This talk page is becoming very long. Consider archiving inactive discussions.

 AjaxSmack 

User Statistics at XTools by these folks

User Statistics at User Analysis Tool by User:cyberpower678 (formerly X!'s Edit Counter by User:TParis)

User Subpages 1 and 2

User Interwiki Accounts

Editing Help Page

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, AjaxSmack! My name is Ryan, aka Acetic Acid. I noticed that you were new and haven't received any messages yet. I just wanted to see how you were doing. Wikipedia can be a little intimidating at first, since it uses different formatting than other sites that use HTML and CSS. In the long run, though, you'll find that the WikiSyntax is a lot easier and faster than those other ways. Here are a few links to get you started:

• How to edit a page
• Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article

There are a lot of policies and guides to read, but I highly recommend reading over those first. If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. Please be sure to sign your name on Talk Pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, along with a link to your user page. This way, others know when you left a message and how to find you. It's easier than having to type out your name, right? :)

I hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. We can use all the help we can get! Have a nice day. Sincerely, Ryan 01:03, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Please do not remove factual text from articles. If the wording appears to be biased but is nonetheless factual, please instead reword it to a more neutral phrasing. More info at Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Lack_of_neutrality_as_an_excuse_to_delete and Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Rewording_a_potentially_biased_statement. Thank you. --Pascal666 04:12, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I saw a commercial on TV the other day where Donald Trump made a comment along the lines of "my hair is recognized the world over". I got curious what that meant, the article on him said nothing about his hair. Finally found on other websites that he had a comb over described with different synonyms for horrendous. I agree the sentence needs to be changed, but I would like to keep a link to comb over somewhere on Donald Trump, as that is the information I was looking for and did not find. I can't comment on the other paragraph. --Pascal666 04:27, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect. Thank you. --Pascal666 18:55, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

All sounds reasonable. In all of the cases that are a matter of naming, my main concern is that all the reasonable redirects are there and all the names are mentioned in the article. I don't really care where the article resides.

The Province of Bessarabia and Ottoman Bessarabia might as well be merged, they do seem to cover the same topic (both badly). Ottoman Bessarabia currently reads more like a dispute than an article. We might as well sort out the mess in one place rather than two. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:55, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding naming, I have a slight inclination toward Yedisan. I have usually read about this rarely-mentioned region in German (Jedisan), but in English it would be pronounced Yedisan. Edisan brings up the most Google hits, but none of them seem relevant to the region here. Olessi 17:24, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have added Names & History subheaders to the article and copyedited some of it. I tried to rephrase the mentioning of "Nogai Tartary" and "West Nogai"; please correct it if I misinterpreted your meaning. Olessi 20:17, 14 December 2005 (UTC1)

Hello LuiKhuntek! I would like to remind you to vote on moves that you have proposed, like Bugeac and Podilia. Even though you proposed the moves, that doesn't mean that administrators will automatically count you as a support vote. It is better to add your name to the support section to be sure. Have a good day! Olessi 18:31, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Huge kab like 103.138.11.13 (talk) 17:50, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am by now so tired of being assumed to be a chuavinist anti-foreign langauge Westerner every time I try to argue for less use of needlees foreign syllabaries and alphabets that I've had enough. I've removed your undue and uncivil sarcasm at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions#No hangul, please, and I'm urging you to restate your arguments in a reasoned and enlightened fashion instead of trying to engage in pure squabbling.

Peter ^Isotalo 11:02, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year! As I remember we never exchanged the data on Arabian monarchies from 'Almanach de Bruxelles' I mentioned when discussing the Aden protectorates, here they are (239kb). As it were private copies, I had made some minor changes and additional notes (even some in my native Dutch), but no changes to worry about; I'm not sure whether I also deleted some genealogical parts, unfortunately. Apparently some Word features suffer from the transfer to this medium, but that's only the presentation.

Please copy them to your PC and then IMMEDIATELY remove them from this talk page, since they may not be fit for Internet access as such. Hopefully they help you to make some more contributions in 2006.

Why are you opposing the move from Nuovo Cinema Paradiso to Nuovo cinema Paradiso? WhiteNight ^{T | @ | C} 08:59, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry about that. I guess I was mistaken. --Khoikhoi 23:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have withdrawn this move request. I think that both Gov't and Politic pages should remain the same until the information on these pages is more developed and warrants a page split.

On a different note, you may wish to participate in this more interesting debate. - Spaceriqui 22:06, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Members ALTAF JACK STYLES (talk) 08:25, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I meant that Polesie is the well established name in English usage and inventing a new name is not appropriate for wp. I'll rephrase. --_Lysy^talk 08:42, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just wanted to leave you a note that the rules of the vote at Talk:List of German concentration camps have slightly changed since you've voted there and it's likely that you might want to reconsider your vote. --_Lysy^talk 20:32, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds great, please proceed! My original list I believe was based upon Colin Imber's "The Ottoman Empire", but I haven't kept tabs on the article and thus I cannot answer for the current version. As long as no information is lost, I believe reorganizing the article would be a really good thing. /The Phoenix 09:54, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I greatly appreciate your courtesy, and certainly would like us to make good use of those data you mention. (As I still believe there is a point in having a single 'master list' that would for example allow readers to look up the Ottoman provinces without knowing where they are, from which links should in time be provided to appropriate historical sections for each, possibly with a mini-history in telegram style (at least aquisition, status changes such as gubernatorial style, loss, mergers) I strongly feel we'ld probably do best to provide both this geographically organized list -I would then also go further to accomodate orientation by modern states and regions- and next a few 'freezes' in time as you intend, which I for one would certainly appreciate- thus we cater for various uses: browing or oversight. As I have a long watchlist and often try to use data both in a pivotal page as our case and various other ones (such as cases of units, titles...) I suspect my work on the 'master list' (any ideas for an actual section name?) will progress slowly, so I suggest you don't wait for it to create a section for case oversights, but I think our combined efforts should result in an exciting page in due time).

As I reread your message, I realize I wrote the above (now in parenthesis) as if you just meant lists, but the word chart may well stand for something far more elaborate and structured, while I'm not sure how that would look- so I wonder if it would be possible to see a sample, I may well have to reconsider the above first reaction altogether.

As I tried to save the above, an edit conflict alerted me The Phoenix just gave his okay. Indeed, as long as no data get lost we should be able to figure it out. It seems like we're on to a good thing!

P.S. May I, be the way, remind you of my request to remove the data under number five on this page, which contain the (formerly free) Almanach de Bruxelles data we talked about while editing Aden Protectorate, after copying them if f any use? I'm realy not comfortable with keeping them openly on a Wikipedia-page Fastifex 10:38, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also highly encourage revising the info at Subdivisions. I can try to expand upon it with information from Magocsi. Olessi 18:18, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have expressed opposition to your proposed long names for the Ottoman provinces. I dislike long names, and ones that don't fit into running text. I detest most efforts at imposing uniformity on WP, which is inconsistent. If you must force uniformity, I would prefer (of the two choices), moving Basra Province, Ottoman Empire into Basra Province, with a dab header to the Iraqi Governorate (and so on); Basra province might be better. (And what's wrong with vilayet, which seems to have been the contemporary usage in English?) Septentrionalis 21:28, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you going to vote on your Talk:Bergen-Belsen rename request? LuiKhuntek 15:49, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message, LuiKhuntek. I thought it was likely to go against Wikipedia policy to vote for your own Requested Move, but is this not so? (Seems odd if not!)  Best wishes, David Kernow 20:40, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it's against policy or not...

Intriguing. I realise I've always assumed it would be. But I've just left a vote there and at least one other user (Lysy) hasn't been taken aback! David Kernow 20:53, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do other wikipedians a favour and start using edit summaries. Thanks, Ghirla | talk 09:46, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I was wrong about this. I thought that Sanjak of Smederevo was an earlier province that existed there before the Austrian administration (1718-1739), and that Pashaluk of Belgrade was a new province that was formed after 1739. However, I looked at some sources, so the Pashaluk of Belgrade was in fact alternative name of the Sanjak of Smederevo, but used more often in the Serbian historiography. Also, I found that the administrative seat was moved from Smederevo to Belgrade in 1521. Can you tell me to which time period refer this part of the article (which you wrote there): "Belgrade had been the center of the region under Austrian rule but was neglected under the Ottomans and Smederevo (Semendire) was the administrative center. Nevertheless, Belgrade eventually became the seat of a pasha with the title of vizier and the Sanjak began to be referred to as the Pashaluk of Belgrade, although it was still called the Sanjak of Smederevo in official documents." Does it refer to 1521 perhaps or to some other year? As for the Eyalet of Temeşvar, I think that current shorter name is better. We do not need too long names for the articles. PANONIAN (talk) 01:25, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please vote again here if you want:

• Talk:Timişoara Province, Ottoman Empire

PANONIAN (talk) 01:26, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think you may be interested in checking this new article. I placed a {NPOV} tag there. --Ghirla | talk 13:27, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello LuiKhuntek! As you are a contributor who has frequently worked on central and eastern European topics, you might be interested in the recently-created noticeboard for articles concerning German-related topics. Feel free to participate with the project if you are interested! Olessi 01:48, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the heads-up on voting procedures on moving pages. This is actually my first time moving pages via administrator's aid, and I didn't know the procedure quite well. Deiaemeth 22:22, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You should vote on your proposed move at Talk:Baitou Mountain. Nominations are not always counted as a vote. LuiKhuntek 22:18, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I didn't propose that page for moving. --Fibonacci 00:46, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. Your tag appeared along with another at the nomination here: Wikipedia:Requested_moves#13_February_2006. Wasn't sure who owned it... LuiKhuntek 03:01, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for notifying me. I have now removed my signature from that nomination. --Fibonacci 03:10, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should have a look at the doings of some anti-Arab Christian activists who designed a totally inaccurate and propagandist Syriacs box, mentioning Maronites and Melkites as ethnically "Syriacs", thus non-Arabs, which I proposed for deletion here. There are non-Arab Christians in the region, be they Armenians or Assyrians, but these fanatics include Arabized Christians in their anti-Arab dreams. Pylambert 23:07, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the translations and everything seems to be correct. About Gradiščanska, I have to admit I don't recall ever hearing about the region around Gradisca being reffered to as Gradiščanska in Slovenian, but then again I don't recall hearing it at all. However I did check the Enciklopedija Slovenije, and it is mentioned a couple of times, so I'm guessing the name is correct. edolen1 16:27, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating the article, I'm from a village that belonged to that county and it was on my to do list. I've expanded a little bit about culture, I hadn0t so much time so I think there are quite a few errors, anyway I plan to expand it more if I'll have some spare time--Klenje 13:13, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saw your work on China rivers. Thanks for the clean-up. One thing you deleted that I have a question about is the little explanation of the different parts of Changjiang. Should'nt there be something to explain that Yangzte, Changjiang, and Jinsha are different eyt the same? Just my opinion.Mike 19:26, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• The river question... haven't noticed any discussion about the format. I just started addding to the majority format at the time... which was for many the entire Chinese name including he, shui, or jiang + River. Of course that doesn't make much sense. I'm cool with how you changed it. No use being redundant... again and again.Mike 13:28, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure whether we should go with the Chinese name with the Chinese word for river included, or with just the name and then river in English.Mike 01:09, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I aggree... river name then "River". Do you think that since it's a list of rivers in China we should use the Chinese name and the international norm name too?Mike 01:55, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind lending your opinion to a content dispute that I am currently involved in on University of South Carolina. As you may know, USC has a strong rivalry with Clemson University. I feel that the athletics section of the article should discuss this rivalry, and I feel that this discussion should include a reference to the overall record between the two schools in various major sports. Other editors have disagreed, and feel that the record should not be mentioned. As it happens, Clemson leads in two of the discussed sports and USC leads in the third. I would appreciate it if you would consider lending your opinion on this issue on Talk:University of South Carolina. Thanks! Ëvilphoenix ^Burn! 00:41, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification! -- thunderboltz^{a.k.a.Deepu_Joseph |TALK} 05:08, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Ajax, I wanted to let you know that I have nominated Arlington County, Virginia as a candidate for US Collaboration of the Week. The article is in need of much help and with a little group effort, it could be brought to Featured Article status! I brought this to your attention as I have seen you have contributed to the article in the recent past. Please cast your vote with your signature at the US Collaboration of the Week page under Arlington County, Virginia. --Caponer 01:56, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, we're up and running at Wikipedia:WikiProject Virginia Highways. --MPD01605 01:29, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a move request under discussion at Talk:House of Karadjordjević Henq 09:42, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ajax. Ive noticed by your edits to the Gibraltar page that you can transliterate arabic using the proper letters (with the dots under the T ect...)When you have the time, could you have a look at the article Arabic influence on the Spanish language and maybe give me a hand with the transliteration? Thanks alot.

Guzman.

Thanks alot for the list Ajax!

Thank you for notifying me about the voting. Adam78 19:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you AjaxSmack for informing me about the Names of European cities in different languages deletion proposal.--Pjetër Bogdani III 13:10, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please see my question at Talk:Budjak#Cyrillic? Thanks. - Jmabel | Talk 18:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. - Jmabel | Talk 02:32, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi -- I rerequested to move of "State Great Khural" to "State Great Hural" that you opposed -- just thought I should let you know in case you want to vote again. Joriki 10:34, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a past participant in the discussion on how to handle the Georgia pages, I thought you might be interested to know that there's a new attempt to reach consensus on the matter being addressed at Talk:Georgia (country)#Requested_Move_-_July_2006. Please come by and share your thoughts to help form a consensus. --Vengeful Cynic 04:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

move request Talk:John II Casimir of Poland

AjaxSmack, your participation is welcome in the Wikipedia:State route naming conventions poll. Please give your input as to the process by 23:59 UTC on August 8.

Regards, Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:58, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is this [1], Ajax? "Currently"? Were you not careful when you were writing this into the article, or you have had bad intentions?
I hope you weren't careful enough. Kubura 23:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure 箍 = 塊 in Taiwanese? I think 箍 means something else. [2] --Chochopk 05:23, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/Style, currency unit should use local form, e.g. Chinese wen, not Chinese cash. If you have any concern, please discuss at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numismatics. --Chochopk 07:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your point. But this is rather an old topic. I think the style guide implies transliterating into Latin alphabets if the local language is not. If you still have concern, please go to the numismatic discuss page. --Chochopk 08:20, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello :) I noticed that in this edit http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Khwarezm&diff=32488817&oldid=32341386 you changed Kuali to Guali. Could you put in the authentic original Chinese characters for this transliteration and a source on the same article please? Many thanks.

You are a god!

I did what I could. I turned it into one box, instead of five small boxes. Here's what you need to do though: find a way to make a separation (such as a blank space or black line) between the various 'end' and 'beginning' sections, so that it doesn't look so overwhelming. The shields need to be changed, too, but I can work on this if you'll take care of cleaning up the article in general. --MPD01605 (T / C) 06:42, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating the article! I'll try to add some info from the German wiki in the future. Olessi 05:18, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have my answer here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Križevci_(former_county) The move of the names was discussed and the reasons are explained there. PANONIAN (talk) 18:27, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Arabic, "jama'" means "mosque" or "the place where people gather". It most likely refers to the Old Central Mosque not the city itself, as older natives simply call it "the jama'" or "the mosque" (according to the Wikipedia entry). However, there's no mention for this in the link you showed me. That article mentioned some of the famous mosques in Nizwa like "the famous jama' of Nizwa" and "jama' sa'al". If you'd like me to translate that article, drop me a line. ~MK (talk) 05:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for spamming your talk page, but since you had contributed in the past to the WP:NC(GN) proposal, which is currently ready for a wider consultation, I thought you might want to give it another look now and, hopefully, suggest some final improvements. Thanks. --Lysy^talk 22:56, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I fully intend to see restored the minimal details you deleted on individual states. A list of Arabic names without any details makes about as much sence as a laundy list in Martian (except to those who already know). Fastifex 23:23, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious, but where did you find references regarding the unincorporated towns? I live in the Hampton Roads/Tidewater area (Chesapeake for the last two years), and I cannot find any references to these being unincorporated towns. All real estate deeds, maps, etc etc ad infinitum refer to the city proper (Chesapeake vice Great Bridge, Virginia Beach vice Kempsville). Locals refer to the area by community name, owing back to the days prior to city incorporation, but that is for historical reference and community pride vice any legal entity. Even the wikipedia entry for Great Bridge lists it as a community. I wanted to touch base with you first before I remove those entries.

Supersquid 23:40, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By definition, unincorporated towns are not legal entities. None of the other towns on the list are legal entities either. You are correct that they are communities and as Wikipedia notes, a town is a "a residential community of people ranging from a few hundred to several thousands." It's just that the word community is extremely vague ("a group of people who interact and share certain things as a group") and the word town narrows the scope of the list to populated places that are not in the incorporated places lists at List of towns in Virginia and List of cities in Virginia. - AjaxSmack 23:58, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Ehhh that seems like a really slippery slope... if it isn't a city or incorporated town, then it's an unincorporated town, is what I take from that. Heh, then that list is woefully incomplete, because it leaves out places like Pungo, Blackwater, Uniontown, Back Bay, North Landing, Centerville... and these are just the places around where I live :-)

But I disagree that they're towns. They may have been (I know Pungo was) but in 1963 the entire county of Princess Anne was consolidated as the Independent City of Virginia Beach. In fact, if you read further down on the definition of town, in Virginia it states

In Virginia, a town is an incorporated municipality similar to a city (though with a smaller required minimum population), but while cities are by Virginia law independent of counties, towns are contained within a county.

By that definition, since Chesapeake, Virginia Beach, Suffolk, Newport News, Hampton, and Portsmouth are all independent cities with no corresponding county, the communities in the list are not unincorporated and therefore shouldn't be on the list.

Supersquid 00:26, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The passage you cite above refers to incorporated towns, i.e. those on the List of towns in Virginia. You're right that the list is woefully incomplete. That's why there's a Template:Virginia-stub tag at the bottom. The solution is to add Pungo, Blackwater, Whaleyville, etc. to the list. Otherwise, by your reasoning, the entire list should be deleted because none of the places on it are incorporated. (If you're worried about the list becoming too long, note the dearth of editing activity since its creation. If it does become a problem, the line "list of important population centers" is a green light to cull.) - AjaxSmack 00:40, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I dunno... I say that Yorktown is a perfect example to what I feel truly merits definition of an unincorporated town. Small population, no independent municipal government (ie no mayor, no city police) in a specific county (in this case, York County). Whaleyville has actually been incorporated into the Independent City of Suffolk, which does have it's own police force, it's own mayor, etc etc. Check out Census-designated place.

I'm not worried overly about the length of the list... and it's hard to determine what is considered admissible in a "list of important population centers." I figured if we went with the definition of actual Census Designated Places (aka unincorporated towns) then we keep the list accurate. Let's move this to the article's discussion page (where it should be... don't mean to clutter your user talk page lol), and maybe we can get some other user's inputs on this and make it worthy of Wikipedia.

Supersquid 01:05, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it means Land of the English. Beled (بلد) means country or land. But I'm not so sure about the meaning of Ingris. Some people, especially in Arabia, (informally) call the English people Ingris instead of Inglis (إنجليز). But I searched this on Google and didn't find much results. ~MK (talk) 13:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think "de-piped pig link" was one of my better edit summaries. Ben-w 22:20, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate your advising me that Skåneland, once again, is up for renaming discusson. Somewhere in the history we've lost the last debate, but I've resurrected some of the material. Skål - Williamborg (Bill) 05:20, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm changing it to the State Route style in accordance with WP:USSH. --NE2 23:44, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The plan (if the move vote passes, as it looks like it will) is to split the 'Passing' section from Pass to become the disambig page for 'Passing'. That covers 'Overtaking'. --AliceJMarkham 23:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the plan changed ever so slightly. I ended up reverting the split of 'Passing' from Pass and redirecting 'Passing' to 'Pass'. A couple of us got very enthusiastic about cleaning up the rather cluttered 'Pass' page. Much tidier all round if you ask me. :) --AliceJMarkham 07:59, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Most of the those maps are not very old. They show Al-Ahsa as an Imara (principality) before the unification of Saudi Arabia. Al-Ahsa and most of the current main regions of Saudi Arabia were seperate in the past (19th and early 20th centuries). However, if you look at this older map [3], you'll notice the (yellow) region I was talking about.

"Bahrain up until 1521 comprised the bigger region of Ahsa, Qatif (both are now the eastern province of Saudi Arabia) as well as Awal (now Bahrain Islands). The region stretched from what is now Kuwait to Oman. This was Iqlim Al-Bahrain (Province of Bahrain). In 1521, the Portuguese separated Awal (now Bahrain) from the rest and since then the name of Bahrain specifically referred to today’s Bahrain." from [4].

"In early Islamic history, the name Bahrain applied loosely to the area embracing the oases of Hasa and Qatif on the eastern coast of Arabia as well as to the archipelago lying just a few miles offshore. Later the name came to be restricted to the islands." from [5] (also read more of that article and you'll find out how Al-Ahsa became a part of Saudi Arabia).

"In 287/900, the Qarmatians acquired control of Hajar, the seat of the Abbasid governor. The Abbasid caliph Mutadid (d. 289/902) sent an army of 2000 men against them, but were defeated. In 290/903, Hajar was finally subdued after a long siege laid by Abu Sa'id. He established his headquarters at al-Ahsa (or al-Lahsa), which became the capital of the Jannabid rule of the Qarmatians of Bahrain in 314/926." from [6].

See also: [7]. —MK (talk) 15:39, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree with you, but I think that using two different spellings (for Al-Ahsa/Hasa) isn't correct. However, both of them are acceptable transliterations, and both of them are used (in the past and at the moment). There's only one way to write the word in Arabic (الأحساء), but the pronunciation varies from a dialect to another. In formal Arabic, it's pronounced Al-Ahsa'. However, people there (in Al-Ahsa) call it El-Hasa. So I think it's better that Wikipedia sticks with one of them.

Al-Ahsa is the plural of Hessi (حسي), which means the rocky ground that is covered by a sandy layer, which stores rainwater. It was called Al-Ahsa because it had many of those grounds. Previously, it was called Hajr wal-Bahrain (هجر والبحرين), and then Ahsa' bani Sa'ad (أحساء بني سعد). Between 500 B.C. and 300 A.D., the principality of Al-Jarha (إمارة الجرهاء) existed on its lands. This was taken from [8].

As a side note, I'd like to tell you that I visited Al-Ahsa more than once last year. I noticed that InterContinental, which was probably the best hotel there, called their branch Al-Ahsa in English (see [9]). But still, many other sources call it Al-Hasa or whatever else. For example, Google translates it to Hassa, which is also an acceptable transliteration. If you search for it using Google, you'll find a variety of transliterations (google:الأحساء).

To sum up, I don't think that using two different spellings for this region here is an accurate thing. This happens to almost all Arabic names, even the most famous ones. The reason is that usually there's no one official/general way to write Arabic words in English. Personally, I think that Al-Ahsa is the closest spelling to the formal Arabic pronunciation, but I don't consider other spellings wrong. Are you sure of that Al-Hasa/Al-Ahsa refered to two different regions in English? Because I believe that's incorrect. —MK (talk) 13:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed you warned Lorenzino about a new proposal of moving Lombard (lnguistics) page back to its natural title of Lombard language. Many thanks! Anyway, since this vote is still open, I kindly ask you oppose to the original move of Lombard language to Lombard (lnguistics). Sorry for not watching enough. Please, let's keep in touch. Bests, --10caart 11:19, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, would you mind checking out the Partium article to see if it's neutral now? It's gone through a lot of changes since you last edited it. Thanks, Khoikhoi 05:47, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I totally forgot to vote. Thanks for pointing it out. - TheMightyQuill 05:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(1) Have you noticed your talk page is a virginia stub? (2) Re any changing or shifting issues in the Indonesia project - it potentially sets a precedent for the whole WP Indonesia project - so please take this opportunity to look at the project as a whole - or place a comment on the Talk page of the project ratrher than an isloated article. Best wishes SatuSuro 11:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the comments on the two (that we have found so far) regarding the change proposals, thanks SatuSuro 12:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• You can find the districts of Kenya here: [10]
• Here are the zones of the Somali region of Ethiopia:[11]
• Here are the districts (woredas) of the Somali region of Ethiopia: [12]
• More Ethiopia maps here [13]
• Here are the regions of Somalia: [14]
• Here are the districts of Somalia: [15]

Thanks a lot for the headsup. I'll do what's necessary.Cameron Nedland 04:03, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Please join us! Chris 07:54, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - I'm contacting you because of your involvement with using English instead of foreign terms in articles. A few are trying to "Anglicise" French terms in Wiki articles according to current guidelines but there is some resistance (eg/: "Région => Region"; "Département => Departement"). Your input would be appreciated here page. Thankyou. --Bob 16:05, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey AjaxSmack,

You moved a proposal to move because you said you opposed, yet you didn't leave a comment as to why. Mind elobarating more on the issue?

cheers JackSparrow Ninja 02:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After five days with no discussion, this RM could use a simple endorsement. Gene Nygaard 06:14, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The page "Palatinate of the Rhine" has been moved to "Palatinate (region)". Navou ^banter / _{review me} 23:07, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The page "Barbarism (grammar)" has been moved to "Barbarism (linguistics)". Navou ^banter / _{review me} 23:10, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please check for redirects if you get a chance. Best regards, Navou ^banter / _{review me} 23:16, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done, but I think there are some double (and triple) redirects left that I don't have time to chase down; please fix when you get a chance. Thanks. Opabinia regalis 23:12, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that Markusseup, John k, you and me are in favour of changing the name into Trentino-Alto Adige. Do we need to start another survey? --Checco 09:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... I don't think it's a bug. Maybe, there was an interwiki conflict? Now, I disabled interwiki removal function in bot. Thans for reporting a bug. - VasilievVV 06:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 10 May, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mongolian barbecue, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

I love Mongolian barbecue and I had no idea about this, but it totally makes sense because I remember it being really popular in Taiwan among my cousins. --howcheng {chat} 18:51, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AjaxSmack, very unfortunately, Mongolian Barbecue was not invented in Taiwan and it's a Japanese cuisine, "Jingisukan" (transliteration of Genghis Khan) invented around 1920s This name appears in a cookbook by 1926 with a first specialty restaurant by 1936. There is already the article on this in Japanese wikipedia [16] and thus I'm going to propose that either this article be moved to Jingisukan or completely rewritten from scratch. Also, the claim that Mongolian soldiers used their shield to cook meat is a fanciful tale invented after dish became popular. Shields that Mongolian troops had used were usually wood and covered with animal skins and thus impossible. --Revth 05:52, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, could you participate in a new poll for Dokdo? The candidates include Liancourt Rocks, Takeshima, and the new Takeshima/Dokdo variations suggested by user:Macgruder. I'm informing you because you voted on the last poll. Thanks. (Wikimachine 18:56, 21 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Hi AjaxSmack. There is ongoing discussion at the ANI where your name appeared. It is due to your restoration of a merge tag here. As per the ANI discussion, could you please try to leave a comment at the article page whenever you tag or restore {merge}. Thanks on advance. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 20:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have anything to add on the discussion about what to call the one that runs through SUEW and DUEW, but I did notice you'd taken time to restructure and thereby to render the existing article more coherent. Needed doing. Thank you. Charles01 05:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Ajax - the district(s) I mentioned were for Bozcaada - which now redirects to Bozcaada (district), and Gökçeada - which now redirects to Gökçeada (district). They originally kept going to Tenedos and Imbros, because there were users insisting upon such usage for those that are known under the Turkish (and proper) name - not the historical name(s). It is a 'happy' split, and one I can see the same for the whole "Province of Bolzano-Bozen" and "South Tyrol" conflict. Rarelibra 21:10, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Lithia water, by Vegaswikian (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Lithia water seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Lithia water, please affix the template ((hangon)) to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 23:24, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please find version of text which speak about Banat, Bačka and Baranja so that this is not misleading and PANONIAN stop to play revert games. You are having census data on discussion page. For your information I having many revert wars with PANONIAN like users from Hungary and Romania because of his misleading articles in which he want to show how Vojvodina has always been Serbian land. I will not give you examples of this others discussions and revert wars it is better for you to stay out :)) --Rjecina 01:22, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see this article like place nationalistic wars. I see 1 nationalistic user which is fighting against others user in his wish to sell his version of truth. With this cultural, polite policy we only support future conflict and new Hitlers which are creating new history to explain future wars. There is only one real history all others can ease become dangerous myths which we must fight. --Rjecina 14:44, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Sorry, now I see it is also used in English. It just seems quite weird for us, people of the Czech Republic, as the term "Moravské Slovensko", Czech equivalent of Moravian Slovakia, is not used in the country. In the Czech Republic, only Slovácko form is commonly used. - Darwinek 11:03, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ajax. I will try to look through the various articles over the next week or so. To be honest, except for superficial edits, I've avoided the UAE. (Both odd and understable, I'd suggest.) I do agree with the broad principal that city and emirate should have their own articles. But it's been a couple of years since I've actually looked them. Marskell 19:42, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello AjaxSmack, could you help us move South Tyrol to Province of Bolzano-Bozen as found through our discussions? It requires an admin to move the page because of Province of Bolzano-Bozen existing already. Icsunonove 21:50, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AjaxSmack, thanks for setting up the discussion. I've put in my $0.02. I more and more like this idea of moving the history content to Tirol. Then having the History of pages redirecting to there, but still have South Tyrol and Alto Adige redirect to Province of BZ (and likewise Trentino to Province of TN). Icsunonove 03:24, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I provided input at the discussion. Also, as I said there, I put top page links to Tyrol (disambiguation) to prevent any potential confusion. Also, I restructured the disamblig page for improved clarity on what are present-day political units and what are historical regions, so you may want to take a look at that. —AldeBaer 11:17, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes I know... the same old, boring conflict Italian vs German name, but I think in this case i have the Naming Conventions on my side. Maybe you're interested, Mai-Sachme 16:04, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AjaxSmack, please, please help key an eye on Province of Bolzano-Bozen. We had a great group of editors finally move this page to the multilingual provincial name, as cited in Brittanica (!!). Gryffindor is now having a hissy fit and saying this is the work of some "Italian" sham vote. [17] Gryffindor is going back and reverting edits in mass [18]. I've personally had enough of Gryffindor's abuses on Wikipedia. Please give advice on how we can have him investigated for the Administrative abuses he has been guilty of since 2005. Icsunonove 05:08, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AjaxSmack, Sorry, I was busy, but that discussion that took place, I'm afraid, doesn't warrant any changes yet. I'm afraid the level of the discussion was poor, with most people not clear on the history. Such a change, as I suggest on the talk page, requires an RfC in History, Politics, and the India pages. Also you can't have British Indian Empire beginning in 1858. I think at this point, the best thing is to revert to the last stable version, and please consider replying to my suggestions on the talk page of British Raj. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:46, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The third opinion request for User talk:Stemonitis has been removed from WP:3o. Third opinion isn't really appropriate in this case since it seems you're basically trying to dispute the outcome of an admin's decision in closing an WP:RM discussion. Also, the discussion is still continuing with other editors on the article's talk page, which violates the 3o guideline of "two editors only." I'd suggest if you still want to bring other editor(s) into the discussion that you consider using WP:RFC/HIST or something like that. Otherwise, see if you reach another consensus with the continuing discussion at Talk:British Raj. --Darkwind (talk) 17:53, 28 August 2007 (UTC1)

Hello! I thought you may be interested in joining WikiProject Dravidian civilizations. We work on creating, expanding and making general changes to Dravidian related articles. If you would be interested in joining feel free to visit the Participants Page! Thank You.

Wiki Raja 22:46, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you could please put in your opinion at the talk page, as a certain user has returned. Icsunonove 00:46, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alex, I would very much like to merge/improve the articles, but there's been a change in my work situation and I haven't got as much time available for this sort of thing as I used to...:)

It will also be tricky as the two articles need a major reworking to put them into some kind of shape.

Bathrobe 06:29, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alex, for a long time I couldn't figure out what should be done to merge the articles on cheongsam and qipao without making major changes. I've finally figured it out. I don't think they need to be merged. I think it's fine to have separate articles. All that is needed is a change in naming.

At cheongsam, I've changed all occurrences of 'cheongsam' to changshan. That's the standard Chinese name for this male item of clothing. It was totally wrong to write the article using the Cantonese and English name 'cheongsam' which, as I pointed out ad nauseum, is different in meaning from the standard Chinese name changshan. With this change, and a few changes in the text, suddenly the article makes sense!

All that's needed now is for the article to be moved to Changshan. I realise that this is introducing yet another foreign word into English Wikipedia, but it seems the lesser evil than totally warping the meaning of 'cheongsam'.

I'm also thinking about moving qipao to the space left by 'cheongsam', but I'm not sure if this is necessary. The qipao article is highly annoying the way it switches between cheongsam and qipao from section to section, from sentence to sentence. I'm sure that Chinese speakers have a hand in this, but I also suspect that 'qipao' is also catching on in English as the new way of referring to the cheongsam.

Bathrobe (talk) 11:44, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AS;

I've already replied to it. I think it needs to be addressed as well. Charles 08:41, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since you participated in related discussion, you might be interested in this.

Happy editing! --Qsaw ^(talk) 19:57, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yemen's Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation refers to the island as Jabal al-Tair Island. [19] It's also the most common use of the term across the internet. Of course, I'm just going on what I've been able to find, so I could be wrong. —Viriditas | Talk 05:05, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When I created the Navbox music template, it had the groups across the top, so it looked very similar to what it did before I converted it. TigerK 69 has since been along and edited the Navbox music template so that the groups are now down the left. It may be best just to revert it back to before my edit if you would prefer it in the format it was in before. There's also a discussion about it all at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Musicians#Navboxes which you could comment on if you want saying that the groups look better across the top rather than down the side.

I've attempted to make a first draft of a new Halifax, Nova Scotia article, in my userspace here. It's in a very rough-and-ready form, and needs a lot of tidying, sorting, and being made consistent, as well as a proper opening, before it's ready. But it should give an idea as to what I believe that article should contain. Your thoughts would be appreciated! Thanks, --RFBailey 17:26, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support at the move proposal for the Amritsar Massacre, however it appears one oppose, one 'I don't care' and several supports isn't consensus. Narson (talk) 01:39, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I may have replied testily; if so, I regret it. What would you consider evidence? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 05:35, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about removing the categories. I didn't know it is acceptable and it caused problems with automatic tagging of album articles with my bot. Seems that I have to find another workaround. Regards, Jogers (talk) 12:50, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, you didn't sound harsh at all. I use Jogersbot to add ((album)) tag to talk pages of articles about albums which haven't been tagged yet. I make a list of pages categorized as albums, convert them to talk namespace and automatically add the tags using Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser. The problem is that redirects generally shouldn't be tagged and the bot also automatically remove album tags from redirect's talk pages from time to time. Having redirects categorized as albums causes the bot to continuously add and remove the tag in the same page. Jogers (talk) 18:57, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you've come upon an issue that is in the middle of being addressed. Could you give your view at the talk page on what could be done to make the article more globally applicable. What my impression of the hurdles to this are:

1. Oil is traded world wide in dollars... no way around that one.
2. The absolute purchasing power (see also here) of various currencies makes a direct comparison of exchange rates difficult for non-economists (OK, it's not easy for economists either)

Any suggestions?

Also, is there something you would add to or change about this section (note that there is more discussion of the European situation at the head of the Effects section)? Thanks, NJGW (talk) 07:07, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking care of this for me. I'll be creating the page for the actress soonish. Alan (talk) 17:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please carefully read Wikipedia:Non-free content, and stop re-adding nonfree images in list articles such as discographies. There have been frequent conversations on this topic and consensus has held that such uses are not allowed. If you feel that policy or interpretation should change, you are welcome to join in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content, but please do not continue to edit disruptively to violate the current policy. Thanks. (ESkog)^(Talk) 18:17, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say thanks for the support of the move. --Novelty (talk) 01:01, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unrelated to the above, but I've changed my conditional support to a support. --Novelty (talk) 04:16, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Considering your involvement at Talk:Levon V of Armenia#Requested move, can I get you to look at User:Srnec/Kings of Cilicia and tell me what you think of these proposed moves before I do them? It is designed to remove all inconsistency and ambiguity and favours English forms for non-Armenian names and whatever Armenian anglicisation is most popular in English texts for Armenian names. I am very open to changing "Thoros" to "Toros" or "Hetoum" to "Hethum" based on evidence of superior usage. Srnec (talk) 21:19, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aj, I was a bit out of the loop last week and too slow to get there with the article split, but the result seems good. Thanks for letting me know and asking, anyway! Best wishes, Sedgefoot (talk) 22:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I specifically deleted my comments because I felt they were non-contributory to the discussion, in an attempt to calm things down. You had no business UNdeleting them. Do not re-instate my comments. Just drop it already. --Hammersoft (talk) 04:07, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I honestly have no idea about what needs to be done regarding flags, I just mass-protected them all because of the risk of vandalism. Could you please point your query to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Flag Template? east.718 at 02:51, February 22, 2008

Sorry, but I remain loathe to mess with things I have no knowledge about. I apologize for sending you around in circles, but as a last-ditch effort, could you run it by Andrwsc, who is active and is the most knowledgeable person regarding flags I'm aware of? Thanks. east.718 at 20:08, March 4, 2008

I have started a discussion at Mongolian tögrög about the proper name for the currency. The new criteria at the Numismatics project don't provide a clearcut answer. Numismatic catalogues, on Dove1950's own admission, use "tugrik" or "tughrik". But the Bank of Mongolia website uses "togrog". Google favours "Mongolian tugrik" over "Mongolian tögrög" by about 2,000:1, but Google results aren't among the criteria. I wonder if you have any insight on this?

(User:Latebird seems open to such a move if we can find recent data showing that "tugrik" is more common than "tögrög". His stance here is much less conservative (i.e. more receptive to new names) than it is at Ulaanbaatar, where even recent data on the growing popularity of Ulaanbaatar is not enough to convince him that Ulan Bator should be moved to Ulaanbaatar.)

Bathrobe (talk) 04:19, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AjaxSmack, I noticed your comment at Ulaanbaatar:

None of this is controversial but it doesn't really matter anyway. Nice was never a part of Italy but the Italian name is listed prominently. Ditto with Nancy, Listing a foreign language name does not denote a territorial claim or signify any type of chauvinism, it's just part of the knowledge that makes up an encyclopedia.

In fact, I have tried listing the Mongolian name of Irkutsk, Эрхүү, at that article but ran into opposition from an American-Russian editor. I eventually backed down and deleted the name from the head of the article (and was unable to find a place in the article where it could be mentioned naturally), but I still feel as you do about the possiblility of listing foreign names -- listing them doesn't signify a territorial claim or chauvinism, just part of the knowledge that makes up an encyclopedia. Since Irkutsk was originally founded in Mongolian-speaking territory and is named after a river (the Irkut or Эрхүү) that ran in such territory, I can't see the harm in adding the name. At any rate, I wondered what you might think about a case like this.

Bathrobe (talk) 06:01, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding that. I think it's definitely better having the Buryat name there. I was able to confirm that Эрхүү was the Buryat name of the river, but had no information on the name of the city.

Bathrobe (talk) 07:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear AjaxSmack! In your last edit you erased Mongolian and Tibetan names explanation from article text. In your commentary you are declaring these names as foreign. It would be not any news for you that Tibetans are native population for the region and the same with Mongolians. So why you call them foreigners?. You know, I guess, that the most part of Tibetans and Mongolians live in China and Qinghai Lake region is one of the territories historically populated with these nations. In simple words, they are native. But I can note that Mongolian name with using Cyrillic (not traditional Mongol alphabet) is not correct - only this sentence (Cyrillic) is possible clame foreign. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 06:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good for moving Smpad to Sempad. Sounds/looks better that way. If you wish to move Hetoums, I'd prefer Hethum, but I won't be bothered if they stay where they're at or go to Het'um. It's a small matter of preference (though one user got mad at me over it once and we got into a brief edit war/arguing match). Srnec (talk) 06:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, since you took part in the discussion about renaming this article, you may be interested in participating in a most evil poll to determine the public opinion on the naming issue. --Illythr (talk) 20:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Treaty of Jassy was written in three languages, Russian, Arabic (Turkish) and German since a copy was forwarded to Russia's ally, Austria. Catherine IInd also was much more conversant in German then Russian.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 00:59, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When you say "It's also the Polish, Dutch, and Swedish name for Iaşi but that doesn't mean it's not English.", are you referring to the post-1944 sources to the operation in these languages? In any case, I'm not sure how that helps to discern what the English name should be.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 02:55, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you don't think I am advocating this from sheer stubbornness, my position is that good article research should discriminate between good and bad original research, even when it is the source for the article. I don't think reference work editors should compromise on article quality in any way as a proof of our integrity expected by users--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 01:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Milord (song), and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://medlibrary.org/medwiki/Milord. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 23:48, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 17 March, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Boxer Rebellion Indemnity Scholarship Program, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Victuallers (talk) 18:11, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I just reverted an esit that removed the old spelling, but could you add a source to the Ulaanbaatar article for the ROC still referring to the city as Kulun? I have changed it into perfect tense for now as this whole recognition stuff has become much less clear-cut since 2002(?), but a source (or something official that uses the name, a Chinese site should do) would be nice anyway. The more recent the better, of course. I would try this myself, but my chinese is very rudimentary. Yaan (talk) 18:45, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your notice. I support the move. There should be no hyphen or CamelCase according to the rules of pinyin. I have left my opinion at Wikipedia talk:History standards for China-related articles. --Neo-Jay (talk) 04:01, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While I support no hyphen and no camelcase, I don't understand the naming of empresses. I think I will observe before making a decision. Thank you for bringing this up =) Hanfresco (talk) 04:51, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You've made a right dog's breakfast of this page now, haven't you? I hope you're please with yourself. You know perfectly well that there was no concensus for this move and yet you ploughed on regardless, ensuring as you went that the move could not be easily reversed. By all means retain the split for now but please restore the agreed nomenclature.
Dove1950 (talk) 16:22, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:TsaiChin-HuiDaoWeilai-cover.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article on Bangalore has yet again been moved to "Bengaluru". That move was done hastily and in disregard of the long-running controversy about it and past lack of consensus for it. (It has also been made irreversible by ordinary editors.)
If your opinion is still that the article belongs at "Bangalore", please say so on the article's talkpage. -- Lonewolf BC (talk) 16:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The "duplicates" are necessary because not all the administrative divisions correspond to the natural atoll or the section of it. This is the case in certain atolls, like Faadhippolhu, which corresponds to the Administrative division "Lhaviyani".

However, North Malé Atoll and South Malé Atoll, together with Kaashidhoo Island and Gaafaru, form the administrative division known as Kaafu Atoll, which is not equal to the plain Male' Atoll.

The same can be said for Haa Alifu, Baa, Alifu Alifu, and other Administrative divisions of the Maldives which include smaller atolls and separate off-lying islands. Mohonu (talk) 08:52, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There's currently a dispute over which is the correct adjectival form of Moldova. It seems to me (as I've noted) that "Moldovan" is correct for the post-1991 republic, with "Moldavian" applying to the mediaeval principality of Moldavia and the Moldavian SSR. However, as you can see at Talk:Moldovan-Ukrainian relations, the dispute shows no signs of slowing down, so I suppose I'm requesting a comment from you there, particularly as this affects a range of articles. Thank you for your consideration. Biruitorul ^Talk 06:01, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Just so you know, I consider you rather an expert on naming conventions, plus you can't be accused of bias either way. I'm not sure why it's such an issue either, but, you know, things you'd never expect to be controversial have a way of appearing so here at times. Biruitorul ^Talk 15:01, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"We have established practice to use ß when it is commonly used in English, or there is no common usage in English." That is generally my sentiment too. Is that codified somewhere? — AjaxSmack 05:38, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

See WP:UE in general and the section "No established usage" for no common usage in English. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk)

But see the talk page also for an effort to state this, and the converse practice of using ss where it is common usage in English. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:37, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case you hadn't noticed, I moved your diacritics proposal to a separate page, WP:Usage of diacritics.--Kotniski (talk) 07:57, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You participated in a recent straw poll at Talk:The Great Hunger on a possible name change. This is a friendly notice that I have opened another straw poll, this time to find the names that editors are most opposed to. If you know of anybody who did not vote in the last straw poll, but who has an interest in the name debate, please feel free to pass this on. Scolaire (talk) 14:30, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AjaxSmack, I need some good advice from you. I’m new in English Wikipedia and hardly understand the rules and traditions of the Project. I really do not understand why user JPG-GR decided that the result of my proposal on the Livonian Order talk page should be called "no consensus". I bet he even didn’t read the discussion. 6 users (including myself) supported the move and only 3 opposed. There were even more opposers to move 3 Williams to Wilhelms, but these articles were moved. For a long time the page Livonian Order was a redirect to Livonian Brothers of the Sword, until in November 2007 Termer decided that this is a good name for an article about Teutonic Order in Livonia. I have shown that the name Livonian Order is ambiguous and even incorrect. I have shown that the correct name often appears in historical books on the subject. I have even shown that the same name is used in mediaeval documents up to the end of the Livonian branch in 1561. I just can’t believe that this all was for nothing. Maybe some of my phrases were grammatically incorrect or even funny, because I’m not native English speaker, but I don’t think that it is a good reason not to read my comments. I almost fall to pieces. AjaxSmack, do I have any way to appeal that decision? — Albert Krantz. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.81.133.163 (talk) 07:24, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Boris Kovač, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Bedford ^Pray 21:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Failed. Maybe you can get an administrator to move them. I really don't feel like taking this to "other proposals", especially for something that should be unanimous. --Pwnage8 (talk) 15:33, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for what you've done. Much appreciated. --Pwnage8 (talk) 05:46, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would voice my support, but I wish to avoid anything directly involving WikiProject Numismatics. The "discussions" related to numismatic articles call up visions of angels dancing on the head of a pin. I personally feel that time would be better spent on article content rather than form. And speaking of content, the article, whether called wen or cash, is inaccurate and misleading. I wish you luck in what you are trying to accomplish, but I suspect you are facing an unending struggle when it comes to WikiProject Numismatics.Sivasova (talk) 23:26, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I, too, don't care much about WikiProject Numismatics guidelines. I only became involved there because the previous version of guidelines directly conflicted with WP:CN and WP:UE. The root of my argument about Chinese cash rests on UE, CN, and WP:OR arguments which are supported by the newer numismatic guidelines. I encourage you to weigh in the debate no matter what your opinion and regardless of how you feel about the numismatic guidelines.

You say, "the article, whether called wen or cash, is inaccurate and misleading." Specifically what are you referring to? I have had some influence over the article content although the current version is User:Dove1950's iteration on the topic. Per your earlier comments on the talk page, the non-wén meanings of "cash" have been forked off into separate articles listed at Chinese cash. Though this may be overkill, there are many cash coins that were not cash (wén) denominated, some cash-denominated coins that were not struck copper cash, and then there's the weight measure called cash. This may be confusing but Wikipedia should reflect English usage which was and is to use "cash" for all three meanings. When this usage was established over a century ago, we didn't have Wikipedia talk pages to sort things out.

Also, I am interested to what unending struggle are you referring to vis-à-vis WikiProject Numismatics you are referring. — AjaxSmack 20:09, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I really do not wish to be drawn into any discussion involving WikiProject Numismatics, but you deserve some indication of why I said "inaccurate and misleading" in regard to the cash/wen articles.

Entry: Chinese cash

• Cash (Chinese coin)

(1) The traditional Chinese cash coin (round with square hole) was brozne or brass. Yes, I know bronze/brass coins are copper coins, but there is even a distinction in Chinese between "green" and "yellow" cash. The non-traditional "cash" common after 1880 were copper coins and were sometimes called coppers or copper cash in English (to distinguish them from traditional cash). In Chinese, the former were referred to as 制錢 zhìqián, the latter as 洋錢 yángqián.

• Chinese cash (currency)

(2) Should read (currency unit). "Wen" is a currency unit (denomination), something abstract, a word or counter that appears on currency, which is physical.
(3) "Wen" was often used on paper money. It very, very rarely appeared on cash coins before the late 19th century, when it came into regular use on the new copper cash coins.

• Cash (mass)

(4) The "and a currency equivalent to that weight in silver" could be dropped. It is misleading. English "cash" was never used in connection with silver currency.

Article: Chinese wén, Section: History

(5) The first paragraph does not explain the usage of "wen" and misleadingly implies that many currency units were employed.
(6) Second paragraph: "...usually 1000." The "number of coins in a string" as money of account was always 1000. The number of coins on a (physical) string was virtually never 1000.
(7) Second paragraph: "...equal in value to...." The copper:silver exchange rate was first fixed at 1000 cash = 1 tael in 1376 under the Ming and lasted but briefly. The official rate was again fixed at 1000 cash = 1 tael silver under the Qing in 1647. This was an ideal rate used for keeping government financial accounts. The actual market rate was different (the only time that a cash coin actually weighed 1/10 ounce with the market rate at 1000 per silver tael was probably in 1684-1702).

I am not saying that all of this data should appear in the article but I do think that an accurate and coherent simplified article cannot easily be written by someone who ignores such matters/distinctions. The Chinese coins article is excellent but stops in the 11th century. Chinese currency provides a brief (and again, in my opinion, a misleading and inaccurate) continuation. There is no article that provides a summary of Chinese monetary history.Sivasova (talk) 15:18, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

These all sound like important points and are consistent with what I've read. You will notice that I had modified the current move request to read "Chinese cash (currency unit)" as you prefer and asked for suggestions if there are other preferred titles. Please add to the debate if you wish. Also, would you consider editing and/or adding the information you presented above to the respective articles? — AjaxSmack 15:04, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article has now been moved. That may be the easy part. As it is, however, the body of the article is entirely written from the point of view of calling the currency wén. I think it needs a bit of rewriting to harmonise the title and the body.

Bathrobe (talk) 01:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a previous incarnation from early this year written in "WP:UE POV": User talk:AjaxSmack/Sandbox/Chinese cash (currency). As far as the article as it stands now, the first picture should be axed since it doesn't deal specifically with the currency unit. (It's already at Cash (Chinese coin)). Some of the info in the history section was copied from Cash (Chinese coin) and is more relevant there since it deals with the type of coin and not the currency unit. I'll get to it when things cool down. I would like it if User:Sivasova would edit the article to address his/her concerns (listed above) as well. — AjaxSmack 01:29, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not competent enough to write on this subject. I do not know anything about the use of wén as a denomination before the 20th century. Someone with a knowledge of Chinese needs to consult original Chinese sources and clarify the usage of wén.

Was wén really introduced as a currency unit in 621? Zhou inscriptions had indicated a coin's value, but the Tang inscribed their cash coins with Kai Yuan Tong Bao.

For about 13 centuries there was virtually only one coin in China, the traditional cash. The name of this coin was qian and, evidently, the denomination was one wén. In any event, English used the same word, cash, for both Chinese words.

Compare this to the situation in England, where the only coin for over five centuries was the silver penny (also known, for a time at least, as an esterlin or sterling). And no denomination was inscribed on it. The English, however, also used foreign coins, so the accounting system was more complex, and English-minted gold and other silver coins were in common use by the 14th century.

The first (non-ephemeral) non-cash (and non-copper) coin to circulate in China was the Spanish dollar from the Mexico City mint. It began circulating in Canton. When? The late 18th century? Certainly the Spanish dollar (yuan) was circulating south of the Yangtze by the time the first Chinese dollar/yuan was minted in 1837. The regular minting of Chinese silver coin only began in 1890.

Someone needs to explain how and when the different Chinese currency and accounting units were used during the Imperial period. And that is something I cannot do. — Sivasova (talk) 04:37, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your input would be appreciated at Talk:British Raj#What to do about British India. Xn4 (talk) 22:35, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to solicit feedback concerning moving this to Adam Jones (football). It makes sense to me, but is there consensus? Please opine in the section of the article talk page. Cheers, Dlohcierekim's sock (talk) 20:44, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well... if I don't place a hatnote in place, people won't find things, so

1. place hatnote
2. request a dab page at AFC
3. remove hatnote and replace with a dabpage link
4. request a move at WP:RM

There's no way around placing a very large hatnote in place, so it can't be a WP:POINT. And I thought WikiPedia isn't a bureaucracy? I only requested a move for an article I was pretty sure wasn't supposed to be primary anyway. (I have done steps 1-3 for other aticles, without the WP:RM, when I don't think it's necessary) 70.51.8.75 (talk) 08:06, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your earlier request. I have loaded the above mentioned image as requested. You might also notice that I have uploaded as many as possible images for the individual historic buildings on The Bund.Let me know if I can help further.Simonfieldhouse (talk) 21:49, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading Image:Familiarity with Didoes.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Ricky81682 (talk) 00:18, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vou have opposed the move of "Carinthia (Province)" to "Koroška" on language grounds and wish to retain the English name "Carinthia".
The problem is that the Slovene European-Union region of Koroska is no longer identical with the part of old Carinthia that was ceded to Yugoslavia in 1919. If you look at the link provided^[1] you will see that the area of the new statistical region which the Slovene government now calls "Koroška" is about twice as large and includes a sizeable portion of Lower Styria that had never been Carinthian, an area which the Slovenes themselves still consider Styrian (Štajerska). Štajerska itself, i.e. the Slovene-speaking "Lower Styria" portion of the Habsburg Duchy of Styria exists now now merely as an idea, because it has been split into statistical regions in which that ancient name does not appear any longer, whereas for completely obscure reasons the Slovenian government wishes to keep the name "Koroška" alive.
I am of the opinion that the local name of a foreign part for which there has never existed an English name could very well be accepted into English terminology. English usage has accepted new local names even for places and areas that used to have an English name. Where has "Rhodesia" gone or "Bohemia and Moravia"? What about Formosa and Ceylon? Don't you call these islands Taiwan and Sri Lanka now? I've even been told off for using on WP the century-old English spelling of "Hapsburg"! Marschner (talk) 15:11, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Jimmy Buffett concert tours, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Jimmy Buffett concert tours has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Jimmy Buffett concert tours, please affix the template ((hangon)) to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 17:51, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw that you had changed the Bridge Creek (John Day River) title to Bridge Creek (Oregon). The problem with this is that Oregon has many streams named Bridge Creek. Please see the GNIS list here. Adding the parent-stream name is a standard way to differentiate multiple streams with the same name in the same state. If you agree with this logic, could you please revert your change? Finetooth (talk) 01:07, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Your logic makes as much sense as mine. Thanks for responding. Finetooth (talk) 17:53, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Tony Tarracino at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed. There still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 15:22, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tony Tarracino, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 12:26, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Category:The Balham Alligators albums (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 15:51, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AjaxSmack. I saw your question to PMAnderson at his talkpage. Please see my answer there, and also the remarks I'm about to post at WT:MOS.

–_⊥^{¡ɐɔıʇǝo}Noetica!^T– 00:24, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"This is an encyclopedia for the general reader, not a work of taxonomy". I'm glad we agree. --Born2cycle (talk) 03:17, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to drop a note regarding your moving of categories to redirects, as you did with Interstate 840 (Tennessee). I've removed those Interstate categories, as 840 in particular is not part of the Interstate highway system...it was built entirely by the state of Tennessee to avoid the stricter Federal regulations regarding construction of such roads. Those categories really should have never been added to the main article in the first place! Seeing that you've recently performed a number of such category moves, you may want to go back and check out those other articles to see if any others should have such categories purged. Cheers! — Huntster (t • @ • c) 10:50, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry you had to hear the same thing three times on that talk page. That wasn't my intention when I wrote the first reply to your comment. Dekimasuよ! 03:49, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I intended to say something slightly different than Dekimasu at Talk:Marko Đoković; in any case, you have not replied. I have seen your note on Noerten/Northeim, and I trust that will converge. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:19, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Converge to consensus, as it seems to be doing.
  • I do not believe, any more than you, that dropping diacritics by itself makes something English; but there is significant evidence (all the sources to the article, for example) that Marko Djokovic is what English writers use, and Marko Đoković isn't. (If you see this repeated there, consider it laziness, and respond where most convenient.) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:45, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:JimmyBuffettTicketStub1995.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. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 19:08, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I left you a reply at Talk:A World to Believe In. ^~Moon~月と日の出 ^~Sunrise~ 18:37, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You added that there is a line backtracked into the song in March 2008. I've never heard of this and am surprised it has not been questioned. I couldn't find it on Youtube and Google did not show any good results for the line. Daniel Christensen (talk) 07:32, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reply here. — AjaxSmack 20:26, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The specific filter that was triggered by your edit has been disabled, not the entire abuse filter. Anyhow, are the restrictions still in place? --Conti|✉ 01:23, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just found the tool to give users back the autoconfirmed status. Seems you still (or again) have yours, tho, so everything should be in order now. --Conti|✉ 01:26, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A second unilateral move has been made here, this time to Inflation (financial). I'd like to request intervention to restore the status quo ante until the issue can be properly discussed. It is highly inappropriate for issues to be decided by unilateral action. JQ (talk) 21:18, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I continue to prefer Alawi or Alawite as what English actually uses; sorry to have missed it. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:01, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This deserved promotion. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:11, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to participate in a discussion at Talk:George Town, Penang#Georgetown vs George Town revisited. -- Tcncv (talk) 01:51, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:PenangSign2.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 07:06, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:PenangSign1.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 07:06, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work sourcing the Bria Valente article. I've been meaning to get to it but haven't had the time. Good to see WP isn't completely overrun by deletionists these days, although it seems that way at times. dissolve^talk 22:54, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I just withdrew my opposition at Talk:Berne#Requested move after checking the numerous UK sources that use "Bern". Since you opposed per my reasoning, I thought it migth be a good idea to let you know :) Jafeluv (talk) 12:28, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Input requested

Ajax, since that move was closed (and the move made), the decision has been questioned, and your opposition has been mentioned. If you could review the relevant discussions at Talk:Bern and User talk:Aervanath and throw in your current input, that would be helpful. Thanks. --Born2cycle (talk) 21:51, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, since you participitated Talk:Assyrian_people#Requested_move, I was wondering if you could do the same for the rest of related pages at Talk:Assyrian/Syriac_diaspora#Request_Move. Iraqi (talk) 00:03, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Gulf and western (music genre), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gulf and western (music genre). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 17:06, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am still skeptical of the article names for the various Chinese empresses - such as Empress Dowager Xiaozhuang. They do not conform to WP:COMMONNAME Do you still have an interest in changing them? Colipon+(T) 20:50, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Live by the Bay - screenshot.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:00, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On August 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Taipei Bridge, 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) 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.

WP:DYK 08:14, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Since you weighed in at both discussions for Adaptation and Good Night, and Good Luck, I ask you to share your thoughts at the discussion to address such situations in the naming conventions for films guidelines. The discussion can be found here. —Erik (talk • contrib) 20:22, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:TsaiChin-HuiDaoWeilai-cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 05:46, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, AjaxSmack! I see you have been involved in the previous discussion about renaming the article Carinthia (province). I've opened a new discussion about the renaming of the article to 'Slovenian Carinthia' (see its talk page) and moving the material about the statistical region to a separate article (like it has been done for other Slovenian statistical regions; see ((Statistical regions of Slovenia))). --Eleassar ^{my talk} 06:40, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be so kind and have a look at Chameria? Is merging OK Guildenrich (talk) 00:39, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:JIMMY BUFFETT -- Pencil Thin Moustache.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:01, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:TsaiChin-HuiDaoWeilai-cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 23:31, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:TsaiChin-HuiDaoWeilai-cover.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. Aspects (talk) 23:42, 15 January 2010 (UTC) Aspects (talk) 23:42, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, AjaxSmack. You have new messages at Talk:IOU (debt).
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

I have nominated Category:The Balham Alligators albums (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:39, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for giving your comments at Talk:Daśāvatāra#Requested_move. As per the consensus: The result of the proposal was move to nondiacritic for the article. Several alternatives have been presented for this particular article (Dashavatara, Dasavatara, Dashavatar) so please help pick an appropriate one. Thanks. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 13:50, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom/Article title. DrKiernan (talk) 09:01, 18 March 2010 (UTC) (Using ((Please see)))[reply]

Hi AjaxSmack, thanks for all your contributions to the coverage of China-related topics. I just wanted to let you know that templates like ((zh-cpcy)) are deprecated; instead of using these templates you can use ((zh)), which has replaced all of them, from now on. rʨanaɢ (talk) 21:38, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:EDDIE MONEY -- I Wanna Go Back.ogg, 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. Dawnseeker2000 01:36, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Kibinda has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This is a disambiguation page where there are no articles to disambiguate.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((dated prod)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((dated prod)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Whpq (talk) 20:04, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, AjaxSmack. You have new messages at Whpq's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Ajax, "Fausto Veranzio" aside, I'm getting a headache just thinking about the amount of hellfire I'll be dealing with if this guy gets incentive. We're talking about a textbook Italian nationalist account trying to "italianize" Dalmatian/Croatian/Montenegrin articles. There are now maybe a dozen blocked accounts (off the top of my head [20][21][22][23] etc...) of the exact same type and each one caused an enormous mess before the community got the idea. This is standard-issue irredentist ultra-right-wing nonsense that's kept quiet for the last 18 months or so. Supporting this in any way is a mistake, a BIG one... --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 20:06, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you pride sir of your behaviour? Using arguments ad personam, throwing discredit on a respectable user on another users talkpage just because you want to make your position prevail. How can you imagine AjaxSmack or other user can believe you anymore? --Theirrulez (talk) 20:36, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, AjaxSmack. You have new messages at Talk:Gazi_Husrevbegova_džamija,_Sarajevo.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

I made a proposal before the move request, which I think represents a decent compromise on the main issues.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 17:54, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You posted messages on both talk pages, saying discuss it on the other! Make yr mind up please. Johnbod (talk) 03:03, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have requested a move of Punjab (Pakistan) to Punjab (Pakistani province). You may wish to express your opinion on the talk page.

You recently participated in a move request of Fausto Veranzio. Since a new move was requested, please discuss it at Talk:Faust_Vrančić#Requested_move_redux if you care. - Theirrulez (talk) 03:38, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 02:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Just thought you would like to know that I have reposted the request for moving Cote d'Ivoire to Ivory Coast, as I thought it was time for this to be discussed again, and that the last request was inappropriately closed with a "No Consensus"-decision. I also reposted your old argument for the move.TheFreeloader (talk) 03:10, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vote for consensus. There's a vote for consensus at Talk:Involvement of the People's Republic of China in Africa#Rename. I'm re-proposing a name: Economic relations between the People's Republic of China and Africa. I saw you preferred 'Economic relations between China and Africa'; there doesn't appear to be consensus for that version. Could you support this one? Ocaasi (talk) 04:39, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, just thought I'd stop by to let you know I've responded to your comment on the Rossmuck talk page. aineolach (u · d · c) 21:28, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello AjaxSmack,

I noticed these two edits of yours, [24], [25]. Just letting you know, that when you have a query or a comment, it is a rule of thumb to put a *'''Comment''' and then your statement, just like you would if you were supporting or opposing the proposal. For example:

• Support per nom.
• Oppose per WP:BIO
• Comment isn't the use of a comma with placenames an Americanism?

I hope you understand I truly appreciate your efforts at requested moves, and I just thought I'd let you know of this. Thanks, warrior4321 00:09, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Departments of Côte d'Ivoire - request withdrawn. Since you seem to have interest in organizing things, maybe you can have a look at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(geographic_names)#Country_subdivisions - would you support table inclusion? It would give the people an overview about how to name country subdivision articles. Currently there is no central overview. Schwyz (talk) 20:25, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:King County (disambiguation) - I added a 4th one, namely King County, Queensland. TakakaCounty (talk) 10:05, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, AjaxSmack. Could I please ask you to take a second look at the discussion at Talk:Coţofeni culture? Not sure if it will sway your opinion, but hey, it might. - Biruitorul ^Talk 13:56, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello AjaxSmack. Could I ask you to take a look at the discussion at Talk:White Rabbit? 75.142.152.104 (talk) 03:39, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Road Types.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the ((GFDL-self)) tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as ((non-free fair use in|article name)) or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 16:46, 2 September 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 16:46, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You commented on the Homs/Hims discussion, so I am notifying you of the current Category discussion at: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 September 6#Category:Hims. --Bejnar (talk) 17:27, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you participated in a discussion last spring that resulted in renaming The Bronx as Bronx. There is now a proposal to open a new Request for Comments on restoring the original name. If you have comments about the timing of such a proposal, please make them soon at Talk:Bronx#Query: when do we consider this? because, unless a there's a consensus against such a Request for Comments, it will begin early this week. Thanks. —— Shakescene (talk) 21:48, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

C U N T C U N T C U N T C U N T C U N T

F A G G O T

W A N K E R

K I K E —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.171.231.18 (talk) 00:52, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I was wondering why you contested to my requests at RM, since you didn't leave one in the edit summary. I'd like to point you to WP:TITLE which says that shorter titles are preferred, and "only as precise as is necessary to identify the topic of the article unambiguously." Since there are no other places with those names, the titles I proposed are appropriate. ~DC ^{We Can Work It Out} 03:58, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:WuChun-lin - LovingOthersIsAHappyThingCDCover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 04:03, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I believe you've made a mistake in the last word in your reply at Talk:Legendary. You probably meant to use "legendary" there. :) -- Quiddity (talk) 04:16, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have proposed moving the African-American Civil Rights Movement pages. You can join in the discussion at: Talk:African-American_Civil_Rights_Movement_(1955–1968)#Proposed_Move Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 23:28, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am working on a list of issue and a stragtegy for the names of places in kosovo , User_talk:Mdupont#Naming_and_status_of_Kosovo_pages I would like to invite you to take part and comment, have seen your activity of kosovo articles in the past. Thanks, mike James Michael DuPont (talk) 12:11, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, do you mind if I move your hook to go live on 26/27th? The GLAM WIKI conference could do with being highlighed by a non US/UK hook? Victuallers (talk) 18:06, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On 26 November 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jadeite Cabbage, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Jadeite Cabbage (pictured), a piece of jadeite carved into the shape of a Chinese cabbage with a locust and katydid camouflaged in the leaves, is the "most famous masterpiece" in Taiwan's National Palace Museum? You are welcome to check how many hits the 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, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - I agree that if Walesa should be moved, then Milosevic would be a good candidate for renaming as well. I'm not trying to single out Walesa - his was just the first article where I noticed this issue. This is also not a crusade against diacritics or "foreign-sounding things". There are many articles where I think WP:DIACRITICS means the diacritics should remain. You mentioned the hundreds of Polish politician articles. I would imagine that the vast majority of those pages would keep the diacritics, because they're either written that way in English-language sources, or there isn't sufficient info to determine a common English-language version.

And I understand your concern with the piecemeal approach and the inconsistency it breeds as articles are changed one by one. My concern with the mass renaming proposal is that while there are many clear candidates for renaming, there are bound to be many borderline cases, and I'm afraid of getting bogged down in a massive Wikipedia debate fest that accomplishes nothing tangible, which is why I'm trying an incremental approach. If you have any suggestions for an alternative approach, I'd love to hear your thoughts. Dohn joe (talk) 23:39, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. Interesting how these diacritical move requests are proceeding, no? Anyhow, I was just trying to get a better feel for some people's positions, and so I thought I'd ask you this: I was browsing the requested move page, and saw that you wrote in the Talk:Tarahumara#Move.3F discussion that English usage is more important than Spanish or local usage. I was wondering how that squared with your opposition to "Lech Walesa" for example. I'm genuinely interested - not trying to posture or change your mind. Just trying to see where people are coming from. Thanks. Dohn joe (talk) 18:18, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am a strong proponent of a strict interpretation of WP:UE. In numerous cases including primarily geographical names (e.g., my favorite, Côte d'Ivoire and others such as the current RM at Talk:Marseille) but others too (e.g., cheongsam, not qipao; Chinese cash (currency), not Chinese wen). I even have proposed moving people to non-diacritic names if the subjects themselves didn't use them (e.g., Ahmet Ertegun). However, as I noted before, I oppose removing diacritics from names of people notable in areas where such diacritics are used. While many newspaper style manuals prohibit most or all diacritics, Wikipedia does not. More importantly, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper, and its usage should reflect that of similar higher calibre sources, e.g. other encyclopedias or books on the subject. Finally, unlike obscuring quality of the pedantic usage of truly different foreign-language terms, diacritics, in my estimation, have zero negative effect on a reader's ability to comprehend the subject. — AjaxSmack 04:26, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think Côte d'Ivoire is everyone's favorite. As for Walesa, isn't he notable outside of Poland? To me, the situation is analogous to placenames. If there's no general English-language usage of a placename, then using the local name is fine; likewise, if there's no general English-language usage of a person's name, then Wikipedia should probably use the local version. But Walesa has an established English version of his name - and it appears in reputable encyclopedias and books. And what about the argument that Walesa himself seems to use "Walesa" when presenting himself in English? Anyhow, I think it's an interesting issue - thanks for your thoughts. Dohn joe (talk) 19:27, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, in my comment at Talk:African-American Civil Rights Movement (1955–1968)#Requested_move I've informally suggested Civil Rights Movement (United States, 1955–1968) (etc.) as an alternative. What do you think of that? (replying there, if you choose to reply, would be preferable to me - thanks). --Born2cycle (talk) 18:00, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, I'll try to be more clear..[[26]] By --Shardan (talk) 16:19, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Xiaochi at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Thelmadatter (talk) 01:28, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 December 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Xiaochi, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that xiaochi, or Chinese and Taiwanese "small eats", can include such ingredients as stinky tofu, sheep head, grass jelly or pork intestines? You are welcome to check how many hits the 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) 18:03, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, AjaxSmack. You have new messages at Talk:Green_Bay,_Wisconsin.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:West Friesland (historical region).png, 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. Kelly ^hi! 04:38, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• White Rabbit (disambiguation) → White rabbit —AjaxSmack? Macr86 (talk) 02:51, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  AjaxSmack, AjaxSmack, my name is Macr86. Macr86 (talk) 02:54, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  AjaxSmack, I can't move White Rabbit (disambiguation) to White rabbit. Now, I need your help to get move back to the article White rabbit. Macr86 (talk) 02:56, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For Chopin's Polish songs, you kindly added the ref "Oxford Music", Kornel Michałowski and Jim Samson. Chopin, Fryderyk Franciszek as equivalent to Jim Samson. Now I found a similar entry for Alfred Dürr, A Dürr, now an External link. I could imagine that it is also equivalent to a New Grove entry. How could I ref that? (I will watch here.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:37, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The cite is:

• Hans Heinrich Eggebrecht and Konrad Küster. "Dürr, Alfred". Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online. Retrieved 8 January 2011.

— AjaxSmack 21:25, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Dürr in prep, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:35, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article General average/New version is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/General average/New version until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. -- Whpq (talk) 17:26, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding the pages to Republic of China – South Africa relations. I meant to do it but forgot. Thanks again!--TM 13:41, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry that I didn't reply; I was out of town and without Internet access for several days. Thanks for the note and for the work! Nyttend (talk) 02:40, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 January 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Duke Ellington at Fargo, 1940 Live, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Duke Ellington's 1940 live recording At Fargo was an amateur bootleg not officially released until 1978? You are welcome to check how many hits the 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.

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:03, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

At Talk:Washington (U.S. state)#Requested move you wrote: This seems to be a textbook case of no primary topic (as explained at WP:PRIMARYTOPIC). - I guess that would be textbook case number 2: Talk:Chihuahua#Requested move - Chihuahua (state)? What can be done, is there any proof of primary topic required, or is it pure voting? TopoChecker (talk) 00:15, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you may be interested in AfD. SEE: County Road 4011 (Volusia County, Florida), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/County Road 4011 (Volusia County, Florida). Gamweb (talk) 17:21, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was doing some minor editing on this, and noticed that the date of death in the intro and infobox don't match. Could you take a look at this and see which is correct? AlexiusHoratius 17:34, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The incorrect date may have derived from a New York Times obit of Towers that originally listed the date as 28 Dec but has since been corrected. — AjaxSmack 22:41, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Shirlington Circle has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable traffic circle, does not pass the WP:GNG.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Admrboltz (talk) 04:11, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 January 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jack Towers, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a 1940 live recording of Duke Ellington by "audio magician" Jack Towers won a Grammy Award in 1980? You are welcome to check how many hits the 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.

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:07, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Uttering has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

To state that "uttering" is a crime is false and unverifiable. The transitive verb of the word "utter" is "uttering". It is not a crime to be caught "uttering". This article should be deleted.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Securel (talk) 19:14, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Uttering is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uttering until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Securel (talk) 21:13, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

• This permission does not give you any special status or authority
• Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
• You may wish to display the ((Autopatrolled)) top icon and/or the ((User wikipedia/autopatrolled)) userbox on your user page
• If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it

If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing!HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:33, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding these names until a full discussion has taken place in Wikiproject Ireland.

Hello, AjaxSmack. You have new messages at Snappy's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Snappy (talk) 22:02, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What does a king do? ANy information? Thank you.

--JabocJacobOhYeah (talk) 22:40, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't assuming anything...it was a simple mistake. It happens. thanks for the catch--User:Woohookitty ^{Disamming fool!} 02:59, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 8 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Christian Zeal and Activity, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that John Adams' "Christian Zeal and Activity" from American Standard is an arrangement of "Onward, Christian Soldiers", a popular hymn tune by Arthur Sullivan? You are welcome to check how many hits the 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.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

On 8 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article American Standard (John Adams), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that John Adams' "Christian Zeal and Activity" from American Standard is an arrangement of "Onward, Christian Soldiers", a popular hymn tune by Arthur Sullivan? You are welcome to check how many hits the 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.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:05, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Uttering is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uttering until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Securel (talk) 18:41, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please vote on the proposed name from regarding the Changbai Mountain Ranges. Thanks. --DandanxD (talk) 05:48, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, AjaxSmack. You have new messages at Talk:Baekdu Mountain.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Get over it, we have POLICIES (god damn it) that enforce the standard that China is NOT the state. --HXL's Roundtable and Record 05:04, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 2 May 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Crimean Socialist Soviet Republic, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... the government of the Crimean Socialist Soviet Republic was headed by Dmitry Ilyich Ulyanov, Vladimir Lenin's brother? You are welcome to check how many hits the 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.

The DYK project (nominate) 06:02, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I closed that move request as no consensus. Feel free to do the merges you suggested if those are right since there were no objections.

Also you may want to consider auto archiving your talk page to manage the length. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:09, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• See Talk:BRICS#Continued discussion. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:01, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I hope I'm not stepping out of line here, but I moved your comment from the contested requests section to Talk:Candy bar where there's now a proper move request. If this is not okay, feel free to delete your comment. Have a good day! Rennell435 (talk) 19:44, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't force me to clean up after you like this again. You should know better than that. —Xiaoyu: 聊天 (T) 和 贡献 (C) 23:09, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I just looked up that Vandalia ref and noticed that the Google book search gives it as on page 41. If I am right I wanted to mention it as I can see it might get you into more upset if the other person spots it. Chaosdruid (talk) 13:52, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		For your efforts in rescuing hastily-nominated articles for deletion, which are often actually quite notable. Northamerica1000 (talk) 03:49, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Perpetual Diet of Regensburg at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! — Toдor Boжinov — 08:07, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What about "Ordos (city)" or, even better, "Ordos (prefecture level city)"? The comment by the only other commentor on the talk page so faruser:Tapered gives (IMHO) yet another example of how misleading the current title is. Regards, Yaan (talk) 11:31, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 September 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Perpetual Diet of Regensburg, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Eternal Diet, "a bladeless knife without a handle", followed the Youngest Recess of the Holy Roman Empire? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Perpetual Diet of Regensburg.You are welcome to check how many hits the 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.

Orlady (talk) 08:48, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Hyphen Page Screenshot.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 22:12, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Unicode Hyphen Redirect Page Screenshot.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 22:13, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just wondering, do you think of the ROC then and now as separate distinct political states or are they the same continuous states? Liu Tao (talk) 14:10, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:14, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello AjaxSmack! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Wiki Media Foundation at 10:52, 25 October 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Hello. I put back your leed paragraph for Matt Fong. You were right and User:HkCaGu was wrong. I have been having the same problem with him at Talk:Michael_Woo#Chinese_and_middle_names, and the next two sections after that one. Also the source he used for Matt Fong's full name is not Reliable. I hope you can take a look at what has been going on at Mike Woo and keep your eye on it. Thank you so much. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 07:15, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The move cropped up on my watchlist and I found the reason, specifically "precision - article is about a type of castle, not only mottes and baileys", is a bit puzzling. Could you elaborate on that? Nev1 (talk) 19:15, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I made a request to move Naja atra to Chinese cobra per WP:COMMONNAME. This species is known by the vernacular name "Chinese cobra" worldwide, not just in English, but in almost any language you can think of. I would really appreciate your support at Wikipedia:Requested moves and it is listed under date January 9, 2012. Thanks. Bastian (talk ★ contribs) 20:30, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You seemed to be the only one making sense in that discussion, and your pointed questions stood unanswered, so I also initially opposed. However, I've since changed my mind. You might too. Check it out if you haven't already. --Born2cycle (talk) 18:49, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Central Provident Fund (South Africa) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Central Provident Fund (South Africa) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

As a participant to previous discussions at the South Tibet/ Arunachal Pradesh / Arunachal Pradesh dispute / South Tibet dispute talk page, you might be interested to participate to the following poll. Thanks, --Pseudois (talk) 04:34, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Sammy Hagar - (Sittin' on) The Dock of the Bay single front cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:32, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The second infobox is pretty distracting and I am for it to remove it from the article. Or you convince me it is a notable cover. Regards.♫GoP♫_T^C_N 12:24, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - You recently participated in a move proposal discussion regarding articles about zombies and zombie pop culture archived at Talk:Zombie. That proposal was not approved, and a new discussion is taking place at Talk:Zombie (fictional) that is narrower in scope, and concerns only whether the older Voodoo and newer Romero zombie pop culture should be included in the same article or whether it should be separated. These are articles that receive a lot of hits, and should probably get more input than just the two editors having the current discussion. I'm flagging all old move discussion participants regarding the new discussion, and your input would be appreciated. LaTeeDa (talk) 21:45, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to diacritics guideline discussion at WT:BLP

Hi, you were one of 100+ Users who has commented on a living person Requested Move featuring diacritics (e.g. the é in Beyoncé) in the last 30 days. Following closure of Talk:Stephane Huet RM, a tightening of BLP guidelines is proposed. Your contribution is invited to WT:BLP to discuss drafting a proposal for tightening BLP accuracy guidelines for names. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:04, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to duplicate this invite on the pages of others who have commented, for or against. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:10, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I do appreciate your help to get this to actually 'stick' this time, in some MOS somewhere. Thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:22, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, please do not put line breaks between HTML list items, as they generate very ugly HTML which causes problems for screen reader users. See the accessibility guideline on the topic. Graham87 15:52, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Gulf and western (music genre). Since you had some involvement with the Gulf and western (music genre) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 20:18, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi you might wish to note this, restored after deleted 7 days. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:14, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On 16 June 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 3-6-3 Rule, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the third digit in the banking industry's "3-6-3 Rule" refers to bankers being able to "tee off at the golf course by 3 p.m."? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/3-6-3 Rule. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added 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.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:04, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion on moving the article Côte d'Ivoire to Ivory Coast. You are being notified since you participated in a previous discussion on this topic. Please join the discussion here if you are interested. TDL (talk) 02:27, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello AjaxSmack, and hearty apologies for my error in the discussion earlier, now rectified! Zarcadia (talk) 21:18, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Terribly sorry, but if you would please add the word "support" bracketed by six apostrophes if your comment on the move from Urban free-ranging dog to Street dog was meant to support the move. I think a reader of your words would understand it to be intended as your support for the move, but it's not %100 clear with typing Support at the beginning. Chrisrus (talk) 03:01, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for speaking up in the BLP RMs; re Oilgate, what are you proposing moving the South African scandal to? In ictu oculi (talk) 06:24, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you missed one of the three Vietnamese RMs Bánh bò. :) btw have you noticed that there's been an upsurge in the selective use of full Vietnamese spelling - not necessarily of people/towns but of other Vietnamese words and phrases - both in English sources and print media. Since Thanh Nien Weekly was renamed Vietweek the web and print edition are using full spelling for native words.

Aside from that, can I ask if you yourself know any Vietnamese / have any interest in editing Vietnam articles? I'm just curious. In ictu oculi (talk) 22:41, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(Vietnamese)#RfC_on_spelling]]. KarlB (talk) 00:07, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On 30 July 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jacobiasca formosana, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the insect Jacobiasca formosana helps create the unique flavor of dongfang meiren tea by sucking the juices from the tea plant's stems and leaves? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jacobiasca formosana. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added 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.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:04, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]