stanford Linear Accelerator Center and creating SLAC (disambiguation). However, there is currently no article on Selective Liberal Arts Consortium, and all of the articles currently linking SLAC refer to the accelerator center. Thus, at the moment, doing such a thing seems a bit superfluous. Am I wrong? -- SCZenz 18:36, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * If you tried to look it up here and it wasn't there, that seems like reason enough to include it to me. The disambiguation page and note at the top of the main article are done now. Thanks for the suggestion!  -- SCZenz 20:08, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Strangler figs
Hi Guettarda - saw your notes on the WPTOL talk; if so, then the current Strangler Fig page needs to be moved - presumably to Ficus citrifolia - and a new page re-done as required. AFAIK, all the hemi-epiphytic figs are in subgenus Urostigma (currently covered at banyan) - or is that not so? I guess that page may need some re-working too? Whatever, I think we can leave Clusia out; while it may be a strangler, it isn't a fig! - MPF 20:35, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Placing users in danger
Guettarda, FYI Wikipedia_talk:Blocking_policy SlimVirgin (talk) 02:27, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

I want to thank you for your eloquent and robust defense of this block, and for being able to see to the heart of the matter. It matters a lot that good editors like yourself are around to defend what Cberlet called the "collective morality" of the project and, in fact, to be its backbone. SlimVirgin (talk) 23:48, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Sixth Form Government Secondary School
Errr, yes the correct name is Sixth Form Government Secondary School, in the afternoon's the Polytech Institute gives other classes, but during the day it is Sixth Form Government Secondary School. Here is a stupid question, what is VfD ?

Regards User_talk:Trinbago aka Nigel

Jtkiefer's RFA
Thanks for your support on my RFA. Jtkiefer T - 05:27, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you
Guettarda, thank you so much. It means a great deal coming from you, not least because I see you as someone who would made an ideal bureaucrat. You manage to be passionate yet reasonable at the same time, which isn't easy, and you're always fair and decent, and you look at all sides of a debate. I try to be those things, but with nowhere near your success. However, I'll give what you said some thought. The problem is that the more active an admin one is, the more people there are lurking in the shadows. It might be a better idea to be a very quiet admin for a few months leading up to any vote. Or even take a complete wikibreak for six months, then have the vote immediately upon returning ... ;-D But seriously, thank you for the kind words, and I will think about it. SlimVirgin (talk) 23:48, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

Talk:MWP and LIA in IPCC reports
The septics rear their heads again... care to take a look, though tis a minor matter in the great scheme. William M. Connolley 18:24:12, 2005-09-02 (UTC).

thank you to Guettarda
Thank you for starting to incorporate footnotes in the Biblical scientific foreknowledge subject area. I did a lot of research for the article and I hope you enjoyed it.

ken 21:27, 3 September 2005 (UTC)kdbuffalo

Plant identification
Thanks for responding to the RD question. Is there a limited number of plants this could be depending on what the apical buds would look like? If you can tell me how they would help, I could relay the info and have the questioner idenitify their own plant. - Mgm|(talk) 13:31, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

thank you once again
Thank you so much for the work on the notation of the Biblical scientific foreknowledge article. I am not too WIKI tech savy yet and have not quite figured out how to do it. I know know that it is footnoted properly that less people will mess with the article. ken 16:24, 4 September 2005 (UTC)kdbuffalo

Thanks
Dragons flight 06:05, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi Guettarda:

Thanks for support and your confidence in me in my recent RFB nomination. I'm now WP's newest bureaucrat. :) Regards, =Nichalp   «Talk»=  19:46, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

 * Indian+bureaucrat: he he he: nice one :D =Nichalp   «Talk»=  19:56, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks so much for the tips. I didnt know that these existed. Greatly appreciated, thanks again. Journalist  C./ '''Holla @ me!

Email
Thanks for the offer! Before I accept, I've been wondering: what does an email allow an admin to do that a talk page would not cover? At the beginning, I really didn't want to provide an email, but I guess I wouldn't be opposed to a Wikipedia-only email account. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 22:22, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Oh, all right, I give in. :-) I already have a Gmail account, so thanks anyways- I'll email an invite to myself at another email address and create it. By the way, if I didn't have Gmail already, it would be impossible to contact you through email- it says "you must have provided an email in order to email this user" or something like that. Also, do you think anyone would mind if I have "Emailaddress.Wikipedia@gmail.com" in my email address? Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 22:35, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Wikiproject cricket
Formally inviting you could sign up for WikiProject Cricket. Like I've explained to Journalist, this would allow someone working on West Indies cricket contact you for advice or clarifications. We're also working on getting the West Indian cricket team up to featured status soon, so if you could review, it would be greatly appreciated. =Nichalp  «Talk»=  06:24, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

to Guettarda
MickWest is destroying a lot of your work in my opinion. I am not too technically saavy but I tried to restore as much of your work as I could. I am talking about Biblical scientific foreknowledge

If you could say something on the talk page I would appreciate it. Talk:Biblical scientific foreknowledge

Sincerely,

ken 18:14, 7 September 2005 (UTC)kdbuffalo

All I did was remove one paragraph that had none of your footnotes (and thanks for those). Ken then reverted to a version that had the old style footnotes, I tried to fix it, but he keeps reverting. MickWest 19:07, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, I'll throw in my two cents worth. Both of these guys have violated 3RR, and I've told them both to visit the talk page.  Hopefully you would do the same, as this is a bit of a weight topic for me to come out of the blue and try to figure out.  I really don't want to protect it.--Scimitar parley 19:16, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree- content, not formatting, is the problem. I've protected the page, hopefully (please, dear god, please) not for too long. --Scimitar parley 20:12, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Roaring Lion
I perform his "Bananas" in my street music band. Glad to start the article as he's one of the greatest of all time. The article needs much more work so if you have the knowledge, please fill it in! :) By the way, I'm so glad you have written because the birthplace seems wrong; I don't think there's a place called Aroquita.  Could it be a diminutive for Arouca?  Also, where are the Caura Hills?  Is that also in Southwest Trinidad?  Badagnani 22:02, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Biblical scientific foreknowledge
Hi again. I'm currently trying to run a straw poll here to get an idea of what consensus is on the disputed paragraphs. I'd really appreciate your comments, because I'm afraid my inexperience is showing. Also, your background and work on the article probably make you more effective at reasoning with the two parties than I. All the best. --Scimitar parley 23:05, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

References and Footnotes
Am I correct in understanding the comparison between Template:an (autonumbering reference) compared to Template:mn (manual numbering)? Do you see the manual numbering method as preferrable, for this article? — Mark (Mkmcconn) ** 23:49, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Email created!
Well, I've done it. You can click on the "Email this user", and I sure hope it works! No, it's not my user name @ the google mail one, but it's close. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 23:24, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Plant ID follow up
I've received an image of the apical buds of the plant mentioned in the reference desk question a few days ago. Would you mind emailing me, so I can send you the image for analysis? - Mgm|(talk) 09:53, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

Popups script in IE
I've tried to make the script behave more in IE like it does in FF as regards the width of the popup. Please could you test this and tell me if it works? I've just blindly copied and pasted code from somewhere so I don't really know if it will or not. You'll need to change the second occurence of popups.js to popupsdev.js in your monobook.js file and refresh to test the development version as I haven't made the change in popups.js (the "stable" version). To clarify: you should have these lines in your monobook.js:

document.write(' ');

instead of the old ones. (You probably want to revert back to using popups.js once you've tested it as I make changes to popupsdev.js which may not work at first, or just be bad ideas). Thanks for your help! Lupin 02:24, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Hi. Do I use

// User:Lupin/popupsdev.js - please include this line

or

// User:Lupin/popups.js - please include this line

in the opening line? Guettarda 02:35, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

 * It doesn't matter - those are comments and I only include them so that I can keep track of who's using the script by looking at pages which link to User:Lupin/popups.js. So I'll leave it up to you :-) Lupin 02:38, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!
Hi Guettarda. Thanks for your support on my RfA. I was pleasantly surprised you had remembered me. Please do keep an eye on me and my logs, especially while I'm learning the ropes with the new buttons. Thanks again! -Splash 18:37, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

"calendrical" order
Yes, sorry, I made that word up. Heehehe.... You guessed right, I was listing the Republic Days by the date in the calendar. Did I mess up the order ? Where ? -- PFHLai 21:03, 2005 September 9 (UTC)
 * You are absolutely correct ! I should know. I actually put this and this on the Mainpage. Thank you for fixing my mistake. -- PFHLai 13:25, 2005 September 10 (UTC)

Aruban people
The plan was to depopulate it, wait the required 24 hours, and then put it up for speedy. I did not know there was a discussion going on. As you can see, I do toss lots of things up for CFD, especially if I cannot make an IMHO safe judgement myself. This time I thought I did have a safe judgement. I had both People of Aruba and Aruban People as active categories. Only one or the other should exist. I looked at the lists of similar categories, and Fooian People was used by the vast majority of these similar categories. I would absolutely have gone the CFD route if I knew there was any sort of controversy. In fact, I'll likely put both up for CFD when I get home from work. One way or another, one of the two needs to be deleted. And I personally don't have a strong opinion which goes, so I'll gladly leave it up to conscensous. TexasAndroid 22:24, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm sorry. I really do not see the logic of using age as a primary determining factor in deciding the proper way to name a category.  It's not something I've ever considered.  Wikipedia guidelines. Conscensous.  Consistency.  Logic.  Common sense.   I've used all of these.  But age?  AFAIK, there's no law anywhere that says that the person who got there first is automatically correct.
 * I made a judgement call. And I appear to have been incorrect in my judgement.  IMHO my fault was in a lack of information.  Not knowing that there was a ongoing discussion on which form to use.  I was in the wrong in this case.  But I really don't think that the age of the categoies had anything to do with it.  Sorry, but I very much disagree with you on this point.  TexasAndroid 23:26, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

 * On a totally separate note, you misspelled one of the two categories in your CFD submission. I should not be editing your text, so I'll leave it to you to fix.  TexasAndroid 23:31, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Heh. Here is where things get interesting. Now we get to see how your logic carries to more general cases.

I have been working my way through the Special:Uncategorized Categories. That's how I came to get in the middle of this. So I have been seeing a *lot* of duplicate categories go by. The vast majority have been left by someone else's move job weeks or months before. They moved from one category name to another, and the old one was left behind, unlinked. Mostly empty, but occasionally I see ones where some articles have since been put back in the old one. This is not a debate about the correctness of the origianl person's move. Rather, I'm coming in, weeks or months later, and trying to clean up.

Let's exclude the cases of obvious misspelling or miscapitalization, because there's really no debate there. But what about all the ones that are, as you say, fit usage? Even if they've been empty for months in some cases. Should every single one of these be put up for CFD? By your logic, since the empty category is the older one, they should all go up for CFD. And do keep in mind, I've to date put up many dozens of these for Speedy in the last couple of weeks, so we are not talking about an insignifigant number of categories. So far, other than the Aruba one, not a single category I've placed for speedy has been declined. Anyway, if you are saying that every single one of these duplicates should actually be placed up for CFD, so be it. A bit more work for me, a good bit more reading for everyone else. But if that's the proper way to do this, so be it. TexasAndroid 02:41, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Let me first stress that I still conceed fully that the Aruban situation should not have been handled as I handled it. I'm somewhat more arguing general practice now.
 * You say "empty for a while". That was exactly my plan originally.  The rules you linked to, which I am well aware of, say 24 hours.  Nothing longer than that is required.  They also say nothing about the person who emptied them being unable to submit them, or that the person who intends to submit them cannot be the one who empties them 24 hours earlier.  So they really do not say anything that excludes how I did things.  There are other reasons how I did things was incorrect, but the rules of Speedy are not one, IMHO.
 * You have still said nothing to convince my why, in the general sense, I should consider the age of a category. In this particular case, looking at the histories more (and I did indeed "find" both, as you snarkily implied I didn't do) I can see how the second one came to be.  You're right.  It was not a recategorization.  But that's a totally different reasoning than the date of creation.  I still see nothing that makes the earlier category more automatically correct.
 * That all said, I think I see a solution for myself, moving forward. I commented earlier about having tossed dozens of duplicate categories up for speedy, and not wanting to drop that many additional categories on CFD.  OTOH, the number of times I've had duplicates where both were populated has been exactly three, including the Aruba one.  Going forward, even if I have an obvious recat that has since had 1-2 articles dropped in the old cat, which the other two were, if I have a duplicate pair of categories that both are populated, they will go for CFD, not depop/wait 24 hours/speedy.  That way I can avoid a repeat of this fiasco. TexasAndroid 13:40, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

fooian vs. from foo
Hi - I saw your note on kbdank71's talk about fooian people vs. people of foo. You might be interested in Naming conventions (categories), which is currently a proposal. The overwhelming current usage is "fooian", however as soon as there is consensus on the naming conventions page I think there is going to be a CFD proposal to rename all the people-related categories to "of/in/from foo" format. Whether this proposal will be accepted remains to be seen. As far as depopulating before listing on CFD, per WP:CFD (bullet toward the end of step II) this should in general not be done. -- Rick Block (talk) 02:24, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

TO: Guettarda

I have some good news and some bad news. The good news is I added some Biblical scientific foreknowledge info. The bad news is it screwed up your footnoting and I don't know how to fix it. If you want to fix by all means do so. Here is the page again: Biblical scientific foreknowledge

ken 22:48, 10 September 2005 (UTC)kdbuffalo

My RFA
Thank you very kindly for your support of my nomination; it means all the more because I respect your contributions. I promise your trust hasn't been misplaced; I will only be slightly buzzed with power, but never drunk. ;) · Katefan0(scribble) 21:02, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia problems
I've recorded some of my thoughts and ideas about problems within Wikipedia, and some possible solutions here. I'd like your thoughts, and whether or not you think I'm crazy. Thanks.--Scimitar parley 17:32, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Geo-stub question
Hi Guettarda - I have a question which you might be able to help with. There are enough Trinidad and Tobago geography stubs thatit is likely to soon get its own category and template. The category is simple: "Trinidad and Tobago geography stubs". The problem is the name for the template - the stub sorting project tries to avoid abbreviations, so T&T-geo-stub is unlikely, but TrinidadandTobago-geo-stub is unwieldy. My question - would there be complaints if it was just called Trinidad-geo-stub? There is a precedent - the Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador (which has Newfoundland-geo-stub) - but I don't want to annoy Tobagans. Grutness...  wha?  11:06, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Whoops - so my guess was wrong :) I think Trinidad-geo-stub will be the one to go for, then, since TT might be a little too ambiguous or obscure. You're right about the bio-stub - I'll propose that at WP:WSS as well. And you don't have to make articles for all those places... though it would be nice, of course... ;) Grutness...  wha?  13:39, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd assumed it was you making those new TT stubs! There are over 70 now, so it makes sense to propose a separate stub category - especially if you go ahead with that threat! :) Grutness...  wha?  05:57, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome
Hello - Yes I am interested in Trinidad and Tobago as well as other places in the Caribbean, so Ive been making a few stubs here and there. Ill have to check the Caribbean notice board out. Thanks for the welcome! BL Lacertae 05:41, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you
I thank you for your support for my RfA, We shall surely interact more. I am certain that our association shall grow. --Bhadani 09:51, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Meliaceae genera
Hi Guettarda - thanks for helping out with some of IP 83.117....'s stuff; it seems he knows a fair deal and has provided some good data but also a burden of his own perceived superiority and weird ideas. Could you check over my changes to the various pages (Swietenia, Khaya, Toona, Entandrophragma, etc) to see I've got details right please? (I've checked from what I've got and some internet search, but it isn't a huge amount). Also 83.117.... has added (from at least seven different IP addresses!) several changes to various nomenclature and taxonomy pages which need verification (83.117.7.230 contribs, 83.117.4.76 contribs, 83.117.21.83 contribs, 83.117.23.63 contribs, 83.117.24.248 contribs, 83.117.5.153 contribs, 83.117.14.217 contribs) - I don't know quite enough to be 100% certain where he's right on these (I think some has already been reverted, but not sure about all) - Thanks, MPF 14:04, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

kdbufallo
Guettarda, can you take a look at Requests for comment/Kdbuffalo please? Dunc|☺ 19:44, 18 September 2005 (UTC)v

Regarding kdbuffalo's talk page, Like I said here, I've not emailed Ken. I've used his talk page to notify him of various problems, and offered some helpful suggestions. MickWest 20:18, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

to: guettarda

Duncharris has sent me more than one very insulting message to my userpage. He uses such words as "fundie", nonsense, etc. Duncharris also admits I have been polite to him. You can go to his userpage and see for yourself.

MickWest and duncharris want to play "Atheist bullyboys" by sending me repeated messages to my userpage designed to irritate me.

If you want to make a message to that kdbuffalo comment page saying I cite an abundance of medical historians, medical/science journals which is the truth it would be appreciated.

Also, I believe this policy is being ignored:

"None of this, however, is to say that minority views cannot receive as much attention as we can possibly give them on pages specifically devoted to those views. There is no size limit to Wikipedia. But even on such pages, though a view is spelled out possibly in great detail, we still make sure that the view is not represented as the truth."

ken 21:31, 18 September 2005 (UTC)kdbuffalo

to: guettarda

I revised my last post to you. I wrote: Duncharris also admits I have been polite to him. You can go to his userpage and see for yourself.

 * Thanks for the tip; I added my comments there. KHM03 23:43, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Move request
Hi Guettarda - could you move Rosewood to Dalbergia, please? It seems that not all of the species in the genus are called 'rosewood', so it makes more sense to have the genus page at the scientific name - thanks, MPF 22:12, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Many thanks! - MPF 22:48, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Andy Ganteaume
Just to mention that I've reverted your change on this article, since there was no Trinidad and Tobago cricket team before 1962-63; for all but one match of Ganteaume's f-c career it was simply Trinidad. Loganberry (Talk) 02:18, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, I'm aware that Trinidad has been united with Tobago politically since the 19th century. However, this CricketArchive filter shows that Tobago was not used in the name of the cricket team, whichi is the important thing here, until the match in Barbados in early 1963. Loganberry (Talk) 02:28, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Gah; I forgot that CA doesn't let you save searches. But do a Scorecard Oracle for teams with "Trinidad" in the title between 1960 and 1965 and the transition will show up. Loganberry (Talk) 02:34, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Caribbean-bio-stub
...is up and running. Have fun! BTW, feel free to change the picture. I was thinking of using a sportsman, but there are no Wikipedia pictures of Brian Lara or Sir Viv, nor of your countryman Mr. Boldon. So it came to a toss-up between Marley or Castro. I though Bob would be less controversial :) Grutness...  wha?  10:28, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I made one for South American biographies at the same time, and the picture I used on that was everyone's favourite Argentinian, Che Guevara. I wonder how long that picture will stay there! :) Grutness...  wha?  13:58, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

My RfA
Thanks for participating and supporting me in my RfA, I hope I will not let you down.

P.S. Advice taken. Molotov (talk)  18:02, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Mahogany anon
Hi, the mahogany anon seems to know what they are talking about, I'm going to leave a message on for the IP that seems to be currently active, asking them to think about Wikiquette.--nixie 01:58, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

User Categorisation
You were listed on the Wikipedians/Trinidad and Tobago page as living in or being associated with Trinidad and Tobago. As part of the User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians in Trinidad and Tobago for instructions.--Rmky87 03:11, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
 * There was nothing on the page when I got there that would indicate it was being replaced. That's why I sent you the above message. The only time I just added a category to someone's userpage was when I reverted 211.30.119.181's edits to Scroogle's page.--Rmky87 03:30, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I removed the list because that is what it says at step three of User categorisation. I was going through the list, deleting each name after sending a Usercat message, when I ran into an edit conflict (which I wouldn't have if I hadn't gotten distracted by one userpage after another (it sounds ridiculous because it was ridiculous)). Technically, the proper way to notify is to stick Template:Usercat in there, save and then go through the list. Yeah, I just would think of that hours later. Anyway, I don't see how one couldn't "interact and collaborate" on the category's talkpage. Also, it is not physically impossible to categorize under "Caribbean," as well as, "Trinidad and Tobago."

P.S.: I don't know where Ianblair got the idea that: Visit the user pages listed and leave them a message on their talk page with this contents: country, where country is the country page the user was listed on and category is the new category that is replacing the list. This way, users can choose themselves whether they want to add their names to the category system or not, instead of rudely editing their user pages. Remember, you still have to sign the edit.

means, "go edit everybody's userpages with only the edit summary as an explanation." At first I thought everyone on the Australian list was just good about also categorizing themselves according to what the text under the subheader said to do. Then I took the trouble to look at someone's edit history (can't remember who off the top my head)...

Gerald Durrell
I almost protected it this morning, but it was such an involved process that I decided to wait a while and see. As long as a couple of us are watching, I think it's OK for the time being, at least. But it could be justified, with the repeated vandalism. - DavidWBrooks 17:00, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Native American (Americas)
Sure, I know it's a direct. In most cases, it was simply easier to drop the "(Americas)" in and not change the wording. Plus, I'm not sure about Indigenous Peoples of the Americas: I rather suspect it should be Indigenous peoples of the Americas and, if we decide so, it'll be a lot easier just to change one rd. (There's nothing intrinsically wrong with a one-level redirect, is there?) –Hajor 22:24, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Hi
Guettarda, thank you for responding to me with your perspective. I'm responding here to keep that page focused on content.

I am not disputing or agreeing with Nat's claims, just asking she stick to content, instead of unhelpful characterizations that do nothing to achieve that end. She must not make false accusations of attacks; I've asked her to withdraw that, as well as uncivil comments on my page. I do not take such accusations lightly, even when they are as obviously specious as hers.

I don't think Nat's long-term best interests are served by being encouraged to keep up such slamming of Coulter. It is true that people get touchy on articles like Coulters'; all the more to keep on content. I intend to encourage everyone to do that. I hope my attempt to do so was civil.

I have worked on this page to make it better. Your invitation to "find a stub" sounds like you're asking me to leave. I hope that is not what was intended. paul klenk talk 01:53, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks for your response. Someone left a message on my page right after -- I missed yours until now.  You make some good points.  However, all of us need to come together on start a boycott on the use of the word "attack" every time someone says something we don't like.  It is absolutely, positively, overblown, used by people with thin skins, and its overuse fuels further disputes.  I think all editors on the controversial and disputed political pages should come together and agree to do this.    paul klenk talk 03:42, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

geo-stub
Hi again - thought you'd like to know that Trinidad-geo-stub for Trinidad and Tobago articles is now up and running (I've also let BL Lacertae know) Grutness...  wha?  08:03, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the info about the counties - I thought it was probably to do with local government reorganisation. Several of the articles talk about them in the present tense, though, so I wasn't sure. Grutness...  wha?  10:30, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Sounds like the same situation as here in New Zealand - we still talk about the country's provinces, and the provincial names are still used for a lot of things. People still identify themselves with them too - describing thmselves as Otagoites, Southlanders, Cantabrians, etc. But as far as local government is concerned they haven't really existed for a long time. Grutness...  wha?  10:49, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Requests_for_comment/BigDaddy777
Since you have begun interacting with Bigdaddy, I thought you might be interested to know that there is now an RfC about him. User:BigDaddy777 at Requests_for_comment/BigDaddy777. This is a serious matter and some are even questioning whether an RfAr should be filed. Your comments would be appreciated. 69.121.133.154 20:23, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

RfA
Just to say thanks for supporting my RfA. Please let me know if you see me screw up anytime. --Doc (?) 19:21, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Plant ID.
Hello Guettarda, You had suggested that the plant in question was probably a ficus tree but in looking at the page on the Moraceae family the Mulberry looks more like it, although the leaf seems to have a serrated edge where the leaf on my tree has a smooth edge and is slightly thick and silky. The leaves die off as new ones appear on the ends of each stem as mentioned in the description of the Mulberry. The roots also grow above the soil ( maybe that needs changing and a bigger pot ). Did Jeffery send you the picture of what I assumed was the apical? If not can I upload it to you? I'll be checking back with you. Thanks. Bridget

Plant ID
I see my message has spread itself all over the screen... How the devil did that happen?

 * Bridget -
 * I feel pretty confident that it is a Ficus, now that I take a third look at everything. When you say "roots grow above the soil", do you mean something like [this]?  That's common in Ficus plants.  They might also put out some little roots on the underside of branches.
 * When I say "Ficus" I am not talking about the plant that every has as a houseplant - I am talking about a large genus with hundreds of distinct species. Most Ficus species have thick, often shiny, leaves.  Many of them have a milky white or yellowish sap too (but not all of them).  I can't go beyond the genus though - there are too many species, and even if I had the resources to try to ID it more specifically, I'd need to know where it's from originally.
 * The "leaf exchanging" pattern of growth could be natural, but it could also show up if the plant was not getting enough light. Trees that are in the shade will sometimes do that - if they are barely making enough energy to survive on they will sometimes use resources from an old leaf to make a new leaf.
 * The funny thing with the text happens when you leave a space at the start of a line. Guettarda 06:15, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Police Commissioner
Thanks for letting me know. I usually don't visit AFD as the page size is too large for my connection. =Nichalp  «Talk»=  13:36, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the offer. There is a country-wise deletion sorting, WikiProject Deletion sorting/India, and it used to be carried out by Vivisa. The page is on my watchlist, but its not been updated for a month now. I used to comment then and look after India-related articles after the voting period. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  14:50, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Plant ID.
Guettarda, Thank you for all of the information regarding my tree ID. I clicked on the link you gave and yes that's how the roots look. I cannot remember where this tree came from. It's been too long. The tree is in a room that gets sunshine and light from many windows, just about all day so the "leaf exchanging" pattern of growth must be natural as you explained. Again......  Thank you. Bridget

title: User talk:Guettarda/Archive7