This is an archive of past discussions. 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.
It is my pleasure to announce that I would like to nominate you for the bureaucrat position here, as well as the checkuser flag. Please give me a holler on my talk page if you either accept or decline one or both of my nominations. Thanks, Razorflame17:05, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hey TRM, I just wanted to check one thing. Per WMF, you need to be >18, of legal age in your jurisdiction, and willing to provide identifying info. [1] I don't know where you're from, so just wanted to make sure you're a legal adult in your country or state (for example, in many Canadian provinces the legal age is 19). Thanks! EhJJTALK17:59, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sure thing. I'm actually going to be 34 soon so I guess I just about scrape by that test! And I'm in the UK so our legal age is 18, just for clarification on that as well... Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:01, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not really. Federally you're an adult (can vote in Federal elections, join army, own gun, etc.), but provincially you can't (i.e. cannot: sign contract, open bank account, vote in Provincial election, buy alcohol or cigarettes, gamble.) It's a weird system in that way. EhJJTALK18:10, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Bad luck Canadians..., better than the States though in that respect I guess. Perhaps that's why so many Americans head to Mexico for Spring Break... The Rambling Man (talk) 18:07, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know, but I hate it when people break our drinking age of 21. I personally like the drinking age where it is, just some teen make bad choices I guess.-- †CM1618:11, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to make sure that people knew about your contributions that you made on TRMOT so that they knew why there was a big gap in your contributions here. Cheers, Razorflame18:27, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, appreciated RF. I was surprised to see how many contributions I'd made, how many pages I'd deleted and how many people I'd blocked as well.... Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:28, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Recently you created many articles, one of which (I only looked at one so far) was not attributed to en.wiki, though the lead sentence is the exact same, infobox, etc. Could you give more care to this in the future please? Synergy20:48, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Rambling Man has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as The Rambling Man's day!
For being such a great wikipedian and kind person,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear The Rambling Man!
Ello. :) I was wondering about something. I use the English Wikipedia as reference for the article that I'm creating here on seWP. Let's just say that I'm working on Sylvester Stallone's article. Should I put the
Hello TRM, I don't know if you have noticed (I'm sure you will have), but Vector has made you a Bureaucrat after a successful RFB: Grats, I'm sure someone will give you one of those T-Shirts :)Kennedy (talk) 11:00, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations and well done for passing your RfCU and RfB (I'll just do the one congrats rather than two seperate ones) :) fr33kmantalk13:05, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello TRM, I am your closing crat. I suggest you apply to be granted the flag. Official tally: 24 25 support, 3 oppose votes (89%). I did not vote, as I was the closing crat. Congratulations. :) --Eptalon (talk) 11:16, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Majorly, thanks for your help. Eptalon, thanks for being brave enough to close it out only 17 hours late....! Who says we don't need another 'crat??! Barras, Julian, AE, thanks for your kind words...! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:41, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the preserved discussion on my Talk Page.
I may well be approaching it in the wrong category. The notability of this article has to do with the rapidly growing Wicca religion having a public entity advancing its beliefs. This is new for Wicca. Maybe I have titled the article wrongly. People keep bashing this issue around but the debate has centred on a musical band and not the fact that there is a music project done by some Wicca priests which significantly advances the concept of Wicca and gives Wicca greater notability and acceptance. We are talking about a religion wherein women who practiced homeopathy and herbal remedies were burned at the stake. Today a musical ensemble promotes Wicca openly for what it is: a nature based pagan religion. That's notable. There are no Wiccan Churches, Popes, Annual General Meetings; Ecclesiastical Conferences but there is a Music Band that promotes Wicca openly, widely, and in many different ways. Katie alsop (talk) 17:25, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a section (that I started to simplify). It explains how CB can also result from damage to certain areas of the brain. Probably the info further down needs to be consolidated. And of course needs simplifying, and creating two articles. --Eptalon (talk) 21:28, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(E/C)Happy Birthday =). Kind regards, and have a great day.
Yotcmdr=talk to the commander= has given you a WikiCake! This WikiCake promotes WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a gift, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Spread the WikiLove by adding {{subst:Gift}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Happy Birthday! And thanks for closing my RfA as successful just under an hour late ;) :P. Hope it was a good birthday present :P ;). Goblin10:14, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hope that you have a great day TRM :). We shall hold an honorary IRC party! ;). At least it wasn't seven hours late like yours ;). (Nah, seriously, I couldn't care if it was still open! :P. Goblin10:47, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To answer that, that Eddie Fatu is a biography, not a article about a wrestling term, event, etc. The only wretsling there is he is a wrestler.-- †CM1617:01, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:PGA
Hi there. Congrats to your first GA :) I've a question: can we archieve SS Andrea Doria? I'm not sure. But Razorflame retired and the changes since the proposal are only minorer edits and no one from Razor. Regards, Barras (talk) 19:49, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Use your own judgement. If you think the article in its current state stands a chance of passing the voting for GA then list it. If not, then archive it. We need more bold editors! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:51, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I have written here rather than fill up the voting page with what could be a long discussion. I get quite concerned that we do lack an objective measure of what is simple English. Eptalon says that we cannot rely on just numbers, but I disagree. I think we need to have a target to aim for, and I suggest a Flesch score of about 70 and Fry grade level of 7/8, around 12-13 years age. Remember that these levels are the levels at a reader would score 50% on a comprehension test. I don't think we have to be pedantic about the numbers, there are often reasons why an article would need to be more complex, especially in dealing with more complex topics. However, we should be trying to keep our vocabulary in the basic English range. I found a short article on readablity and the readability tests which you might enjoy [2]. Peterdownunder (talk) 01:05, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll have a read. However, in the meantime, until these numbers make it into the criteria for GA and VGA, I think your oppose is invalid. It's a case of IDONTLIKEIT, not a review of the article against the criteria. Plus, if you are serious about opposing purely on a statistical analysis of the article rather than providing me with examples of what to simplify, I don't see how I can improve the article. Those scores do not take into account the fact that a number of long or complex words are linked so the reader can understand what they mean. The Rambling Man (talk) 05:58, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, can you confirm precisely what values you will use as a measure to support/oppose GAs and VGAs? I assume GAs should be equally simple according to these scales? Do you think we should address this problem on existing VGAs, e.g. Hanami, whose Flesch score is way below 50 and whose Fry level is over 13? It seems inconsistent to oppose the promotion of one article based on this but not act on demoting other articles which are much "worse". Will you also oppose Mosque based on the automated tool? The Rambling Man (talk) 06:07, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi TRM, I am hoping to answer all your queries, but I'll start with this one as it's the easiest. I have been reading about readability scores all day to see if I can understand what they show, their relative strengths and weaknesses. I think we don't need a precise score, the statistics should give us a rough estimate. I think both GA and VGA's should be equal - that is, VGA's don't need to be "simpler" than GAs. Yes, I think we should address this problem on existing VGAs - if these are going to be featured as the best articles on the SEWP, then they really need to be in simple english - it is the justification of the whole project, our very reason for being. It is very hard to justify a simple english article that needs Grade 11 to comprehend it, it simply isn't simple enough. The list you compiled in your sandbox was interesting. And yes, I will oppose Mosque if it is too complex. Peterdownunder (talk) 06:31, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Problem is the "tool" gives no advice on what specific areas of an article need improvement. That needs a human. So simply opposing on a statistical analysis is quite unhelpful to most editors. Will you be looking to modify the VGA/GA criteria? Will you also be seeking to demote articles which don't meet these measures? The Rambling Man (talk) 06:43, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with your comment on the human touch, as you could write an article that made no sense at all but has "perfect" readability stats, so as I have said they are a rough guide. Do we need to modify the criteria? I don't think so, as I would argue that the article should be in simple english as its basic reason to be kept on the SEWP. If we are going to feature an article as one our best, then we need to make sure it is "simple". I had many discussions with Lynx at the end of last year about easy ways to help editors with simple english. For me, the most useful tools are using Lynx's Basic English dictionary as the default dictionary in Firefox, so that it brings up complex words as spelling errors as I write, meaning I can check them quickly. There are already more than 12 in this paragraph!
Readability tests are the best objective measure we have of the level of writing - read William DuBay's article on Principles of Readabilty [www.impact-information.com/impactinfo/readability02.pdf] its about 60 pages, but interesting. It is not a matter of IDONTLIKEIT, but applying the available tools to check the article.
I look forward to your assessment. However, I think you'll need to provide specific advice to every article you oppose as otherwise it will be seen as an unactionable oppose. Our regular contributors will not be interested in a 60 page document, they will seek actual advice. And until the VGA and GA criteria are modified, I think it's unreasonable to oppose based on the computerised and unhelpful output. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:42, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And presumably the "tool" does not take into account non-Simple words which are linked to either Wikipedia or Wiktionary? How do we deal with these? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:43, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Would the score on the Hanami article be skewed due to all the Japanese characters and translations? Just a thought, because that articles score is very different from the other VGAs. Kennedy (talk) 07:52, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Quite possibly. But either we use the scores or we don't. Until we understand exactly what is and what isn't taken into account (e.g. tables, foreign characters, linked complex terms), I'm not convinced an automated review followed by an automatic oppose is helpful. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:56, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I heartily agree that most of our editors won't read a 60 page manual on readability (which isn't in simple english itself!) But as the readability stats are one tool to establish a level of simplicity I think it is reasonable to use them. And the tool does not allow for linked complex words, so that does become another factor in making a judgement. I would hate to see a situation where items were opposed because they scored 68 instead of 70 for example, because that would be nonsense. I would also not want too see a situation where complex articles were could be simplified purely by adding a link to every complex word. It would make it such an effort to read. Writing in simple isn't easy, DuBay's article mentions that the US Army found it too hard to get their manuals down to a simple enough level. We also have to allow for other factors such as pictures, images, layout etc which can also assist in making things easier to read. Kennedy's comment is interesting, as I had a similar thought when simplifying the article on the Sichuan earthquake, do foreign names etc make the score higher? It would be good to have an answer, but I don't think you can make it as simplistic as we use scores or not, the scores are a guide. Peterdownunder (talk) 08:15, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am enjoying reading the article, what a health battle the poor man has had.
In the Early Management section I find this sentence to be a bit awkward, "Ipswich finished lower than sixth in the First Division once in the next nine seasons, in the 1977–78 season." Peterdownunder (talk) 08:39, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the section on his health affecting his career, did the 5th bout of cancer stop his work with the Irish? The article says he was "set to start", but what happened next?--Peterdownunder (talk) 08:52, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well in a previous incarnation of the article it was clear that this subsequently led to him not being healthy enough to carry out the job. Cutting sentence size down to what has been recommended has resulted in a loss of clarity I suppose. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:02, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just so you're clear on the facts of the matter. If you're more interested in pushing your agenda, then maybe the facts don't matter to you, but here they are, regardless. -- Thekohser (talk) 20:18, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, I have to give you some props. You're starting to see the mess we're mired in here at Simple English, and you're actually doing something about it. Keep up the good work! This is going to be a long, hard-fought mission. -- Thekohser (talk) 17:20, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My school internet is slow. I left a block note, noticed he wasn't blocked, reverted it, then noticed he was blocked, went to re-revert and after I saved noticed you left a message. My internet is slow, so we kind of conflicted and I edited over your edit. Sorry. Pixle1234 (talk) 19:10, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
account usurpation request (SUL)
Hello, this is to request an account usurpation. I am User:Nudimmud in English and other wikipedia projects. I am using this username for other language projects, including English Wikipedia, where I mainly participate in, and currently having problem unifying my accounts. The proof of my ownership is provided here, in my userpage in Korean Wikipedia. The target user has no edit count in Simple English Wikipedia for over 2 years. I placed the request in Wikipedia:Changing username page two days ago and no response is given yet. I beg someone to handle this problem as soon as possible. Thanks in advance. --221.150.47.128 (talk) 11:34, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I've seen your comments on the talk page, and dealt with most of them. I've also left a note there. Would you mind having a look and reviewing the last few sections. Thanks, Yotcmdr=talk to the commander=15:02, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Abortion
Hello TRM,
I have moved/added Abortion (links to the article, not the vote) to the voting section; has been been listed as a candidate for some time now, and I fixed most of the things I found. Article has many references, but still has a number of red-links in the central section. Please note that I am not in the medical profession, I am also not a biologist. I have addressed all the issues that were brought to my attention, and as you know, the GA/VGA business currently is a one-man-show, not something the community is involved in. My personal opinion about the subject does not matter; I simply think that making a controversial subject (there are those in favor, and those against, with all variations) would show that even though we are a small community we are capable of handling such subjects. In short: I moved the thing to the vote, and am waiting for it to fail...--Eptalon (talk) 08:56, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, TRM, nice to see you again. Alright, so here's the deal: all bureaucrats have participate in the RfA above except you, so it looks like your the best choice to close this RfA. It is overdue by several hours, and since then, one oppose was added. I discussed this with User:Chenzw, and he suggests that the vote should not be counted, as the RfA technically ended already. Anyway, we await your decision. Thanks. — RyanCross (talk) 08:37, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi TRM. I think I have fixed all your concerns. Can you review the other sections, please. Thank you for your time. Barras (talk) 08:58, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh hai
Perhaps you can help. How can I make a signature "Dish It Out" in a blue font? Thanks in advance!!
Sent. Contains a typo that should read "an admin". Synergy01:37, 29 May 2009 (UTC)For those seeing this, no drama involved. You can pm me on IRC and e-mail for specifics, but I will only reply to admins.[reply]
Hi there! I posted a proposal on WP:PVGA nearly one week ago. I am wondering that you don't review the article. I would be very happy if you have a look at Beethoven if you've the time. Thank you Barras (talk) 10:08, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, I didn't know... but I do know ;). In that case, we can hand it over to you as you obviously have qualifications ;). (Joke, i'm happy as long as it's drama free and keeps me with encyclopedia building ;).) Regards, Goblin20:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Username change
Can you please take a look at WP:CHU? I have made a request there. It's really problematic not too be able to login to en (since I have a different username there). PmlinediterTalkO 13:08, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am currently a rollbacker on regular Wikipedia and would like to help stop vandalism here, too. Is there a rollback group here, too? If so, may I please join it? I hope this is the right way to ask on Simple Wikipedia. Thanks,
Well, let's think :) I granted the tools. I was faster... No worries. I have stolen your work, because I granted the tools. It was more a joke or something like this, TRM. Barras (talk) 18:10, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The orginal article Wijerd Jelckama was a DYK article and GA nominee until it was deleted because it was to similar to the English wikipedia version. Chenw restored it here and I wonder: would you be able to help me completely rewrite the article so that I no longer looks similar to the English version? I doubt I have the skill for it, considering my (relatively) limited knowledge of the English language. I do not know all the synomims. Mighty Wodan (talk) 14:33, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi TRM! Not sure, but have you other concerns to Jupiter, that we probably should not promote this article to this status? Or do you think all is fine, now? Barras (talk) 15:12, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hey
I hope you understand my comments were not meant as anything personally directed towards you specifically. I hold you in pretty high regard on this wiki as both one of the best article writers and one of the most level heads. I mostly just object to people placing a moving target in front of me (or anyone else for that matter). And I have a tendency (believe it or not) to just take crap that comes my way and not say anything about it. And I felt I needed to make sure people understood there are issues here beyond the obvious. -Djsasso (talk) 13:46, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, and I completely understand your concern. I knew there would be fireworks...I just didn't expect it to result in a removal after a few short hours. -Djsasso (talk) 14:24, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your last edit summary made me smile. I'm going to work on the Essjay event a bit more. I want to thank you for reviewing shortly... I'm new to the GA process so I might need some help on the first couple of articles. Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 20:45, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My name is "Tirkon" in every wikimedia project except here. The problem is, that another person seemes to be used this name for only one posting three years ago, which is located here. Is it possible, to get this name here, too? -- 84.132.110.237 (talk) 19:04, 9 August 2009 (UTC)de:Benutzer:Tirkon[reply]
Hi, I never saw your reply. I was wondering if your got my response and you were ok with it... or if I could do anything else to make things right. Thanks, NonvocalScream (talk) 17:01, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You had mentioned a couple of days ago that you were going to check out if that stuff in the Biden article had been fixed so that it can make GA. Have you had a chance to do that? Thank you, Purplebackpack89 (talk) 20:52, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like the Biden GA is probably going to die from lack of interest this afternoon, even if you note that your concerns are Fixed. Think it merits renom next week? Purplebackpack89 (talk) 14:58, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Muffin Music
Hi, I was about to create a new page for "Muffin Music". It's a record label. But theres one problem the page seems to be banned from being created.
(The title "Muffin Music" has been banned from creation. It matches the following blacklist entry: .*ffin.* <autoconfirmed>)
Cba to make a new section, but what do you think of my P(V)GA changes, and did I miss anything? Ta! Goblin20:50, 30 August 2009 (UTC) I ♥ Shappy![reply]
WT is short for Wikipedia talk and is used here and at enWP. I had always understood that WT can be used whenever you wanted to. Am I wrong, or did you not know this? Griffinofwales (talk) 22:57, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If the article has a WP shortcut, the talk page can also have a WT shortcut. This is what I have always understood to be correct. Response to your last question: Because they couldn't shorten the other half for some odd reason (that's not what happened in this case). Griffinofwales (talk) 23:04, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For the sake of sanity, please get to grips with the fact that this page was deleted because no-one on God's finest Earth will type this in. It's an "unlikely redirect". Case closed. Good night... The Rambling Man (talk)
Do you see that categorisation in en.wiki? Or anywhere else? Perhaps you should categorise "bad hair" for Lincoln too. Come on, log cabins are log cabins, not something inherently related to Lincoln. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:51, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't, but we aren't enwiki. I would note that "Lincoln Logs", which are toy log cabins and are covered in the log cabin article, are in the Lincoln category. In America, if there's one person you associate with log cabins, it's Lincoln. Also, you deleted it again before I was finished adding people to it. Please give me 30 mins to add people. Purplebackpack89 (talk) 20:58, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note away. But understand, this isn't "American Wikipedia", and moreover, adding "people" to the "log cabin" article is inappropriate. A log cabin is a cabin made of logs. It doesn't deserve a heap of personalities' categories adding to it. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:00, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how to call it, which is why I said it's up to you. Bluegoblin has laid out three suggestions, and since it appears that he, you and I are the only three following, I leave it you. I would note that a non-promoted closure would probably result in a renon (as Bluegoblin suggested). Your ball. Also, I'm guessing that the dearth of simwp interest is coinciding with back-to-school time Purplebackpack89 (talk) 01:03, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I just wanted to drop you a short line. Yesterday I re-discovered the article Braille, about the writing system for the blind people. The article we had was more or less a 1:1 copy of the enwp one. I spent some time today, re-structuring and simplifying it partly. Without doing a full review, do you think this would stand a chance of becoming a good article, in the time provided? - Do you think we could interest other people in helping? - Comments welcome. --Eptalon (talk) 11:31, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I do need to be off shortly, to do something else. As to the alphabet, I see the following:
Put the whole thing into a separate page, like list of braille characters, and only keep like 2 or 3 of the characters.
I do think that list is language specific, we probably need to point that out, too.
Other issues I see:
The EnWP page has a whole section on braille literacy, we probably need to at least mention that.
Braille is not the only such system in use, we should at least mention other such systems.
London Underground 2009 Stock is currently at PGA, and is nearing the end of it's three week period. I was wondering if you could comment on it, and if it was ready see if we can form a consensus to promote.
Hello there, when you have the time, a GA review for mimicry would really be appreciated. It has been a long time since I have seen such quality of writing. I see the following:
Uses specialized scxientific language, but explains it.
Not sure if we could go direclty to VGA witrh this?
I'll see what I can do. Also, for GA advice, please speak to BG7. I have not participated in the changes, although I believe (and always have done) that a consensus-based process rather than vote counting is much better. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:07, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hey TRM, just wanted to let you know I've replied to your comment at DYK above with an idea that would maybe make the hook more interesting. I await your thoughts! Thanks. — RyanCross (talk) 07:38, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Could you possibly pop by and give me some more comments? I've fixed the majority, but am now in a rush as it is due to close tomorrow! That said, I won't rush my work and if it's not ready i'll withdraw it :).
Prod! It's tomorrow! ;) Sorry, not meant to be sounding rude or pushy, I know you have a real life, i'd just appreciate a review ;) Regards, Goblin19:03, 14 October 2009 (UTC) I ♥ Fr33kman![reply]
Say, you said that there are some problems with referencing in Romania, right? Would you be so kind as to help me fix up the article? There is too much work for me to do alone. Thanks in advance, Razorflame16:19, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I want to take a moment and thank you again for your contributions. I look forward to seeing your comments on article talk pages for example. When you make suggestions to make our articles a higher caliber. Thank you for what you do. Kind regards, NonvocalScream (talk) 22:52, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's not notable enough...? I think bombings are very notable they happen all the time in the middle east. But if you think it was not good enough thats ok. 72.87.61.181 (talk) 13:52, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've been thinking about nominating you for admin over at meta, but I wanted to get your permission first before I post it. Thanks, Razorflame22:05, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's a bad idea. I can't see why TRM would want to accept a nomination on a project he isn't at all active on. I would oppose, as would everyone else on Meta, simply because someone with 5 edits isn't going to be familiar with how a project works... Majorlytalk02:31, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How about you let him decide for himself Majorly and maybe stop poking you nose in where it does not belong? I'm sick and tired of your "comments". I posted this on his talkpage, not yours. Razorflame03:49, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for getting back to me. I believe that my comment above was justified because I've just about had it with Majorly. Sometimes, his comments can make people seem childish in a way that is not a good thing. Razorflame12:58, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
SPL
Hi! I've adressed most of the issues you found on the Scottish Premier League article (except the referencing, which I haven't really finished/done) and you said you'd do a more thorough review. If you do have an y more issues which need fixing, could you put them on the SPL talk page. Thanks a lot, Yotcmdr=talk=10:20, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You offered to help me with the Wijerd Jelckama article some time ago. I have worked on it. Will you help me to expand it further, or, even better so, to make it more simple? You offered to help me back in june, does the offer still stand? :D Mighty Wodan (talk) 06:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yo, Ramblerdude, can I have a new review please? Also, what shall we do about an image for the article :SGoblin10:51, 2 November 2009 (UTC) I ♥ Fr33kman![reply]
The QandA. Every month, a user will be interviewed by a member of the Simple News team. This idea was started by Kennedy. Interviews are generally taking by a member of the Simple News Team - to date this has included Bluegoblin7, Kennedy, Pmlinediter, Juliancolton and Yotcmdr.
Sure. I'm borderline "what's delaying my dinner" forever right now here. I sat back and watched this Wikipedia for five days or so, and it's not impressive. Even the regulars want to destroy each other. I'll see what I can do with your article but can't promise anything. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:12, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers dude. As you might have noticed i'm trying to just get on with my content creation and leave them to it. Cheers, Goblin22:16, 19 November 2009 (UTC) I ♥ Yotty![reply]
We Are One!Simple News is now One Year Old, and we would like to thank all of the Simple English Wikipedia contributors who have helped with it during this time. As we move into our second year please continue to send in your contributions, and let's try to develop Simple News further!
On that note, please do continue to submit articles, QandAs and the like. You may have noticed that recent Issues have been fairly bare - and the only way that will change will be with your help.
But in November, if all speak English, why do not copy-paste from Wikipedia in English? However we do not do anything. Do not care about their other Wikipedias, how about the proposal? Go! We have more quality items than English! One day I made over 20 quality items! Or even more! Go! You decide! Thanks. --Ervin C. (talk) 15:54, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, you cannot copy-paste articles because it is not allowed under the GFDL, the license that this wiki uses. If you continue to copy-paste articles, you may be blocked from editing. Goblin17:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC) I ♥ Shappy![reply]
Done Both nominations have now been put on-wiki and are awaiting your acceptance. Cheers, Razorflame 17:41, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Fixed
Fixed. Think it merits renom next week? Purplebackpack89 (talk) 14:58, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
