Welcome!

Hello, Erechtheus, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! ForestH2 09:29, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I generally can't remember off-hand all of the warnings. I use Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace because it is very diffucult to remember every little warning! Hope that helps... Ian Manka Talk to me! 23:07, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :) Erechtheus 23:23, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

) It wasn't as bad as I was expecting, actually. I'd give it a thumbs-up to anyone who likes strawberry soda. Not for me, though. Lambertman 02:36, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also wish unethical behavior were notable. Sadly, it is not -and attorneys are not alone in this, unfortunately. jawesq 01:44, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Best of luck to YOU!!! When you get your monthly state bar newsletters, you will see attorneys getting disciplined or disbarred. Ethics is all important, and we need more ethical attorneys. By the way, I also am owned by a couple cats (and a couple dogs)! jawesq 01:50, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is this? I see you suggested it for Jim Shapiro, which is great. Where did you find this and what is it? Thanks!jawesq 03:02, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at that. I think if you look at that again, A6 (attack page) is under 'non-speedy' deletion. It's a very good reason, however, in addition to non-notability.jawesq 03:07, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I take that back. I believe you are correct. Sometimes the WIki instructions are VERY badly writtenjawesq 03:09, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to ask an admin about this - one who helped me earlier today. Maybe he will agree. I hope so.jawesq 03:12, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please look at the quotation under 'external links'. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Jim_Shapiro This links to another Wiki project, quotations, that was nominated for deletion, as well. Your input there is welcome. Thanks!jawesq 03:21, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. Although the article survived one AfD it doesn't preclude it from being nominated again though it would have to be for a different reason or it will only be kept again. If you want to pursue deletion then have a read of Wikipedia:Deletion policy. Although no rules are hard and fast on Wikipedia if you follow them you're less likely to be contested. As you clearly understand, I removed the tag as it was not a suitable candidate for speedy deletion though if you go through the AfD process, the delete tag cannot be removed until a decision is reached by a sysop based on the arguments presented by those who respond to the AfD. Good luck! Mallanox 22:25, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Please re-visit the AfD. I found a bunch of info that establishes notability. PT ^(s-s-s-s) 18:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Glad to have been of help to you and your Azerbijan-style article. I kind of roam around looking for articles whose stub definitions need refining, so for me it was all in a day's work. For your reference, in case you weren't aware of it, there's a good list of stub templates here which is where I usually head if I can't remember what I'm doing. All the best. Budgiekiller 18:19, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. For your interest, I usually head here for categories too. It starts a little on the abstract side, but it's probably better to have an abstract cat than no cat at all. Cheers. Budgiekiller 18:59, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that I should not write an article about me. You should note that the article was not written by me. Hence I am not able to comprehend the Vanity Issue. Can you please clarify it. My problem is not with deleting or keeping it. It is regarding to the mud sligning that has been happening in the AFD Debate of various individuals (as well as corporates / Organisations etc) after nominating the article for debate.

I was pushed into editing the article only for the past 2 days after I get comments like "non-notable" "exam-cram" "limited shelf life". How am I to oppose it. If it is an article, we can remove that citing lack of sources.

And then the important question is - How will the article come under vanity when I did not write it.Doctor Bruno 00:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just because you have mentioned it, I thought that I will bring the issue of User Blocked to your attention.

For the past few days, whenever I try to edit an article or talk page, I get a reply that the user has been blocked. The IP given is Google's IP. After few minutes, when I click the 'edit this page' I am able to edit

I am editing from India

Hence I feel that there is a problem some where, perhaps related to the Google ToolbarDoctor Bruno 14:08, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will get a snapshot next time and send that to the Admin Doctor Bruno 14:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/78/Wikiblock.jpg/800px-Wikiblock.jpg

I saw you voted on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Year pronunciation. I have to say that the nominator of this page was an Afd vandal. Georgia guy 16:18, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You nominated Florian Grassl for deletion partly because there was "no information [in the article] that would establish the individual's notability". I discovered much of the article was removed in a previous edit and have restored the missing information. This may not sway your nomination, but I thought it'd be nice to let you know. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 08:30, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the information. I should have checked that myself. You are right that it does not change my assessment. It does change my rationale, though. Erechtheus 18:05, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, Snape's Worst Memory is a story in the Harry Potter series, or some kind of substory. I'm not sure, but there are pages that link to it. You might want to check the article links and reconsider the {{db-nonsense}} tag. I think the article could use a lot more cleanup and some context to indicate just what it's about, but in the Harry Potter context, it isn't total nonsense. --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 18:26, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Actually, I should have rechecked the article links more closely. It turns out that it was deleted (per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Snape's Worst Memory), so it really should have been tagged with {{db-repost}}. I didn't even notice that. Ah, the joys of editing when half-asleep. --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 21:35, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. I barely had time to start adding the other text about St. Gummarus I was working on before this got tagged for deletion. Three whole minutes. Thanks for the WP:AGF. --evrik 18:21, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• ummm... next time you could wait more than three minutes. --evrik 18:30, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• BTW, I just got to Gummarus. --evrik 21:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nice. I definitely approve of that penny's worth of electricity or whatever. He seems quite interesting. Erechtheus 03:08, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. =) In general, articles with only links do get deleted (CSD A3), but this specifically does not apply to disambiguation pages (and practically, not to lists that are better served as categories, but as a rule, those should be turned into categories too).

I suggest you read through the criteria, as well Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Explanations (which is incomplete). The criteria are meant to be rather clear-cut. Patent nonsense is just that: Stuff that makes absolutely no sense however you look at it, and doesn't look like it's written in any legible language Generally, stuff that looks like it may make some sense are better PRODded. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 18:49, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It's likely to get deleted anyway, but ya never know. NawlinWiki 16:50, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Update: It's quoted on the Liverpool FC website so I will cite this as a source.

Hi, I've just spotted your banner about potentially merging this chant into the Liverpool F.C. article. The main problem with doing this is the main article is already over recommended size. Lots of far more important bits of information have already been moved into various sub-articles, so there is very little chance of people deciding to put this in. I didn't realise the chant's article existed, and now I do, I really don't see what the problem with it is. Plenty of songs have their own articles, and this song happens to be public domain, allowing us to list the entire lyrics. aLii 14:09, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that before you go around accusing serious editors of vandalism, you read what Wikipedia:Vandalism says about it ("While having large chunks of text you've written deleted, moved to the talk page, or substantially rewritten can sometimes feel like vandalism, it should not be confused with vandalism.") Perhaps I could also direct your attention to Wikipedia:Assume good faith? Truth is though, even with all the good faith in the world, I couldn't really take this edit seriously. The preponderance of silly and useless categories is just reaching staggering proportions. Of course, if you had been more concerned with creating better articles than with clogging them up with useless categories, one click would have taken you to the Norwegian page, where you wouldn't have to be a linguist to decipher: "fødd 25. mars 1941 i Trondheim".

But hey, I've created articles on every Norwegian government ministers since 1814 - about 4-500 of them - and hardly any of them have anything but year of birth and death. If this is what you like to do, then knock yourself out. Eixo 15:04, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, I respect your opinion, I just don't like being called a vandal. Has the implementation of this category been discussed at all, though? There seems to be no clear policy on where to use it. In an article such as Jane Johnson (c. 1813-1872) it is meaningless; she was a slave, we're not even sure what year she was born, we'll certainly never know the date. The same is the case with most people born before the modern period, like Amr ibn Hishām. Here the category serves no purpose at all, because the information simply doesn't exsist. Including it won't prompt any useful editing, it will only stand as a reminder of the article's inadequacy for ever and ever and ever. If I've created a good biographical article, incorporating all available modern scholarship, I certainly don't want that scar on it. It is iportant to distinguish between information that is missing and that which is simply unavailable, and these issues must be adressed before any wide-scale implementation (we're talking of tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of articles here) is started.

I'll put this on the category talk page as well. Eixo 16:30, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Erechtheus, A7 is probably the most contentious of the speedy deletion criteria. Speedy deletion was initially created just to eliminate obvious vandalism. Some administrators will not delete any article under A7. This article probably does fail WP:NMG and likely will be deleted, but if there is anything in an article that suggests even a shred of verifiability and notability, then I prefer that it goes through a non-speedy mechanism (prod or AfD). Hope this explains things. -- Samir धर्म 02:05, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I used the helpme template to ask what I should do with an image in an article such as Frank Reynolds (artist). I'm not sure where that would be addressed in the FAQ. Erechtheus 02:27, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean 'what to do with it'. You mean orienting it on the page? Or is it a license problem? —Centrx→talk • 02:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I mean properly orienting it. As far as I know, there is no problem with the use of the image. Erechtheus 02:42, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have put it where I think it makes sense. See [1], specifically "|right". —Centrx→talk • 02:45, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My thanks to you. This is the first time I have dealt with anything about using an image effecitvely in an article. Seeing it done really helped me out. Erechtheus 02:48, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, wow, neat! I categorize articles every day but somehow never knew about the missing place/year of birth categories. Very useful.--Fuhghettaboutit 05:45, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. In fact, I may use the categories just for that purpose. I imagine a simple Google search, at least for birth dates—something like ""first name last name" "date of birth""—would quickly find the required information for many bio articles.--Fuhghettaboutit 05:53, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to drop a quick thank you for helping clean up The Carlton Hotel. It is always good to see little gnomes helping clean up after some of the more sloppy (not me of course!) user. Thanks again.--Saintlink 07:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it could be removed at my discretion as directed. They are longer than a few sentences and provide a healthy number of references. I'm alright with the stub status.

thank you, i'm trying my best. these two groups have history that is buried pretty far, so it's hard to research them. NinjaNubian 08:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind words. I appreciated your reading and giving attention to the article. I thought that there might have been a decade category for deaths, like deaths in the 1870s or something like that, so when I saw that there were no such categories, I changed it. It is a pleasure when Wikipedians dwell and work together in unity.--Drboisclair 19:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Erechtheus. Thank you for taking the time to reviewing this article, your detailed input will be especially help. Hopefully in the future we'll get this to GA status. Cheers.--Bookandcoffee 01:22, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for wikifying shankar(cartoonist)'s page. thanks for edit help Nileena joseph 10:32, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was a mistake on my part, I forgot to put something in the edit summery. TJ Spyke 01:09, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are edit summaries a requirment for adminship, or do they just help your chances?--KojiDude ^{(viva la BAM!)} 01:42, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. (This edit summary thing is gonna take some getting used to...)--KojiDude ^{(viva la BAM!)} 01:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A propos of your deletion notice on the basis that this is a non-notable church location, in fact this is part of a series on Anglican cathedrals in Canada. There is substantially more information to be added in due course, but the article does not merit deletion. Thanks. Masalai 08:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Little by little over the next few days now that the longstanding redlink has been filled in a little. It is, after all, the cathedral church of an important diocese; it may well be the oldest extant Anglican cathedral in pre-1949 (when Newfoundland entered Confederation) Canada. What, in particular, is your concern? Surely there are ample other such pages that are considerably less significant.Masalai 08:14, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, this is my fault for not reading the edit summary (or the whole article). My first reaction to the OR tag was that you thought the whole article was fictional, when this is not the case (i.e. the existence of Colfox and his position as an MP are verifiable), but your tag obviously applied to later parts in the article. Feel free to reinstate the tag. --New Progressive 20:45, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hi, and welcome to the Virginia WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the state of Virginia.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• The project has a monthly newsletter; it will normally be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

• Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every Virginia article in Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! plange 01:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The September 2006 issue of the Virginia WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. plange 02:14, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your help-- if you're interested in the general topic, let me know, because I will be writing/editing a few more. DGG 02:47, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Erechtheus. I reported Zacto Systems Philippines to Wikipedia:Copyright problems rather than deleting it since it is not from a commercial content provider (CCP), which is a company that makes money directly from the content that has been copied. The company must be a CCP to qualify for speedy deletion under A8. Basically, a company has to be a newspaper/news site, magazine, encyclopedia or something similar for it to qualify as a CCP. The company must be selling add space or charging a subscription to view the content. Advertisements, promotional content and "about us"/"company history" content do not count, since paying to see them and having them be supported by ads is very unusual. If the content is used without permission, they still count as copyright violations, of course. Many admins do not know about, do not understand or just ignore the CCP provision, but I do not. However, good work on catching the copyright violation. Thanks, Kjkolb 09:09, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion to see if there was any changes and on the talk page to see if there was a discussion about it. I found that the CCP requirement was removed last week without my noticing (it is on my watchlist), so you are correct. I had argued for its removal several times before, but we never had a consensus. It will make things easier from now on, although I wish that all potential copyvios that clearly postdate the originals could be deleted, not just those less than 48 hours old. Also, 48 hours is extremely conservative in regards to mirrors. A week or two would be more realistic. Anyway, I deleted the article. Sorry for the mistake. Talk to you later, Kjkolb 11:38, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join Wikipedia:WikiProject_Baronetcies. - Kittybrewster 11:18, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I must decline at present, but I wish you luck in this project. Erechtheus 18:40, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm after adding a link to the Lega Calcio website (Offical Italian League website) showing the fixtures for future serie a games which backs up the information on the page, therefore I removed the citation template. Just wondering what is fully required for describing what the page is about. As it stands, that page is essentially a sub page of the main 2006/2007 Serie A article and as such, doesn't really need much explanation. I've improved the explanation a bit and really there isn't much more to be said. I've left the other template on the page for removal on your discretion. Thanks. Niall123 11:20, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to withdraw, though I suggest that you wait until the AfD closes so that it can gather more community consensus, as it's always possible that someone can come up with a better idea.--TBCTaLk?!? 06:22, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was just through there yesterday and noticed the signs in and out of town read "Hanover Courthouse". While most people refer to it as Hanover or write Hanover on their addresses, the community still retains its original name. The actual Hanover Courthouse is beautiful, it's definitely worth a stop everytime ;) --Caponer 15:56, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm new. Do you want me to put in stats? Like, I'm not sure the exact number of people killed or anything. I'm not really sure what you'd like. What would you include?Template:Unsigned:Effervescence92

Hi there, I just wanted to say that, in relation to my (admittedly out of process in that context) remarks on the deletion review regarding that Admin you had an issue with, you will have my support for any Request for Comment or other similar procedure you might consider initiating. I understand that admins, like anyone, can have bad weeks, but I do see them as having quasi-"public official/servant" status on Wikipedia, and I don't think its acceptable to brusquely ignore official processes such as afd policies and deletion review at their personal whim. Bwithh 23:35, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI - this article has been renominated per WP:BIO. Rklawton 01:32, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cyril Lord was an entrepreneur who went spectasularly bust during the 1960s in Northern Irelnd. His career there was very similar to that of De Lorean a few years later. He came in for coverage in Private Eye in its early years. The material is there for a proper article, it is a question of assembling it within the strictures about original research, I will do this in the next couple of days. The Private Eye article needs adjustment in several areas, this is one, but it is better to do the additional articles first. Guy 06:00, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the category "Place of birth missing" as it is mentioned in the article "Kersbeek-Miskom" (Which is by the way a part of Kortenaken) --Donar Reiskoffer 09:59, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Erechtheus - No problem at all with deleting my article - it didn't meet the encyclopedia criteria! And now that I know about the criteria, I agree with it. Thanks for the note on my user page.

For me, the issues with using wikipedia are that I am so, so busy, and the few times I have time to write I don't also have time to wander through all of wikipedia's rules. For me, the time choice is one or the other - contribute, or learn the rules, which can mean hours and hours of wading through policies which may or may not be relevant. At which point I lose the train of thought about what I wanted to contribute in the first place. Sometimes it's easier to contribute and then let someone who actually knows the current policies (and where to find them) edit.

...and BTW, I have a question - all of the users I've met so far are men? Nice men, but is that just an odd coincidence or are there more men using wikipedia than women?

Pls respond on my user page, as the chance that I'll make it back here is slim.:) - Aunt Amanda

Hey, thanks. We're all here to do the same thing, right? As for beating you to the submission, that's probably just a sign that I have too much time on my hands! Dppowell 20:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that you added the "unsourced" template to the stub I created for Emile Henry Lacombe. The basic data are taken from the Federal Judicial Center's biographical directory available online, which is a public domain resource. Eventually, there should be an article on every federal judge, particularly appellate judges, and this was meant as a starting point. I believe there is a template reflecting information derived from the FJC directory, but I'm not quickly finding it. Do you happen to know what it is? If not, I will poke around for it tomorrow. In the meantime, thanks for noticing the article, such as it is. Regards, Newyorkbrad 00:32, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. I've been here about three months now, and I understand exactly what the "unsourced" template is for, so no need to worry about that. The prior time a longer article I wrote (Peter J. Hamilton) was tagged as unsourced, the tag actually pushed me to get the sources listed, so it did a service. What I am not sure of is whether it's necessary to include an "unsourced" tag when the author has tagged his own article as a stub, because part of the definition of a stub is that stubs typically don't have sources yet. But of course, ultimately the goal is to have real articles about these people, not just dates of service and the like, as in Martin Manton and Richard J. Daronco and Harrie B. Chase, so any tags that will push me (and other parallel contributors) to get there are probably a good thing. Newyorkbrad 00:40, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Having poked around some more, I think what I was thinking of was probably a "public domain source" template or something of that nature. Cf. the "bioguide" template for members of Congress, which produces: " This article incorporates public domain material from Biographical Directory of the United States Congress. Federal government of the United States." Maybe I should generate a similar one for the Judicial Directory. Regards, Newyorkbrad 15:13, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that you claimed that I was adding nonesence to the article. I don't exactly understand what you are referring to. I added valid sources that legitimize the claims that the story has spread. I certainly don't think this constitutes vandalism. [tarzanman21]

Hey Erechtheus, your answer on Kuntayithote talk page[[2]] answered my concern. Thank you. I have a question. Can a user edit another user's page (not talk page) and is it considered proper? Somebody edited my userpage and I don't know how I should deal with that. Kuntan 07:35, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Erechtheus, thanks again for your effort.Kuntan 07:45, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Erechtheus, thank you for supporting my recent RfA. It finished with an amazing final tally of 160/4/1. I really appreciate your support. Cheers, Sarah Ewart (Talk) 07:37, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Erechtheus, Please do something about Nair article. Casteist users are keeping on vandalising it by removing its contents. I am not familiar with the templates. Although I have asked for vigilance on the relevant discussion board [[3]] none has paid attention. Kuntan 16:00, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The revert on my userpage came on second thoughts following your suggestion that the user who put the graphic there might be helping me and also following my making peace with him. I was no way disregarding the help you extended. And I wish to seek your help in the future also, if you wouldn't mind. I am thankful to you for your suggestions. I think a mediation or abuse reporting would be required in the case of the article Nair. Some users are indulging in vandalism out of casteist prejudice. Regards. Kuntan 20:04, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. _________________________________________________________ Yours truly, Ume$h Ghosh Blog http://umesh4ever.blogspot.com Orkut http://www.orkut.com/Profile.aspx?uid=3632382679451682289 Yahoo Messenger (redacted by Erechtheus) MySpace www.myspace.com/umesh1985 Esnips(Free ebooks and my songs) www.esnips.com/UserProfileAction.ns?id=c7449333-3ba6-40fc-8199-207120342dee _________________________________________________________

Not a problem. Easy mistake to make, and it's now been deleted. Oh, and I don't normally bother with that nothanks template. That's just me though. -- Steel 19:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Carol Newinn bio was just introduced on wikipedia by me, please give it some time to gather information before requesting it to be deleted. Did you bother to read the articles that I presented ?

• Cheerleader Carol Newinn: Raising the Spirits of the Houston Texans
• BN Magazine Up-close

Bnguyen 16:23, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Erechtheus... Thank you very much for your support in my request for adminship. Ultimately, no consensus was reached, and I failed to be promoted, but I am very grateful for your support. Erechtheus, thank you for your supporting opinions. Your trust in me to use the tools means a lot, and I hope that I can live up to your standards at some point in the future. Yours, Thε Halo Θ

I think that there might be a misunderstanding. I did not create the Damon Amos article - I tried to nominate it for deletion. I did not remove any tags from the article. I hope this clears things up. Best regards. Verkhovensky 01:48, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Thanks a lot for your speedy reply.

Verkhovensky 01:55, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sources now added to the articles for the Callander and Oban Railway and Killin Railway. Also the stations at Killin Junction, Killin and Loch Tay. --Stewart 12:25, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you're going to use the citation on Neil Finn's albums you may as well start adding them to the other hundreds of thousands of albums on the wikipedia that are unsourced but exist. I'm not citing an actual CD that I own but if it's a citation you want how about checking the bloody history on Neil Finn's page before I changed the format of the discography. Or possibly google the albums and then add them yourself. Or would that be too hard?

Originalsinner 18:58, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]