Hey, just wondering if you were still up for reviewing this article. It's been 11 days since you said you would..:) no pressure or anything, just hoping you are still up for it Arre 23:29, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Forgot about that! thank god you reminded me. I will try to get on this next week. I have been considerably busy lately. I may convince Zach to help me on it :) Cheers! — ΛΧΣ²¹ 23:30, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, its okay :) Arre 07:26, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I know you are busy, but just sending you another reminder about the review :) It would be really amazing if you could start it soon. Arre 07:30, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I convinced Status of helping me :) I will try to take it this weekend before going inactive. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 16:11, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh you did? That's great :) This weekend would be amazing. Just read that, good luck with your future work on Wikimedia projects. Arre 05:27, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes :) And given that I won't be for much time, and your article is a bit long, I'll try to get as much help as possible to finish the review for you ASAP. Cheers! — ΛΧΣ²¹ 05:29, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou that means a lot. Can't believe I have been working on the article since December 2011...Lol :) Arre 06:44, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey again..the weekend is over, wondering if you were still whiling to do the review. I hate to sound naggy... Arre 10:03, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I stayed home today to do it. Sorry, I spent the weekend reviewing grant proposals :/ — ΛΧΣ²¹ 13:50, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have completed a redo of the current nomination page with the revised instructions here. What do you think?--Dom497 (talk) 02:06, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. It is great, although I'd implement some new changes in design like those I did on the Newsletter ;) I think that only using green is a bit old-fashioned :P — ΛΧΣ²¹ 02:09, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not good with code so I can't really do that! :( --Dom497 (talk) 02:12, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can do it for you this week :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 02:14, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :) --Dom497 (talk) 02:19, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I wanted to ask you if you think SheiKra has a chance at FA (once a peer review and copy-edit are complete)?--Dom497 (talk) 02:30, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It may, but it needs some work first. Yeah, I think that a good peer review and a copyedit might do the trick. And well, most articles have several FA nominations (I have had too pass at first, Homework and Gravity Bone, but that's just luck and practice I guess), so don't worry of the first one fails. Depending on when you nominate it, I may pop in and give a hand :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 02:40, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have a feeling it will be a long time before the copy-edit and peer review are done. :P --Dom497 (talk) 02:46, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please look at it as well as it' respective talk page.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 03:00, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think? Does it need some work?—cyberpower ^Chat_Offline 14:33, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I just took a fast look yesterday. I will do a thorough read today, and will come back to you with my thoughts. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 14:34, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You'll need to send me a talkback for my attention. Looking at my talkpage will explain why.—cyberpower ^Chat_Absent 22:41, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well? You still haven't given me your input.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 13:55, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Would you care to do like a pre-FAC review for God of War: Betrayal? It can be done on its talk page. The article is practically complete (it's a short article) and I think once my other article is done at FAC, this one will be ready (maybe?). I also have a Peer Review up for God of War II to prepare it for FAC. --JDC808 ♫ 05:08, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could you give me a week or so? I am currently full with my other duties and can even barely make content contributions. When I get a bit of time in some 9 days, I will give you a very thorough review :) Regards. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 05:14, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. No problem. I'm not really in a hurry. I'm still waiting for my other FAC to receive more comments and the verdict of if it will be promoted or not (it has 6 supports and 2 opposes). --JDC808 ♫ 05:25, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think the current RfC is beginning to die and soon will be dead if no one start's talking about it again. I still don't understand what Part 2 of the RfC will be but surely you would know. With that, I don't know what further steps need to be taken with the RfC so maybe you could help quickly move the RfC to part 2 or something because if this die's, we can say good bye to new instructions (which I have spent way too much time working on :P )--Dom497 (talk) 00:25, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will do my best to take it to part 2 soon :) Thanks for the reminder. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 00:28, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The bot to repair the Billboard site revision catastrophe has undergone its initial test run (see Special:Contributions/Chartbot). I uncovered a few small bugs in the initial edits, but any that I didn't revert are, to the best of my knowledge, good. If you have any issues with it, Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Chartbot is the place to bring them up.—Kww(talk) 20:40, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice. I am now following the BRFA. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 00:41, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hahc21, yes I was disappointed that List of honors received by Maya Angelou failed because of lack of support. I don't know what it is; I've been having that problem a lot these days. The article I currently have at FAC (Sesame Street research) is in its third nom because the first two failed due to lack of support, too. But I digress. Here's my question: how long should I wait before I resubmit to FLC? I ask because it happens to the final article I need assessed before I submit a Maya Angelou FT, which I'd like to have happen before her 85th birthday on April 4. (Her main article and a DYK will be on the main page that day.) Thanks for your assistance, and for all you do for the project. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:24, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks will do both as you recommend. I did the same with the above-mentioned article; I contacted past reviewers and so far it has five reviewers, although I'm a little worried that it's been almost two weeks since it's been there. Sigh. Wanna go over there and take a look for me? I can't tell you how much I'd appreciate it, and I'd be happy to do something for you in exchange. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:40, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for hte barnstar, it was the first thing greeting me when I logged on and my first knowledge of the promotion. It's taken a LOT longer than I thought I would but it's over! Thank you for the barnstar, keep up the great work. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:16, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Razr Nation. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 01:30, 9 March 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

LlamaAl (talk) 01:30, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think you forgot the words "space permitting" in the summary for Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(music)#Merging_of_non-notable_albums. If there are too many non-notable albums in an article, than the album articles amount to size splits. --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:26, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Whether or not you saw my reward board post, you've earned this barnstar for your efforts to shrink the RM backlog. Thank you, and keep up the good work! BDD (talk) 06:21, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow thanks :D I had no idea that the reward board existed. It is always a pleasure to help. Thank you. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 06:33, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have reworked the lead, and nothing is outstanding on the FLC now. There is one oppose and four supports.  — AARON • ^TALK 14:01, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. I will check today. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 17:08, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:31, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Conflict Resolution.--Amadscientist (talk) 10:34, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A pleasure to join :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 16:20, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Its so long since we talked. Well Chopra FAC is going very slow. Please, would you comment here Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Priyanka Chopra/archive1. It would be helpful. Thanks.Prashant talk 15:42, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's so sweet of you. I think it nears it close. So, do as soon as you could.Prashant talk 16:16, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I am not sure if we had interacted earlier. I am an editor from India and just wanted to check if its possible for you to take a look at the article and provide some feedback on PR raised? One of the editors has provided some of the comments. Any kind of feedback would be helpful for the article as I am planning to raise it for FLC in future, for the centenary for Indian cinema in May. - Vivvt • (Talk) 13:58, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I will try to take a look and give you some feedback, althoguh this week is somewhat busy for me. If you don't hear from me this week, ping me again next Monday. Cheers! — ΛΧΣ²¹ 16:51, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. - Vivvt • (Talk) 16:57, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work on the page! Tony (talk) 12:35, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Agree, good job! Thanks for taking over. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:15, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks :D — ΛΧΣ²¹ 02:54, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you still plan on taking this to FAC, but we're almost there. After the Billboard Latin Music Awards, I think it will be ready. If you do plan on taking it to FAC, let me know as soon as you do it. The RIAA finally updated its site to include Independiente on it. Erick (talk) 00:37, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, good job on the featured content page! However, please do not separate list items with more than one blank line, as it makes the text difficult to read for screen readers. I've fixed it for the current issue. Graham87 09:16, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Would you be kind enough to take some time and promote the list to FA status? The consensus, and quality, of the article all suggest it should be promoted but no director has taken the time to even look at it. It is three-weeks now and I really would like to finish this to go ahead and move on to the next one. I hope I get a good reply from you. Thanks. EpidemiaCorinthiana (talk) 23:32, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey EpidemiaCorinthiana. I have done a quick check and I see that an oppose from user Struway2 has yet to be fully addressed, and his last comments are from today. Also, most featured list candidates run for a month or so, and closing the candidacy while discussion is still ongoing is not something that we are used to do. Try to solve first the issues raised by Struway2, and, in a week or so, it may be ready. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 00:03, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Hahc, hope you get around to adding more to Sharon Newman's GA review soon. I hope you're well. Thanks, Arre 05:57, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If I stay at home this weekend, I will add a bit more; if I have to leave town, then It'd have to wait until next week. I will update you with my position once I know where I will stay :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 05:58, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you link me to where your restriction on closing discussions was lifted. IRWolfie- (talk) 10:48, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive245#Request_to_lift_restriction Vacation9 11:25, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your closure of MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#wikipediocracy.com this thread before I realised that the NAC restrictions had been lifted. My block was unwarranted as there was no final warning or other injunction in place - I hope my unblocking note makes this clear. However, I should say that I don't think this closure was appropriate, not for an admin and certainly not for a WP:NAC. The guidelines there and at WP:SK#NOT don't cover the kind of close you made, and any closure of a disputed case (there were several support votes as well as the many opposes) should really not occur at all. I would strongly advise you against ever making another NAC. I'm not going to issue a final warning against ever issuing another one, but if you do make another poor one I'll formally argue for a topic ban against you performing any more. Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 12:35, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Well... this is a royal screw-up. Hope you take care of yourself. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:56, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• For what it's worth I would have done the same close as you (although not as early)... even though I personally don't agree with it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:00, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all the work you have done with good articles, in particular with providing me with assistance in them during my first few attempts at reviewing, and have fun with whatever you decide to do next. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:12, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I do hope you change your mind and come back. I don't see any need to flog you over a mistake, nor sanction you. (If it has gone to WP:AN, I would have voted to oppose any further restictions.) As I pointed out to someone else, you make no more mistakes than the rest of us, but yours have tended to be very public mistakes so you tend to get flogged a bit for them. Take a week or two off, and I hope you come back. I prefer you are here. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 16:29, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Although I'm sure you don't believe me, I'm 110% on-board in agreement with Dennis' comments above. A few errors made all-around that all surround some serious wankery at its root. There's no doubt that you had the best interests of the project at heart. Take some deep breaths, and come back refreshed (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:20, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Add me to the list of editors who'd like to see you back. Take the time you need but please do return! Zad68 16:37, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To the memory of the scuttled,
the banned, and those
who have just given up.

• My friends all seem to leave me, you are number 3 in two days, think! - I understand a mistake was made and reversed. - You cant wait until "all this madness ends", that will never happen, let's face it. - See may user page and look for "consolation." (warning: high voltage) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:44, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• This was just simple mistakes all round, and humans make them all the time. As the unblock comment in your log makes it very clear that the block was an error and apologises for it, you still have the equivalent of a clean block log. I too hope you will reconsider and will continue with all the good things you have been doing here. (And if you're waiting for the end of madness, I can't see that happening while there are still humans on the planet ;-) Very best wishes -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:03, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• What Boing! said. I repeat my apology for the block, and reinforce the view that your block log is still effectively clean. Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 17:08, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I am, as all, sad to see you go. But as Dennis said, take a breather for a bit. I hope you decide to come back. Thanks for all the work you've done and don't be discouraged by a simple mistake. Vacation9 18:56, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Woah! What the heck? This is getting insane and depressing. GamerPro64 22:14, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Just wanted to drop in and say you do lots of good here. If you're feeling burnt out, just take a break and come back when you're refreshed and ready. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 02:12, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, take your time if you need to, but it would be great if you came back. You've done a great job here. HueSatLum 21:28, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Well that was a sterling example of a forqueup all round. There's a Bavarian expression that translates as "paint it green and throw it to the rabbits" - I hope you manage to do whatever is the equivalent in your neck of the woods. We all do stuff with good intentions that somehow ends with Auntie Nellie never speaking to Cousin Maisie again...just don't make this one of those occasions. Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:22, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you retired? What happened? Anyone else feel free to answer. — nerdfighter 02:37, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• He was blocked for closing a discussion and the blocker thought he was still prohibited from doing non-administrator closes, then unblocked when the person realised his/her mistake about an hour later. Hahc seems to have decided that this place is too full of drama to actually get anything done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:46, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• (edit conflict) See also: Wikipedia:ANI#Inappropriate_NAC.3F —Theopolisme (talk) 02:47, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would not be surprised if that reason wasn't the only one, looking at other editors leaving or resigning. It has become not easy to stay, and I respect everybody who doesn't, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:52, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Razr Nation. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 03:48, 16 March 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

And I've only just seen this latest madness as I write this... if there's anything I can do to help you out, please let me know what it is. I'd hate to see you leave like this, your work here has been truly exceptional. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 03:48, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of Flight of the Conchords episodes. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:16, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In case you do return, which would be great, I am leaving this message letting you know that the Metamorfosis World Tour ended on March 9th and as such it will have a three month grace period. GamerPro64 20:08, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Too bad that I have replied you when you've left. Anyway I hope you return soon. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:38, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello AXE. To help restore some of your faith in the project (hopefully), I'm reviewing your GAN, Adentro. Regards — Robin (talk) 12:52, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure if you remember my earlier request or not, but I had raised a PR request for the list and requested your inputs. The article received few PR comments from couple of users. In the mean time, I saw your "Retired" message on your user page. As I am planning to take this list for centenary celebration of Indian cinema on 3rd May 2013, a moment ago I nominated the list for FLC. There I saw you are back in the game, so thought of intimating you of the same. - Vivvt • (Talk) 20:12, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A 'Request For Comment' for Good Article Nominations is currently being held. We are asking that you please take five to ten minutes to review all seven proposals that will affect Good Article Nominations if approved. Full details of each proposal can be found here. Please comment on each proposal (or as many as you can) here. At this time, Proposal 1, 3, and 5 have received full (or close to) support. If you have questions of anything general (not related to one specif proposal), please leave a message under the General discussion thread. Please note that Proposal 2 has been withdrawn and no further comments are needed. Also, please disregard Proposal 9 as it was never an actual proposal.

I tried to email you, but you had it disabled at that time. Glad to see you are staying open as to your future here. Kim is really a nice guy and someone I truly respect, so I trust him completely when he says it was an honest mistake on his part. I've made more than my share of mistakes with the admin bit here at Wikipedia, so I know how easy it is to make them. You should know that I have a deep respect for you as well, and completely understand why you were frustrated over the series of events. I would have been upset as well. Sometimes, bad things happen to good people. If you need an ear, feel free to email or ping me. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 06:24, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh gosh. Seems like I was very sad and frustrated. I completely forgot that I disabled email. I have enabled it again now that I decided to go back and calmly edit again. I have an inmense respect for you, Dennis, and I don't have grudges, anger or resentment towards Kent. I understand that, while blocking, he was (a) doing an enforcement that would have been correct if my restriction were still in place, and (b) following an incomplete report of the situation made by another user. So, the fault is not in his hands, and I'm looking forward working with him in the future :) I will send you an email now, so that we can talk for a while, given that I'm still not ready to go back and pick up where I left. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 06:30, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Who Framed Roger Rabbit. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The Good Article Barnstar
		Thanks Hahc21 for helping promote Adentro to Good Article status. Please accept this little sign of appreciation and goodwill from me, because you deserve it. Keep it up, and give someone a pat on the back. User:DivaKnockouts answered the queries, so I suggest thanking him. Kind regards — Robin (talk) 17:59, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! Thanks! I have thanked Diva just now :) This was a big surprise :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 18:06, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. You're a great asset to the pedia, Harold. :) — Robin (talk) 18:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :) Although sometimes I feel like I'm not welcomed. But is good to have friends like you always willing to cheer me up ^^ — ΛΧΣ²¹ 18:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Anytime. — Robin (talk) 18:43, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I completely forgot about it actually. Unless any of the commentors want to move to support I can't do much else since I already responded to everything. I guess archiving's the best bet in this case. Wizardman 21:13, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hahc21. Since you are a clerk who has been recently active, perhaps you can advise on how to log something. Earlier this month Arbcom unblocked Russavia subject to a new restriction. This restriction might logically belong in WP:ARBEE, since the Committee said that it 'retains the Eastern Europe topic ban', a ban which was placed by arbitration enforcement in April, 2012 under the authority of WP:ARBEE. Also, the committee implied that their new ban has the same authority as a discretionary sanction, so maybe it should simply be placed in 'Log of blocks and bans' under WP:ARBEE. (They seem to be saying that 'any mention of Polandball will violate your existing AE topic ban from Eastern Europe.') Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 18:56, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let me study this a bit more before returning to you with a proper reply. Regards. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 02:17, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see NW's response to my question. I never knew there was an Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Motions. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 21:15, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thanks for the notice. I will try to add it myself if possible, today. I will trip from tomorrow until friday or saturday and won't be available at all. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 21:22, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A minor point: could you adjust the above list's talkpage to reflect the status of the recent FLRC.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 21:55, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 02:15, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, it should still be FL, you said it was kept at the end of the recent FLRC so it shouldn't be a former FL!shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 21:38, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh damn. I read it backwards >.< — ΛΧΣ²¹ 21:38, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All cool. Cheers.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 21:42, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

God of War is up for FAC again if you could voice your support again. Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/God of War (video game)/archive3 --JDC808 ♫ 04:49, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Portal guidelines. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please add user:MarshalN20 next to Cambalachero on Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Argentine History. He should be there too. Thank you, --Lecen (talk) 01:38, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done — ΛΧΣ²¹ 01:43, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. --Lecen (talk) 01:48, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Vital Articles. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you make any tweaks you see necessary to it? I'd like to get this RfC going.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 12:13, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

bump—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 23:01, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know I know :) I have been reading it but RL has caught me a bit busy. I will try to give it another read today, so that I could be ready for next week. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 23:03, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Would you care to comment at my nomination here for the article Song of Innocence? A support, oppose, or any other comment to start the process would be appreciated. If not, no need to reply to this. Dan56 (talk) 00:10, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently travelling. When I'm back, I will be glad to give it a review. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 00:12, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When you revert edits like what you did here, we try to think where would this go best? - in this case, I would have said to move it to Evidence Talk, but of course, each of us think differently. :d - Penwhale | ^{dance in the air and follow his steps} 06:56, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was struggling to find a place to put them (I forgot that he could actually leave them on the evidence talk >.<), but his answers to me really discouraged me to provide him help in any way, so I dropped it. I will be unavailable for the next 8 hours or so, so you can go and add them yourself if you wish :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 16:32, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We are halfway through round two. Pool A sees the strongest competition, with five out of eight of its competitors scoring over 100, and Pool H is lagging, with half of its competitors yet to score. WikiCup veterans lead overall; Pool A's Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) (2010's winner) leads overall, with poolmate Miyagawa (submissions) (a finalist in 2011 and 2012) not far behind. Pool F's Casliber (submissions) (a finalist in 2010, 2011 and 2012) is in third. The top two scorers in each pool, as well as the next highest 16 scorers overall, will progress to round three at the end of April.

Today has seen a number of Easter-themed did you knows from WikiCup participants, and March has seen collaboration from contestants with WikiWomen's History Month. It's great to see the WikiCup being used as a locus of collaboration; if you know of any collaborative efforts going on, or want to start anything up, please feel free to use the WikiCup talk page to help find interested editors. As well as fostering collaboration, we're also seeing the Cup encouraging the improvement of high-importance articles through the bonus point system. Highlights from the last month include GAs on physicist Niels Bohr ( Hawkeye7 (submissions)), on the European hare ( Cwmhiraeth (submissions)), on the constellation Circinus ( Keilana (submissions) and Casliber (submissions)) and on the Third Epistle of John ( Cerebellum (submissions)). All of these subjects were covered on at least 50 Wikipedias at the beginning of the year and, subsequently, each contribution was awarded at least three times as many points as normal.

Wikipedians who enjoy friendly competition may be interested in participating in April's wikification drive. While wikifying an article is typically not considered "significant work" such that it can be claimed for WikiCup points, such gnomish work is often invaluable in keeping articles in shape, and is typically very helpful for new writers who may not be familiar with formatting norms.

A quick reminder: now, submission pages will need only a link to the article and a link to the nomination page, or, in the case of good article reviews, a link to the review only. See your submissions' page for details. This will hopefully make updating submission pages a little less tedious. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) J Milburn (talk) 23:02, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account, which contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AutomaticStrikeout, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and admit to it now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Grants News

VOLUME 1

MARCH 2013

ISSUE 1

Eight projects have been awarded grants in this pilot round of the Individual Engagement Grants program. You can read more about them in our blog post. Many thanks to everyone who participated in this round! We look forward to seeing even more of your ideas and input in preparation for round 2, which begins on August 1st.

Grants News is brought to you by the Wikimedia Grantmaking Team. You can change your subscription to this update on the list.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2013 RfC/3. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:16, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Hahc21. I added my statement at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Argentine History/Evidence. I don't know if it's larger than allowed. Once you read it, you'll understand that the issue is quite complex, mainly because it has stretched for four years and over several different articles. I'd like to ask you to keep it is as it is, since it will give a fair representation of what is the problem without the possibility of presenting diffs and information out of context. Thank you, --Lecen (talk) 17:50, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It actually is quite long, given that you only have 1000 words to write your statement, and that was why I collapsed it, so that the evidence page does not end being very long. Notwithstanding, I understand your point. You might want to write to one of the drafting arbitrators and tell them that you need all that evidence there, and ask for an extension of the word count. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 17:54, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I sent a message to Kirill Lokshin. Thank you very much. --Lecen (talk) 18:00, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great. You're very welcome. If you need anything, just ask me :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 18:01, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My statement on the evidence page is actually an enlarged and improved version of the statement I wrote on the arbitration main page. Could you somehow add a message to the arbitrators telling them to ignore the first statement (perhaps collapsing it entirely and providing a link to the second statement?) and focus solely on the second one (in the evidence page)? Thus they won't have the need to read two similar statements. --Lecen (talk) 18:04, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about it. The statement on the main case page, which is the original statement you wrote when the case was requested, is saved as-is for the purposes of archiving. The arbitrators will now look only to your statement in the evidence page when assessing the situation and reaching their conclusions :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 18:08, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you again. --Lecen (talk) 18:13, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 18:14, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've (sort of) granted an extension of the evidence limits, subject to certain constraints; please see User talk:Kirill Lokshin#Arbitration: Argentine history for the details. I'd appreciate it if you could let the other parties know that the extension applies to them as well. Thanks! Kirill ^[talk] 21:56, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've informed the other two parties of this. Thanks! — ΛΧΣ²¹ 00:50, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Kirill Lokshin told me that I should have one section dealing solely with the other party (with 1000 words at most) and another section dealing with the sources (with 2000 words at most). How do I know how many words are written at both? Could you add a bot to each? Or is there another way? --Lecen (talk) 22:38, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The bot recognizes and analyzes each section with a level two header. My recommendation is to use a level two header for the initial statement regarding the dispute (e.g. == Evidence presented by Lecen ==) and another level two section for the discussion about sources (e.g. == Source discussion presented by Lecen ==, or similar). That way, the bot will count the number of words and diffs under each section. Regards. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 00:50, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have to comment that, because of a recent flood in Buenos Aires, my house is a disaster and there is a general blackout in several neighbours, including mine. I hope that I will be able to fill the evidence in the time required, but I must point in advance that I may need to ask for more time, and that I may not be immediately available for questions that may take place (I have already pointed that in my talk page). You can confirm that this is not an excuse here, here and here, among other sources: as you see, we are talking about the worst flood in Buenos Aires in the last century. I hope you'll understand. Cambalachero (talk) 13:41, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know, and don't worry. I understand (and I'm completely sure that the arbs do too) that real life things happen, and if you need more time, it'll be provided given the circumstances. I hope everything is okay with you and your family there. Take you time, and solve the issues you have to. After all, real life comes first :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 14:10, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is always an excuse for him. He was busy when I opened a mediation request[1] and he was busy when I opened the thread at Juan Manuel de Rosas.[2] He is never busy when this whole issue is not being discussed, as can be seen on his history log. I'm going to use an excuse too: [3][4] It's amazing that people still fall for what he says. But not all: "I note that Cambalachero became inactive at the start of the mediation request, and became active again when the request was closed. That is an unfortunate coincidence, but it happens."[5] --Lecen (talk) 19:32, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I'm back, it took a bit longer to return because my router was among the things broken by the flood, and I had to buy another. Thanks for understanding, it's good to see that at least some users here understand that there is real people living in the real world behind those fancy usernames. I read that the time to provide evidence closes on April 12, next Friday. I think I can still do it in time, but can I request to extend that to April 14, next sunday? Usually most of my freetime is in the weekends, and a delay of 2 days shouldn't be much of a difference anyway Cambalachero (talk) 20:06, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. Welcome back. I saw the news about the disaster. Big mess :( Now, about that extension, you'd have to ask one of the drafting arbitrators. They are the only ones who grant deadline extensions. Cheers — ΛΧΣ²¹ 20:47, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, pls comment on Chopra FAC. I have nominated it. Last time you weren't able to comment as the candidate was closed because of less inputs. I hope you will comment soon and you'll help in the fac.Prashant talk 19:47, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know you said you won't be around for time-sensitive things but me and Aircorn are aiming to get the instructions/tabs/new nominations page released within the next week. You offered to "redo" the noms page to get rid of the "old green" so I was wondering if maybe you could do that soon. If you can't, its fine as we'll just stick with the green for now. If your up to doing it, my vision is is here while Aircorn's is here.--Dom497 (talk) 20:43, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aw hehe. I will try to do my best to make a great shiny design, but it'll have to wait a bit. I have a big list of things I have to do :s You can go ahead without me if I don't make the line and then I will present my design when I have it ready. You know how perfectionist I am and I don't like to show unfinished things :P — ΛΧΣ²¹ 20:30, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, ok.--Dom497 (talk) 20:36, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have another question regarding RS. It's Venezuela related, so I'm sending a message to a few people in Wikiproject Venezuela (yourself included) with the hopes that you might be able to shed some light on this issue.

Here is the RS/N discussion ([6]).

Thanks for your help! Justiciero1811 (talk) 22:52, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Commented :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 21:01, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks for your quick input! :) I've continued the conversation on the RS/N thread. Justiciero1811 (talk) 22:16, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to let you know that I responded on the talk page. Thanks so much for your help with this subject matter! Justiciero1811 (talk) 00:18, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Launched. Feel free to comment.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 23:35, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Commented :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 03:51, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 6, No. 1 — 1st Quarter, 2013
Previous issue | Index | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q1 2013, the project has:

154 Featured Articles 53 Featured Lists 7 Featured Topics 5 Featured Pictures

43 A-Class Articles 589 Good Articles 9 Good Topics

---

Content

Changes to Featured and Good content News items and announcements

Feature: "A-class: Is It Worth It?" Interview: Teancum

---

Project Navigation

• VG Project Main pages

  • Main project – talk
  • Project category – talk
  • Portal – talk

  VG Project Departments

  • Assessment – talk
  • Cleanup – talk
  • Peer review – talk

   

  • Reference library – talk
  • Newsletter – talk
  • Video game images – talk

To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

If you have time, God of War: Ascension is up for GAN. --JDC808 ♫ 20:28, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to take it. It's always great to review your articles :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 03:51, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks. --JDC808 ♫ 16:07, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Harold, I believe you missed doing this while updating the talk page —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 03:48, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. Thanks for taking care of that :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 03:50, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Protected Page Editor. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 12:17, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Just bringing to your attention, since you are the clerk for the case, that there's an error message on this Arbitration page. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:11, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed Thanks for letting me know. I was unaware of that error :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 04:14, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]