User talk:Badbilltucker/Archive/Jan

Sir, other than the grammatical corrections, What sort of improvements I have to do in the article? Please say if there is any such things. I will do my level best to do so. Thanks. - Paul 18:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Also thanks for quick reply. - Paul 18:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for the lovely barnstar! Really, I love working on wikipedia--but that's the problem. The rest of my life has become so much more productive since I stopped living here. I figure if everyone on earth gave as much of 2 years of their lives to WP as I did, then it would be the most totally amazing web site in the universe--and no fundraising efforts could ever keep up with the demand for disk space. Anyway, it was a pleasant surprise when I just logged in briefly. Thanks again, and more power to you. Elf | Talk 21:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Thank you very much for the confidence you place in me. I don't actually know all that much about either Islam or Taoism, although I am learning very quickly. I do know something about using sources and reflecting what they say, which is a useful skill in WP, I hope. So I'll try to bring that into the Religion project.

I would like to send you the greetings of the season and will do so in this format, which I got sent and might as well pass on. (Perhaps a warning of what the WikiprojectReligion might become.)

"I wanted to send season's greetings to everyone, but it is so difficult in today's world to know exactly what to say without offending someone. So I met with my solicitor yesterday, and on her advice I wish to say the following:

"Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low stress, non-addictive, gender neutral celebration of the winter/summer solstice holiday, practiced with the most enjoyable traditions of religious persuasion or secular practices of your choice with respect to the religious/secular persuasions and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all.

"I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2007, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make England great (not to imply that it is necessarily greater than any other country) and without regard to the race, creed, colour, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishee.

"By accepting this greeting, you are accepting these terms: This greeting is subject to clarification or withdrawal. It is freely transferable with no alteration to the original greeting. It implies no promise by the wisher to actually implement any of the wishes for himself or others and is void where prohibited by law, and is revocable at the sole discretion of the wisher. This wish is warranted to perform as expected within the usual application of good tidings for a period of one year or until the issuance of a subsequent greeting, whichever comes first, and warranty is limited to replacement of this wish or issuance of a new wish at the sole discretion of the wisher.

"Disclaimer: No trees were harmed in the sending of this message; however, a significant number of electrons were slightly inconvenienced." Itsmejudith 17:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The January 2007 issue of the Novels 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.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 19:39, 4 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

I see from my recent changes patrol that you have created this project. It looks like a great start. I left comments on the project discussion page. Edison 20:53, 4 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

I removed your talk page from my watchlist and regret it now. I did a massive copy-edit of Neetham and wanted to see what you thought before I went forward. I still don't get from the language if this is religion or history, or both. I may have perhaps made things a bit too current.

I want to let you in on some thoughts I'm having. I basically need your advice. I want to start two new Wikiprojects. Wikiproject Mental Health and Wikiproject alternative sexuality. I've got no clue how to start either one, but I have a vision for both. Yours truly, Nina Odell 17:49, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, why you removed Ayyavazhi from

Also one request too. While discussing with me please use simple english that I can understand quicky since I am a non-native speaker to English and not so much knowledgable with the language usages. Thanks and also Sorry for all my mis-understandings. Thank you very much also for your help edits. - Paul 19:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No matter sir. Also, You proceed on your own way making it to FA status. Since you are much more experinced than me, you know what to do. And ask me for any citations and for any doubts about the texts in the article. Thanks once again. - Paul 19:48, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I would like some assistance in charting a commonality between

Wheels within wheels for the glory of the Ophanim Thanking you in anticipation Namaste in agape and walking my talk in beauty B9_hummingbird_hovering [B9_hummingbird_hovering] 17:32, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, tucker. I would like to ask you to design a portal for Egypt. We now has 1 FA, 1 A Class and 3 GA articles within the scope of WikiProject Egypt and as you know I don't have enough experience to design it myself. Thank you.

--Meno25 17:58, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, I re-edited the section Inclusiveness and exclusivity in Ayyavazhi article, since I started a new article on that section as Inclusiveness and exclusivity in Ayyavazhi. Do this re-formation now, affects your works on that article any way? If so you change back the section to the previous level.

Also Iam on a trip to Chennai and so I may not repond quick to the articles and the discussions for two or three days. Thanks - Paul 19:14, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pursuant to your suggestion, I have added a bibliography to Blue Network, and would like your further thoughts regarding same. Eric O. Costello 19:16, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Unassessed LGBT articles could do with some assessing. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 20:12, 7 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks for your note; I've seen your posts and appreciated them. I continue to be amazed at some people's reasoning skills, if they can even be called that ... Ugh! Anyway, thanks for your efforts. :-) Keesiewonder 00:15, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that you've been adding ratings to the articles on certain English mediaeval monastic sites and related topics as part of the wiki Catholicism project. Many of your ratings seem to me rather arbitrary and to be honest I would strongly question whether your giving such ratings is useful at all; it would be more constructive to point out where an article is, in your opinion, weak (as you did with the Beaulieu Abbey article). The speed at which you are giving these ratings also gives great cause for concern. Soph 01:14, 9 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Hi Badbilltucker.

I'm a member of WikiProject Abortion, and I've been working on article assessments. I've never assessed articles before, and I'm not sure I'm doing it right. I wonder if you could take a look at a few of the articles I've assessed and tell me if you think I'm way off base. Here are a handful of my attempts: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 I would greatly appreciate any pointers you can share. Thanks in advance. -GTBacchus^(talk) 08:25, 10 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Whether you intend them or not, I am very troubled by an ongoing focus on me, rather than the issue, on the Hinduism Wikiproject page. If you're concerned about my conduct, let's discuss it in a productive way - but making comments like 'notice the ongoing behavior', etc. are decidely unproductive and I believe entirely unwarranted. Thank you for your consideration. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 18:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - I wanted to point out that Armenians are not Eastern Orthodox, they are Oriental Orthodox. Please remove the tags you added to the talk pages of Armenian Monasteries as they do not belong there. Thanks, --RaffiKojian 19:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. There is no listing that is appropriate on that page. There should be a separate listing of either the Armenian Church or the umbrella Oriental churches which have an article. In any case, these monasteries all fall neatly in the realm of wikiproject Armenia - so they can always get that tag if need be. --RaffiKojian 05:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Badbilltucker. Perhaps I am missing something. It seems to me that Ryan has given direct answers to your questions. Could you, for my benefit, state (in question form) exactly the question that you believe Ryan did not answer? Thanks. --BostonMA ^talk 19:34, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Can you help remove the 'unknown importance' tag from the Lutheranism article? I guess I could probably do it too ... but will give you the option first ... Thanks! Keesiewonder 11:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am just curious, but why are pushing so much for the creation of so many WikiProjects? They should be created by people who are knowledgeable about the subject and will be able to devote time to them - otherwise they will simply be lame ducks with a a bunch of tags around; which will be worse than not having the WP in the first place since its desolate state will discourage new users from joining in - something that won't happen with quality and functioning WPs. WikiProjects are not a trophy collection u know :)) Baristarim 14:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, no problems :) I agree that every article should be covered somehow.. Baristarim 14:53, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image wise, the Inverted Pentagram. Its a nonspecific and commonly used in the LHP.

Is there a difference between "work group" and "task force?" They both sound good to me really. Task force kind of suggests a specific set of goals. I guess task force. WerewolfSatanist 05:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So not to be a pain, but how long before we have our own page to call our own and properly bring the Devil to Wiki?WerewolfSatanist 23:24, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Big Man requests a better explanation of the distinction between "task force" and "work group." Sorry to bother you still. Its just weird to actually affect change like this WerewolfSatanist 23:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Work Group. Work group implies more of a working together kind of feeling (and also a little more permenance). Thanks again. If I wasn't lazy I'd do it myself. WerewolfSatanist 00:15, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If i were to join the council, what would i be expected to do? Or would it just be where i could show that i assisted in Transport in Scotland. Remember i originally had a sdifferent proposals but due misunderstangs due to me this expanded into the present project. I still haven't got round to sorting the page out yet. When i have more free time, i will follow the guide and see what happens.

I have also tried on the talk page to WP:SCOTLAND, at least a while back, and got no response. What do you think i should do? Should i try again? Simply south 17:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think i mentioned that i needed help with the project and should it be a part of WP:SCOTLAND, either that or related. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scotland#Wikiproject.

I'll join the council to show that i assisted with WP:TIS. I've also raised a question on criteria towards lists, templates and categories, amongst others on the council talk page. Simply south 17:55, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I've got some urgent univesity work to do and so that is why i am trying to take this break. Also, do you have any ideas how lists, templates and categories could be rated? Simply south 18:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the above link. Anyway i'll get back to you, i just need to expand out from railways right now first. Maybe i should have sub-cats for different modes of transport. I think i will wait a while longer before assessment on the project and when i can focus on it. Thanks. Simply south 18:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for your edit to

Hi, you've recently added the

See [5]. Thanks for telling us that. Also, please post at Wikipedia talk:Did you know, not Template talk:Did you know. Some people mix them up, but WPT:DYK is the discussion page, adn T:DYKT is the suggestions page. Thanks. Nishkid64 00:36, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I too loved the Foundation trilogy and was excited enough when I first discovered Wikipedia to compare it to the Encyclopedia Galactica (although my enthusiasm has fallen off a bit as I realized Wikipedia's limitations). I was just so pleased to discover I had this "ultimate archive" dream (and related to Wikipedia) in common with someone else that I felt obligated to share! Um, now you know. —

Hi there,

Looking through our Archives I saw that you took an interest in the

I am really messing up Template:WikiProject Iran, can you help fix it like you did for our Burmese one? Thank you so much! Chris 04:12, 14 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

• 
  From Commons. NinaOdell Talk 13:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"The greatness of a community is most accurately measured by the compassionate actions of its members, ... a heart of grace and a soul generated by love." - Coretta Scott King (attributed)

ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Historical_persecution_by_atheism#.5B.5BHistorical_persecution_by_atheism.5D.5D I would like to word it right but can not because there is no way to not be offensive I can't think of how. Please help. Vote to keep the article. There are articles on Chrisitian, Judaism and Islam but why not atheism? Fair is Fair. LoveMonkey 06:49, 16 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Hello. As a person interested in

Hello again. As someone who seems pretty familiar with WikiProject proceedings and Wikipedia in general, I was wondering what your view is on ending the renaming discussion of this project early. I was the silly person who set such a long term for voting (expecting a bit bigger response and a lot more conflict). However, looking at the edit histories of all the past and present members of the Project, I think all but two members have voted who are likely to vote (the other two seem to have gone on hiatus, but at least one supported the change; the other I'm uncertain, but doubt he would object). That would indicate 100% acceptance of the proposal. As I start working in earnest on the

assessment of articles, it seems ridiculous to continue creating new categories, templates, etc. under the old name only to have to change them in less than half a month. As a result, some have been named using the new name (depending on how optimistic I feel and how difficult it would be to rename the thing later), and some still have the old. Would there likely be any negative fallout from ending the discussion and voting early, even though we have not yet met the early ending criteria I arbitrarily set? We obviously have consensus among those most likely to care or even express any opinion. And waiting makes much more work down the line. I'd appreciate your feedback, here or on my talk page, whichever is more convenient for you. Thanks. --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 03:23, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks for responding and the advice. I will do it then whenever I feel ready to tackle the challenge. :-) Probably within the next 48 hours. --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 14:29, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya. Regarding your decision to split the Category:Temples and shrines of Kyoto - I'm not particularly opposed to the move, I would just like to mention a few points. (1) I originally created the category with the phrasing "temples and shrines" with the intention that "Buddhist temples and Shinto shrines" was implied. Now that they are split, why not go for "Buddhist temples in Kyoto" or "Temples in Kyoto" and "Shinto shrines in Kyoto" or "Shrines in Kyoto"? That is to say, since all temples (寺) are Buddhist and all shrines (神社) are Shinto, why not shrink down the category names? (2) There is a degree of syncretism in Japanese religion, and while it is fairly simple to label all -dera, -ji, and -in places as Buddhist and all -jinja and -jingu places as Shinto, is this split really 100% accurate? Do these places not contain elements of both faith systems? As I said, I don't really have a problem with this move, I just want to make sure that we've considered all the angles and done what's ultimately best organizationally. Thoughts? LordAmeth 20:51, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, I've made some additions to the Teachings section in Ayyavazhi article. Please take a look.

Also, One thing I wish to remain once again, (perhaps you might not have noticed, which I told earlier)

"one correction; It was noted in the article that, Ayyavazhi was founded by Ayya Vaikundar in 19th century South India. ==> Ayyavazhi was not founded by Vaikundar. Ayyavazhi rise-up as a religion(developed) after the period of Vaikundar only based on his teachings, but not initially founded by him."

Sir if any suggestion please tell. Also, Thanks for all help edits. - Paul 00:40, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okey, Sir. Sorry and Thanks very much for all helps and quick response. - Paul 00:46, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I'd like to delete this page you created recently; the very fact that we have those categories (and a link to them in our navbox) makes this redundant. --InShaneee 01:29, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Crap alive! I didn't know that was even possible! Consider my objections withdrawn with all haste; that's just awesome (however, I'm still not sure that the 'adding articles to that page' goal needs to be there; that's a pretty mechanical task that can be done using the handy-dandy assessment log). --InShaneee 01:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't suppose I could convince you to volenteer for the job? :) --InShaneee 02:02, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rightous! One other thing though: the page seems a bit sparse. According to the Assessment page, the project includes exactly 600 articles at present. Do you think it's just because a lot are missing tags? --InShaneee 02:05, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, cool. Just be careful; Quang khem sounds like an actual animal (and thus not under our scope), and creatures that are purely mythological in nature fall under the Mythology project's scope. --InShaneee 02:09, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and you can find a list of all current Paranormal articles that may be missing Cats here. --InShaneee 02:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's dangerous territory, though, do be careful. Many 'mythological' creatures don't qualify as Cryptids (as no one seems to be claiming that they were or ever real, and many would argue that once a creature is confirmed as 'real', it no longer qualifies as a Cryptid (and thus wouldn't be under our scope, anyway). --InShaneee 02:16, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]