User talk:Wine Guy/Archive 1

Maps of dioceses

I like your new articles on the Episcopal provinces. Some include maps, showing the dioceses. I think it would be useful to have a map showing all the dioceses. If it were possible, one could then make a particular diocese red, like the county maps showing the position of various counties within states. Also we could use a map on the Anglicanism WikiProject to show which dioceses have articles and which don't. But I have no idea how the graphic stuff works.--Bhuck 18:22, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment, Bhuck. That's an interesting suggestion about trying to highlight the maps. I'm not great with graphics myself, but maybe it's something I can figure out. The maps on Provinces 4-6 (and 7-9 when I get to them, tonight maybe), are actually the older style logos which are printed on letterhead and what not. Provinces 1-3 have newer websites, and "fancy" new logos. P-1 retains the map concept, but 2 and 3 do not. I might be able to find them, though. They are kind of useful aren't they? I'll see what I can do. --Wine Guy Talk 22:55, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Are you putting the graphics files just on :en-Wiki or also on Commons? I often try to incorporate graphic references when I translate articles into German for the :de-Wikipedia, but if they aren't on Commons, the links don't work right. (See, for example de:Diskussion:Presiding Bishop) Also, I notice that the map in Province 7 labels the diocese including most of New Mexico and the area around El Paso, Texas as the "Diocese of Rio Grand" (no "e"), while the (red) link in the list in the article is to the "Diocese of Rio Grande"--but the map text could be in error.--Bhuck 08:01, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Right now the files are just on en.WP since they're fair use. I've started trying to create some maps that would be free licensed, but since I'm no CG expert, I'm still trying to figure out how to do what I want. I know the maps are not that important, but this gives me an excuse to learn more about image and graphic stuff. When I get something usable, I'll upload to Commons per your suggestion. Oh, and the Rio Grande is definately with an e, it's an error on the map/logo (which I hadn't even noticed.) --Wine Guy Talk 23:44, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Sheng Kung Hui

After a prelimary search of Sheng Kung Hui in Google, nearly all pages is with respective to Hong Kong Sheng Kung Hui (Hong Kong Anglican Church (Espiscopal)), which manage dioceses in Hong Kong and Macau. On the other hand, Taiwan Sheng Kung Hui (臺灣聖公會) yields only 2 entry in Japanese and it shows another name The Episcopal Church of Taiwan also.　臺灣聖公會 is an overseas dioceses of Episcopal Church in the United States of America. The English name of the churchi in the official website is Taiwan Episopal Church. [1] Historically there was Chung Hua Sheng Kung Hui (中華聖公會), namely Anglican Church in China. As communist took over the China in 1949, it is hard for churches to survive and the Anglican was no long active in China. Many Chinese fled to Hong Kong, Taiwan and overseas. Part of them re-established the church in Taiwan with help of Episcopal Church in the United States of America, but name it as 臺灣聖公會 in Chinese.

I'm also confused with Anglican and Espiscopal churches in the name of Hong Kong Anglican Church (Espiscopal). For more information, you might visit http://www.hkskh.org . The meaning of 聖公會 in Chinese is more closed to Episcopal but it is Anglican in history and nature. It is more commonly translating 聖公會 to Anglican Church. In the article Espiscopal, it say many Anglican churches named Espiscopal. In fact Episcopal Church in the United States of America is an Anglican Church too.

Sheng Kung Hui in English is rarely referred outside the context of Hong Kong Sheng Kui Hui in past decades. There is no need to move the articles. — HenryLi (Talk) 04:16, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

— HenryLi (Talk) 04:16, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

For Episcopal Diocese of Taiwan, there is an Chinese wikipedia article zh:臺灣聖公會. While their website http://www.episcopalchurch.org.tw/ is Chinese, which is not intelligible for you, I found a short introduction [2]. For your information, the diocese is independent of ECUSA as described in its website and it is under the name of ECUSA for histoical reasons. (Also Chung Hua Sheng Kung Hui ceased to exist in reality.) — HenryLi (Talk) 08:27, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Music samples is now a guideline

Wikipedia:Music samples is now a guideline. Thank you for your active participation in the discussion. The guideline will always be open for new proposals and amendments. As for now I invite you to join to the discussion in Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#Proposal for Music Samples to adopt a new samples-related CSD criterion. CG 15:15, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

What vandalism are you talking about?

I didn't vandalise anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MartinRamos92 (talk • contribs) 07:50, 9 July 2006

Sorry, I was mistaken and have reverted back to your version. Please understand that replacing a German flag with a Nazi flag is common act of vandalism, but your edit was absolutly correct; I should have looked more closely. Please forgive the misunderstanding. --Wine Guy Talk 08:15, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Dude I didn't even touch your page. Lawmanmt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.93.21.66 (talk • contribs) 17:33, 11 July 2006

Well, it appears that you are on AOL, so if you have been blocked, or seen notes on a talk page it may or may not be directed at you. To avoid having problems in the future, I would recommend creating an account. Also have a look at this page for more help. --Wine Guy Talk 02:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Your WP:ARV is broken

might want to look into that--Dalek Cab 02:40, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I think you mean ARV or WP:AIV, but yes I noticed that the .js did something odd, I'll keep an eye on it.--Wine Guy Talk 02:51, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I've left a note for Lightdarkness about the bug. I'm sure he'll get around to fixing it. --Wine Guy Talk 18:54, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

User 210.8.215.219

This user recently vandalised the Dune (novel) page, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dune_%28novel%29&diff=63541587&oldid=62880763

I saw your warning on his talk page so I thought I should inform you so you can ban and/or warn him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Konman72 (talk • contribs)

Thanks for the note. I've looked up the IP and it appears we have some new vandals from Belwyn High School in Aussieland. If there's any more vandalism from that IP, I'll drop an email to the school's network admin. --Wine Guy Talk 06:22, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Province X

VIII of IX provinces done. And now the Anglican Communion Network comes and tries to start a Province X--that promises to be the most interesting article of all, given that only some people will consider it to exist, while others point out its uncanonical status. Will be hard to map, too, I suppose... :-) --Bhuck 12:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Interesting indeed. I have all sorts of thoughts on the subject (read-I could easily start ranting). However, I dare not utter them even on my own talk page for fear of violating all sorts of WP ideals...;-) --Wine Guy Talk 08:39, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Accusations of Vandalism

I am sorry but I am having a hard time understanding the basis of your accusations of vandalism. I have also discussed this on my talk page but am hoping to expand the dialogue by addressing you directly and not just editing and adding commments on my talk page. I find the label of vandal offensive. Worst case was I was careless in my addition of one word in brackets to your comment on the Giffords page. This was done with no intent to change the meaning of what you wrote but just too highlight that she is not a current senator--and that is not something I think that is negative. I am the one who created the Giffords article to begin with--in fact without looking I don't even know if you voted to keep or get rid of it. I am sorry that this small edit offended you, however, to label me a vandal is extreme and unwarranted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Utahredrock (talk • contribs) 07:44, 19 July 2006

I'm really not that worried about the edits which you made here to my comment, as well as as two other editors. You say this is a "small edit", however, as I've tried to explain, other editors do not take kindly to someone else editing thier remarks. Official Wikipedia policy does not take kindly to it either. I (and others) are more concerned about this edit when you deleted the nomination for deletion and replaced it with your own comments. As much as we may try, it is very difficult to assume good faith in this situation. It was that edit which led JChap2007 to tag your user page with a vandal warning. Please note- I was not the first to warn you about your actions. I have tried to help you understand where and how your edits strayed from accecpted policy and guidelines. Just to refresh your memory, I posted the following on your talk page not long ago:

When you participate in a discussion and wish to clarify something, you are welcome to add your own, new comment in reply to what someone else has said. You are not welcome to change the wording of other user's comments, that is vandalism. Since you apparently have not read it yet, below is the section of WP:VANDAL to which I am refering; it is under the heading Types of vandalism-

Changing people's comments

Editing signed comments by another user to substantially change their meaning (e.g. turning someone's vote around), except when removing a personal attack (which is somewhat controversial in and of itself). Signifying that a comment is unsigned is an exception. e.g. (unsigned comment from user)

While you did not change my vote, you did add a word to comment which changed the meaning. Please be aware that Wikipedia editors tend to be very protective of their own comments in discussions; some get upset if someone else does something as simple as correct a spelling error in a talk comment. Because of this, the following template exists-

I noticed that you edited someone else's comment at [[at [[{{{1}}}]]]] for clarity, spelling or grammar. As a rule, refrain from editing others' comments without their permission. Though it may appear helpful to correct typing errors, grammar, etc., please do not go out of your way to bring talk pages to publishing standards, since it is not terribly productive and will tend to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. For more details, see Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Thanks,

Please note, this is an example of sentiment regarding etiquette; your edits crossed the line into vandalism. That is not my opinion, that is a fact based on policy. On another issue of policy, user's are generally prohibited from removing vandalism warnings from their own talk pages, as you have done here. Since you had already been warned about vandalism, you could be blocked, but I assume good faith and understand that perhaps you were not aware of this policy. Now, you are aware. So, I will replace the warning originally placed by User:JChap2007 [3], and add a formal warning not to remove it. Once again, I hope you will look through the WP policies and guidelines so that you don't have difficulties in the future.

You have since removed that comment, and accused me of a personal attack, which is something I do not take lightly. I'd be interested to know what in the above comment you interpret as a personal attack. I have not said anything about you personally. I have pointed out why your actions are considered vandalism, and have cited my reasoning per WP policy. I have done this in an (increasingly futile) attempt to help you understand what the problems were so that you could avoid them in the future. Perhaps you would prefer not to avoid problems, and to that I can only say good luck, be well, and good night. --Wine Guy Talk 10:03, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

As you don't appreciated being called a personal attacker, I don't appreciate being called a vandal. In the plain language of the vandal policy it is clear that I did not commit vandalism and being labeled a vandal seems like a personal attack. Somebody edits something by innocently adding a work and they are a vandal? That's not an attack? The word didn't change the meaning of anything and was added in such a way that it was clear that it was added--in other words it wasn't an edit of what you wrote just another word in an attempt to add clarity.--Utahredrock 15:52, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

What are we arguing about?

Now I am really confused. I see that we agree regarding the Giffords article. I also see that the word former is still in your comment, though apparently not the way I wrote it. What exactly did I put in that you consider vandalism?--Utahredrock 07:49, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out that "former" is still there, I'll remove it presently. In my opinion, it makes no difference whether she is a current or former state senator. I'm capable of wording my comments as I see fit. If you disagree with my comment (or anyone else's), feel free to reply with your own comment. Please, do not edit other peoples comments on any discussion page.

And BTW, we are not arguing. I've stated my opinions, and quoted directly from WP policies. If you choose to respond in an argumentative fashion, well, that's your choice. --Wine Guy Talk 10:03, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah I was quoting from Wiki policy too. I agree that whether she is a current or former senator makes no difference--I just added the word "former" because someone else commented on it. I was attempting to clarify the point--admittedly a non-important point. I did not add it to edit your comments and still do not see how it was perceived that way. It is so refreshing to know you/we are not arguing. I do wish you would give me the benefit of the doubt when I added that word--which you now don't seem to be concerned with. As I stated elsewhere, what's the point of this discussion other than you strange insistence that I edited your comments? Clearly to state so is a huge stretch.--Utahredrock 15:52, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Comments on Utahredock's talk page

I have restored your comments on Utahredrock's talk page. Personal attack? Not even close. I'm trying to WP:AGF with this editor, but it is becoming increasingly difficult. JChap (talk • contribs) 12:47, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/V. Alexander Stefan

• Delete all per excellent nomination. Nice work Netsnipe. --Wine Guy Talk 21:55, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. --  Netsnipe  ^(Talk)  18:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

No problem, I'm always happy to give kudos to the deserving! On a different note, it looks like your browser clipped some text here when you added your comment. Probably that Google toolbar/Firefox bug I've heard about. It's no big deal (I restored the clipped text), but I thought you might want to know about the bug so that you can keep an eye out for it. Cheers! --Wine Guy Talk 19:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

WABC (AM) article reversion

Someone with the same IP as mine (at that time, anyway, as AOL IPs are not static, due to the proxy servers) vandalized the WABC page six hours after I had made major revisions to the article. Because of the one line of vandalism, and then your reversion, four hours of my work was lost. Please revert to the version posted at 00:23 on 26 July, as I believe it was a significant improvement to the original. I cannot revert the article, as I'm obviously an AOL anon user without an account - yet. By the way, I am not the AOL anon user some have complained about on that page, but rather a 30-year radio industry veteran and broadcast professional attempting to make a meaningful contribution to the article. Thanks. 64.12.116.131 07:15, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I see that another editor has restored the last correct version per your request on the WABC (AM) talk page. Thanks for your contributions, they are most welcome, valued, and will never be lost to vandalism or ham-handed reversions (mea culpa). As I think you already know every version of every page is stored in the history, and can be very easily restored. In order to help avoid annoyances like this in the future, I strongly suggest that you create an account. All you need to do is create a new username and password, email address optional; it should take less than thirty seconds. Also have a look at the page Advice to AOL users for hints on how to avoid most of the myriad problems caused by AOL proxies. Hope that helps; happy editing! --Wine Guy Talk 18:47, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the response and the tips. You are right, nothing is ever lost on Wikipedia (unless the server permanently crashes, I suppose). I'm fairly new to this, but will sign up for an account shortly; the range of AOL IPs is blocked so often, it makes it hard to get anything done! Best wishes - 152.163.100.139 04:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

AMiA & ECUSA

I realize AMiA is not a part of ECUSA; however, I believe a mention of the AMiA is appropriate in the ECUSA article. The dispute and a compare/contrast of the two organizations seems valid to me. Following your logic, one could say a brief discussion of the Confederacy does not belong in an article on U.S. history. What do you think? Propol 18:39, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I do agree that a mention of the AMiA may be merited in the ECUSA article. However, given Archbishop Carey's condemnations of those involved in the creation of AMiA, the mention as writ seemed, at best, misleading. I fully intended to write a note on the ECUSA talk page regarding my edit, and...well...I forgot. I will take this discussion over to the ECUSA talk first thing tomorrow. I'm sorry I forgot to do that in the first place, and thanks again for bringing it back to my attention. --Wine Guy Talk 06:21, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Re : LinkCentre AfD

Done. :) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 09:38, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Worklist

Yes, that list looks fine to me, and the layout looks nice. I like your summary style showing the meaning of the assessment levels! I also like the idea of listing the key articles first, that shows people which articles need the most attention. Will you also cover cathedrals, or do you prefer to emphasise that the church is "the people not the building"? How about the bishoprics such as Bishop of Durham? (BTW, I attended an Anglican church in Whitley Bay for many years - in the US I'm a member of a Presbyterian church). One comment on the list, did you mean to list the American Episcopal Church at that level, it doesn't seem to match with its Scottish counterpart?

Looks like a very good start to me. If you choose to use the bot to generate the list for you, please let me know. Meanwhile I will also shamelessly steal from your list and nominate Anglicanism for Version 0.5! Thanks, Walkerma 03:48, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

RE: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jenny Rom

I wanted to clarify / add an other comment, but because the discussion was closed I will do it here.

You are correct, of course, when there is no source, or no source can be found. But just because some previous contributer failed to mention their sources doesn't mean it can't be verified per se. I found a source to verify at least a part of the information, making your argument for deletion invalid. I'm sorry if I sound a bit incoherent.

I agree the article is still not exactly an example for other articles to follow, to put it lightly, but that is a different discussion. --SevenMass 15:00, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Merimbula

A question, not a criticism, Wineguy why did you revert the changes made to the Merimbula, NSW, Australia page. Most were pretty good! --como006

Reply is here.--Wine Guy Talk 18:28, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Invite to join WP:Wine

Howdy! I don't know if you were aware by there is a Wikipedia Wine Project that I would like to you invite you to consider joining. Your experience as a sommelier would be of immense benefit in improving the quality of Wikipedia's wine articles. Plus, with a user name like Wine Guy, we just wouldn't be complete without you. As a personal note, one of the articles that we are trying to improve to FA status is Riesling which has a section on Riesling with food. It could certainly use an expert's set of eyes. Agne 04:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Female bishops

Thank you for adding to the "Female bishops" category which I created earlier this year. I appreciate your assistance in making this category more useful. Ringbark 12:58, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I note that someone has proposed this category for deletion. Please go to Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_December_26#Category:Female_bishops and vote. Ringbark 11:22, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Anglicanism COTM

The Anglicanism Collaboration of the Month has been reactivated! Please consider going to the page to either vote for one of the nominated articles, or nominate one yourself. Thanks! Fishhead64 02:50, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

English Reformation

I notce that you are of the opinion that the above article is close to being a good article. I also notice the descriptors used for its present classification. I am not aware of any significant omissions. On the contrary, I think that the material on Henry VIII may be too detailed. I am happy to consider suggestions for inclusion of more material but would appreciate some suggestions. Roger Arguile 15:59, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

WP:Anglican's assessment of Bath Abbey

Hello there! I think the time for re-assessment has come: I have just completed a major rewrite of the article.--Vox Humana 8' 15:26, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Anglican collaboration of the month

Wassupwestcoast 02:42, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Christianity

Hello Wine Guy/Archive 1!

You are cordially invited to participate in WikiProject Christianity The goal of WikiProject Christianity is to improve the quality and quantity of information about Christianity available on Wikipedia. WP:X as a group does not prefer any particular tradition or denominination of Christianity, but prefers that all Christian traditions are fairly and accurately represented.

You are receiving this invitation because you are a member of one of the related Christianity Projects and I thought that you might be interested in this project also - Tinucherian (talk) 05:10, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Please stop disrupting discussion on 2009 USA Swine Flu

I added the tag to the article appropriately, and it should be discussed in the appropriate discussion page not just removed from the article at will. If you have a dispute with the tag, discuss it...don't just revert. Flipper9 (talk) 18:45, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

The above comment was moved from user page to user talk page where it belongs. Wine Guy Talk 19:06, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

As you have been blocked for your disruptive behavior, I would suggest that little of what you have done today has been appropriate, or constructive for that matter.

For future reference, if you add something to an article and it is removed for a valid reason by another editor, discuss it on the talk page to reach a consensus before attempting to add it again. Wine Guy Talk 19:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorting

See User_talk:Abecedare#porcine_sniffles where Ludwig and I are discussing this issue (just to keep the conversation in one place). Abecedare (talk) 05:37, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Letter to Wine Guy

Dear Wine Guy,

Do not make assumptions. The social libertarian reference was perfectly cited, and I am sorry that you take offense to most people thinking you are a communist.

Go get a real job instead of harassing people online to inflate your ego.

Have a nice day,

-John —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.181.252.116 (talk) 07:26, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

What's UP

I like your userbox: This user utilizes advanced amounts of alcohol. That's pretty funny. You have, as listed above a sweet personality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ElioDelRIo (talk • contribs) 04:26, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, thanks! And yes, that userbox is a fav of mine, quite accurate too; I've been a professional drinker for a long time. If you'd like to use it, it's available here: {{User:UBX/Alcohol-3}} Cheers!Wine Guy Talk 07:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of 2010 Papua New Guinea bus crash

An editor has nominated 2010 Papua New Guinea bus crash, an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010 Papua New Guinea bus crash and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. - Eastmain (talk) 00:30, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, but my only "contribution" to the article was to revert vandalism [4] while doing RC patrol. WP:AfD#Notifying_interested_people suggests: ...it is generally considered courteous to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the articles that you are nominating for deletion. Do not notify bot accounts, people who have made only insignificant 'minor' edits...", I should think that I fall into this category. This isn't a criticism or complaint, just a suggestion that might save you time when making AfD notifications. Cheers! Wine Guy Talk 01:08, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

You're quite right. Thanks for reverting the vandalism there. - Eastmain (talk) 01:13, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

PS - I should note that I think the article should unquestionably be speedily kept, and having gone to the discussion page to say that, I find it's already been done. If only all decisions at AfD went so easily! Wine Guy Talk 01:17, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Fianna Fail and Oscar Traynor

Dear Wine Guy,

Why did you change wikipedia entry on Oscar Traynor? I added information about his involvement in the Rose Tattoo case which I think is of huge historic interest. Why do you delete it? The article calls the man a revolutionary. There is nothing revolutionary about shooting policemen in the back of their heads and then joining a cabinet that protected paedophiles and shut down plays that they perceived went against the teachings of a papacy.

Secondly why did you change my edit of Fianna Fail and how dare you call it vandalism? They do have a history of corruption. That is simply fact. Two of their TDs have gone to jail in the last ten years. Their former leader, Charles Haughey, was instrumental in setting up the provisional IRA, smuggled arms to Northern Ireland and is documented as receiving thousands of pounds in bribes. I haven't even gone into their disgraceful relationship with the banks and developers. I say on my page that they had a deferential attitude to the catholic church. Again this is fact. They consistently voted against contraceptive and divorce and most recently the Ryan Commission on child abuse explicitly stated that the department of education showed a deferential attitude toward the Catholic church. Since FF have been in power for most of the the 20th century it is reasonable to say that the dep. of education for most of this period has been run by FF ministers. They were also the political party to bring in a ban on the sale of tampons in the 1940s. The minister behind this was Con Ward. He did this after the bishops raised concerns about the tampons effects on young girls morality.

Regards,

Andrew —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrewlegge (talk • contribs) 01:59, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Please read the following: Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Once you have read those, if you still have any questions, let me know. Wine Guy Talk 02:20, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

nested parameter

Hi. I would like to inform you that |nested= is not anymore used. Banners are automatically nested when inside {{WPBS}}. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 00:05, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks for the note. Wine Guy Talk 00:08, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks Wine Guy for the explanation and links. Much appreciated. I will review. Best regardsPea12345 (talk) 10:52, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Wine Guy

I appreciate your kind remarks. We are definitely on an up hill battle at The Restoring Music Foundation, but we have some great traction and have been blessed with the connections we need to possibly give it a worthwhile go.

NO hard feelings either way, I understand that the rules make things work. I must admit though, the articles would really be helpful as we fight this musical war but allas, "I have made it a rule never to smoke more that one cigar at a time." - Mark Twain The rules are there to keep us from hurting ourselves... :)

I don't honestly know enough about this nor do I have the time to really do the research I need to do to get this wiki scandal squared off. I'll leave it to the fates.

I hope this finds you well,

--Cdpurifoy (talk) 08:35, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Busk Margit Jonsson

Just letting you know that I declined your PROD. Theleftorium 14:43, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, and thanks even more for referencing the article. The fact that it was an unref'd BLP was my primary concern. Cheers! Wine Guy Talk 19:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Patrick Deneen

On January 24, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Patrick Deneen, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Ucucha 06:01, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: User:202.150.117.199 and SpikeyRussia

Re your message: Thanks for the alert. I blocked the account and semi-protected another article. The range block might be a little excessive at the moment, but it might come down to that. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:50, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Wine needs you

Wine Guy, you're a member of several Wiki projects, but in spite of your vocation you aren't a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Wine?

We could use help from anyone with expertise. At the moment we're trying to get a new Wikipedia guideline ready to be evaluated as qualifying for "official" status. The draft is at Wikipedia:Notability (wine topics). ~Amatulić (talk) 19:03, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, sorry I couldn't reply sooner. RL has been a bit hectic the past few days regarding a new restaurant that may or may not be opening, for which I may or may not be working... long story. I know it may seem odd that I have not become involved in WPWine, I have certainly considered it; however, for a number of reasons I made a decision not to involve myself in wine articles on wiki. In a nutshell, I would find it very difficult to adhere to core policies of WP such as NOR and NPOV when writing on wine. I also have some very close relationships with wineries and winemakers, so I have conflict of interest concerns as well.

I am extremely passionate when it comes to wine topics, and have very strong opinions about which I tend to be quite outspoken. That passion, and opinions based on my personal knowledge and experience are part of the reason that I am good at what I do; but I can't turn that off when I log in to WP, as would be necessary. There are probably areas where I could contribute without worry, but discretion being the better part of valor, I feel it best that I remain away from wine related topics for now.

That being said, I will try to have a closer look at the proposed WP:WINETOPIC and see if there's any useful input I could add. I can't promise though, as I may be re-entering the world of the 80 hour work week sometime this month, possibly as early as this coming week. If that happens, I will likely be on wikibreak for the foreseeable future.

Sorry I'm not able to be of more help to the project right now, but thanks again for the note; it's always nice to be wanted. Cheers! Wine Guy Talk 10:17, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

We are not so far apart. My family owns a winery, so I have a conflict of interest also. My difficulty arises from the fact that much knowledge about wine isn't written down (at least from a winemaker's point of view) so Wikipedia's sourcing requirements sometimes present challenges when I know something but can't find a source that's verifiable and reliable.

Even so, I have found it rather easy to edit wine articles with a neutral point of view. There are articles about grape varietals that need work, as well as articles about particular regions that you may have a special interest in. And also, there are policy articles such as WP:WINETOPICS that don't inspire passion but need work - if not directly editing, then at least with comments on the talk page. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:05, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Spong

I read that he was against theism, so I inferred that he must be an atheist and thought it would be common sense. Sorry if it is not conforming to policy. Wandering Courier (talk) 07:48, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Bishop Spong does have well-documented, sometimes controversial views on the role of theistic doctrine in the Church, and society at large; that does not make him an atheist, i.e. a person who does not believe in God. To suggest that a bishop is an atheist is highly controversial, and potentially libelous; for you to add that to an article without a very reliable source, based solely on your own "inference" and what you think is common sense, is troubling. I strongly suggest you read closely No original research, Verifiability, and Biographies of living persons before you continue editing articles, especially those which are biographical. Wine Guy Talk 08:39, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

I apologize for my indiscretions in that post, and it was a mistake on my part. In the future this will not happen again. Wandering Courier (talk) 09:15, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Designated survivor

Let me know if you want me to keep chiming in. As far as I'm concerned, you and I agree on everything on this issue, please let me know otherwise.Naraht (talk) 10:46, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Personally, I would wait for JasonCNJ to respond to my last post, but it's entirely up to you. Cheers! Wine Guy Talk 11:07, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Sure. I figure we can tag team. Which ever one sees a comment from him first. And the other if they have something to add. I just wanted to know if you wanted postings that were more or less "agreed".Naraht (talk) 03:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Artistic-mind

Hello Wine Guy, why do you accuse me of being a sockpuppet? What is wrong with my English level? FYI I am a native english speaker! Did you even read my posts ? If so, please explain to me what exactly is wrong with posting them? Is it a crime to post information on articles on wikipedia? Isnt that what wikipedia is about? Editing articles if you want to include important facts? Do you fear I am one who is not bad mouthing a Catholic Bishop that makes you suspicious? Check my ip address... you will see I am NOT Bischof-Ralph's sock puppet. I am my own person, THANKYOU VERY MUCH!!! Artistic-mind (talk) 23:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I stand by my assertions. The case will be decided at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bischof-Ralph. Wine Guy~Talk 00:27, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I will point out that this and this do not appear to have been written by a native speaker of English. If you did not make these edits, then perhaps your account has been compromised. Wine Guy~Talk 00:44, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Not every American writes perfect English and not every editor writes perfect grammar. Many people struggle with words at times. FYI, I have lived in the US for most of my life. I stand MY grounds!!! I am not Bischof-ralphs sock puppet, my account has not been compromised. I am an American and I think an appology from you after investigations is closed is fair! If you go back and read the posts between myself and the others you are accusing you will see that our English and our style of writing is not at all even close to being similiar. You just don't like Bischof-Ralph or anyone else who stands up for him. I will pray for you. (ps. as for typos and grammar, it is rude to point out someones errors in a negative way. Perhaps you can be kind enough to offer help and to edit the errors without insulting or accusing ? Artistic-mind (talk) 08:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Your request for rollback

Hi Wine Guy/Archive 1. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Tiptoety ^talk 21:54, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I will keep all that in mind; and I appreciate your (quick!) response. Wine Guy~Talk 22:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

BLP cleanup thanks

		The Cleanup Barnstar
		Thanks for helping out with the mistagged BLP cleanup effort! Keep up the good work. Gigs (talk) 14:52, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

invitation

I have been impressed with your efforts on wikipedia, I would like to invite you to our squadron....

WikiProject Article Rescue Squadron Hello, Wine Guy. You have been invited to join the Article Rescue Squadron, a collaborative effort to rescue articles from deletion if they can be improved through regular editing. For more information, please visit the project page, where you can >> join << and help rescue articles tagged for deletion and rescue. Okip (the new and improved Ikip) 10:59, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Michelle Cannon

Thought you might like to know Michelle has reappeared on the talk page of Alfred Seiwert-Fleige..... Interesting, now the other 'three' have been blocked. I'll be watching the article. Peridon (talk) 23:01, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, interesting indeed. Since "Michelle" didn't participate in the AfD, I didn't put her in the SPI; if Michelle cannon were another Ralph's puppets I would have expected to see "her" at the AfD. I'm really rather neutral on the Seiwert-Fleige article, as long as it is accurate and NPOV; not being used to bolster the legitimacy of "Bishop Ralph". I'll be keeping an eye on it as well, but my time is a bit limited at the moment, and may become more so. Keep watching! Wine Guy~Talk 01:48, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank You!

Hello, good job on correcting my error with a better word choice on the snowboarding olympic champions! BLUE_DOG^TN 02:13, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem, nice navbox! Wine Guy~Talk 02:24, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Update

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Templeknight Michelle is in touch with TK. A new user, "'I am here because a friend told me that many articles with catholic topics in wikipedia need some help". I still have suspicions about Michelle. Peridon (talk) 21:44, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I've been watching it as well, Michelle cannon may have an agenda, but I don't think it's the quite same as "Bishop Ralph". She has been canvassing several member of Wikiproject Catholicism; some have replied thanks but no thanks, a couple have told her to go away [5] [6] (I chuckled at Gentgeen's reply), and most have either not been around or have ignored it completely. You may have noticed that I reverted the article (again) [7] to the "AfD approved version"; Templeknight has so far respected the request in that edit summary. I'm still around and watching that article, and I think some others are as well. Wine Guy~Talk 22:28, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

My reaction was LOL... I presume I'm one of the 'anti-Catholic' brigade - which amuses me as I'm not even a Christian... Peridon (talk) 22:47, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I think that just makes you a heathen or something like that. ; · ) But the fact that you drink real ale and real cider (cider I up, landlord!) makes you OK in my book. Wine Guy~Talk 23:10, 18 February 2010 (UTC) —The preceding comment was intended to be humorous.

All the old Ralph stuff looks to have reappeared (with those doctrinal references) - I think TK could be a Ralph sock and MC either another or meat. Ralph used that two party discussion before, and TK's spelling/wording is a little suspect - and familiar, somehow. I've reverted to where you left it. Peridon (talk) 12:34, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Have just reverted his reversion of my revert (or something like that...). I say sock. Peridon (talk) 12:42, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I've opened an sock investigation at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Bischof-Ralph. Feel free to add your comments. I'm just going to leave the article for now, it can be dealt with once the SPI is concluded. The constant back and forth with socks takes away too much time from more worthwhile editing. Wine Guy~Talk 23:15, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Ta for that. I get lost with those things. Tin Song has reverted the article with quite a nice comment. BTW - I think I'm anathema now - "like people deleting whole articles and adding false information. This is exactly what User:Peridon did... He deleted the whole article and added false information that has already been proven wrong and he continues to do this over and over... --Templeknight (talk) 21:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)" Peridon (talk) 23:19, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I know what you mean, it's great fun being accused of malfeasance by a sock. I imagine this SPI will be wrapped up quickly. Then it might be time to AfD "Bishop Alfred" again. Wine Guy~Talk 23:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Looks like an edit war is developing with someone called Ban Yoo! Michelle Cannon thought he was something to do with me, but he isn't. Peridon (talk) 17:33, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Ban Yoo (talk · contribs) has been blocked. Just another disruptive sock of Bish. Ralph. Wine Guy~Talk 17:40, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi i left you an apology here Weaponbb7 (talk) 03:55, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

New proposal for wording

Hi, I still think we are misrepresenting facts and would like you to take a look at Talk:Johnny_Weir#Sexuality_verbiage_still_needs_work. -- Banjeboi 02:37, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done I think (hope) we're getting closer. Wine Guy~Talk 07:13, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Johnny Spillane

On February 21, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Johnny Spillane, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 12:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, but most of the credit for this one goes to Marylanderz, who did much of the expansion. Cheers! Wine Guy~Talk 18:16, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

AWB broke image link

Hi, just wanted to let you know that an AWB edit you made broke an image link by adding a comma to the file name here. No big deal, it's fixed, just thought you might want to keep an eye on that. Cheers. Wine Guy~Talk 09:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, WG. I've opened a bug report here. AWB shouldn't do that, and didn't in past versions of the program. I think it's something just recently added to the program. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:18, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Karine Ruby

would you please add a picture of Karine Ruby to her Wikipedia page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.236.163.221 (talk • contribs) 05:40, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I'll see if I can find a free picture, or get someone to release one under a free license. Wine Guy~Talk 06:03, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done Wine Guy~Talk 07:32, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

WP:Athlete

Hello, I am making a comment here so that we don't have a discussion about the Olympic portion of WP:Athlete on the Wendy deletion page (It might start getting off track). Anyways you are right about the Olympics being a statement about inclusion. My problem with saying Olympics is that that is really strict as compared to just being professional. Why not say the finals of a national championship or Olympic trials. I don't think it is right that someone who is 4th best in the nation in their sport is not notable because they didn't make the Olympics. Now if we were to get rid of WP athlete all together I would be ok with that and just stick to WP:bio. But if we are going to make exceptions for athletes we should do so in a way that makes things somewhat equal across professional and Olympic type sports.Thats just my opinion. If you agree or disagree feel free to comment on the WP:Athlete talk page. I have posted something along these lines there. MATThematical (talk) 05:21, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, I'll have a look in at the talk page later. I may have slightly misinterpreted your comment on the AfD, it seemed that you were saying that the guideline specifically excludes non-Olympic athletes. In a sense, it does — it excludes amateur, non-Olympic athletes who are otherwise non-notable. I think a non-Olympic amateur may be notable under the general criteria of WP:BIO if they have received significant enough coverage in reliable sources. To use your example of someone who is 4th best but didn't make the Oly. team, if there are articles written about them and their athletic prowess they probably make the cut here per WP:BIO. If the only coverage of them is, for example, a stats listing, they're probably not notable. That's my take. Cheers. Wine Guy~Talk 06:37, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Kinuyo Yamashita

Hello Wine Guy. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Kinuyo Yamashita, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: It's sufficiently different from last time, considerably more sources. PROD or take to AfD if required. Thank you. GedUK  19:41, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, I'm not sure any of the new sources address the notability issue by providing "significant coverage in independent, reliable sources" though. I guess it's back to AfD for another round with the SPAs. Wine Guy~Talk 19:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Obit links edits

I have no idea why you so strongly object to my linking to obits on certain pages. I am not trying to boost rankings - merely to link to well researched, factually rich articles. I thought that this was the point of Wikipedia - the spread of information. But no, a tiny number of self-appointed 'guardians' of the site step in to insist that by providing a new, entirely free, link to a source of highly-expensive to produce articles, I am spamming Wiki users. Fine. Stuff you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Obituarist (talk • contribs) 18:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

My primary concern is adding obits to non-biographical articles, particularly when the subject of the obit is not even mentioned in the article where you add an obit. This edit, for example, adds an obit for a John Gray to The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited; John Gray is not even mentioned in the article on HSBC. Same thing here, Sir Norman Payne is never mentioned in the article on BAA Limited, yet you add a link to his obit to that article. It's additions like these that raise concerns of spamming, especially since the obits all come from the same publication.

The links you add need to be directly related to the article; linking J.D. Salinger's obit to the article J.D. Salinger may be appropriate, linking it to The Catcher in the Rye would not be (I know you didn't add the link on Catcher, just an example to illustrate my point). You might also consider using the obits as a source to add content to articles, instead of just adding links to all the obits in the Telegraph. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, but an encyclopedia with content derived from reliable sources; obits can indeed be a valuable source. Other editor's have suggested that you look at the guidelines for external links; I'm suggesting it again. Wine Guy~Talk 19:12, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

PS: Another option is to put the link on the talk page of the article with a note that it contains information which other editors may wish to add to the article. Wine Guy~Talk 19:21, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

What's going on with Crucifix?

Looks like an impending storm to me. avs5221 (talk) 05:22, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Not that I know of. I noticed an anon running around inserting POV and original research, removing cited material etc., I went behind and cleaned up after him and told him to cut it out. Pretty tame, standard stuff for religion articles. I notice they came back and fixed a couple typos. No big deal. Wine Guy~Talk 06:32, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

igloo

Hi, and thanks for your interest in igloo. Before using the program, please read the following information carefully - failure to do so may result in your test access being revoked.

igloo is a JavaScript-powered, browser-based anti-vandalism tool, which means you do not have to download or install anything on your computer and it will work on multiple operating systems. However, it does mean that the performance relies on that of your browser and it may operate more slowly than downloaded programs. You must have either Mozilla Firefox 3+ or Google Chrome to use igloo, as it is currently incompatible with other browsers.

igloo relies on a system called iglooNet to assist you in finding and reverting vandalism. It is this system that transforms the program from a pretty version of recent changes to an actual anti-vandalism tool. Naturally, this is beyond the power of a client-side program, and igloo will regularly communicate with an external, non-Wikimedia server. Because of things like server logs, and the iglooNet abuse tracker, this may allow your IP address to be attached to your username - something which is otherwise impossible on Wikipedia. If you do not want this to happen, you MUST NOT USE IGLOO.

If you decide that you do want to test igloo, please keep in mind that it not wholly stable, and you may experience problems where it performs an invalid edit, or other unwanted action. If this happens, fix any mistakes you've made, apologise to anyone you've offended, and let me know. I don't take any responsibility for your use of the program - if you aren't willing to fix any errors, don't use it.

igloo is already quite powerful. The following is a simple guide to using the program:

• The igloo interface is similar to that of other software, including huggle. Recent changes appear on the left, and diffs appear on the right.
• igloo sorts diffs based on iglooNet data so that edits most likely to be vandalism are displayed first. You can press spacebar to view the top diff, or click on any diff to view it directly.
• When you find vandalism, press 'Q' or click the revert button to revert the change, and issue a warning to the user. igloo automatically issues the correct warning. It will ignore existing warnings that are more than 5 days old, and restart from the beginning.
• The iglooNet assertion system tags clean and dirty edits with colour coding - if it suspects an edit is vandalism, it will be flagged as red, and if it believes it to be clean, it will tag it green.
• At any time, you can re-review diffs you have already seen by pressing backspace or using the icons to move through the diff history.
• Remember that igloo cannot currently revert to an arbitrary revision in the page history, so be wary when looking at past edits to a page.

If you have any questions, comments, suggestions or other feedback, I'd love to know. If you hate it, and won't be using it again, please let me know why - and I'll remove you from the test whitelist. If you now try and use igloo, you should find that it will allow you to use the program. Thanks, and good luck! Ale_Jrb^talk 10:24, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

What's it all about, Alfie?

I've noticed, ta. Got in touch with Neb maat whosit the German admin to let him know. Papphase has a large editing history over in Germany, and I've contacted him there. You probably read the post above yours on my talk page.... I've been missing for a week, and was interested to see what had gone on while my back was turned, so to speak. Peridon (talk) 17:30, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism: Crime and Disorder Act 1998

Just noticed some vandalism and obscenities on the above artice by User:212.219.59.227 . You have recently reverted edits from this IP address and added a warning. Could you please also act on this article. Thanks Vrenator (talk) 09:46, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done He hasn't edited since the final warning, but previous edits are fixed. You can always revert vandalism yourself as well, see Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism. Thanks for pointing out the CDA article, I hadn't noticed it since they were a day old and I'm monitoring recent edits as they happen. Wine Guy~Talk 10:05, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

User:Nick835

Thanks for the advice which would have allowed, Mr.Wine Guy I want to carry pictures of the Wikimedia Commons has worked, out how I work and how much image Delete why they learned how to thank you . Nick835 12:07, 10 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick835 (talk • contribs)

Please do not scan the photos for all, Please . Nick835 12:13, 10 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick835 (talk • contribs)

Lo siento, no entiendo lo que está diciendo. Hablo un poco de español, si eso ayuda. Wine Guy~Talk 12:24, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Por favor, no escanear las fotos para todos, por favor, Gracias por el consejo que le habría permitido, Mr.Wine tipo que quiero llevar fotos de Wikimedia Commons ha trabajado, cómo trabajo y cuánto Eliminar imagen por qué han aprendido cómo darle las gracias. Nick835 18:48, 10 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick835 (talk • contribs)

Re. -- Wine Guy~Talk 19:26, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

What is your language, I speak English, I also speak French and Arabic, why can speak the language of, thank you. --Nick835 20:14, 10 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick835 (talk • contribs)

My language abilities are at the top of my userpage. Your page says that you are a native speaker of English, but (no offense) that is clearly not the case; it also says you speak Spanish well, also not evident. If French is actually your native language, I may be able to help you; but Arabic won't work for me. I may be able to find someone else who could help you in Arabic if that is your best language. Wine Guy~Talk 21:36, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

EN: I can speak the French language you could help me at the site of the Wikimedia Commons.

FR: Je ne parle pas la langue française, vous pourriez m'aider sur le site de Wikimedia Commons. --Nick835 17:45, 11 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick835 (talk • contribs)

If you spoke any French at all you would know that "ne (x) pas" is negative; Je ne parle pas française means "I do not speak French". I now see that you're blocked at commons, and rightly so. I won't be wasting any more time with this. Wine Guy~Talk 19:13, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Global blocks

Locked four, other account was not unified. Thank you, always happy for serving. --M/ (talk) 21:06, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Grazie. Wine Guy~Talk 21:36, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Re: Fossil fuel

Sorry, but how is removing "the bubble show" from a page about fossil fuels considered vandalism? I believe it is the IP editor who should be warned for placing random text on the page. Please explain. Thank you, Brambleclawx 00:36, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I think our reverts conflicted, WP:Igloo incorrectly reverted your edit. Thanks for pointing it out. Wine Guy~Talk 00:41, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Brambleclawx 00:42, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Having taken a closer look, I'm guessing that the issue was technically my fault, not igloo's. I was probably a half second too slow on the revert button, igloo usually will abort a revert if there's an actual conflict. Thanks again for pointing it out. Wine Guy~Talk 01:39, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Wedding Peach Page

Kinda wondering why you reverted my change back http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wedding_Peach#Sailormoon_Rip-off_line

Did you even look before you reverted that back? It states this:

In 2004, Wedding Peach: Young Love was released, a compilation of Wedding Peach stories made specifically for the monthly magazine Shogaku Sannensei ("Elementary School Third-grader").[4] To better fit the magazine's target audience, the "Young Love" version of Wedding Peach features younger-looking characters, less complex storylines, and simpler dialogue.

wedding peach is a ripoff of sailor moon

If removing that line isn't constructive, well quite frankly I don't know what is. --69.247.203.73 (talk) 06:54, 13 March 2010 (UTC) Block quote

My mistake, it looks like I read the diff backwards; while I was using an automated script to patrol changes, I am human. It's been fixed, and I've removed the notice from your talk page. Thanks for pointing out the error. Wine Guy~Talk 07:10, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

RE: Wyndham Deedes images

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		For dedicating some of your valuable time to improving images for those of us who don't have the brains to do it ourselves! Thanks for the picture of Sir Wyndham Deedes, you can see it in action here. Thanks again, Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk | Sign 19:51, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Glad I could help, and the appreciation is appriciated! Wine Guy~Talk 07:45, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

thanks

Thanks for the note, I probably wouldn't have noticed otherwise. I believe the issue is resolved. bahamut0013^words_deeds 13:58, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Revision history of Schrödinger equation

Since you are the most recent editor I see of the "Schroedinger equation" article, and apparently have the power to undue any changes that are made there, and because I am unfamiliar with all the editing procedures, I decided to send this to your attention.

I have seen that a couple of people have suggested an addition to the article that would show the separation of the time-dependent wave function into a product of a time function with a space function, leading to the time-independent form of the Shroedinger equation. This addition would only take a couple of lines, and in my opinion considerably reduce the voodoo factor. Anyone who knows how to take a derivative would follow the logic, even if they had never seen the Schroedinger equation. I hope you will add the needed lines to the article. In the meantime, I will try to learn how to make the changes myself and post it to see if it will be accepted.

76.248.144.40 (talk) 21:43, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, and I'm sure your opinions and contributions would be welcome; I'm probably not the best person to ask though, my only edit to the article was to remove some rather juvenile vandalism. I took the liberty of copying your message to the article's talk page at Talk:Schrödinger equation#Rewrite. You can add to that discussion by clicking the edit button next to the heading "Rewrite". I would also recommend looking through Wikipedia:Introduction which will explain how to go about editing articles. Wine Guy~Talk 00:25, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Wine Guy is not available.

--Wine Guy~Talk 19:38, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

New ubox and top-icon for WikiGryphons

• Please forgive the talk page spam. There are new userbox and topicon selections for editors who identify themselves as WikiGryphons; see User:Ling.Nut/Gryphontopicon2 and Template:User wikipedia/Gryphon2. Cheers! • Ling.Nut 02:16, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Hannah Teter crop.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Hannah Teter crop.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. Courcelles 16:10, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to events in June and July: bot, script, template, and Gadget makers wanted

I invite you to the yearly Berlin hackathon. It's 1-3 June and registration is now open. If you need financial assistance or help with visa or hotel, just mention it in the registration form.

This is the premier event for the MediaWiki and Wikimedia technical community. We'll be hacking, designing, and socialising, primarily talking about ResourceLoader and Gadgets (extending functionality with JavaScript), the switch to Lua for templates, Wikidata, and Wikimedia Labs.

Our goals for the event are to bring 100-150 people together, including lots of people who have not attended such events before. User scripts, gadgets, API use, Toolserver, Wikimedia Labs, mobile, structured data, templates -- if you are into any of these things, we want you to come!

I also thought you might want to know about other upcoming events where you can learn more about MediaWiki customization and development, how to best use the web API for bots, and various upcoming features and changes. We'd love to have power users, bot maintainers and writers, and template makers at these events so we can all learn from each other and chat about what needs doing.

Check out the the developers' days preceding Wikimania in July in Washington, DC and our other events.

Best wishes! - Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation's Volunteer Development Coordinator. Please reply on my talk page, here or at mediawiki.org. Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation Volunteer Development Coordinator 13:59, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Gettting Wikimedians to the Olympic Games

Hi. I am part of an effort to get Wikimedians access to the 2016 Summer Olympics as accredited reporters and photographers. Part of this effort includes covering the 2012 Summer Paralympics. Two Wikimedians have credentials to attend these games as reporters through Wikimedia Australia. As English Wikipedia does not allow original reporting, this is largely through Wikinews with a project page found at Wikinews:Paralympic Games. If you are interested in helping to get Wikimedians to the next Summer Olympics,I'd encourage you to assist with Wikinews efforts, and also to work on all language 2012 Summer Paralympic Wikipedia articles before, during and after the Games to demonstrate a track record of success. Thank you. --LauraHale (talk) 03:06, 17 August 2012 (UTC)