This user is a cricket pundit for the Times of India, the world's largest distribution daily English language newspaper. Details/disclaimer

This user is a cricket pundit for the Mint Wall Street Journal - [ http://www.livemint.com/articles/2008/12/05231402/A-captain8217s-legacy.html]

User:Blnguyen/UB

You are welcome to leave me a message or request admin action.

Blnguyen (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) has been an administrator since 29 May 2006 and an arbitrator since January 1, 2007.

FOR ANONS, I WILL DEFINITELY REPLY HERE. FOR EVERYBODY ELSE, THIS MAY BE HERE OR AT YOUR TALK PAGE. IF IT IS A MULTI-PARTY DISCUSSION, THEN DEFINITELY HERE

Archives

Requests

Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park - Genghiskhanviet (talk · contribs)
Economy of the Republic of Vietnam - Genghiskhanviet (talk · contribs)
Michigan State University Group - Kevin Forsyth (talk · contribs)
Nguyen Tri Phuong - Magnifier (talk · contribs)
Phan Thanh Gian - Magnifier (talk · contribs)
Vietnam War - Wandalstouring (talk · contribs)
Cyril de Zoysa - Pectore (talk · contribs)
User:Garden/WikiCup

Checkuser and sockpuppetry

File:Blnguyen banana.JPG

Deposit banana here to rouse the checkuser attendant!

Straw poll for selecting photos of cyclists at the 2009 Tour Down Under

Photos were taken at the team parade at the start of the 2009 Tour Down Under, January 18, 2008.

They were all very gentlemanly. Very dignified and genial. So were the crowd. Apart from the middle-aged man who stood net to the YellowMonkey and intentionally jabbed him in the ribs for about an hour. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 04:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The crowd favourites, judged by the decibel level of the applause, were in no particular order, Armstrong, Hincapie, Pereiro, Greipel, Voigt, O'Grady, Michael Rogers, McEwen, Baden Cooke, Bobridge (local boy). YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 04:59, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Voting section

Simply vote and comment as follows below the individual sections.

Comment (numbering pictures from 1, 2, 3 etc, left to right) and ~~~~

Poll: Cameron Meyer

(no previous picture)

No. 2 tossup; not crazy about either. Durova^Charge! 16:12, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Not crazy about either but have a strong aversion to semi-constipated looks. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 23:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 - 2 is the better of these. Cirt (talk) 02:58, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
0. Pdfpdf (talk) 16:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 --—Sandahl (talk) 23:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No preference. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Lesser of two evils. Sarvagnya 21:04, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 - but it's close. Privatemusings (talk) 00:22, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Daniel (talk) 07:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1, but cut off the bottom part. Khoikhoi 04:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 06:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1, with tighter cropping. - Bilby (talk) 07:20, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:35, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2, but it would need cropping. --vi5in^[talk] 23:47, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. probably Chadsnook (talk) 05:20, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Davide Malacarne

(no previous picture)

2. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:19, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 - Best framing of the bunch. Cirt (talk) 03:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. don't like the smile in 2. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 4 eyes open, less harsh profile than 1 or 2. Durova^Charge! 05:30, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Number 4 is best.—Sandahl (talk) 21:28, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Less grainy. Sarvagnya 21:08, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Daniel (talk) 07:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Khoikhoi 07:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 -- Samir 06:16, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
First choice 2, second choice 4, third choice 1. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:39, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 vi5in^[talk] 23:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. 4 looks almost as good. Chadsnook (talk) 05:21, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Davide Vigano

versus

4 - Best full expression and view of face. Cirt (talk) 03:10, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 per above.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:33, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 4 per above. Durova^Charge! 05:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 —Sandahl (talk) 05:05, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
5. Clearer, sharper and frontal enough. Sarvagnya 21:10, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
5. Daniel (talk) 07:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
5 is the best. Khoikhoi 07:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
5 -- Samir 06:16, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 vi5in^[talk] 23:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
5 hard to choose between 4 and 5, but 5 is clearer. Chadsnook (talk) 05:24, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Francis van Londersele

2 - But might want to crop to just the head/shoulders, the hand is a bit bright/blurry. Cirt (talk) 03:14, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 per above.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:37, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 1 Less open expression, but better lighting and focus. Durova^Charge! 05:35, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Durova.—Sandahl (talk) 05:11, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Lesser of two evils. Sarvagnya 21:13, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1, I guess. Khoikhoi 07:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 06:13, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Frederick Willems

1. Although 3 is a better pic, he looks better in 1. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 2 the only one with tolerably even lighting. Durova^Charge! 05:37, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 because of best lighting.—Sandahl (talk) 05:34, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 is the lesser of 3 evils. Khoikhoi 07:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 06:13, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:38, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 --Chadsnook (talk) 05:27, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: George Hincapie

versus

4. Although there's a hint of a smile in 3, 4 is brighter. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:41, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 3 more dynamic composition, better facial expression. Durova^Charge! 05:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 brighter —Sandahl (talk) 02:12, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 for the profile pic, but you might consider including the last one in the article as well. Khoikhoi 07:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 -- Samir 06:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
First choice 5, second choice 4. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:37, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Y not? 03:21, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 --Chadsnook (talk) 05:29, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Gert Steegmans

versus

2. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:21, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. frontal.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:50, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. 1 best view of face. Durova^Charge! 05:40, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 best angle on face.—Sandahl (talk) 05:35, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Khoikhoi 07:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 sorry dude -- Samir 06:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:36, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 --Chadsnook (talk) 05:29, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Luis Leon Sanchez

2 and 3 were the same - 2 replaced with new photo.

3 is wee clearer then 2. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 06:01, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Maciej Bodnar

1 Bastique ^demandez
1. The other at Traffic Cops.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:05, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 06:00, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Y not? 03:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Ncmvocalist (talk) 08:13, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Mario Aerts

2. (However, the lass in #1 has a nice smile ... ) Pdfpdf (talk) 09:34, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Bastique ^demandez
1. Hello! Are you guys blind? Did you not notice the person behind him?--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Pardon? What did you think "(However, the lass in #1 has a nice smile ... )" was about? Pdfpdf (talk) 14:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Didn't notice. Musta been distracted by sumtin :D --brew crewer (yada, yada) 17:44, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 —Sandahl (talk) 01:51, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. —97198 (talk) 07:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4, easy -- Samir 06:00, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Mark Renshaw

2 better lighting, pose Bastique ^demandez
2 per above. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:12, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2—Sandahl (talk) 01:23, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:59, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Markus Eichler

2 better quality Bastique ^demandez
2. The other pic might be placed here.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:14, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 —Sandahl (talk) 01:52, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:59, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Martin Elmiger

2 Bastique ^demandez
2 notwithstanding the microphone, it's clearer. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:19, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 —Sandahl (talk) 01:53, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:59, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Martin Muller

2 Both are good but the lighting is better in 2 than 1 Bastique ^demandez
2. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:20, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 it's a bit brighter.—Sandahl (talk) 01:54, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:58, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Mathew Hayman

versus

3 Best expression Bastique ^demandez 03:25, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. I actually suspect his expression doesn't really change. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:28, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 is best —Sandahl (talk) 01:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 05:58, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Mathieu Drujon

1 Great smile Bastique ^demandez 03:24, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 per above.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 —Sandahl (talk) 01:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:58, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Matteo Bono

2 Obstruction in 1 Bastique ^demandez 03:24, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Don't like the teeth-situation in 1.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:33, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 —Sandahl (talk) 01:56, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:57, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Matteo Tosatto

3. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:28, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 Great shot --Bastique ^demandez 03:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Looks better in this one.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:35, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 05:53, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Matthew Goss

2 1 is better quality but that tongue ruins it. Bastique ^demandez 03:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 per above. 1 might be more a good pic for this article.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:37, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 per Bastique —Sandahl (talk) 01:57, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 despite tongue -- Samir 05:53, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Matt White (cyclist)

1 Dimensions are terrible on 2. Bastique ^demandez 03:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This guy obviously does not like yellow monkeys.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:38, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
0 as per brewcrewer Pdfpdf (talk) 15:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:52, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
crop 2. -- Y not? 03:25, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Maxim Iglinskiy

2 Bastique ^demandez 03:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. The other is too in-your-face.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:43, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 looks a little like a mugshot but it's OK.—Sandahl (talk) 01:59, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:52, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Michael Rogers

1. It is a different pose from nearly all the others. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. This is a wonderful shot. Bastique ^demandez 03:21, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 nice shot of profile.—Sandahl (talk) 01:26, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:51, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Mickael Buffaz

1 Best expression. Bastique ^demandez 03:20, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. per above.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:51, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Nicki Sorensen

3 best expression Bastique ^demandez 03:20, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:48, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:51, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy makeover -- Y not? 03:26, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Nicolas Portal

3. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Best face shot. Bastique ^demandez 03:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toss up. Looks better in 1 but 3 is a better pic.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Nicolas Roche

1 better lighting of the two Bastique ^demandez 03:18, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Baseball cap hides too much of the other one.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Durova^Charge! 00:44, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 05:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Ncmvocalist (talk) 08:16, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Nikolay Trusov

2 Eyes are closed in 1 Bastique ^demandez 03:16, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 per above.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Cirt (talk) 05:43, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Oscar Pereiro

3 Bastique ^demandez 03:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3–Capricorn42 (talk) 05:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:54, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3, but I would erase that terrible vertical line with Gimp or Photoshop.--Unai Fdz. de Betoño (talk) 09:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 05:41, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Pablo Lastras

1 Bastique ^demandez 03:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, 1 –Capricorn42 (talk) 05:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:55, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Cirt (talk) 05:41, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:49, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Paul Sherwen

2.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:55, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Durova^Charge! 06:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Cirt (talk) 05:40, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:49, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Perrig Quemeneur

Both are same images –Capricorn42 (talk) 05:48, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. ~~No, I changed my mind. Now 2~~. Again 1.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:57, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
0. Hey Brewcrewer, what about #3?? (They all look constipated to me.) Pdfpdf (talk) 14:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Marginal preference for 3. Durova^Charge! 06:53, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
no preference, all the same. ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 05:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 05:49, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Perrig Quemeneur - take 2

Hmmm. Hard one. Either #0 or #2 Pdfpdf (talk) 14:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 per above.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:42, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Durova^Charge! 06:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Cirt (talk) 05:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Pieter Jacobs

3. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:38, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 06:01, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 Durova^Charge! 06:13, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 Cirt (talk) 05:37, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 05:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Rein Taaramae

Don't like either, but 2 might be good for Cracking joints.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 06:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Durova^Charge! 06:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. —97198 (talk) 07:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 05:37, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Phil Liggett

2–Capricorn42 (talk) 05:47, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 06:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Durova^Charge! 06:06, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 05:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:47, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Remy di Gregorio

2–Capricorn42 (talk) 05:47, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. The other at overbite.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 06:06, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Crop the bottom third and adjust the levels. Durova^Charge! 05:30, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 00:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:47, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Rene Mandri

2–Capricorn42 (talk) 05:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 06:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Durova^Charge! 05:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 00:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:40, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Rick Flens

2 –Capricorn42 (talk) 05:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 06:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Durova^Charge! 05:24, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 00:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:40, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Ronny Scholz

3 Although the background it too bright, the profile and smile are nicer.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 06:16, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 with levels adjustment. Durova^Charge! 05:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Cirt (talk) 00:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 05:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Rony Martias

1. Less scrunchy.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 06:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 better lighting, equally grimaced expression. Durova^Charge! 05:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 00:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Scott Davis (cyclist)

versus

0. Don't like either much, but both are MUCH better the the photo on Scott Davis (cyclist)!! Pdfpdf (talk) 14:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- (And what's he doing using our Scott's name?!) Pdfpdf (talk) 09:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Gun to my head, I would go with 2.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the existing photo. Durova^Charge! 05:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. —97198 (talk) 07:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Cirt (talk) 00:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3, sorry -- Samir 05:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3-- Y not? 03:27, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Sean Yates

1.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Durova^Charge! 05:10, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 00:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:38, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Sergey Klimov

3 –Capricorn42 (talk) 05:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:45, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 Durova^Charge! 05:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 23:59, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 05:38, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Sergio de Lis

1, –Capricorn42 (talk) 05:44, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:45, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Durova^Charge! 05:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 23:58, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 --Unai Fdz. de Betoño (talk) 21:32, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:37, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Stef Clement

versus

3. The least frowning.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:47, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 Durova^Charge! 05:08, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 Cirt (talk) 23:56, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 -- Samir 05:36, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Thierry Bricaud

1 –Capricorn42 (talk) 05:43, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:47, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Durova^Charge! 05:08, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 ~ BB 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Cirt (talk) 23:55, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:34, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Thomas Rohregger

versus

I think we should stick with the current pic.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:49, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Current pic. Durova^Charge! 04:59, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. —97198 (talk) 07:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 Cirt (talk) 23:54, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Sorry dude -- Samir 05:34, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Timmy Duggan

Nah.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:50, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Durova^Charge! 04:58, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. —97198 (talk) 07:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 23:53, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:34, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Timothy Gudsell

1 –Capricorn42 (talk) 05:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Better smile.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:56, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 for the lighting. Durova^Charge! 04:53, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 23:53, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:33, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Tom Leezer

It's really a toss-up. This is the second toughest decision I've ever made (there was this donuts incident), but I guess I'll go with 1.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:59, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Durova^Charge! 04:52, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, it's twins...wait, nevermind. 1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 23:51, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:29, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Travis Meyer

0. (Did he come last?) Pdfpdf (talk) 12:23, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Durova^Charge! 04:51, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. —97198 (talk) 07:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 23:51, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 -- Samir 05:28, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 -- Y not? 15:41, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Vitaliy Buts

1 (cropped) –Capricorn42 (talk) 05:40, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nice smile! I like all three. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:21, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Durova^Charge! 04:50, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 Cirt (talk) 23:50, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Samir 05:28, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Vittorio Algeri

2 -- Tinu Cherian - 06:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2 Durova^Charge! 04:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 —Sandahl (talk) 04:13, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 Cirt (talk) 23:50, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 -- Samir 05:27, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Volodymyr Zagorodniy

3. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:52, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3 -- Tinu Cherian - 06:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 Durova^Charge! 04:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 23:49, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4 -- Samir 05:26, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Wesley Sulzberger

1 -- Tinu Cherian - 06:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Durova^Charge! 04:47, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 —Sandahl (talk) 04:12, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Cirt (talk) 23:48, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Samir 05:26, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Willem Stroetinga

Number 1 -- Samir 07:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 –Capricorn42 (talk) 05:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 --Unai Fdz. de Betoño (talk) 21:52, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Durova^Charge! 04:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 —Sandahl (talk) 04:11, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 has better expression. Cirt (talk) 23:45, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Yoann Offredo

Number 2 -- Samir 07:17, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 -- Tinu Cherian - 06:37, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
0. Pdfpdf (talk) 00:16, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 Durova^Charge! 04:39, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 —Sandahl (talk) 04:10, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. —97198 (talk) 07:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 but crop it to head/shoulders. Cirt (talk) 23:44, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Alison Carle

Added at the request of Brewcrewer (talk · contribs) and Pdfpdf (talk · contribs):

1. Obviously. I had some suggestions for the other pic but I'm trying to be a little classy these days.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:39, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:19, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- (Given Brewcrewer's new found predilection towards trying to be a little classy, my safest option is to attempt to refrain from putting my foot in my mouth. Hence, I will make no comment. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:19, 22 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]
- P.S. YellowMonkey: Thanks for the additional photos. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:19, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Durova^Charge! 04:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 05:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 —Sandahl (talk) 04:10, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1 if you can crop it. Cirt (talk) 23:44, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Uno -- Samir 05:25, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Invincibles issues

Other stuff

??

OK, I give up. Why have I been had? Do they not call it the American war? If so, the lead sentence in the vietnam War article needs editing. Mdw0 (talk) 11:01, 24 February 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Only the communist government propaganda does that. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:59, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't sound very neutral. Fact is, in the context of history there is a victorious socialist government and also one or two victorious socialist Vietnamese, so what they call their wars is relevant. You cant edit out history just because you disagree with the politics of the figures involved. Incidentally, I say socialist because communism is actually a utopian impossibility that isnt self-sustaining. All the extreme left wingers degenerate into either more practical socialists or very temporary murdering nutters. Anyway, I think the name American War is an interesting reminder that not everyone has the same POV as the Americans. I've gotta say that once I heard that name I thought it was obvious - what else would they call it? I've heard more than one person from Vietnam remind me that the war is referred to as part of a series of wars by the Vietnamese, from both sides of politics, but of course that's hardly a valid Wiki reference. When I get a decent citation I'll put it back in. Mdw0 (talk) 03:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Everyone calls it the Vietnam War inside VN and outside, except for communist party textbooks. Ask Kauffner (talk · contribs) about this. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 01:36, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then you ought to edit the first sentence in the Vietnam War article. But just to follow the logical outcome of your comment - if its in the communist party textbooks, then it would be referred to as such by the Communists and Communist Party supporters in Vietnam. Which would mean thousands if not millions who use it. Correct or not??? Mdw0 (talk) 03:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Yes, but academic usage is the determinant on Wikipedia, and VCP textbooks don't qualify. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 08:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Therefore an academic source that ackowledges popular or government use of the term would be enough to indicate its use exists here, correct? Your opinion as to whether communist academia exists or qualifies as worthy I can predict. Fortunately its not the main issue. Mdw0 (talk) 02:40, 5 March 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Well it is used, just not academically, so articles and sections can't be called that in general Wikipedia usage. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 06:20, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If an academic source from somewhere says it is often referred to as the American War, then its in. Not that academics everywhere refer to it as such. For instance, a communist academic would not be regarded as good enough, correct? The ones who write the textbooks? Also, do you have a link in the Manual of Style that says only academic reference and not more general usage can be used for section titles? Mdw0 (talk) 07:18, 5 March 2009 (UTC) [reply]

No it isn't otherwise we will have all these things called "War of Zionist Aggression" in teh general text of a few articles because a lot of Islamists use it. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:38, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I am prepared to say OK to that for the sake of a sane Wikipedia, but its a policy decision to not use information because it may encourage insanity elsewhere. It does NOT mean that I've been had, or that the actual information in and of itself isn't sensible and interesting.

Are you willing to edit it out of the Vietnam War article? Surely if its not allowed in the History of Vietnam article three-quarters of the way down, its not allowed in the leading sentence of the VietnamWar article? Mdw0 (talk) 02:23, 6 March 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Sockpuppets?

Hi YM, Could you please take a look at Talk:British_India#Sockpuppets.3F? Thanks. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 04:13, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying. Please see this subpage of my user page for some answers to your questions. I will be compiling more stats there. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 15:03, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed, also he has Umar Zulfikar Khan (talk · contribs) and two others... what were they called? YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:53, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dzw49 (talk · contribs) and RF75 (talk · contribs) YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 01:26, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! This is amazing. To think that so much time was wasted not only by these sockpuppets but also by us: user:RegentsPark, user:Nichalp, user:Philip Baird Shearer, me and a few others!! Thanks a million for working on this! (I had my suspicions about Umar Zulfikar Khan when he turned up on the talk page, but he seemed more knowledgeable than the others. There is one other person, user:Doorvery far, who has also sided with these folk on Talk:British Raj, see here for examples of him and Xn4 supporting each other. You are welcome to investigate this at your convenience ... but he might be innocent as well. Thanks again. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 02:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most people on Wikipedia, including me, are pretty unsuspicious of socks, although some lodge RFCU for any guy that disagrees with them. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Doorvery far isn't him. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 02:05, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have a lot of experience with sockpuppets, so I would appreciate your advise on what if anything should be done about user:UmarZ (contributions) given my actions in baring User talk:Xn4#Topic ban on British India and other similar articles (see this and that edits in particular). --PBS (talk) 14:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's him again. It needs a block. you can do something with Xn4 if you feel necessary, or ask someone else. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Xn4.[1] --PBS (talk) 10:48, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. Thanks, YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 23:39, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perry

This edit may be of interest. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 22:42, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And see here as well. Hope you don't mind some wider discussion. I am always nervous about BLPs where there has been claims of defamation (although I think there is no evidence of defamation in the article) and thought it wise to get a broader perspective. Cheers, Mattinbgn\^talk 00:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. I don't think it is defamation. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I borrowed the book through an inter-library loan. Our library here, while shiny and new, is very small and I had to send away for it. ILLs only give me a month and by the time the article was reviewed I was on my second letter from the library looking for the book to be returned. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 04:21, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How many cricket books are down there. The suburban library tends to have too many light-hearted cricket books (anecdote type), or Perry. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not a lot, I need to order in most books that I am after. It does have some Perry books as well; his book on Monash is in the recommended section! My personal cricket library would be around 100 times bigger than the town one. It is otherwise well appointed for facilities however and it has the only wireless hotspot in town. Will keep an eye on the attack article. Plenty of conspiracies on the web at the moment. Take a look at Pakpassion for lots of speculation (and lost of refutation as well, to be fair.) -- Mattinbgn\^talk 09:53, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, you have a good library then. The only books I have are SRW's 1996 WC diary, Cashman's AZ (which is good), and Pollard's "Cricket the Australian Way", the rest are borrowed. ARW and AZ were 20c from the library clearance sale. For whatever reason they usually turf anything over ten years old. I guess you must have 800+ then unless the library only has 8 cricket books. How much did it cost you to put all that together? Bought them new? YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I exaggerate slightly! I reckon I have about 200-250 or so books (including two book-shaped objects by Perry). My first was the Compleat Who's Who of Test Cricketers by CMJ which is now held together with tape and staples! Most of the early ones were gifts. When I lived in Brisbane, Lifeline held a "bookfest" at the Convention Centre where you could buy books by weight and I did well out of that exercise. I had an opportunity to buy a set of ABC Cricket Books from around 1960 to 1975 for $100 at the bookfest but as a struggling student I couldn't afford it and have regretted it ever since. Plenty of looking about second hand book shops etc. I picked up a first edition copy (no jacket) of Between Wickets at Daylesford for $10, which I thought was a bargain. When books have taken my eye, I occasionally buy them new; like the new Kim Hughes book by Christian Ryan I want to purchase next time I am at Borders. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 01:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A. R. Rahman

Please unprotect the page. Consensus was not found. And the version of Shahid is in my opinion a clear violation of WP:UNDUE. He reverted again to his version pushing his POV. The last stable version was without any mention of filmfare awards. The discussion on the talk page is ongoing and has not ended it seems. --Bollywood-Turk (talk) 09:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you 91? well you can debate on the talkpage for a few more days until your account matures. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "until your account matures."? I'm most probably older than you Monkey. --Bollywood-Turk (talk) 10:40, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article is only locked for new users and anons. Once your account has been around a few days it can edit it. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think, you misused your privilege of administering Wikipedia at A. R. Rahman here. A complaint is on the way. I'm sorry, but this is not the first time, I have observed such kind of behaviour of you. I'm assuming bad faith, because you are involved in the "Filmfare" Award problem at A. R. Rahman and also were/are a real life Times of India contributor in the Cricket section. Since Filmfare Award belongs to Times of India I believe you have decided at A. R. Rahman in your (company's) favour. --91.130.91.92 (talk) 16:17, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do not write for the TOI. They only plagiarised my stuff. I am not their supporter, YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This changes nothing. --91.130.91.92 (talk) 01:02, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So a guy who gets cheesed off that his work is plagiarised would go and plug the person who took a free lunch from him? stop kidding. Go ahead, report me. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 01:07, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --91.130.91.92 (talk) 01:47, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. I've dont nothing wrong. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 02:16, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Viet history

My pleasure :). I would also like to thank you about the article Gia Long. I'm doing a small research and your works give me a lot of new information.

By the way, I think you should write some paragraphs about Chau Van Tiep and Vo Tanh on article Gia Long, they (plus Do Thanh Nhon) played an important role in bringing Gia Long to power.--Amore Mio (talk) 14:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll have a look. Also, on wikipedia the policy is to not but titles before articles, so no Emperor/Empress and so forth. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me fix it, I can't change the title because Thuan Thien and Thua Thien were already taken.--Amore Mio (talk) 03:24, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I got it. Thank you very much.--Amore Mio (talk) 05:39, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much again.--Amore Mio (talk) 09:07, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Attack on Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore

I wonder what will happen to the 2011 Cricket World Cup? I wouldn't be to keen on going to either Bangaldesh or Sri Lanka. With the Mumbai attacks, no where is safe. I hear the 4th umpire is in a critical condition. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 09:42, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the Pakistani matches won't be going ahead, now that India won't go there, that changes one vote against them and the Champions Trophy was already voted down last year anyway. The BCCSL are broke and get handouts from the BCCI and the BCCI will probably cut off their money if they won't vote against Pakistan now, if they weren't already staying away. The Tamil Tiger blast in 1996, well the SL govt were trying their best to stop them, but as far as Pakistan goes, there is a rather large elephant in the room as to Pakistan funding Islamists. The other countries aren't going to sit there and gift Pakistan all their group matches by forfeit. Maybe Bangladesh might go but Pakistan should beat them anyway (95% chance). I don't think the other countries should be cancelled, it isn't nice but the murder rate in RSA is the highest in the world, and the % chance of a terrorist death compared to car accidents and ordinary criminals is much lower, and the other three governments are doing their best. With no checks whatsoever at Australian cricket grounds on training, and pretty perfunctory ones on game day, there's nothing stopping them travelling overseas and walking straight through the gate at a practice section. I'm surprised LET haven't already done that to India, or that the BCCI hasn't insisted on meaningful security in Western countries, because there isn't any apart from a few unarmed bouncers. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mind monitoring this article for a while? I lost all knowledge of cricket when Steve Waugh retired so my knowledge is a little archaic. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on how you look at it), I won't be able to tell the difference between vandalism and fact. —Dark ^talk 10:14, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

... and just in case you're too "busy" . *offers a banana* —Dark ^talk 10:17, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need any cricket knowledge here. Just info about Islamists, unless these gunmen are Tamil Tigers. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please check over User talk:Champarani, as this editor is causing some problems and has now resorted to swearing at me in Hindi Thanks :) Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 10:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked him. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the article to my watchlist. It's hard to know if some statements that will and have been added are factually verifiable or just personal opinions. I strongly suggest that any statement added needs to be reference otherwise it should be removed. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 10:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah me too. No doubt when there is information on who the culprits are there will me more fringe theories espeecially from a few Pakistani users with a pro-Islamist bent like Yousaf465 (talk · contribs), eg see the junk on state sponsored terrorism, whitewashing the Taliban etc. Some Pakistani guys have been saying that the Mumbai attacks were done by India or Israel, and that will crop up here as well. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

speak of the devil. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:23, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose this user is in denial. But wikipedia isn't exactly the place for expressing these opinions on articles. Hilfy and Siddle are in doubt. Damn! Although from what I've seen locally at the old NTCA Ground and on TV, I'd rate Brett Geeves higher than Hilfy. Geeves is a good lower order batsmen and probably a better fielder (not saying that's very hard). Geeves is also a top bloke, not saying Hilfy isn't though. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 09:11, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hilfy is a pretty poor fielder, even almost like an old subcontinental one. I can't see how Hilfenhaus gets any wickets apart from when it swings because, well, I don't think he's much good. I was surprised RSA/NZ didn't try and target him much in the ODIs. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After reviewing some of Yousaf465 (talk · contribs) contributions, I now see what you mean. It's a bit of a worry that on his talkpage it states "This experienced editor is seeking to adopt new users." Well hopefully I don't have too many altercations with him the future, although I see you already have. I've also just noticed he has given himself a barnstar! :S Very very strange indeed. If he gives himself a barnstar for just removing red links, imagine how many barnstars some other wiki editors (including yourself) could give themselves. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 09:27, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just when I thought things couldn't get any stranger, his blog says "(the terrorists) seem to belong to southern or western Indian states". Don't know where he got that from. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 09:33, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not surprising from him. He'll have altercations as long as he edits any military/history article. He went to the Mumbai attacks talk page and said the writers of the article were imagining things. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did you people check that in article,I did atleast and result wasn't what was mentioned in article then who should I believe NDTV or website from where I checked it.I gave banglore as location.Another of my WP:Or!User:Yousaf465 (talk)

Enough of these fringe theories that only live on silly Pak newspapers. the things in the Indian papers are in BBC and proper papers as well. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 06:20, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seems that he has now removed that blog article, unless I missed it. Sometimes people just need to use common sense with issues like this.

It has been swinging a bit down in Hobart and since the previous curator has moved to the MCG, the pitch is playing a lot different. There's a lot more sideways movement and the pitches seem to have more uneven bounce and are generally slower. These factors are probably helping Hilfy. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 06:50, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you wanted a bbc link here it is [2].If you understand.Remember that

Mumbai attack were planned in Jalalabad,Pakistan.

CNN-IBN burea chief. User:Yousaf465 (talk)

Well well its not his fault

The good thing is he has started using sources!! Conspiracy theories will float around for quite sometime (thanks to the Pak national leaders and media). Its not Yousaf's fault entirely, but its the Pak government which floats these theories. I remember watching a Pakistani national channel on youtube hinting Hindu terrorists for Mumbai attacks. Only on 12th February (2 ½ months later) did Pakistan accept the perpetuators were Pakistanis (Pakistan finally admits Mumbai attackers link -- The Independent (UK)! --KnowledgeHegemony ^talk 07:54, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have been using them before.remember the cfr article ?User:Yousaf465 (talk)

None of the sources say that or don't work. Also I googled it and only see Pakistani webforums and wacky newspapers. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:56, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems he is trying to bring the attention away from Pakistan. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 09:40, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He always does that. I hadn't read his blog, but a lot of people in that part of the world have rather ridiculous ideas. I read a "mainstream" Pakistani newspaper that once said that Buddha and Buddhism was from Pakistan. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I could not but praise the coverage of Geo News as it came up. Unfortunately some people, including cricketing personalities such as Miandad, tried try to deflect attention while the usual hawks like Sherry Rehman were uncharacteristically placid at first. I should be trying and editing the article in a few hours since it seems to have gotten the attention it needs right now. As a current event though, the article can always use more attention. JSR 0562 12:54, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What was in GEO? YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Geo has the report If you have the will to understand.User:Yousaf465 (talk)

I'm quite comfortable with my own logical faculties thankyou. I don't claim that Buddha was from Pakistan unlike some Pak newspapers. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 06:20, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That newspaper would have been referring to Taxila,not to Buddha's origin .User:Yousaf465 (talk)

Geo was the network that carried out the Kasav probe into Okara, proving his identity for television audience. They have the same news as most other Pakistani networks but the usual 'blame-game', as it is called in the subcontinent, is slightly toned down. Geo had good video footage and probably the best eyewitness accounts of any television network. They interviewed and quizzed a number of people including one curious case of a civilian who made what, in my opinion, was the first comparison to Ajmal Kasav, much before the officials came up with "we will get the bastards" and other statements. Also, the 'Indian agent' theory was snubbed by Chidambaram no less in an interview with Arnab Goswami yesterday. JSR 0562 05:37, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 06:20, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also discovered that both 'user: Sebastian-566' and 'user: Hibbertson' came up on March 3 and seem to work pretty well together. JSR 0562 05:46, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get Nishkid on it. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 06:20, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An open proxy in Nepal....YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:38, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some theories that people have come up with seem very bizarre! And, I thought some of our journos were shoddy. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 06:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They're quite common in Pakistan. Nadirali (talk · contribs), Unre4L (talk · contribs), Szhaider (talk · contribs) and Siddiqui (talk · contribs) were all banned for making claiming a whole pile of inventions that occurred deep in modern Indian territory as Pakistani, and changed the description of all sorts of people from "ancient Indian" to "ancient Pakistani" when the concept of Pakistan was never made until about 100 years ago. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:38, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

86.150s is the banned Nangparbat (talk · contribs) YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 23:39, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vietnam districts and communes

Vietnam translation

Hi buddy. I've begun going through the Districts of Vietnam. I have decided to create some merged regional templates instead of the seperate provincial ones for now to connect more together. However the provincial templates will be filled out with the communes of each province and any other topics etc over time so they will still be kept but just not used in the district articles. I would be very grateful if you could still consider developing these sub stubs on the districts of Vietnam as something of a priority and practically the whole country is missing on here. I've begun connecting the wikipedias with tags, if you could help translate any articles from Category:Articles needing translation from Vietnamese Wikipedia this would be useful. Thanks. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 16:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this might take a while. There was a table somewhere on the net with a list of all the districts with popn and area size. To get it direct from teh govt website you need to go to this interactive map thing which takes about 2 minutes to load per picture. Thanks for your work. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've started Communes of Vietnam. Perhaps you could find a source to support the number of communes. A number in english say around 1000, one says 1003 yet the Vietnamese wiki says 9109. Also any government lists of communes and population etc would be very useful. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 17:42, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely closer to the second number. The # districts is about 500 and there are many more than two communese per district. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah thats what I thought apparently there is 436 communes in one province alone, the highest. Thanks Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 10:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Districts and provinces

User:Dr. Blofeld asked me to help out - I think what he wants to do is lay the groundwork for some extensive work on Vietnamese towns and villages. Consequently, "X District" because "X town" also exists; he'll expand the initial title into a disambig page. In cases where the town and district are codependent, I tried to avoid moving over to "X district" - I may have missed one or two, though, sorry. --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 03:12, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So you're saying that the moves to "District" everywhere are deliberate? YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. That's how I was requested to do them, anyhow. --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 03:41, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point. As I say, I was requested to help out; I had assumed some sort of discussion had already happened. --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 05:30, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Officially the name is in Vietnamese, obviously district does not come after it. Moving them to the correct Vietnamese names would seem appropriate but the reason why it was moved to district is because yes I intend starting the communes once I have sorted out the infoboxes on the district. Often the districts, communes and main village will shyare the same name, this is why I moved to district and yes also in consistency with the naming of the provinces ... Province. Ar eyou telling me this is incorrect also?. The difference is there are communes and towns which share the same name. There are no towns called "California". Surely you wouldn't recommend moving back to the plain name and making it confusing with the main cities? Anyway for starters the communes will be extracted from Vioetnamese wikipedia where naturally they are in the official naming so it makes things simpler later. I'm rather surpised that you've said anything as you left me the impression you're not interested in these districts anymore, or perhaps just too busy. Yes I do intend starting the communes but not like with France. They will at least have an infobox and map and some data if possible. KNow of a website? Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 17:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DHN has the link to the government website maps which have the area and population at least. You can ask him if they have a tabulated online version of census with % males/females/literacy and all that. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Normally if there are different communes with the same name, they are in different provinces or districts so Chau Thanh, An Giang or whatever is needed, so the usual dabs are only needed for cities having hte same name as the province, but that's no big deal. Consistency is the main thing and unless a bot is around it isn't worth doing by hand to move them. I am a bit busy, although the prospect of doing all the districts properly is rather daunting. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning Vietnam

Would be good if you could spend 5-10 on one every day or two for sure. I understand you are always very busy but we do need to get some details into these districts, very glad though that you started them all off otherwise there would be more to do! I'll be looking to develop the communes over the next few months. 9,000 articles on places in Vietnam would be great. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 14:12, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Got cracking on An Giang Province. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 02:04, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If I can be of any help, let me know - I've got AWB, and I'm not afraid to use it... --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 01:26, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, there's no hurry. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 02:04, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. I can add population and area references after I've added the infoboxes. I'll be working on the communes of Vietnam and Cambodia over the next few months. Small problem at present though my Internet crashes when I try to visit Vietnamese wiki. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 10:53, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Read this

Here is a conversation between Yousuf and user:Adil your (who IMO should have been blocked for sockpuppetering). I hope they don't team up. Also note user:Adil your used the similar sock ip which I had contacted about earlier and you replied in affirmative) for contacting Yousaf. I wonder why Adil your was not warned for socking :S BTW, he has also been warned earlier by another admin (user:Hipocrite) for vandalism on India related page. --KnowledgeHegemony ^talk 14:16, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did block him a couple of weeks ago. I hadn't spotted that vandalism which was at the same time as his block. Aha, I see funny business at Khemkaran. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey that was not sockpuppy but a meatpuppy as I have already told YellowMonkey......And from then on ALL my posts have been from the Adil_your account with the exception of only my first post after the Block where I forgot to sign in but I have been logged in since then....And All Yousuf told me was to follow Wiki-Rules at all times....You can see that for yourself....Adil your (talk) 16:38, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You've been vandalising Khemkaran. Blcoked. I checked your version against that of Rama's Arrow and Tintin. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 02:04, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Adil your (talk · contribs · logs) is in convo with another admin User:KillerChihuahua about your "alleged" misconduct... I suggest you clarify the matter with KillerChihuahua to avoid any sort of misunderstanding, as the manner in which Adil is describing events is absurd and vague. --KnowledgeHegemony ^talk 06:42, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't noticed that, but we'll be right. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:38, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

86.158.233.205

Geolocate shows London, UK. I vaguely recall that geolocating BT-Central-Plus IPs sometimes gives incorrect locations. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 02:43, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, that is Nangparbat. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 02:44, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oho. We can blank out his junk then eh? YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 06:20, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's usually Pak POV pushing, but on occasion, he makes a useful edit (like removing unsourced material). Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 06:23, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But he's banned. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:38, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GAN for Ba Cut

I've reviewed the article and left notes on the talk page. I've put the nomination on hold for seven days to allow the issues to be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, here, or on the article talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on Ealdgyth - Talk 18:23, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Adil your

Can you explain your block of this user? I don't understand what edits of his were problematic enough to lead to a block, though I see some instances of edits others disagreed with enough to revert them. He says he wasn't warned. Mango juice^talk 21:14, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He's putting vandalism on Khemkaran and effectively disrupting it against a few other users, aside from teh fact that eth content is nonsense already. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 23:39, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed those edits, they are not vandalism. No one seems to have made an effort to engage the user in any form of discussion, let alone warning him if the edits were viewed as unwelcome. He was maybe edit warring, very slightly. I can't understand why you issued this block, and I think it shows very poor judgment on your part. Mango juice^talk 13:21, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More on districts

Yeah the vietnamese wikipedia is causing my computer a serious problem. I can't even access it anymore to retrieve the data or communes. I just don't know what the problem is. I tried a minute ago and it froze for 5 minutes. P.S why can't you move your poll thing to a seperate page like User:YellowMonkey/Contest or something, Its just your talk page is a whopping 201 kilobytes long, seven times as long as the recommended maximum and it is quite slow posting here. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 22:28, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do, but I thought it would get more attention on the main page. I guess I should photograph some female sportspeople then eh? YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 23:39, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That would be good! Congrats on all your photographs BTW. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 10:44, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"I guess I should photograph some female sportspeople then eh?" - You only "guess"??? Pdfpdf (talk) 11:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(P.S. Are there any beach volleyball competitions on the horizon?)

Happy YellowMonkey's Day!

YellowMonkey has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as YellowMonkey's day!
For all the ways you contribute excellently around here,
enjoy being the Star of the day, YellowMonkey!

Cheers,
bibliomaniac 1 5
00:59, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou sir. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 01:07, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At least give the guy a "yellow" background not a luminous lime green one LOL! Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 10:45, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I concur! (With all of the above.) Pdfpdf (talk)

And Happy "Let's-have-a-long-weekend-in-March-because-having-a-long-weekend-in-winter-is-a-stupid-idea" too!

For you poor unfortunates who don't live in Adelaide and don't know any better, Monday is the Adelaide Cup Holiday.

Annecdote: Queen Juliana's birthday is/was on 30 April - mid spring - a rather pleasant time of year in the Netherlands. At age 70, after 32 years in office, she said: I've been doing this for a while. I'm getting on a bit now. I think it's time to hand over to my daughter. So she quit. (Sorry purists - she abdicated.) So along came B. Now, these Dutch women ain't stupid. B's birthday is on 31 January - the time of year they have long-distance ice-skating races on the canals. So once in office, B decreed that the Netherlands would continue to celebrate the Queen's Birthday on 30 April ...

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:06, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An anon has made a complaint at AN/I

Just noticed this in AN/I and thought that you may like to be informed. Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Misuse of site protectioning Bidgee (talk) 01:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, he told me about it. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 02:16, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vietnamese history

I included a great deal of info about Vietnamese history in History of the Song Dynasty, although it was striclty about diplomatic, trade, tributary, and hostile relations with Song China in the 11th century. What's funny is that I actually know a bit more about Vietnamese history than my Vietnamese friend Khoi. Hah. Perhaps my library has a treasure trove of sources on old Vietnamese history. However, after I am done with this Han Dynasty project (and helping with an economy-related article for another user), I think I'm going to take a long Wiki break.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 04:16, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Socks

I'm sorry you had to be reported, although nothing will happen cause you did the right thing.

What I must say is that Bollywood-Turk (talk · contribs) is a clear sock puppet, maybe of this anon, maybe not, but he's a clear sock puppet and needs to be checked. And is there a way to check is "91..." has had an account? Shahid • ^Talk2me 07:05, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not worried. Well he used to be an IP. As long as he doesn't use both to double up, it's ok. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 08:27, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rashid Khalidi

Hi -- I recently inquired into the status of this page, which you protected some time ago, and did not receive any response. Do you think it would be appropriate to unprotect at this point? Thanks, Mackan79 (talk) 07:59, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 08:27, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requests

Checkuser and sockpuppetry

Straw poll for selecting photos of cyclists at the 2009 Tour Down Under

Voting section

Poll: Cameron Meyer

Poll: Davide Malacarne

Poll: Davide Vigano

Poll: Francis van Londersele

Poll: Frederick Willems

Poll: George Hincapie

Poll: Gert Steegmans

Poll: Gianni da Ros

Poll: Greg Henderson

Poll: Henrik Redant

Poll: Jacopo Guarnieri

Poll: Jesus Hernandez

Poll: Jos van Emden

Poll: Jose Luis Rubiera

Poll: Jose Rojas

Poll: Juan Horrach

Poll: Julian Dean

Poll: Julien el Fares

Poll: Jussi Veikkanen

Poll: Kai Reus

Poll: Kasper Klostergaard

Poll: Kenny de Hayes

Poll: Kym Dillon

Poll: Lance Armstrong

Poll: Laurent Biondi

Poll: Laurent Lefevre

Poll: Luca Barla

Poll: Luis Leon Sanchez

Poll: Maciej Bodnar

Poll: Mario Aerts

Poll: Mark Renshaw

Poll: Markus Eichler

Poll: Martin Elmiger

Poll: Martin Muller

Poll: Mathew Hayman

Poll: Mathieu Drujon

Poll: Matteo Bono

Poll: Matteo Tosatto

Poll: Matthew Goss

Poll: Matt White (cyclist)

Poll: Maxim Iglinskiy

Poll: Michael Rogers

Poll: Mickael Buffaz

Poll: Nicki Sorensen

Poll: Nicolas Portal

Poll: Nicolas Roche

Poll: Nikolay Trusov

Poll: Oscar Pereiro

Poll: Pablo Lastras

Poll: Paul Sherwen

Poll: Perrig Quemeneur

Poll: Perrig Quemeneur - take 2

Poll: Pieter Jacobs

Poll: Rein Taaramae

Poll: Phil Liggett

Poll: Remy di Gregorio

Poll: Rene Mandri

Poll: Rick Flens

Poll: Ronny Scholz

Poll: Rony Martias

Poll: Scott Davis (cyclist)

Poll: Sean Yates

Poll: Sergey Klimov

Poll: Sergio de Lis

Poll: Stef Clement

Poll: Thierry Bricaud

Poll: Thomas Rohregger

Poll: Timmy Duggan

Poll: Timothy Gudsell

Poll: Tom Leezer

Poll: Travis Meyer

Poll: Vitaliy Buts

Poll: Vittorio Algeri

Poll: Volodymyr Zagorodniy

Poll: Wesley Sulzberger

Poll: Willem Stroetinga