I did reply to you on the CSN discussion thing but didn't receive a reply. Is that because you had nothing to say or because you missed my post? It doesn't really matter, quite honestly I've got my hands full with other Wikiproblems right now anyway and I don't think I'm up for a lengthy debate on policy, but just in case you missed my response I'm letting you know it's there. Regards, Gatoclass 14:46, 11 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the heads up, yes my hands are pretty too also. I'll have a look at the thread and see if anything's still simmering. Cheers, Durova ^Charge! 02:07, 12 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I like ladies with pretty hands. (Sorry, I just couldn't resist!) Raymond Arritt 02:14, 12 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Doh! ...pretty full... ...pretty full of typos... ;) Durova ^Charge! 02:17, 12 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Re this, I agree that recusal ought to apply to content disputes rather than administrative action. The tactic some editors try to use is to spin any disagreement (the sysop blocked me and I don't think I should have been blocked!) into grounds for recusal. That tactic occurs from time to time no matter what guidelines and policies are in place. My point is that nobody gets away with that more than once or at most twice, and that seldom to never affects the balance of a consensus sanctions discussion. The attempt to shut the door on that particular exploitive attempt opened the door to a much more harmful one: partisan vote stacking at sanctions discussions. I can't emphasize enough that this is a guideline/policy issue that has nothing to do with the existence of the community sanctions noticeboard. Maybe now since AN and ANI are taking over its functions again, more of the community will see how pernicious this issue is. Durova ^Charge! 02:17, 12 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I didn't realize CSN was being merged back into AN. I can't keep up with the policy changes around this place :)

Anyhow, next time the issue is brought up for discussion, feel free to notify me as I will probably want to participate. Regards, Gatoclass 03:15, 12 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Thanks. Things do happen fast. Durova ^Charge! 03:21, 12 October 2007 (UTC) reply

		Ready to swab the deck!
		Another motley scallawag has joined the crew. Thanks for your comments at my RFA. Arrrgh! Thanks, Coach. - - Jehochman Talk 23:30, 11 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Hey--

Just to recap the last portion of our conversation, now archived on page 34:

I propose to watch and see what IP does once the freeze is lifted. I tend to think he'll simply revert again, as he did before. At that point, a possible strategy might be to reinsert edits piecemeal (with cites), rather than simply revert, and see just what he backs out. Would that be a reasonable approach? Thanks again, Witzlaw 15:10, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Very reasonable. That approach makes the situation very clear to third parties and much easier to remedy. Don't be shy about reporting the deletion of referenced material as vandalism. Just remain polite and patient and keep making the page a better article. Best regards, DurovaCharge! 16:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Just FYI: As predicted, IP reverted the last set of changes. But before I could do anything, another anonymous IP editor reverted also. Assuming there is another edit war (which, I emphasize, I am not presently involved in), it may become difficult even to perform piecemeal changes to the content. For now, I will hold off on further action, at least through the end of this week. Witzlaw 00:46, 12 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Actually the second anon just bolded the name of the school. You're welcome to add cited information as long as you don't engage in a direct edit war. I doubt the IP's edit summary was serious. What I do suggest you do is add references rather than delete existing ones, and open an article content request for comment if any problems continue. You may cite this conversation with me if anyone attempts to report you. I'll vouch that from the time I made contact with you until this post, you appear to be acting in good faith and seeking advice. That's as much as I can ask of any editor. Thanks for being patient. Durova ^Charge! 02:06, 12 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Thanks so much. (You're right, I misread the edit by the second anon.) I did do a partial restore of my prior edits, in which I corrected a dead URL link and restored a paragraph that I previously cited. I did not restore as yet the other deleted section (the one that I didn't write) because it didn't have cites as originally written and I've not had a chance to research that one. Perhaps I may take that up this weekend. All the best, Witzlaw 12:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Replied HERE. Anchoress 03:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Let's take to WP:AN? Durova ^Charge! 03:38, 12 October 2007 (UTC) reply

		With thanks!
		Thanks for participating in my RfA, which closed successfuly. I leave you with a picture of the real Blood Red Sandman! Note his 'mop' is slightly deadlier than mine! - - Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 18:33, 12 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Today is the one year aniversary of my time as a Wikipedian! Best, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles ^Tally-ho! 04:18, 13 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I've left you something at your user talk page. :) Durova ^Charge! 14:21, 13 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Thanks! :) Sincerely, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles ^Tally-ho! 15:32, 13 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Look at this notice of DYK acceptance! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Chergles#Did_you_know Chergles 16:59, 13 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Congrats! Your barnstar is delivered. Durova ^Charge! 05:47, 14 October 2007 (UTC) reply

heh, heh again! Someone else's DYK [1] was in grave danger because he/she did not cite the DYK hook. I fixed it and found the citation so it did get in DYK. I don't claim credit for the DYK. I was just helping out so someone's work would be recogniZed instead of rejected. Chergles 19:25, 16 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I'll let that qualify. Keep the barnstar, and I hope it's a positive inspiration. Durova ^Charge! 19:39, 19 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I just left a request and now I'm not sure if I did it properly and what to do next.I'll post that I've done this on the talk page of the article in dispute and hope that the other editor agrees to participate. If there's more I need to do, would you let me know? Thanks. WaverlyR 13:19, 14 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi, I'm semi-offline this week. Have you contacted Navou? Durova ^Charge! 12:03, 16 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi Durova, take a look at this diff an old friend dropped by-- Cailil ^talk 00:05, 15 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Thank you for the star. As to the above note by Cailil, I denounce bringing up old wounds. Please don't punish me for that. Chergles 15:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC) reply

The admin tools are supposed to be preventative, not punitive. Of course I find it curious that you show a particular interest in that page. If you just keep writing new DYKs and let bygones be bygones then there won't be anything to worry about. Durova ^Charge! 12:06, 16 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Maybe it's paranoia, but I quiver with fear anytime someone signs his/her name "Anacapa". Therefore, I might as well stamp my feet, jump up and down, and yell "I AM Anacapa" because it's more likely to be believed then "I am not Anacapa". More likely, I'll try to say nothing at first and hide. Wikipedia can be a warm, cozy place but there are small parts of it that roast like hell. Chergles 18:56, 16 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Really, things should be fine as long as you keep making productive mainspace edits and avoid the old Anacapa stuff. That's all old history unless problems reemerge. Durova ^Charge! 20:37, 16 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alkivar. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alkivar/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alkivar/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Picaroon (t) 21:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I'm sorry to have to come back here, but I just wanted to get your opinion on something. Would you consider this to be a personal attack? When I saw this on Talk:Michael Vick, I did take this as an attack. I'm not complaining about this or anything; I just want an opinion about this. To me, this seemed like Chris was calling me stupid for "not answering his questions." But that's just how I viewed his remark. Ksy92003 (talk) 00:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC) reply

It's best to post that to a formal noticeboard instead of to my userpage. Or, if it's possible, let a little water roll off your back and take the matter to ordinary dispute resolution. Durova ^Charge! 02:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC) reply

That's what I was thinking (reporting it at Arbcom enforcement). But since it was just one little statement, and I wasn't sure if it'd be classified as a personal attack, I thought I should get an outside opinion before reporting it. Ksy92003 (talk) 02:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Or he could, I don't know... grow a pair and not be a baby.► Chris Nelson ^Holla! 02:49, 17 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Man, Ksy is really dying to find something incriminating against Chris. Pats1 ^T/ C 02:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC) reply

If that's bait, Chris took it. And I can't ignore it on my own user page. One week. Durova ^Charge! 02:53, 17 October 2007 (UTC) reply

But is what Chris said really a personal attack? Wait, I can guess the answer. Take it to ANI, right? Pats1 ^T/ C 02:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC) reply

The original one could be read as a normal expression of frustration, and dispute resolution would have been better than coming to me (or to ANI). No doubt about his post over here, though. Durova ^Charge! 14:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC) reply

So are you saying I should heed Ksy's advice and "shut my mouth?" Pats1 ^T/ C 18:22, 17 October 2007 (UTC) reply

You're taking my comment out of context, Pats1. That comment meant that if you jump into a conversation that doesn't involve you, which you shouldn't do anyway, don't jump in with comments such as "Man, Ksy is really dying to find something incriminating against Chris." It's those types of comments which provoke other users, and you shouldn't say things like that if you don't need to, which in this case, you didn't.

Additionally, I don't have any idea why you continue to remove your comment on your talk page. First of all, you made that comment on your talk page, and I moved it to your talk page to keep the discussion centralized. I made a comment which was in response to that. There is no reason why the comment should be removed, as my comment was in response to that, and its important to see what I responded to. Ksy92003 (talk) 22:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Guys, I'm concerned about the whole direction this is taking. Rather than let things get personal, it's usually a lot more successful to add references to the article or open a request for comment to bring in fresh perspectives. Durova ^Charge! 15:41, 18 October 2007 (UTC) reply

You said, "Several of my coaching students recently got their mops so I've got a couple of open slots right now. Interested Wikipedians are welcome to drop me a line." so I'm posting to say "interested". Any help you can offer would be much appreciated. Sheffield Steel ^talk _stalk 19:46, 17 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Awesome. Do you have gmail chat? Durova ^Charge! 15:37, 18 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I don't even have gmail :-( Sheffield Steel ^talk _stalk 21:55, 18 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Eep. Ordinary e-mail is fine then, if you don't mind, or we could start here on this page. You know what kind of stuff I do, right? I'm not exactly the typical sysop in terms of how I spend my time (you won't find me on CSD but you will find me on COIN). Durova ^Charge! 22:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Your evidence against Burntsauce should probably be presented to the Arbcom (if you have not already done so privately), and maybe also send it to Alkivar if he hasn't seen it. — Random832 20:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC) reply

You're right; I've had minimal time online and am catching up today. Thanks. Durova ^Charge! 15:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I posted a request for CEM a few days ago and wonder what the usual wait time is for a response. I realize you're catching up. Thanks. WaverlyR 17:59, 18 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Done, and case opened. Durova ^Charge! 18:08, 18 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Not sure what is supposed to happen now. Should we each state our position on the open page? WaverlyR 22:19, 18 October 2007 (UTC) reply

That's a good idea. I suggest taking a "this is where I'm coming from and how this situation looks to me" approach rather than listing grievances. Durova ^Charge! 22:45, 18 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I don't know how I missed it. I'm sorry. Mercury 01:54, 19 October 2007 (UTC) reply

No worries. Just do your best and we'll take it from there. :) Durova ^Charge! 15:48, 19 October 2007 (UTC) reply

		The Sandwich of Exceptional Excellence
		I award you, Durova, this Roast Turkey Sandwich of Exceptional Excellence (Potato Salad of Congeniality cluster, 1st class) for your fine public relations work on behalf of Wikipedia. - Jehochman Talk 16:34, 19 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Mmm, delicious! Thank you. Durova ^Charge! 19:37, 19 October 2007 (UTC) reply

DO you think I might be ready for a run at RfA? Jonathan letters to the editor— my work 19:09, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Hm, so you're eleven? That would probably be a new record. The youngest sysop I know about is thirteen. Seriously though, I suppose your main interests would be in vandal-fighting and CSD. And there's no reason your age should be a barrier to either of those. Two things do concern me. One is a personal quirk: I'm no fan of admin channel IRC. Sometimes in real time people say things that aren't very nice - things they wouldn't post onsite if they had a moment to think about it - and the logs are leaky. So the whole thing doesn't look particularly good, especially since some of the people on that channel aren't even administrators. That doesn't necessarily stand in your way at RFA - it's just my take on that matter. A more substantial objection is that your mainspace contributions are on the light side. I prefer to see someone become a major contributor to at least one good article before getting the tools. Sometimes people who head over to Wikipedia namespace without enough field experience have some off-target ideas about how the site works. It really makes someone a better sysop to have spent some quality time at regular editing. Of course some adults aren't wordsmiths and it's particularly challenging to create a GA when you're very young. So sometimes as an alternative I've nominated good people for RFA on the basis of work that got into Template:Did you know. I've written some tips for that in my user space. There are probably some topics waiting to get created into articles out of local geography and history, and a few books from your community library that aren't widely available that you could use to source the new pages. Sounds good? Durova ^Charge! 19:31, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

(ec)Okay! DeliveryBot 23:55, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

The above-linked arbitration case has closed. Giovanni33 and John Smith's are subject to identical editing restrictions for one year. They are limited to one revert per page per week (excepting obvious vandalism), and are required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page. Should they exceed this limit or fail to discuss a content reversion, they may be blocked. For the Arbitration Committee, Picaroon (t) 20:11, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I'm sorry Durova but I don't understand it. How can asking a question be a violation of WP:POINT?-- G-Dett 22:24, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Jimbo couldn't have been clearer. And you are millimeters from a WP:POINT block yourself. Tread lightly. Durova ^Charge! 22:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Hey Durova. I was just looking at WP:AN/3RR, as I have thought about my future RfA and have told myself that I would like to take part in dealing with WP:3RR violations. I saw that one user blocked somebody for 6 hours for their first offense, and that got me to thinking about something. For 3RR violations, is there any sort of standard time scale for the durations of blocks (such as a certain duration for the first violation, a different duration for the second violation, etc.)? Or is it all just an administrators' judgment? Ksy92003 (talk) 03:34, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I'm not Durova, but it is administrators judgement. Typically escalating in time if they have multiple offences. Viridae ^Talk 04:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I normally start with 24 hours. Sysops have a lot of leeway regarding duration. For people with prior block histories I may make that longer, but if the blocks are old news (six months or more) I often give them a clean slate in terms of duration. Other factors can come into play - if the editor has, for instance, repeatedly deleted legitimate warnings then I may add a day or two. For really egregious gaming the system I sometimes ignore precedent and just apply a lengthy block. If any block I apply seems out of the ordinary I do my best to set forth the reasons in case it comes up for review. None of us bats .1000 in that regard, but I try. Durova ^Charge! 04:40, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Thanks. That really helps. I'm just trying to prepare for the one day where hopefully, I may eventually have a successful RfA, and I would like to be as prepared as possible for that time. Ksy92003 (talk) 04:45, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply

We've begun an exchange but I'm not optimistic. I will be away for 10 days or so. We need guidance from the BLP noticeboard and we may need a decision or 3O about where to put the information about spouses. I'm not sure what your role is at this point but any help would be appreciated. WaverlyR 12:01, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I'll see what I can do. Durova ^Charge! 17:12, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Amandajm 05:43, 22 October 2007 (UTC) reply
  • DYK: Edmund Blacket DYK Oct 21, 2007
  • GA: Sistine Chapel ceiling, my rewrite was virtually completed by March 10, 2007
  • FC: Restoration of the Sistine Chapel frescoes, FC as of Oct 14, 2007

Your Majesty, I enjoyed these very much. Your crowns will be ready shortly. Durova ^Charge! 05:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Thankyou! Thankyou! Thankyou! I'm glad you enjoyed them! :-) Amandajm 06:16, 22 October 2007 (UTC) reply

But golly, when are they going to order new wallpaper. ;) Durova ^Charge! 06:34, 22 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I followed up on Jehochman's suggestions (currently here here, earlier discussions here) but I'm finding that multi-venue-tasking (gmail is slower than wikipedia) annoys me a bit. May whatever needs to be discussed be discussed on my user talk page? — Athaenara ✉ 07:20, 22 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Sure. Durova ^Charge! 08:38, 22 October 2007 (UTC) reply

MER-C undertook the nom. — Athaenara ✉ 13:55, 28 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi Durova,

is it OK to request a triple crown for someone else? If so, then please consider:

• Dincher
  • DYK: Fox Point State Park
  • GA: Worlds End State Park
  • FC: List of Pennsylvania state parks

and while I'm at it, may I also request one for myself?

• Username
  • DYK: Cogan House Covered Bridge, Fair Play Men, Recreational Demonstration Area
  • GA: Larrys Creek, Plunketts Creek (Loyalsock Creek), Worlds End State Park
  • FC: Larrys Creek, White Deer Hole Creek, Plunketts Creek (Loyalsock Creek)

Thank you, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 11:04, 22 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Thank you very much! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:18, 23 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Thank you, Your Imperial Majesty. :) Durova ^Charge! 01:27, 23 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Hey there.

I've just replied to your second email, but by its contents it looks as though you didn't receive my first reply to your original query. Have I been spamtrapped?  :-) —  Coren  ^(talk) 02:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Got it. :) Durova ^Charge! 04:13, 23 October 2007 (UTC) reply

You slave driver you! Ouimetoscope. I couldn't go to bed early as planned because of you!  :-) —  Coren  ^(talk) 05:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Beautiful! :) Durova ^Charge! 07:14, 23 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Please excuse my ignorance as I am not a regular wikipedian nor very computer savvy. I came across this post about our company through Google Alerts. I posted a reply/request through the post and through Spamwatcher's page (I am NBRIin the post, but I suppose you knew that) and have not received any response. I found you through the posting on his My Talk page (with a threat of banishment). Has Spamwatcher been banished? Or perhaps I do not know where to go to find the response? I have looked on my "My Talk" page as well as that of Spamwatcher and can find nothing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2007_Archive_Mar#Nincompoop_Business_Revealing_Its_Identity_.28NBRII.29

I have attempted to read the rules and guidelines before asking these questions, but most do not seem to be addressed.

Do I just need to be patient and wait for a response from Spamwatcher?

Any information is greatly appreciated.

thank you,

NBRI —Preceding unsigned comment added by NBRII ( talk • contribs) 15:27, 23 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Thank you for taking the proactive step of contacting me. Yes, there is a problem with "inheriting" an account that was previously used by another person. Our site jargon calls that a "role account" and it's prohibited unless it's preapproved by the Wikimedia Foundation. No worries if you've acted in good faith, as long as you create a new account now that you're informed. Something like NBRII2 would be sufficient. I see why your query didn't receive any reply: it went into a page that was archived seven months ago. Regarding your other questions, here are some useful links.

• User:Jmabel/PR
• An outside essay on PR and Wikipedia
• User:Uncle_G/On_notability#Writing_about_subjects_close_to_you
• Wikipedia:Search engine optimization

Additionally, I write a column for Search Engine Land about white hat strategies and synergies for the business community at Wikipedia. In order to avoid an appearance of impropriety I won't link to them directly, but they're easy to find. In particular one called "The Right Way to Fix Wikipedia Articles" may be useful to you. Feel free to contact me via Wikipedia's e-mail feature Special:Emailuser/Durova. Best regards, Durova ^Charge! 15:50, 23 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Durova,

Thank you very much for your quick and informative reply. In the interest of making this publically known, I am posting this here. I will read through your linked (and non-linked) posts before proceeding with trying to fix this issue. In the future, if I have questions I will contact you through the email feature.

I will also create a new account.

Thanks again for your help.

NBRI —Preceding unsigned comment added by NBRII ( talk • contribs) 16:08, 23 October 2007 (UTC) reply

No problem! I generally find that most of the people in the business community would cooperate with our site procedures if only they knew how. This site can be confusing to non-regulars and it doesn't behave like other "Web 2.0" sites. Thank you for taking an interest in participating the right way. Cheers, Durova ^Charge! 16:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Dear Durova, I hope that you are okay in regards to the fire. Anyway, I have found a hoax article in which I could vote delete: [2]. Sincerely, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles ^Tally-ho! 16:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Lol, a delete vote from you...may I frame it? Many happy returns. Cheers, Durova ^Charge! 04:29, 25 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Oddly enough, it actually isn't the first! Glad you're okay from the fires. They (as in MSNBC and Fox News) were comparing it to Katrina in terms of cost and degree of devastation. By the way, I replied to your reply to a different message of mine. Sincerely, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles ^Tally-ho! 06:25, 25 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Alkivar/Evidence. Durova ^Charge! 23:22, 27 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Dear Durova, thank you for the reply. I have added evidence here, but as you can see that new account in addition to acting similarly and in support of the editors under dispute is also accusing other editors of stalking in a similar fashion to some of the other anti-"in popular culture" editors. Anyway, please see if what I entered is the correct format as that may be the first time I ever entered evidence in one of those things. Thank you for your time and help. Sincerely, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles ^Tally-ho! 01:36, 28 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Thank you for the very useful reference about how the community has dealt with similar cases in the past. I cannot help myself from asking how you reconcile your obvious role in helping businesses interact with Wikipedia with your obviously active role as a WP editor. You response is awaited at the ArbCom page. Physchim62 (talk) 17:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I don't think there's any need to involve that arbitration request - I'm not an involved party to the proposed case. The question itself has me scratching my head. Why would there be any contradiction for an active and experienced Wikipedian to communicate site procedures, venues, and standards to a broader audience? Durova ^Charge! 04:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Agreed, irrelavent to the community concerns about the present case. Physchim62 (talk) 16:22, 25 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I'm on the fence about whether Oswald acted alone, but he was most definitely involved and could well have been the lone triggerman. I don't like artificial turf, but if you're going to have a Metrodome, you pretty much have to have it. I'm not necessarily a huge fan of the DH, but I like offense, and there is nothing interesting about seeing the pitcher come up to bat and strike out. I suffered through the Bob Buhl season with the Cubs, when he never got one hit all year. So if they can't learn to either hit or lay down a bunt, they shouldn't be batting. Having said that, a pitcher that can hit is a joy to behold. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:28, 25 October 2007 (UTC) reply

It's my favorite sports movie too. :) Cheers, Durova ^Charge! 22:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi Durova, <selfpromote>I'd like to put in a RFTC. I've done about 30 DYKs so these are just some random faves.

• JayHenry
  • DYK: Malagasy Hippopotamus, Radical Chic & Mau-Mauing the Flak Catchers, Dateline:_Toronto
  • GA: Frank Sinatra Has a Cold, Nature (journal), Ryan White
  • FC: Hippopotamus, Ban Ki-moon, Pygmy Hippopotamus

</selfpromote> -- JayHenry 05:59, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Fascinating! And I must say, quite a wide range of interests. No worries about the self-nomination, Your Imperial Majesty. The award is well earned. Durova ^Charge! 15:59, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

and it was pointed out in your TURNIP essay, sort of, by lack of elucidation. "If an editor shows no sign of being sorry for a mistake..." This has come up twice in my RfA, from events that occurred months or years ago and have not recurred, yet I've got people saying that I show no sign of having learned from mistakes. I would think not repeating them would be a good indicator, yet when I explained thus, I was told that those are "excuses for behavior" and such.

Now, I'm well aware that not everyone is going to necessarily be in support of me, but if "learning from" or "being sorry for" a mistake is not evidenced by not repeating it, how does one show signs of being sorry? MSJapan 18:30, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

You could just say, "Oops, I goofed. It won't happen again." A little acknowledgement goes a long way. Based on something I saw in Signpost a few issues ago I looked at my contributions for 2007 and noticed I average about one apology a month. Nobody's perfect. Durova ^Charge! 00:32, 27 October 2007 (UTC) reply

It's what you got. 68.218.185.214 09:34, 27 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I salute you for your call to action at User:Durova/Triple crown winner's circle, and present the following for your consideration:

1. -- South Park and Philosophy: You Know, I Learned Something Today - October 21, 2007.
2. -- Trapped in the Closet (South Park), October 23, 2007.
3. -- The Joy of Sect, October 27, 2007

Thank you. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 00:03, 28 October 2007 (UTC). reply

Looking below, I saw you appreciate it if we format them as they appear on the page itself, so here they are again:

• Curt Wilhelm VonSavage
  • DYK: South Park and Philosophy: You Know, I Learned Something Today
  • GA: The Joy of Sect
  • FC: Trapped in the Closet (South Park)

Am I correct in that the italics is for articles also created by the user? Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 06:56, 28 October 2007 (UTC). reply

Italics is for articles that would be italicized, such as the titles of books if the article is about a book. Durova ^Charge! 03:52, 29 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Oh. Thanks. In that case, the above is correct. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 04:06, 29 October 2007 (UTC). reply

Awarded, Your Majesty. :) Durova ^Charge! 04:28, 29 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Thank you! FYI, I am currently hard at work on attaining the Imperial triple crown jewels. Your honor spurs me on to do more good work in improving quality of articles on Wikipedia. Thank you kindly. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 04:30, 29 October 2007 (UTC). reply

• Awesome. If that inspires more improvements to the project, then it's all worthwhile. Best, Durova ^Charge! 04:43, 29 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• It does, and it is. Ta ta for now... Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 04:50, 29 October 2007 (UTC). reply

Hi. I just left a note on the category Anglo-Norman invasion of Ireland, which you seem to have set up. For the reasons stated, I think it should be named in line with the article of the same name. All the best. 213.202.160.117 01:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Dear Durova, I have not posted anything yet in this discussion, but if I said something like, "Keep, because such arguments as this one from the earlier discussion that ended in an overwhelming keep still have validity at present in addition to the significance of this particular aspect of the show to its plot and structure," would that be more along the lines of what you suggest? Again, I thought I would check with you first before posting it in the actual discussion. UPDATE: I didn't received any objections, so I'm going ahead and posting this argument. I hope that's okay. Best, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles ^Tally-ho! 02:23, 28 October 2007 (UTC) reply

86.150.128.67 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Hi Durova. Last month you blocked this IP for abuse of multiple accounts. They're editing again [3] and its clearly the same user but I'm unfamiliar with the background. Is another block needed? WjB scribe 02:59, 28 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi Durova; I just found User:Durova/Triple crown winner's circle. A couple of nominations for your consideration:

First:

• David Fuchs
  • DYK: Raptor Red
  • GA: Defense of the Ancients
  • FC: Master Chief (Halo)

• TKD
  • DYK: Machinima.com
  • GA: Donut (Red vs. Blue)
  • FC: Diary of a Camper

—  TKD:: Talk 06:50, 28 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Dang, that's the shortest FA I've ever seen. And I want to watch Red vs. Blue again. Totally off topic, but just because I like military women generally I'll give a barnstar to whoever raises the page about Tex to GA. :D Your Majesties, your crowns will be delivered shortly. Durova ^Charge! 15:06, 29 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the award. Yes, I think that Diary of a Camper is the second-shortest current FA in terms of prose size ( Hurricane Irene (2005) is, I believe, the shortest). As for Tex, I'll consider it, but first I would like to get back to working on promoting machinima to GA (even with a recent sourcing push, the article has a few major content gaps, such as the treatment of intellectual property issues). If you're looking for fictional women in the military, you might be interested to know that Caribbean H.Q. just got Nicole (Dead or Alive) promoted to GA. :) —  TKD:: Talk 16:53, 29 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Follow your heart. :) I guess I have a soft spot for Tex. Nearly the only competent character on that series. Cheers, Durova ^Charge! 17:04, 29 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Good morning ( GMT time); regarding your block of the above account, could you make a point, when possible, to leave a block message in future? It improves the general readability of an unblock request (e.g., User talk:JohnEMcClure), and makes processing such a request much easier. Plus, it's general courtesy to the blocked account (even if they are a sock :) Cheers! Anthøny 08:33, 28 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Thanks, that happened very late at night and I left a message at the arbitration case asking for someone to help out with the templates. Will try to be better about that in future. Durova ^Charge! 15:36, 28 October 2007 (UTC) reply

WP:ANI#Block review is pertinent to you. -- Eyrian 09:27, 28 October 2007 (UTC)