User talk:AmandaNP/Archives/2010/June

This is an archive of past discussions with User:AmandaNP. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I have nominated Category:E-mail servers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. PleaseStand ^(talk) 02:12, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I could train you, but not for next couple of weeks as I have various real-life obligations to undertake. And I won't go on IRC because it's a hotbed for counterproductive drama so my preference would be over msn. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 20:52, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok, let me know when it is a good time, I will email you my MSN soon. -- /DeltaQuad.alt|Notify Me\ 15:32, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi MWOAP, I have made a proposal at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Star Trek#Proposal and thought you might be interested. Thanks, --Alpha Quadrant (talk) 20:18, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

 Working Looking into. -- /DeltaQuad.alt|Notify Me\ 15:32, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi MWOAP, I just wanted to tell you I like the vandalism defcon box you made and that I am using it on my userpage. --Alpha Quadrant (talk) 23:57, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. -- /DeltaQuad.alt|Notify Me\ 15:32, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi MWOAP,

I've recently returned from a fairly lengthy wikibreak, and while I am refreshed and once again in the mood to edit, I'm afraid I just don't have the enthusiasm or patience left to continue admin coaching my current students. I've enjoyed working with you recently, and I'd still be happy to answer any specific questions you may have, but I'm afraid I just can't be an effective mentor for the time being.

Obviously this isn't a reflection on you or your efforts so far. I wish you the best of luck should you run for RfA in the future.

Regards,

Juliancolton (talk) 19:51, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I think I will just wait another while till a nomination comes along. -- /DeltaQuad.alt|Notify Me\ 15:32, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi MWOAP! Thanks for your lovely welcome on my user page. As well as hoping you might have time to cast an eye over the copyedit work I have carried out since joining I would also like to know how it is possible to know how to know when a message I have placed on someone elses talk page is responded to? Do I have to elect to watch the page? If so, then please let me know on my user page as I have NOT elected to watch your page. --SciHound (talk) 11:12, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

 Working Looking into. Usually, like I will right now, I will put a talkback notice using WP:Twinkle on your talkpage. -- /DeltaQuad.alt|Notify Me\ 15:32, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I noticed ClueBot reverted one of MWOAPBot's edits as possible vandalism and gave a "Warning #1". mechamind90 21:02, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Nope, this is just a problem with my bot. -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 19:31, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi - Have you noticed your bot triggering this edit filter?  7  23:29, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Ya, just not sure where to ask to get that to stop tagging. -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 23:34, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Looks like it will clear up when the Bot is fully approved.  7  23:54, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}

Resolved

 – by DeltaQuad

You have an old version of AWBUpdater (2.0.0.6). Current version is 2.0.0.7. Go to http://toolserver.org/~awb/snapshots/ and download a new version of AWB along with a new updater and make a clean install, please. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 23:39, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Will do. -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 12:59, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}

Resolved

 – by DeltaQuad

Thanks for pointing me in the right direction to upload an image to Wikipedia to have it placed in the oceans page. Thanks! :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.114.128.183 (talk) 03:12, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

No Problem. -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 13:00, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}

Resolved

 – by DeltaQuad

Thanks for the response. I have posted this argument on society sports and culture, WP:Football and asked for neutral editors opinion. Replies from the society have agreed with the fact that the section is overweight and the proposal was along the right lines. Where do I go from here. The article and section really needs neutral editors (editors who have never really edited the page before) to look over it and give strong opinions about which way to go. Thanks for any advice and guidance in advance.(Monkeymanman (talk) 20:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC))

I just saw that this user was on ANI regrading disruptive edits. If you get a 1 or 2 users siding with you, and no opposes, then I would say change it back. -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 20:36, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

He is asking me to revert the section back to the way it was before he was blocked. Another user shrunk a statement within the section due to recentism and undue weight (aswell as the fact that it had its own article) it was not opposed and he immediately tried to revert the article after unblock. Even if another 2 or 3 users said that the section should be condensed he would still argue that it is necessary to keep it as full as possible. How do I get neutral editors to engage in strong discussion with this. Do I need to open mediation and how do I go about it. Thanks again(Monkeymanman (talk) 20:49, 15 June 2010 (UTC))

Ok, not quite sure what you are saying right now. First if you haven't already, take it to a noticeboard. If that fails, go for Informal Mediation. That first one will allow non-involved users to comment. -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 22:44, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}

Resolved

 – by DeltaQuad

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}

Resolved

 – by DeltaQuad

Can this GA review be completed in the next day or two? Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 04:27, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

I probally should have noted this on the review. I currently can't finish it as I said on the nominators talkpage. I am currently in exam period so I might be able to have finished in a few days, but not just one or two. -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 14:03, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

 Working -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 00:04, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done Another user took over. -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 02:24, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}

Resolved

 – by DeltaQuad

reference on Mielke talk page, thanksSartoresartus (talk) 05:12, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 00:04, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}

Resolved

 – by DeltaQuad

Just a note, the correct location for Articles for Creation submissions is on the project talk page. I'm messaging you about this because of this move. Anyway, cya around! Netalarm^talk 23:48, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh, ya, I was probally do that a little to fast. I will keep my eye out for that. -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 00:04, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}

Resolved

 – by DeltaQuad

I have replied to your comment. - 98.92.57.226 (talk) 13:55, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 02:24, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}

Resolved

 – by DeltaQuad

Please be careful to note external links in an article before tagging it with a BLPPROD. That tag is only if there are no references at all in the article). Thanks! Hobit (talk) 02:54, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Duly Noted. -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 02:24, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}

Resolved

 – by DeltaQuad

Thank you very much for your contribution to my Rfa. I have made a comment about it at User talk:JamesBWatson#Your Request for Adminship which you are, of course, very welcome to read if you wish to. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:54, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}

Resolved

 – by DeltaQuad

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}

Resolved

 – by DeltaQuad

(Loreensherman (talk) 20:39, 22 June 2010 (UTC)).Thank you for your review of the submission on the article "Four Tests Formulaic Communication Passes in Economics" and stated that you "can't totally tell what you are trying to communicate her[e]". Therefore, to assist you I wonder if, the forces affecting economics are understood. Is this what I need to clarify? Or do you want more clarification on the point that all four tests confirm the significance of Formulaic Communication. To me, the article clearly proved that there are four key economic forces that affect today's market that in The Industrial Age were defined differently. This difference in the foundation of thought and knowledge has led to a paradigm shift. I wonder if this shift is what is not understood in the article. Could you offer more specific feedback. I feel that this explanation offers the clarity you are looking for and if I include it in resubmitting the article if it would meet the criteria expected in the Wikipedia submissions. Please advise me on how to proceed and what else may be required. Thanks for your timeliness and consideration. Loreen Sherman. Loreensherman (talk) 20:39, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Resolved on UTP. -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 16:27, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}

Resolved

 – by DeltaQuad

Living? A new world record! 1846 to, uh, 2010 is a longggggggg time. —fetch·comms 21:40, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

My bad. Didn't read it good enough. -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 16:27, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}

Resolved

 – by DeltaQuad

• Please check your email for incoming. It's just a reminder, thanx Mlpearc pull my chain 'Tribs 04:49, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done and responded via IRC. -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 22:17, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello, AmandaNP. You have new messages at Acather96's talk page.
Message added 15:57, 28 June 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.