Hello, Mwalcoff. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Max Weber83 (talk) 00:07, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For earlier discussions, see User talk:Mwalcoff/Archive 1.

I agree with your comments regarding the need for still another major overhaul. Yours, Famspear 05:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Our discussion is not having (for me) anything with Israel attack but only with preemptive war (it is not important which state make preemptive war) which is against international law. You will not find lawyer who can support in the independent court and win case of preemptive war against UN rules Rjecina 7:28, 28 march 2007 (CET)

Now you make mistake. In UN there is 192 countries. Of that number only U.S and Israel think that preempitive war is OK under law. Wikipedia need to add this to article and I will fight for that. It will not be surprise for you that all polls in Europe (not to say other part of world) show that this 2 states which support preemptive war are more dangerous for world peace of Iran (for example). In last year poll number 1 for must dangerous state for world peace has been together U.S.A and North Korea. Israel has been "only" number 3. Rjecina 19:28, 30 march 2007 (CET)

I am now really tired. My only edit in Six-Day war are words of Dayan. All writen on discussion page is for discussion not for article. My point is that I can write what I want on discussion page (NPOW all any other) because we are free to exchange thinking so that article latter can become better (if changes from discussion are OK). Now if you have something against words of Israel minister of defence in wartime which is speaking latter why war is started I want to hear it if not I really do not understand where is problem (discussion page is never problem)? Rjecina 1:44, 31 march 2007 (CET)

Hi, thanks for the complements. I know the colours are similar between the ADQ and the PQ, but that can't be avoided. Yellow is not one of their colours! As for the number of colours, I don't plan on changing it. The map is meant to show the % each party got, and 2 colours defeats the purpose. If anything, more colours are warranted because some ridings were +70% and +80%. If you want to see what more colours look like, check out my maps at Ottawa South. I think they tell a better story than what 2 colours look like. -- Earl Andrew - talk 00:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they are trying to delete a category of Jewish athletes again. This time, figure skaters. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_April_14#Category:Jewish_figure_skaters . I pointed out to the originator of the attempt that we had addressed this general issue already with the main category and with Jewish fencers, where the attempts failed (due in part to your help). Still, they insist on trying to delete this category. Any help by your weighing in on the issue would be appreciated. Thanks again. --Epeefleche 00:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC)--Epeefleche 20:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for your help. --(Aytakin) | Talk 21:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

whether I am allowed to contact people with regard to a delete review discussion, where they voted on the original vote? Thanks --Epeefleche 20:39, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that just proves I should pay a bit more attention now doesn't it? lol, thanks for reverting my mistake. Happy editing! Jmlk17 03:18, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mwalcoff,

I am sorry if I offended you. However, some of your suggestions were not correct. RS

Thank you for being a voice of reason on Talk:Atheism. I've been editing Wikipedia for two years, and I have never felt nearly as frustrated as I have felt in this dispute. I find it quite ironic that some of these supposed freethinkers are more fundamentalist and dogmatic than anyone else I've dealt with here. -- Mwalcoff 23:25, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the nice note. Yeah, it would be nice if everyone could stay level-headed all the time. My guess is that articles such as Athiesm and Charles Darwin (another I keep an eye on) have a lot of stressed editors because they are constant under a barrage of POV edits from both sides. Hopefully a nice consensus will emerge on the demographics section soon... Cheers, Debivort 02:47, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...on my talk page... --Parzival418 _Hello 06:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would just like to applaud your defence of reason and NPOV on the atheism article. Its people like you that keep wwikipedia from becoming some left-wing blog. Warfwar3 16:09, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, there really is such a thing as a one-point safety on a PAT in college football. I doubt it could happen in the NFL because the ball is dead as soon as team B gains possession, but in college football, it can happen. It actually happened recently in a Texas-Texas A&M game ... 2004 I think. Texas's kicker whiffed on the PAT and basically just pushed it forward and it rolled under the line. An A&M lineman recovered the ball and retreated into his own endzone where he was tackled. Texas received one point. --BigΔT 22:49, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While my Holocaust-scholar/publicist's hackles rise at queries of the "who'z-a-Jew" sort on the various RDs, I appreciate your reasoned response (that followed my own attempt) today. It fits my WP-inclusionist inclination, much as I suspect the OP got better than s/he deserved. Hang in there! -- Cheers, Deborahjay 01:03, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like your opinion on the discussion progress, and in particular the analysis (with third-party help) results. I shall meantime hold off further 'editing' pending your response, though I feel we should have a wider range of outside opinion to draw on. Dominique 22:45, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree entirely -- I'd rather have a picture of the cover on the article, most likely the current one, however, those seem to keep getting deleted, too. (see the history of the page) I figured I would try the 1978 Cheryl Tiegs picture, as considering it led to some controversy, I felt it may have been topical enough to warrant inclusion. I guess everyone will only be happy when we don't have any pictures in this article, which, to some, defeats the purpose of having the article at all... User:RHolecko 20:24, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well whoever has deleted cover pictures didn't give much of a rationale. There is a reluctance to use fair-use magazine covers on stories about people or events, but there shouldn't be much controversy over using a cover picture for an article about the magazine itself. You might want to try putting a cover photo back up and launch a discussion on the talk page if it's deleted again. -- Mwalcoff 23:24, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The correct word/spelling is not "Centre," but "Center."

Yours truly, --Ludvikus 14:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes! I accidentally brought a lot of dead people back to life with my big deletion. Thank you for catching the problem edit quickly and fixing it. I'll be more careful in the future... Que-Can 01:33, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Video game content rating system - Is this what you were looking for, friend? If not, perhaps you could look through here: [1]? Hope this helps! Scarian^Talk 00:00, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any idea what games they were for example? With 2 million articles it might take me a very long time to shift through all of them. Hehe, any extra clues that you remember to narrow it down, buddy? Scarian^Talk 00:03, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't see what the numbers referred to, so I deleted all three edits you made on December 10. Hope that works for you. SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 02:15, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First, don't try to speak Spanish if you can't. On the other hand, I don't have the faintest need for your advice about making friends and tolerating religious nonsense. No, I do not tolerate stupidity, if that's what you wanted to hear. Now I'm deleting your comment in my user page and don't expect me to reply back, my time is too valuable to be wasted this way. --Taraborn (talk) 08:13, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please have a look at my question for you at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities#Mistakes_in_Holy_Books_and_Proving_Religions_False. Thanks.--Pharos (talk) 05:42, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied to your "informative" answer in the Miscellaneous reference desk. Please, keep in mind that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, so, for the good of the RD, try to cite your sources in those cases (if they do exist). --Taraborn (talk) 19:33, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[2] I like the compromise... good job! Jmlk17 05:26, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya. I'm a bit mystified here. The revision history of the template indicates just one editor, who was not you (unless it's an alternate account?). Hence my G7 deletion is totally in process and guideline, and I really can't see why you've taken it to DRV. If you want it back just ask - I'd be more than happy to restore it. You may or may not be aware, but DRV guidleines recommend you discuss with the deleting admin before taking it to that page. Let me know - I'm happy to help! Pedro :  Chat  21:43, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sardanaphalus Created it according to the logs (unless it was created, moved, and selectively deleted?). Any how, if you're happy I'm happy and if you need any help please feel free to ask - sorry I couldn't be more useful this time round. Pedro :  Chat  21:56, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

60th — with appreciation for your contributions on the Humanities Reference Desk. Considering how tough all this can be and usually is, fellow editors are greatly valued, so please accept this acknowledgement and be encouraged. -- Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 12:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could my suggestion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) reduce your concern? --Kevin Murray (talk) 16:36, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Loc35.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Adambro (talk) 22:15, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on User:Mwalcoff/Test2, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because User:Mwalcoff/Test2 is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting User:Mwalcoff/Test2, please affix the template {{hangon}} 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) 16:41, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 4 August, 2008, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, which you nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

-- tariqabjotu 15:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had just started importing stuff from WP:WORDS and jargon when I got called away. That stuff you removed shouldn't be in the lead section. I am going to make a proposal tomorrow at WT:WIAGA that might make that stuff relevant further down on the page. Join us. (Normally I watchlist, but I'm not watchlisting any new pages until after the WP:V0.7 deadline on Oct 20.) - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 01:23, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Political ideas are one thing, sociological strategy another. B' s politics look reactionary to us, but he was also something of a social revolutionary. It also could be argued that the SPD and the very strong worker' s movement was the 2nd or even 1st reason for the Bismarkian reforms. Also his sums were tiny compared to ours. The same with the German Democratic Republic. If workers in evil capitalist BRD had to depend on DDR social securities all hell would definitely break out here. I don' t know or care about Obama' s socialism. I also think the money guys are thieving scum, worse Bolschewiks that the genuine stuff, but this does not change the fact that your and sadly our socialism has to be paid for. So you have to take the money from a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h and give it to i, j, k, l, m, n, o to x, y, z. A and B and C find ways not to pay and so it is the middle classes who pay for it all. This only works for so long, like the Soviet Union, then it goes kaputt. West Germany of course is the World leading expert in "Rob Thy Neighbor" (Exportweltmeister), so you all pay for our welfare system, which has ruined half of german local industries (textiles to steel) in the last 40 years. And our new beautiful welfare world incidently includes half of Anatolia. All nice people, all way better off down and out in Berlin than in Diarbakir (probably not spelled correctly). I live with them in Wedding, I can' t say many bad words about them,it is nice that Turkey is made richer with their savings, but all this has to be paid for and it is paid for by somebody else- in part because our "socialism" has destroyed their chance and the chances of german unskilled labour to work. --Radh (talk) 08:03, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This user is a Reference desk regular.

The box to the right is the newly created userbox for all RefDesk regulars. Since you are an RD regular, you are receiving this notice to remind you to put this box on your userpage! (but when you do, don't include the |no. Just say {{WP:RD regulars/box}} ) This adds you to Category:RD regulars, which is a must. So please, add it. Don't worry, no more spam after this - just check WP:RDREG for updates, news, etc. flaminglawyer^c 21:41, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I left a comment at Template talk:In the news#Tally, just to let you know. Spencer^T♦C 22:32, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:100 0611 (Small).jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia: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. Thank you. JaGa^talk 07:11, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On 25 May, 2009, In the news was updated with facts that involved the articles 2009 Monaco Grand Prix, and 2009 Indianapolis 500, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 05:09, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Autoblock #1500080 lifted or expired. Request handled by: PeterSymonds (talk) 18:40, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply] Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

On 23 July, 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2009 Open Championship, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 11:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 July, 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Perfect game, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 03:28, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The Reference Desk Barnstar
		Thanks for answering my To Catch A Predator question on the Humanities Reference desk! --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 20:01, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On 20 January 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article United States Senate special election in Massachusetts, 2010, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--Jehochman ^Brrr 11:34, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 January 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 14:02, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm guessing that you didn't intend to remove my comment here? (It's not that important - I was trying to squelch what looked like a troll, but others have fed it anyway). --ColinFine (talk) 08:27, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On 29 January 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Ben Bernanke, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 09:58, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you hit a game-winning home run in the last of the ninth, would it be reasonable to call it a Mwalcoff homer? :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:47, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On 1 March 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Ice hockey at the 2010 Winter Olympics – Men's tournament, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

-- tariqabjotu 11:22, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On 10 April 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article New START, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:21, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to thank you for trying to bring common sense to ITN. There's a long-running history of posting obscure stories while ignoring ones everyone talks about (see Kennedy, Ted). If more people like us got involved, we can change things up. ~DC _{Talk To Me} 07:50, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You should be thankful, otherwise he is know have banned user who disagree with his side of story. [3] was just a minor example. you may find some more example [4] A friend. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.121.176.229 (talk) 08:22, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I totally thought that was on the Unusual Articles page, not the Unusual Place Names page. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 00:12, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 05:05, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they did lose much of their territory; the remainder was carved into two states, one a communist dictatorship, with a death strip at the border; they had no self-government at all for four years; they were supposed to pay $20 billion in reparations; thousands of foreign troops were stationed there; and millions of Germans got kicked out of their homes in Central and Eastern Europe. Not that they didn't deserve it.

I assume by that last sentence you were ironically critisizing what someone else said. Or were you?--92.251.158.103 (talk) 23:40, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mwalcoff. I removed a subthread including one of your posts diff, because it was started by blocked Sockpuppet of a banned editor, while adding nothing to the question (and, personally, I found the sockpuppet's post puerile and offensive). If you feel it is worth restoring, I won't remove it again. ---Sluzzelin talk 23:19, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 04:07, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

-- tariqabjotu 03:55, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Saw your edit but beg to differ; the level of municipal services differs greatly; it's only zoning and building permits but does not extend to things like water rights, roads, courts, schools and other things which are defined by countyhood in the US; regional districts are very pointedly weak and highly undemocratic in nature, and services and powers associated with counties in the US are run by provincial-level ministries and agencies which have different jurisdictional boundaries and are, ultimately, far more powerful than RDs; whatever the wording that results, the differences are greater than the similarities; your reverted/current wording obscures this....Skookum1 (talk) 05:09, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm bringing this up here rather than on the talk page, because it's only about you making a small mistake, rather than about ref desk policy or something that has to be dealt with as a group.

In bringing up the discussion of Flamarande's answer on the talk page, you forgot to link the question/edit/diffs, and you forgot to notify Flamarande. This is a small thing, and we all forget: I'm just reminding you for future occasions. I have notified Flamarande of the discussion, so you don't need to now. 86.164.144.120 (talk) 21:11, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I wrote the article. Few user who are native English speakers helped me. I asked for GA review, nobody said that article still is not OK (regarding English). I don't know what is English term for this. We call it Majski prevrat. Coup we translate as (državni) udar. -- Bojan  Talk  07:11, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't fine any English source that deals with this topic in details - all are in Serbian. You can rename, article I would not object. I am only interest to get this article perfect 'cause this event was one of catalysts for WWI. -- Bojan  Talk  03:12, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I used to like that site a lot! Some of the researchers were very nice and very smart. Did any of them make it over here?--Voluptuous Nature (talk) 03:00, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for removing a troll's question, and for reporting it at Wikipedia talk:Reference desk. I have added a comment to your new thread.

Here are some examples of other questions posted from the same IP 88.104.xx.yy and promptly deleted by virtue of DNFT:diff 1, diff 2, diff 3, diff 4 Dolphin (t) 07:14, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

JSYK - Wikipedia:U.S. Wikipedians' notice board/USCOTM has risen from the grave.....you could now nominate Jim Brown (finally) or vote/comment on some other choices. :) cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:20, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I (hopefully) answered your question over at the reference desk, but it's been transcluded already so it might not appear on your watchlist. Regards, Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 00:27, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Mwalcoff. At some time you added this piece of information. Don't you remember where it is taken from? In particular, I'm speaking about the first paragraph, since I want to make use thereof for a well-referenced Ukrainian article. Thank you, --Microcell (talk) 17:51, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You made a good faith answer to a question from a regular and well-known troll at WP:RDM. I have removed the question to prevent further disruption, but I do earnestly apologize for also having to remove your good-faith answer to the question. I have started a discussion at WT:RD since this is for some reason always contentious. Feel free to comment there. --Jayron32 22:36, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--Jayron32 14:01, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Elsewhere Mwalcoff wrote,

Fifelfoo, I wish we were having a face-to-face conversation because what you're writing reads like a foreign language to me -- "bull pen" (the wikilink goes to the baseball term), "false courtesy," "disconnected with the actual work," "casual loading," etc. I understand what you're saying about Australian labor law but that notwithstanding, I still don't see how someone voluntarily taking a position that requires little education but can bring in oodles of cash can be exploitative, unless it's like exotic dancing or something. I trust your sincerity but perhaps we should continue this conversation on user talk pages, although I'm about to be away from my computer for a couple of days.

Wotcher, I thought I'd bring it here. It would be easier with a face to face conversation too, I think I'm writing with far too much Australian short hand. I've edited together something approaching bull pen (unless it gets moved by the wikipowers that be before you check it). "False courtesy" relates to Australian expectations of interpersonal authenticity: "You old bastard" or "You f* c*" can be terms of great endearment, "Sure thing mate" can be a signal of impending assault (see "I'm not your pal, buddy, I'm not your buddy, pal." from Catch-22). The idea for Australians is that the actual work is moving plates, only possibly taking an order (you order at the counter half the time): courtesy and pleasantry, efficiency of service in terms of speed, and other factors aren't considered to be central to the "job" of waitstaffing? One example, I was at a locals-only pub I didn't know, and where they didn't know me, but I looked and drank like a local. The bartender called me "darling" and "sweety" which was a test to see what kind of person I was. I had to wait a fair bit for the drinks too. But in the service context, this meant that she was treating me as a member of the pub's community, which included an implicit expectation that she was a social person at work. Bludging, the Australian habit of not-working while in paid employment (largely eliminated in the 1980s and 1990s), goes back to this concept. My bartender only had to pour a competent beer, if she liked me and I liked her, we could have some other kind of relationship (as acquaintances), but there wasn't the expectation of cheerfulness or servility that comes across in US discussions of waitstaff. If I had forced her into a servile position, I would feel shame—waiting five minutes for a beer in a pub full of people I liked was better than being in a pub full of people I didn't like. "Casual loading" refers to a payment given to Australian workers to make up for the absence of expected industrial entitlements, and to force employers to hire permanent staff. So as a permanent I get sick leave and holidays. As a casual I get 20-25% more money than a permanent to make up for missing sick leave and holidays. I guess for the Australian the idea of a waitstaff who is obliged to display servility (and taking "tips" is servile to the Australian mind), it a shameful occupation. In contrast (in Australia, where both are legal, and there's a nascent trade union) exotic dancers and prostitutes have decent well paid jobs that aren't reliant on tips. The shame, and the servility, seem to inhere in the individual payment for repeated small services; whereas, in Australia, hourly work is viewed as admirable. Australia doesn't have the same idea of small business success that happens in the US, and even successful construction contractors (plumbers, roofers, etc) are normally viewed as "self-employed workers" rather than small business owners. I hope this helps unpack some of the Australian complexes about appropriate work, servility, and when it is acceptable for your waiter to smile at you :) Fifelfoo (talk) 03:53, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:16, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:28fe.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. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:23, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I'm a bit indifferent in having the scores on there. Originally, I was all for the scores being on there but now I'm not too sure of where I stand. As a Giants fan [feel free to mock if you wish, haha!], I do like my NFL and I don't mind seeing the scores...However, I also feel the main portal being overblown with all the championships that are listed there. Four times this year alone has the portal been in excess of 300,000 bytes. I just think that from next month onwards [boy, does it feel odd that 2012 isn't too far away], we have to be more selective in what goes in or out. It's that or segregated portals, which may not be popular either. Damned if we do, damned if we don't! Craig(talk) 00:10, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When put like that, it sounds pretty adequate if I'm honest. I definitely agree that some of the obscurer events can go...it would be good to get some guidelines drawn up for the portal, so we can see what events can be posted and what other ones can not. Craig(talk) 04:14, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. I know this happened just recently but no administrator would close these frequent rm's down, so here we go again. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:05, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your upload of File:Bc2005-3.png or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 13:01, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dead Man's Curve 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dead Man's Curve 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. TrueCRaysball | ^#RaysUp 23:58, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You participated in a Burma RM in the past so I'm informing you of another RM. I hope I didn't miss anyone. New move attempt of Burma>Myanmar Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:48, 7 August 2015 (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) 12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of places in the United States named after other places in the United States. Since you had some involvement with the List of places in the United States named after other places in the United States redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 21:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]