A bit over a year ago, you commented in the afd discussion for Comparison of web based file managers. It was shortly thereafter reposted by its creator as List of web based file managers, which is currently on afd itself. I invite you to participate in the new discussion. — Korath ( Talk) 18:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Peter: You just did some nice editing on the court-martial article -- one in which I attempted some clean up. Thank you for deleting and moving the info.
Given your interest in the subject (e.g., courts-martial in your neighbor to the south), I invite your attention to Norbert Basil MacLean III. This article, as I see it, is a vanity piece developed to praise MacLean and his efforts to promote a change in US law. One editor -- Mattwashdc -- is the (if not only) contributor to the article. For my part, I've tried to edit out misinformation and extensive POV. Also, I've initiated a GA relook on it and tagged it as COI and cherrypicked. (Moreover, more tagging is certainly justified.) Not only does the article fall below GA standards, MacLean himself is not notable. Finally, Mattwashdoc has put MacLean into several other articles to promote himself -- I mean, Maclean -- by means of multiple Wikipedia references.
But a second opinion is needed. (This is especially true because Mattwashdc has reverted some -- not all -- of my edits and tags without explanation.) With this in mind, I ask that you give a gander and your opinions.
Thank you so very much.--S. Rich 18:23, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Hey Pmedema, do you have an idea of what resources you need? Any specific articles you need access to? Otherwise, I can't really help you, since I don't know anything about this man. bibliomaniac 1 5 15:26, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Peter and friends -- your work in following up on my request has greatly exceeded my expectations! While I hope you continue, I want you to know that I greatly appreciate all that you have done.-- S. Rich ( talk) 15:29, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Peter: I invite you to take a look at Norbert and see what you think. From my view, Mattwashdc has bitten the bullet and let go of his RGW effort. With this in mind, your review and stubbing of the Equal Justice article were a great help. Thank you.-- S. Rich ( talk) 15:36, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi there! I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. Recently, you reverted my fix to Norbert Basil MacLean III.
If you did this because the references should be removed from the article, you have misunderstood the situation. Most likely, the article originally contained both <ref name="foo">...</ref>
and one or more <ref name="foo"/>
referring to it. Someone then removed the <ref name="foo">...</ref>
but left the <ref name="foo"/>
, which results in a big red error in the article. I replaced one of the remaining <ref name="foo"/>
with a copy of the <ref name="foo">...</ref>
; I did not re-insert the reference to where it was deleted, I just replaced one of the remaining instances. What you need to do to fix it is to make sure you remove all instances of the named reference so as to not leave any big red error.
If you reverted because I made an actual mistake, please be sure to also correct any reference errors in the page so I won't come back and make the same mistake again. Also, please post an error report at
User talk:AnomieBOT so my operator can fix me! If the error is so urgent that I need to be stopped, also post a message at
User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/OrphanReferenceFixer. Thanks!
AnomieBOT
⚡ 05:22, 19 August 2010 (UTC) If you do not wish to receive this message in the future, add {{
bots|optout=AnomieBOT-OrphanReferenceFixer}}
to your talk page.
I believe I have done the editing for this article "up to the quality" that you expected.-- Huayi ( talk) 18:33, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
It's on a subject that I know nothing about! I could not even begin. Still, I've done some copy edits.-- S. Rich ( talk) 03:46, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Peter - thank you for your comments. I'm a nubie to Wikipedia and trying to understand wikifying. Please be patient with me and I welcome your comments. Whusebo ( talk) 20:34, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
I hope you do not mind, but I have moved your message at WT:Identifying reliable sources to WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Zecharia Sitchin which I believe is the correct place. Johnuniq ( talk) 00:47, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi Peter, I have just expanded the I-Fly article with some more sources and an image that I found. Do you think that in its current shape it has a chance to pass WP:CORP? I really dare say that there are many airline articles around here that look much worse. I appreciate your thoughts and comments. Per aspera ad Astra ( talk) 16:22, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
You participated in a discussion respecting the proposed move of this list. Unfortunately, the proponent of the move initiated overlapping merge, move and AFD discussions, causing some degree of confusion, when it appears that his objective was to merge this list into one list for North American veterans. If you are interested, the actual merge discussion is at Talk:Last surviving United States war veterans#Merger proposal. Best regards, -- Skeezix1000 ( talk) 15:17, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
The article Brad Wright (blogger) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
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. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Claret
Ash 00:03, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I see you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wright on Health. I was wondering if you'd also like to express an opinion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wright on Health (2nd nomination). Claret Ash 12:58, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Peter. I wanted to drop a line and say I remember quite fondly the interaction we had 2 years ago. You awarded me my first barnstar, and I still value it far beyond the others. Since then, I've gone on slogging away at WP and have racked up a bunch of edits, plus a couple of other nice barnstars. My engagements with you were worthwhile and they, for better or worse, were most encouraging. Again, many thanks and best regards. – S. Rich ( talk) 03:55, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Thought you would be interested to know I have nominated the page William Sledd for deletion, as you proposed should happen so long ago on that article's talk page. I would appreciate any feedback you have in the new AfD page. As far as I'm concerned, this person is not notable.
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.255.102.180 ( talk) 10:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello P. I wanted to let you know that you forgot to sign your post here. Occasionally (though not always) the person closing an AFD will ignore an unsigned post so I thought I would let you know so that you can fix this. Cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD| Talk 19:50, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 16:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Pmedema. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Pmedema. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Pmedema. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
A bit over a year ago, you commented in the afd discussion for Comparison of web based file managers. It was shortly thereafter reposted by its creator as List of web based file managers, which is currently on afd itself. I invite you to participate in the new discussion. — Korath ( Talk) 18:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Peter: You just did some nice editing on the court-martial article -- one in which I attempted some clean up. Thank you for deleting and moving the info.
Given your interest in the subject (e.g., courts-martial in your neighbor to the south), I invite your attention to Norbert Basil MacLean III. This article, as I see it, is a vanity piece developed to praise MacLean and his efforts to promote a change in US law. One editor -- Mattwashdc -- is the (if not only) contributor to the article. For my part, I've tried to edit out misinformation and extensive POV. Also, I've initiated a GA relook on it and tagged it as COI and cherrypicked. (Moreover, more tagging is certainly justified.) Not only does the article fall below GA standards, MacLean himself is not notable. Finally, Mattwashdoc has put MacLean into several other articles to promote himself -- I mean, Maclean -- by means of multiple Wikipedia references.
But a second opinion is needed. (This is especially true because Mattwashdc has reverted some -- not all -- of my edits and tags without explanation.) With this in mind, I ask that you give a gander and your opinions.
Thank you so very much.--S. Rich 18:23, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Hey Pmedema, do you have an idea of what resources you need? Any specific articles you need access to? Otherwise, I can't really help you, since I don't know anything about this man. bibliomaniac 1 5 15:26, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Peter and friends -- your work in following up on my request has greatly exceeded my expectations! While I hope you continue, I want you to know that I greatly appreciate all that you have done.-- S. Rich ( talk) 15:29, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Peter: I invite you to take a look at Norbert and see what you think. From my view, Mattwashdc has bitten the bullet and let go of his RGW effort. With this in mind, your review and stubbing of the Equal Justice article were a great help. Thank you.-- S. Rich ( talk) 15:36, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi there! I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. Recently, you reverted my fix to Norbert Basil MacLean III.
If you did this because the references should be removed from the article, you have misunderstood the situation. Most likely, the article originally contained both <ref name="foo">...</ref>
and one or more <ref name="foo"/>
referring to it. Someone then removed the <ref name="foo">...</ref>
but left the <ref name="foo"/>
, which results in a big red error in the article. I replaced one of the remaining <ref name="foo"/>
with a copy of the <ref name="foo">...</ref>
; I did not re-insert the reference to where it was deleted, I just replaced one of the remaining instances. What you need to do to fix it is to make sure you remove all instances of the named reference so as to not leave any big red error.
If you reverted because I made an actual mistake, please be sure to also correct any reference errors in the page so I won't come back and make the same mistake again. Also, please post an error report at
User talk:AnomieBOT so my operator can fix me! If the error is so urgent that I need to be stopped, also post a message at
User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/OrphanReferenceFixer. Thanks!
AnomieBOT
⚡ 05:22, 19 August 2010 (UTC) If you do not wish to receive this message in the future, add {{
bots|optout=AnomieBOT-OrphanReferenceFixer}}
to your talk page.
I believe I have done the editing for this article "up to the quality" that you expected.-- Huayi ( talk) 18:33, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
It's on a subject that I know nothing about! I could not even begin. Still, I've done some copy edits.-- S. Rich ( talk) 03:46, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Peter - thank you for your comments. I'm a nubie to Wikipedia and trying to understand wikifying. Please be patient with me and I welcome your comments. Whusebo ( talk) 20:34, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
I hope you do not mind, but I have moved your message at WT:Identifying reliable sources to WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Zecharia Sitchin which I believe is the correct place. Johnuniq ( talk) 00:47, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi Peter, I have just expanded the I-Fly article with some more sources and an image that I found. Do you think that in its current shape it has a chance to pass WP:CORP? I really dare say that there are many airline articles around here that look much worse. I appreciate your thoughts and comments. Per aspera ad Astra ( talk) 16:22, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
You participated in a discussion respecting the proposed move of this list. Unfortunately, the proponent of the move initiated overlapping merge, move and AFD discussions, causing some degree of confusion, when it appears that his objective was to merge this list into one list for North American veterans. If you are interested, the actual merge discussion is at Talk:Last surviving United States war veterans#Merger proposal. Best regards, -- Skeezix1000 ( talk) 15:17, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
The article Brad Wright (blogger) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
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. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Claret
Ash 00:03, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I see you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wright on Health. I was wondering if you'd also like to express an opinion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wright on Health (2nd nomination). Claret Ash 12:58, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Peter. I wanted to drop a line and say I remember quite fondly the interaction we had 2 years ago. You awarded me my first barnstar, and I still value it far beyond the others. Since then, I've gone on slogging away at WP and have racked up a bunch of edits, plus a couple of other nice barnstars. My engagements with you were worthwhile and they, for better or worse, were most encouraging. Again, many thanks and best regards. – S. Rich ( talk) 03:55, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Thought you would be interested to know I have nominated the page William Sledd for deletion, as you proposed should happen so long ago on that article's talk page. I would appreciate any feedback you have in the new AfD page. As far as I'm concerned, this person is not notable.
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.255.102.180 ( talk) 10:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello P. I wanted to let you know that you forgot to sign your post here. Occasionally (though not always) the person closing an AFD will ignore an unsigned post so I thought I would let you know so that you can fix this. Cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD| Talk 19:50, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 16:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Pmedema. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Pmedema. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Pmedema. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)