User talk:Patton123/Archive/March 2009

Thanks! Not really sure what it was for though (unless it was just general). - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:16, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You might like to think seriously about standing for coordship in the upcoming elections. You are active in the project, know your way around, and are clearly a hard-worker; you'll be an asset :) – Roger Davies ^talk 05:40, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow thanks! I think I will, I think I'm much better at reviewing and organising stuff than writing "brilliant prose", as my current FAC demonstrates :P. Thanks for the note!--Patton^t/c 20:00, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The coordinator election pages are now all set up. Feel free to nominate yourself here. — Roger Davies ^talk 17:01, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. Would something involving

Lol yes, hahaha that's funny XD--Patton^t/c 21:35, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Never fails to crack me up neither - maybe I'll see if I can squeeze Aleksandr into my sig sometime next week! Anyway, I noticed that even though it was only meant as a joke oppose, the bot that tallies the scores at the top of the

(bring on the trumpets!) 21:16, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Better indent it.--Patton^t/c 22:25, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's all done and dusted, and my RfA has passed successfully with 83 support votes, 0 oppose votes and 2 neutrals. Many thanks for your support - bring on the trumpets mop!

Hello, Patton123. You have new messages at C21K's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

C21K^talk 23:29, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Barnstar. C21K^talk 16:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Np :-)--Patton^t/c 16:53, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to your claim that an IP was connected to Malleus. Please, please, in the future, look at the Whois before making such accusations in such a heated time as this. It does not help you. It does not help the community. Ottava Rima (talk) 01:15, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh right, will do lol. Could be a proxy but won't bother arguing. :-)--Patton^t/c 11:26, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Struck :-)--Patton^t/c 11:27, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The

You've accumulated some unanswered questions on the nominations page, and it would probably be a good idea to answer them so the community can get a feel on where you stand with the current issues. Just a helpful suggestion. TomStar81 (Talk) 05:05, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah thanks! I checked twice but somehow missed them :-)--Patton^t/c 16:59, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

S'all right, that's why we use the buddy system here to make sure everyone is up to speed on the current situation and doesn't get left behind. I'm in the process of looking through your contributions, so you can expect a support vote or additional questions from me shortly. TomStar81 (Talk) 02:49, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support :-)--Patton^t/c 14:21, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

wanna !vote on

Ah yes. That proposal is much better than the original one. I will be supporting this time :-)--Patton^t/c 16:34, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. It is clear to me that this article should be renamed to M10 Tank Destroyer.(I think that's what you want too.) M10 Tank Destroyer is the main name. The name M10 Wolverine name should also be kept as an alternate name, as it is definitely legit. Wallie (talk) 20:32, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your comment on the talk page already :-) Thanks!--Patton^t/c 14:19, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good Luck on the Election for Coordinator! Based on What I see you would make a Good Coordinator. Have A Great Day! Lord R. T. Oliver ^{The Olive Branch} 21:39, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!--Patton^t/c 22:49, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

-download | sign! has given you a bubble tea! Bubble teas promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a bubble tea, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy drinking!

Spread the bubbliness of bubble teas by adding {{subst:bubble tea}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Ah thanks lol! My day's been rather stressful up to ow; thanks!--Patton^t/c 19:34, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The

Although i probably should have discussed this first, i just went and redirected the stub stub templates accompanying these to a more uniform Template:London-transport-stub to end some confusion between transport systems (which includes the DLR). Although it hasn't done it yet, that should make these categories empty. Simply south (talk) 22:29, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They should change soon to empty due to above Simply south (talk) 22:32, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And just in case you didn't see, see Iridescent reply at my talk page. Simply south (talk) 00:14, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input over at

Lol well it's generally good practice to leave out "the" in article titels. :-)--Patton^t/c 17:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am rather upset at some comments you have made on

You refer to a mere mention of a book on atheism as "offensive" and "a negative emotion". This perpetuates a harmful negative stereotype about atheism. I am not upset at you for being religious, but for the stance you take toward people who are not, and your opinion that atheists are not even allowed to mention the existence of their views in a discussion where other religious views would be okay.

I wish you would re-examine your comments, perhaps mentally substituting the references to religion and lack of it with something else that doesn't hit so close to home for you, like sports teams or music genres.

If I can take the potentially-offensive step of mentioning the existence of a text, I'd like to point you to nakedpastor.com, a site I read sometimes. It is written by a Christian pastor, but it is largely about examining your faith and coexisting with those who disagree. rspεεr (talk) 06:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very much an agnostic. I didn't oppose because of that comment, which isn't that bad at all. I opposed becuase someone later came to his talk page saying he felt insulted by the comment, and Teratornis essentailly told him to fuck off. At least that's the message I get after reading Teratornis's comments.--Patton^t/c 12:09, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean his response to OrangeMike? I have to say I'm still with Teratornis here. He had an eloquent defense of himself. Do you think he was obligated to say "Okay, I'm sorry, it was unacceptable and offensive for me to support atheism"? rspεεr (talk) 14:43, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"I'm sorry if I offended you, I didn't mean for the comment to be offensive". Those exact words would have been great. Saying the person is silly for being offended insults them.--Patton^t/c 21:32, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If the conversation was to have gone in a constructive direction, I believe the burden was on OrangeMike to explain his accusations of incivility, not to simply post one-liners about "I'm offended because it's Dawkins" twice. I think you have a reasonable enough perspective on this that we don't need to keep debating (and I'm sorry for the assumption above that you were the closed-minded variety of Christian), but I also think that Teratornis was perfectly justified to defend himself against OrangeMike's baseless accusations. rspεεr (talk) 17:46, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orange Mike wasn't accusing him of anything, he just said he felt offended by it. NP anyway ;-).--Patton^t/c 20:24, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Who granted Orange Mike the right to never be offended? People choose to be offended by all sorts of things, but it's their choice. --

Fatuorum 20:29, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Not quite sure what you mean. I think Wikipedians should do everything they can to make this a kinder and more welcoming place, including saying sorry for things that are only slightly offensive.--Patton^t/c 21:38, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much indeed for being brave enough to stand in the election. It was unfortunate that this year there was a very strong field indeed though, despite that, you managed to attract more votes than both Woody and me in the August 2007 election. With a slightly higher profile, you should be able to romp home next time around.  Roger Davies ^talk 10:38, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The Invisible Barnstar
		Please accept this barnstar for your very many significant and helpful contributions to the project. Because you invariably keep to the background without seeking recognition or reward, your work is even more appreciated. Thank you,  Roger Davies talk 10:38, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a million! It wasn't unfortunate at all, we have a bunch of great new coordinators now, like Abraham B.S. and Skinny87. Anyway I better get back to editing :-). I'd liek to get WWII to FA but I haven't even started yet. Thanks again!--Patton^t/c 16:03, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you meant to strike your oppose, but it still is in the count. It would probably be good to either "out indent" or clarify that you still oppose. Maybe it is obvious what's intended, but I couldn't tell. Thanks! Hobit (talk) 21:22, 29 March 2009 (UTC) Sorry, it is obvious, I just can't read. Hobit (talk) 01:31, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lol NP. Thanks anyway, have a great day!--Patton^t/c 18:44, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From the above, it looks like you still are opposed, but it's not that easy to immediately see that. It would be less likely to confuse other editors, for example, if you were to leave "Strong" struck through, but make "oppose" not struck through. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 15:38, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will do.--Patton^t/c 16:44, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:25, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]