Archives

2007

Thanks for the message on my page. I have just posted a response. Orangedolphin (talk) 00:09, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you are interested in working in collaboration with Wikipedia members on improving the article Accountancy, you will be pleased to hear that the Accountancy task force has been set up and is seeking participants who can assist with the article's overhaul. Perhaps you would like to provide verifiable content on this subject matter, in which case your input could be invaluable. Alternatively we are also seeking participants who can help with the systematic sorting of related accountancy articles into meaningful categories, an activity that does not require undertaking research but will nonetheless help improve the quality of the article's links. Either way, the task force would like to hear from you!--Gavin Collins (talk) 16:55, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I can't help with "accountancy". I have some good books and sources on accounting, but the term accountancy is off my beaten path. Good luck with your project! --Foggy Morning (talk) 01:26, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you have access to a university library, let me know if you come accross the following:

• Previts, G. J, and Merino, B. D. A History of Accountancy in the United States: The Cultural Significance of Accounting. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1998.
• Miranti, Paul J. Jr. Accountancy Comes of Age: The Development of an American Profession, 1886-1940. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1990

One or both of these books may help explain the origin of the term. --Gavin Collins (talk) 13:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, sorry but I can't help you. Good luck with your project. --Foggy Morning (talk) 02:05, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Foggy Morning

I have created a company box and added a logo for Keefe, Bruyette and Woods. May you check if everything is OK with it. Thanks a lot!

Lamro —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lamro (talk • contribs) 09:37, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on the book, really. If it's considered an accurate/reliable source of information, then I don't see a problem with the author adding it in; if it's considered original research, then remove it, or at least cite from it in a section other than the lead. This might be helpful. · AndonicO ^Hail! 15:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Herbou is back, as you noted originally as an IP address (easily tracked to portugal). I seem to have got him to at least log in, we will see how the rest works out.--Gregalton (talk) 15:59, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Foggy Morning

There is an article about a law firm. Three links lead to the text. I have occasionally created a mess.

• Cadwalader, Wickersham and Taft
• Cadwalader, Wickersham &Taft
• Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft

The third spelling is a right one. May you correct the links and the name of the article?

Best regards, Lamro (talk) 11:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. When any editor removes a {{prod}} tag from an article, it cannot be re-added (per the proposed deletion policy). WP:PROD says "If anyone, including the article's creator, removes Template:Prod from an article for any reason, do not put it back, except if the removal was clearly not an objection to deletion." It also says "If you still believe the article needs to be deleted, list it on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion." You can see how to do that here. Thank you. --Pixelface (talk) 03:21, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What article are you talking about? --Foggy Morning (talk) 03:27, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the Addams Family (Game Gear) article, you added a prod, I removed it, and then you re-added it. After someone removes a prod, the article should be taken to AFD if you still think it should be deleted. --Pixelface (talk) 03:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining. Both articles are unsourced. I'm not clear on why you deleted the prod on an unsourced article without providing sources, then suggested in the edit summary that it might be merged, but didn't put a merge tag on it. I have no desire to prod and AfD every unsourced article in Wiki, but that one has been unsourced for a long time, so I prodded it. Do you have sources? --Foggy Morning (talk) 03:46, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was an Addams Family videogame released for several platforms[1] — Amstrad CPC, Amiga, Atari ST, Commodore 64, Game Boy, Game Gear (which the article in question is about), Genesis, NES, Sega Master System, SNES, ZX Spectrum, and arcade — and I'm sure it received coverage in the gaming press. They should all probably be mentioned on one page, The Addams Family (video game) (although at the moment, the article The Addams Family (arcade game) looks like the better article). I've gone ahead and merged the content from Addams Family (Game Gear) into The Addams Family (video game) and turned Addams Family (Game Gear) into a redirect. --Pixelface (talk) 08:40, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Consolidation sounds like a good idea -- thanks for working on that. If you know of coverage in the gaming press, it would help if you added the citations to the articles. Without the citations, the information can't be verified. Sooner or later it'll be deleted if it's not clearly sourced. Good luck and thanks for your patience! :) --Foggy Morning (talk) 23:52, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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) 17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]