Hi Amcbride! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 05:43, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Allen, thanks for your note. I've looked at the history and where I wrote "rv to 02:29 December 21" I meant to write "rv to 02:59" i.e. the last version by 70.248.252.11. I can't see anything the anons added that should have been kept, unless you mean these quotes [1] at least some of which I believe are already on the page. But you're certainly welcome to add any that aren't if you can find full citations, and also make sure the person is still involved with PETA, or at least was until recently. One of the quotes from an outreach person is from 16 years ago, which I'd say wouldn't be appropriate to include unless she's still involved. There are some Ingrid Newkirk quotes here you might want to look at, though I see they're mostly unreferenced. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 22:32, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See here [2] for Gores support of the Iraq invasion which includes such quotes as going alone in the war;

"We know that Saddam has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power...We have a goal of regime change in Iraq, we have had for a number of years. We also have a clear goal of victory in the war against terror. In the case of Iraq, it would be difficult to go it alone, but it's theoretically possible to achieve our goals in Iraq unilaterall."

Gore did go very anti-Iraq following the failure of finding WMD's.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.185.46.78 (talk • contribs)

Thanks very much for this comment. See User_talk:67.185.46.78 for my response. --Allen 06:45, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Allen. Thank you for your positive comment. One thing I think Wikipedia suffers from is a lack of recognition of article writers, so your comment is appreciated. I'll look to spread the positive Karma to someone else...Jrbouldin 00:00, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sceptre/RfA

No, no need to apologize! I'm happy to help. But, good. Feel free to ask me any other questions you may have. Thanks.--Sean|Black 07:04, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The unregistered user who added the extra digits to π was not just ignoring the comment about using the Talk page before adding digits, but in fact added random digits having nothing to do with π. Thought you'd like to know. --Macrakis 15:02, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

128.111.95.210hi allen thanks for your welcome. I am learning. Please explain what 'revert' means and who does it. Also I notice that some articles I edit are packed from stem to stern with self-serving points of view by those the subject of such articles. Is POV by ommission ever disciplined here? For example the Mennonite people have a long history of banning, shunning, and shaming those who fail to conform going back hundreds of years yet there is little such mention in their wikipedia history. A quick glance at any good secular history on the Mennonites shows such POV by ommission. How do I combat POV by ommision that without becoming a POV target myself and without having to fight tooth and nail against the Mennonite gang to include each uncomfortable but legitimate word here.?

Thanks for your note! My response is here, on your talk page. --Allen 05:41, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Allen. The POV response helped me a lot. By discipline I meant a code of conduct and people who call character assassination here etc. To me discipline and standards are quite friendly because they eliminate the Hobbesian hate. I will also see what I can do to get a name so i can find myself here! Thanks again you play an important role. 128.111.95.210 06:10, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I write briefly just to pass along my thanks for your recent edits; though small, they surely helped further a neutral tone in the article, something for which the article has been sorely lacking. Most notably, though, I write apropos of your talk page post about having inadvertently confused NPOV and POV; even as you confused the two phrases, your edits still better depicted neutrality than most that have been made to the article (by those who know, or ought to know, the difference). Cordially, Joe 22:13, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Joe! --Allen 22:20, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please check edits by this guy? His other activity here is spam or grafitti but I am not knowledgeable enough to do a complete revert. TIA Pavel Vozenilek 05:15, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Hello Amcbride, and thank you for your support in my request for adminship! It passed with a final count of 63/4/3. I am honoured by the community support and pledge to serve the project as best as I can. CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 16:39, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a section to the talk page to see if we can get a consensus on what the paragraph should say. If enough of us then are satisfied, we can avoid endless debates with proponents of one view or another, revert with a polite reference to the discussion and be done with it. Everyone is invited to come. --CTSWyneken 14:46, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So does that mean you do not support the possible changes to the alst sentence being discussed below? Just trying to determine where the consensus lies. Thanks.Gator (talk) 15:59, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for all of the confusion, I've withdrawn my proposal, so if you are OK with the proposed paragraph at the top, please feel free to vote accept. Thanks and I apologize again for all of the confusion.Gator (talk) 19:53, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment, it gave me a real laugh. Crypticfirefly 05:42, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Hello Amcbride, and thank you for your support in my request for adminship! It passed with a final count of 98/2/0. If there is anything I can do to help you, please leave me a message on my talk page! -- xaosflux Talk This can go on for ever The edits which have been aged on the discussion page are immediately removed when they are posted. You have evidently violated the implicit terms of confidentiality expected from a Wiki administrator and broadcast the name of a person who wrote you all over the site. When your request that the interchange be moved to the discussion page was honored, you then faded away. And now you are acting as if you are paid to suppress important truths about a company which may be engaging in dubious behavior. The facts about USAA are going to come out: now, you have made your actions part of the story. Do you have any solution in mind?