User talk:Nate1481/Archive 11

I just noticed: Congratulations on the Full 10k!. Enjoy your Wiki pause. jmcw (talk) 20:36, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:33, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 07:40, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:08, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Nate

we need your help on the Wiki dyslexia page again. Could you add some more of the discussion page to the existing discussion archive, as the discussion page is getting overly long.

And I have a few wiki technicla problems you may be able to help with, mantioned in the last few dyslexia discusion entries.

dolfrog (talk) 00:20, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Regarding this reversion, hrmm.... you acknowledge my factual correction, but this just makes it more awkward-sounding. The use of the term aikidōka outside of Japan has long been a peeve of mine... although I well understand the linguistic issues. The point I'd like to make about its use in this case is that the term is not at all necessary in a section whose topic is "uniforms and ranking". I suppose it got in there at some point in the far past and no one has felt any need (until now :-) to try to remove it. The term appears in the lead paragraph and I've even recently linked that myself to List of aikidoka. My peeve, however, compels me to try to limit the use of the word to places where it is appropriate, and remove it from those where it serves no real purpose. Surely you must agree that the aside in question serves no purpose in this section, and it can only improve the text from a stylistic standpoint to remove it :-) Himatsu Bushi (talk) 04:42, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 13:15, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

hi nate, can you tell me who put together the article on bradford, here on wikipedia as my name was added due to my being in the uk top ten and producers records since 1991, and then it was removed! lolol from the notable bradfordians section dispite my being in the guinness book of hit singles ect

cheers

james

Sammon70 (talk) 16:53, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:53, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:44, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 00:13, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 11:54, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Zen Do Kai, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zen Do Kai. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:26, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Zhuan Shu Kuan, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zhuan Shu Kuan. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:59, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi All

I have added some new sections below which have come from various talk pages in recent days but all realted in some way to the dyslexia project. So I have added them all below, in the hope that we can all begin to add our own input as one person working alone can cause also sorts of problems as can be seen above. I will post a copy of this to all who I think may wish to the new begining of the Dyslexia project and a copy will appear on your individual discussion pages ( I hope you do not mind). The oringinal copy of this can be found at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dyslexia the discusion page of the main project article you will see revise project template, the changes on the tamplate is the addition of a Project pages section, which includes the orinal project pages and the new STAGE TWO page which is hopefuly the new starting point. the STAGE TWO page has the dyslexia article as it is now. And we can tinker with it without changing the actual article itself and discuss and issue we may have before making further changes to the article itself.

dolfrog (talk) 21:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

What's the policy/guideline on large lists of students on an instructor's page here? Isn't that beyond the scope of what the article is supposed to be about? I'm referring to something like at Chan Shing for example. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 23:51, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

FYI: Re this edit, you didn't sign it. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 15:26, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

No worries. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:32, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:07, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

You archived a talk page discussion using notability - (These notability guidelines only outline how suitable a topic is for its own article. They do not directly limit the content of articles. For Wikipedia's policies regarding content...), and talk page guidelines. Given that the discussion was about an issue that the article does not currently address, may I suggest that you improve the article, so it deals with the question raised.93.96.148.42 (talk) 02:31, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

The discussion was on an aspect of the BNP that is not currently covered by the article, hence was concerned with improving the article. May not have been a brilliant discussion, but totally appropriate subject.93.96.148.42 (talk) 16:38, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:13, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 00:31, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Nate for all the hard work! I'm glad that you have spent time helping clean up the Cai_li_fo page, it reads much better now. Huo Xin (talk) 18:19, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:09, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello Nate,

You placed a template listing various concerns regarding this page. If I read your note correctly, you mentioned that you might be able to recruit an expert in the field. I am curious what "expert" you may be considering for this page. Are you familiar with Doc-Fai Wong? Clftruthseeking (talk) 16:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello again,

How can we redirect Choy Li Fut to the Cai Li Fo page without offending anyone? Your insight is appreciated. Clftruthseeking (talk) 02:51, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestion. There are many nuances of Wiki that I am becoming (or trying to become) familiar with. Clftruthseeking (talk) 22:57, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello yet again,

Thank you for the help with formating and Wiki-fying the Wong Doc-Fai page. Clftruthseeking (talk) 19:19, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, there.

I'm working again on the dyslexia article series and wanted to see if I can get anyone working with me again .... The WikiProject page is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Dyslexia.

Hope all is well.

Best, Rosmoran (talk) 01:56, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

You accused me of breaking 3RR, count the revisions, I have only made two (plus an edit to add further references that reverted nothing, only added). Blackshod (talk) 16:11, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I was aware and commented on talk User:Blackshod, but thanks for the warning anyway. I have taken the question of notability to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Notable members on articles for input. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 16:15, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the tip. I have heard differing opinions on this. I prefer 'they' or 'their' as well, so I guess I should use what I think is right. Some think that usage is grammatically incorrect. Maybe you are an authority? I will take your advice. Plusein (talk) 11:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Wall ball. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wall ball. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:28, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 12:00, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 09:45, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, there. I just started a new conversation on the Wikiproject dyslexia talk page about our attempt to provide a worldwide view in these articles. We could use as many people providing feedback as possible. Please read and respond, if you can.

Thanks!

Rosmoran (talk) 21:51, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mixed_martial_arts#Quinton_Jackson.23Feud_with_Mo_Lawal, input appreciated. --aktsu ^(t / c) 13:45, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Also now Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mixed_martial_arts#List_of_.22notable_fighters.22_at_Strikeforce. --aktsu ^(t / c) 09:21, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 05:21, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 04:42, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:16, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey, could you take a look at Talk:Strikeforce and maybe chip in so we get closer to a consensus for the latest issue? There have been quite a few issues the last two months (mainly POV-related things) so any additional eyes on the article would also be appreciated. Thanks, --aktsu ^(t / c) 16:10, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I forget which editors were involved with what and I guess you already knew of the things going on there after the "notable fighters"-thing (which I guess we should get back to as it hasn't resulted in any changes to the status quo of "anything goes"). -_- --aktsu ^(t / c) 16:13, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I have done a GA Reassessment of this article as part of the GA Sweeps project. I have found the article does not meet the current GA Criteria. My assessment can be found here. I have put the article on hold for one week pending work. I you as one of the primary editors of this assessment. Should you have any questions please contact me on my talk page. H1nkles (talk) 18:02, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:19, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for cleaning up my edit to Wrestling ... unfortunately you added a spelling mistake, punctuation mistake and a broken link ... ha, ha, I'm still looking for the term "daft" in the WP:CIV article Hutcher (talk) 05:16, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Yea, I don't think that merging them to a generalized ranks page is a bad call. My only fear would be ending up with too much redundancy with the Main BJJ page (and possibly getting deleted).

As you know, the main BJJ page addresses ranks/belts to a general degree. The individual pages were obviously created attempting to be much more specific for each belt, and with the hopes that someone with a LOT of BJJ knowledge might come along at some point and expand them out with more detailed info (so they'd have a lot less of a stub feel to them).

A separate article regarding BJJ ranks would be nice, but I almost feel that something like that would need to be written by more of an "expert" on the topic. What do you think? Do you think that an average practitioner (or anyone for that matter) with just the right sources could craft it? Buddy23Lee (talk) 17:27, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 08:34, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, regarding your edit summary here. I totally agree that the martial arts frequently have a national origin, I haven't removed the country parameter from the template. Only the flag, there really is no use for a flag when the country itself is already written. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (icons). Garion96 (talk) 12:06, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(icons)#Do_not_solely_decorate for instance. What purpose does it serve? And of course from past precedent, movie infoboxes have removed the flags, so did biography articles and a bunch more. Besides a pretty icon a flag has no real purpose in the infobox. Plus it can cause problems, is there a martial arts started in Germany during the third reich? (We have had some usage of that in other infoboxes) or is there a Tibetan martial arts? Do you use the Tibetan flag or the Chinese flag? Or my favourite hypothetical, a Northern Ireland martial arts. :) Garion96 (talk) 12:28, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Godwin's law can be overrated. You really can use an example of nazism in a normal discussion. Besides, recognition? Do you know many people who can recognise all these flags? Or see the difference between the flag of New Zealand and Australia? Since you already noted they should not be added when it's ambiguities it might as well be removed completely. Garion96 (talk) 12:56, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

You never responded to my last comment so then you shouldn't be surprised I reverted your edit after a week of no response. So far you still haven't explained why they are useful especially since you agree that sometimes they shouldn't be placed. Either have them always or never. And per wp:mosicon never is the best option because of course they are decorative, people can read. Garion96 (talk) 12:35, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

i was wondering if you saw this in Crotalus horridus's block log - 19:04, 22 December 2008 Phil Sandifer (talk | contribs) blocked Crotalus horridus (talk | contribs) (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 24 hours ‎ (Egregious disruption, using Twinkle to querrelously AfD articles so as to advance a POV.)

if he keeps trying to delete all these anti-bullshido articles while saying things like 'bullshido is a cult' then i think someone needs to involve an admin. Theserialcomma (talk) 19:19, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Since you participated in the deletion discussion of Bullshido.net in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bullshido.net (2nd nomination), you may be interested in my renomination of the article for deletion. If you would like to participate in that debate, please comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bullshido.net (3rd nomination). Thanks, Cunard (talk) 22:44, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 08:22, 1 October 2009 (UTC)