User posts: 06:36, 10 January 2025 UTC [refresh]

User:Miskin

Cool Cat, without taking sides, could you take a look at this user's history, such as on Cretan Turks page but also elsewhere. Am I the only one who thinks that, removing information sourced or transferred from another article, and then putting it back, and then removing it again, and then writing long diatribes mentioning my user name again and again are calculated and subversive acts? He is in dispute with a lot of people (even with the Serbians - for a Greek, that's an accomplishment). I had made it clear some time ago that I didn't consider him a serious user.

Now I am starting to think that there is an agenda for, perhaps, creating pet little Greek Muslims to brainwash the next generation of Greeks:) (check the vote on the title Greek Muslims on that article's talk page, it was the caucus of the century [1]). The only problem is that they are nowhere to be seen, and very few among those population groups included in the category consider themselves as Greeks. That should raise question marks for a serious mind. I am beginning to think that the organized bullying of Cretan Turks page forms part of a general trend. Before his arrival, the page was being developped constructively with involvement from another Greek user. Regards. Cretanforever 21:59, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry for getting back on you about this in a delayed manner.

Is the issue still a problem? What exactly is the problem with the artice/user (I havent looked)? Have you tried WP:RFC?

--Cat out 12:38, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind for the moment. If I start to mind, I will try WP:RFC as you suggest. It's part of a general habit of making alphabet soups out of ethnicities. People are no longer being referred to along religious denominations. That was 19th century talk (i.e. Bosnian Muslims). And in the case of Turkish Cretans, Greeks are very badly placed to put forth denominations. The more so when their own language defines Turkish Cretans as Turkish Cretans. If they bully the page, I will add hurtful stuff. One fine day, they will grow up! :) Cretanforever 12:56, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A patient pacifist approach is the better side of valor. If you end up adding info in a biased manner, I can't help you. Do not make edits driven by revenge. Furthermore in such a case, an RFC would not go well... --Cat out 13:06, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No question of "making edits driven by revenge". I am only withholding sources which, for example, point at Turkish Cretans (mentioned in the article) who knew the Greek language but did not speak it, considering it as a tongue for the lower-classes. Things like that. Well-sourced. It's not the kind of stuff I would gladly include in the article, despire what's on the air for the Turks.:) Cretanforever 14:18, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedians by number of edits

CC, you asked about gettign these data for another wiki, which one? Rich Farmbrough, 15:58 30 September 2006 (GMT).

Tr.wiki. :) --Cat out 16:24, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

tr:Kullanıcı mesaj:Rich Farmbrough Rich Farmbrough, 19:40 30 September 2006 (GMT).

Incidentally you are number 49 on tr. Cool Cat 2050 (edits). Rich Farmbrough, 21:38 30 September 2006 (GMT).

Four way talks for the 21dec panel

Hi, I'd like to discuss a general outline for the Wikipedia panel as well as other issues. :)

This is what I have at the moment. Feel free to reply, and at least acknowlege you had seen it.

User:Cool Cat/Panel 2006

Just a reminder: The panel will happen in Ankara, Turkey on 21 Dec 2006. --Cat out 17:02, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Panel

Hey Coolcat, I got your note, but it seems that what I'm to talk about has morphed from being a discussion on policy and project goals and various ideas on that (e.g. factions) into a discussion on copyright policies on Wikipedia. I could probably still talk about that, but I don't think it'd be very interesting - copyright and related policy is a fairly dry topic. Any news on funding? Take care. --Improv 08:00, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This isnt fixed. I had to reduce the number of panelists I am to invite to three. If you like to talk about something else, it can easily be adjusted. I just had to give an outline to the people. I did get your name right, right? --Cat out 10:58, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering if you could write in a paragraph what you'd like to discuss in the panel. I need to submit a general outline of the panel by this monday. --Cat out 00:00, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Misconceptions? See: User:Khorshid/Misconceptions

I do not think a userpage is for that stuff... --Cat out 15:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that it's strictly innapropriate, though I'm not pleased that it already exists on its own subpage, as well. Have you considered MfD? --InShaneee 15:35, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was waiting for your review before seeking any kind of action. I do not want to make the nomination myself. How should I proceed? --Cat out 16:04, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Take it to MfD, mention why it was removed from wherever it was removed from, and point out that it already has its own subpage in his userspace. --InShaneee 19:38, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. See: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Khorshid/Misconceptions --Cat out 18:37, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, about the "misconceptions" section on your userpage...

Firstly I'd like to point out that I also agree that Iran is overdemonised. However I feel a userpage does not exist for one to express political beliefs. I would encourage you to remove it. You can for instance put the content to a blog and link to it in your userpage.

The deletion is for the now seemingly obsolite "User:Khorshid/Misconceptions". I would appriciate if you {{db}}'ed it.

--Cat out 23:15, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing political about it. Its just a list of misconceptions.Khosrow II 00:44, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure the US president and/or Fox News would disagree. That makes it political. --Cat out 01:09, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That makes no sense at all. Unless you have a convincing argument, I wont take it off.Khosrow II 03:57, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look, it is all about perspective. That is what politics is about.

I do not have time to "convince" you. It was a mere friendly advice.

--Cat out 04:08, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As long as I am not breaking any Wiki rules, I dont have to change something just because a person doesnt like it, because that doesnt make any sense, just dont look at my user page if your offended. If I am breaking any rules, please notify me and give me the link to the rule. Thanks.Khosrow II 04:13, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a rule driven comunity we are not a burocracy. If you really are looking for a rule, it can be removed on the basis of wikipedia is NOT a soapbox. Exact quote you mau want to consider is: "You might wish to go to Usenet or start a blog if you want to convince people of the merits of your favorite views."

Like I told you, I agree with some of the stuff you are saying there, so I am not offended. However I do feel that would be more approporate off-wikipedia.

--Cat out 12:48, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, its sourced, second of all, Fox News or Bush may disagree on almost everything on Wikipedia, both are propagandists anyway. There is nothing political about my User page. You can contend that I cannot even have "I am a proud American and proud Iranian" on my user page on the basis of propaganda if you wanted to. I can probably find something that would seem political to me on many other user's wiki page, it would be pandamoniam.Khosrow II 14:57, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Contient templates

Hi Cool Cat,

(moved Template:Countries and territories of Africa to Template:Africa: moving back to proper location)

Just noticed your move; please help me understand why "Africa" is this template's "proper location". Thanks, David Kernow (talk) 02:13, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the intended function of the Continent template navboxes such as {{Africa}}, {{Europe}} etc. was to link to countries (defacto or not) on a spesific continent. There are several reasons for this. Two of the important reasons are:

To limit the number of entities that appear on the template for practical purposes: There are way too many countries in africa.
POV concerns: Some people decide to add random "territories" of contraversial regions. If official UN territories are allowed, unoficial ones must be allowed as per WP:NPOV which only creates problems.

There are probably other reasons but I am at the moment focusing on these two.

For teritories a seperate {{Teritories of Africa}} may be used.

--Cat out 12:19, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply.

Unfortunately, I don't see how the name "Africa" will dissuade folk intent on adding "entities" and/or territories to this template from doing so. Secondly, when found within code, {{Africa}} does not indicate what aspect/s of Africa the template addresses. As the template (still) carries countries and territories, {{Countries and territories of Africa}} seems particularly appropriate.
You may not be aware that {{Navigation Template}} alone does not seem to accommodate smaller screen or window sizes, producing poor linewrap. That, at least, is the result here.
As the region names are (currently) no longer aligned, distinguishing between each line of countries/territories is now not so straightforward. I suggest the small images further assisted this useful feature.

I am copying the above to Template talk:Africa in the hope other folk may comment.

Ok. I'll try to sort this with you w/o involving other parties since so far you sound to be a reasonable person.

The intention of contient templates have always been to link to political entities: countries (defacto or not). Yes the template does have teritories which is infact problematic.
- If we are to include a single teritory, we have to include all of them. Which may not be all that problematic for africa (since there arent that many border disputes in africa) but it is for asia, europe and etc. We have to apply the same standard to all continent templates.
- I have been meaning to remove (more like move) the continent links from the africa template but didnt really have had the time.
I am not sure I understand that. Normaly there should not be a linewarp problem at all. The "navigation template" has a generic fixed div size. Can you provide a screenshot?
I am inclined to remove the images with the continent names. They hare already hard to see. If they get any smaller (as they need to), they will become useless so we might as well remove them completely.

--Cat out 23:27, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Glad that I seem reasonable – so far...! <chuckle>

The intention of contient templates have always been to link to political entities: countries...

Understood. In that case, suggest these template names become {{Countries of X}}. Meanwhile, I'd steer away from referring to them as "political entities"; some folk may take exception to either or both these words, especially if they live in or know a "country" with a complicated history. (Perhaps this is so with yourself and Belgium...?)

...there should not be a linewarp problem at all ... Can you provide a screenshot?

See Image:Screenshot showing template.jpg.

I am inclined to remove the images with the continent names...

The images may indeed be a cosmetic extra; first, though, I'm more concerned that, in a template such as {{Africa}}, it's now not so easy to see which line refers to which (compass-based) region, as both their alignment and thumbnail images have gone. Hope you understand what I mean.

Yours, David (talk) 00:40, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Belgiums case is relatively straight forward when in contranst with places like the balkans or middle east. I intentionaly used the referance "politcal entities" since for instance Taiwan is no county as far as China is concerned. Infact China considers Taiwan to be a part of itself. Taiwan claims to be in control of all of mainald china and does not consider it to be a country. What is a country and what isn't can be very complicated by itself so we do not need "territories" and "wanabe countries" such as Scandinavia, Basque, Kurdistan, Assyria, Greater Armenia (last three overlaps actualy) and others on the continent templates.

I'd like to evade a {{Countries of X}} since people will object to defacto countries then. It causes problems even though it shouldn't.

I have updated template africa in a bold move. I intend to do the same to Oceania template. Removing images and teritories would fix the linewarp problem.

--Cat out 01:07, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(resetting indentation)

I intentionaly used the referance "politcal entities" since...

I'm intrigued by your approach as the kind of examples that have arisen (Belgium, Taiwan, etc) are one reason why I feel avoiding descriptions such as "political" might be wise – this does not mean, however, that I'm opposed to your approach as (1) I'm still learning about it and (2) it may well be an improvement!

I'd like to evade a {{Countries of X}}...

I hope you understand, however, my point that seeing say {{Africa}} while editing a page is not as useful as (say) {{Countries of Africa}} unless you already know (well) what the template contains. My experience thus far indicates that succinct but informative template names (or category names, or...) outweighs any misguided amendments people may or may not make to the templates themselves; if that were a significant problem, I'd discourage making it (too) easy for people to edit templates by including {{Tnavbar}}s in them! Also, a <noinclude> explanation on the template's could also serve to dissuade mistaken edits, or be something to which people could be referred.

I have updated template africa in a bold move...

Now seen. Suggest for now that, as the country names are in a small font-size, the bullet-point dividers are correspondingly smaller, i.e. ·s. Also, recommend the syntax [[Country]] · to ensure consistent linewrapping. Yours, David (talk) 01:28, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I am merely trying to be carefull :) I wouldn't dare put "political entities" in the template, I merely use it for the sake of argument here.
Perhaps that would be better given that logic. How about {{Countries in X}}?
You are welcome to do all that however I don't particuarly understand the reason for &nbsp.

--Cat out 01:37, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re 1. Understood. I wonder if using "political entities" is wise in any context, but for now am happy to let that debate rest.

Re 2. I believe the geographic / country subdivision preference is for "of", but may be mistaken; what knowledge I have of naming conventions etc etc is primarily via WP:CfD. Whether "in" or "of", however, either would make the template's name informative and can always be switched later.

Re 3. Will do. The reason is to avoid divider characters (bullets, middots, vertical-lines) appearing at the beginnings of lines.

Unless you fear making unnecessary contributions to these templates, perhaps what might be best is if you format them in the way you feel is most effective, then I (and hopefully others...) provide feedback...? Yours, David (talk) 01:49, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS Re divider characters, do you like me prefer middots or bullets as being less obtrusive than the vertical-line character...?

Right.

Happy to see that.
I think both may be problematic. Cyprus is not in Europe noe is it a part of Europe while it is diplomaticaly considered a part of europe.
Oh thats fine.
I do not "fear" making edits. Just my enthusiasm had caused problems in the past. :)

re P.S.: I'd prefer the larger circle (bullet I presume) over the other two. The verticle line may break the template and the smaller circle is harder to see, especialy on larger resolutions.

--Cat out 02:03, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re 2. Perhaps it's best to stick with "of" for now, as this is the conjunction used by country subdivisions (cf WP:WPCSub).

Re 4. I'll keep the templates I've found thus far on my watchlist (plus any similar I find subsequently) and when it looks as if no-one is making any more amendments to them, I'll let you know what I think. Here's another observation already: the {{Africa}} ({{Countries of Africa}}) template may now look compact, but it also looks dense; perhaps too dense. Perhaps some separation by region might assist people consulting it. Since it now includes the NavHead [Hide] function, using a little more space might not necessarily be to its detriment. (Perhaps, however, the current non-stop string of countries is sufficient; I'm just sharing a thought that occurred to me which may be more relevant elsewhere.)

Re PS: I was wondering how far your screen/window size and/or resolution might be influencing your formatting... For instance, here is how your talk page looks when I open it in my browser and jump to this discussion – somewhat to the right! (This is on a 21" monitor at resolution 1152 by 864 with my browser window (Firefox) maximiz/sed. Yes, switching off the sidebar will help, but I (and other folk) don't always wish to browse in this way.) I grant, however, that middots can appear too insubstantial; unfortunately, as was the case with {{Africa}}, bullets appear too boldly, detracting from their role as dividers. I had toyed with the idea of creating a {{·}} template to produced bold middot characters (·) but then thought the occurrence of many such templates (e.g. as would be the case in {{Africa}}) might make undue demands. On the other hand, I guess the vertical-line template {{!}} is used heavily... What do you think...? Do you reckon people would accept {{·}}...? Yours, David (talk) 02:34, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re 2.:Well, honestly speaking I do not care either way. My only concern is people complaining later on.

Re 4.:I merely listed them in an alphabetical manner. If there is a better way to do this, I wouldnt object to it provided we dont deal with territories again. :)

Re P.S.: Whenever I design a template, I design it for a 800 x 600 resolution. I however causaly work with 1024 x 768.

My userpage is unnecesarily wide atm due to an image on a debate a bit higher. (the 3rd solar system image I believe). Normaly it doesnt crate an issue. I'll correct this.
I still think dark larger bullets ("•") would be better. They look fine to me. On my screen (17" - 1024 x 768) a <small>ified "·" is very hard to see. I believe it occupies a single pixel. So for all practical purposes, it is not there.

--Cat out 02:52, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re 2: Go with "of" and redirect any flak my way!

Re 4: I'll let some time go by, then revisit the template (and siblings) in situ somewhere and see what I make of it. Re resolutions/current state of your talk page: understood.

Re bullets etc: I agree that middot can seem too small or insubstantial. On the other hand, bullets seem to prominent, especially in templates using smaller-sized fonts. My preference in lieu of a character midway between them is the middot; but do you think a "bold middot" template {{·}} (producing ·) has any mileage...? Do you reckon you or other editors would balk at seeing (multiple instances of) this template within a template...? (Don't worry, I won't hold you to your answer; I'm just fishing for feedback...) Yours, David (talk) 03:09, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re 2: I'll let you handle it. I cant be doing all of the work ;)

Re 4: Thats fine.

Re resolutions/current state of talk page: I restructured my talk page per your comment. For me, it is very important for pages I touch to appear perfect on all reasonable resolutions.

Re bullets etc: The template is a nice idea. While I do not oppose/object (nor support) the template, from experience I know people will complain for it being redundent. They would argue that a {{.}} is practicaly the same amount of work as '''.'''

--Cat out 04:03, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re 2: Happy to oblige. (Is there a single category in which these templates reside...?)

Talk page looks dandy now. (Hope your Wikimood improves soon!)

Re middot template as redundant: Yes, I guess so... Perhaps I should give a trial on a non-major template and see how folk react...

Before I forget: Thanks for your time and input to this thread. I appreciate the opportunity to understand something of people's Wikipedia experience. Best wishes, David (talk) 04:27, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re 2: No such category but see Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries/Footers. I would not mind if you "applied" {{Navigation Template}} to those footer templates.

My wikimood can only improve if I run into more people like you. :)

--Cat out 04:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re 2: I'll add Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries/Footers toward the top of my slightly-lengthy to-do list. by the time I reach, it'll probably also be a good moment to see how I feel about the {{[[Template:Countries of [Continent]|Countries of [Continent]]]}} templates. (As it was my request, I'll locate and rename these to "Countries of" during my next Wikipedia session.)

Re wikimood: Ditto! Until my report back (or sooner), David (talk) 05:00, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

plus {{Oceania}}

I notice you have also amended this template in a similar manner. Unfortunately it too now suffers from unmanaged linewrap. However, distinguishing between each line should still be straightforward once this linewrap is addressed, as there is some alignment provided by the images and bold links. As with {{Africa}} above, {{Oceania}} does not indicate the template's content, so recommend {{Countries and territories of Oceania}} or the like.

Regards, David Kernow (talk) 20:04, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Copied to Template talk:Oceania.

Same as above. It should be about countries only and w/o images. Same reasons. --Cat out 23:27, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Understood; will therefore continue above only. David (talk) 00:40, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Iraqi Kurdistan

Why did you revert me? Iraqi Kurdistan as it is is a part of the federal body of Iraq. We certainly do not put {{North America}} on Michigan. --Cat out 14:26, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see no reason not to define Michigan as part of America, and - even more to the point - I see good reason to define Quebec as a distinct political entity within North America and not only as part of Canada. --Vindheim 16:07, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about individual counties, cities, and other regions? It is highly redundent to do so and against established concensus on the usage of these templates.

You are welcome to define Iraqi kurdistan as a part of Middle east and asia or Michigan as a part of North America but you can do that with a simple sentence without using the template.

If it is not linked on the table it really should not be used.

--Cat out 16:12, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

spambot

it really wasn't that difficult; I noticed a link from an old thread you'd posted about the spambot in the AN archives. i clicked it and there was spam; so i put db-spam on and that was that. :-) —ptk✰fgs 00:11, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was so natural to you that you didn't notice... I stand corrected. --Cat out 00:39, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again already, Cool Cat!

(adding margins)

I did this as some of the country names in the templates using {{Navigation Template}} looked a little too close to the side of the NavFrame. Hope you approve. Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 02:30, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
PS Since Wikipedia templates seem to use sentence-case, how about {{Navigation Template}} → {{Navigation template}} – or even simply {{Navigation}}...?

Me likely. I made the move :P --Cat out 09:38, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply.

Do you know the user Tasc...? Unfortunately I'm in the midst of a tricky situation with him/her as of this very moment. See here and his/her recent User ~~contributions~~ reversions... David (talk) 09:43, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(For example, one of them was my adding margins to this template...)

It is often unnecesarily stressfull to work on templates. I'll join the discussion. --Cat out 20:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I really hope I don't regret drawing your attention to this user's behavio/ur. This is a Wikipedia first for me: it's less than 24 hours since I first came by this user and his/her self-centred posts and uncollaborative/incivil manner are already very perturbing. By all means let go if s/he starts refusing to communicate, which unfortunately I fear is a real possibility. I just hope s/he has a more mellow mood somewhere! Regards, David (talk) 22:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be happy to help. Just keep your cool. --Cat out 00:22, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

David, let's move this discussion to your talk page, as you're one, who seem to be eager to continue communication. -- tasc ^words_deeds 22:58, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd apriciate it if you would adress me on my talk page. --Cat out 00:22, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've got only templates for you. Template:Good night -- tasc ^words_deeds 00:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oyasuminasai Tasc-san. --Cat out 01:02, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

For your superb contribution to Turkish Airlines Flight 1476, I hereby award you this barnstar. Keep up the good work. --Cat out 15:45, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Cool Cat, i'll try to keep up the good work. İyi geceler --Ugur Basak 18:49, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia panel

Hi, I am organising a panel about wikipedia in Ankara Turkey 21 dec 2006 as a part of the larger internet conferance. I have compiled some of the information here. I am looking for a person to talk about the foundation. I originaly had Anthere in mind but she seems to be somewhat busy. While she did not decline, I realy have to have a plan B option. Do you have anyone in mind (including yourself) that you could reccomend for the task? --Cat out 28 okt 2006 01:42 (CEST)

i'd love to discuss the possibilities and have some ideas in mind, maybe we should irc or email about it first? grtz, oscar 00:12, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I am on IRC right now. I am Kawaii_Neko on irc. --Cat out 28 okt 2006 02:15 (CEST)

We can discuss it anytime you like. However I really need to form the panels basic structure by this monday (UTC). --Cat out 28 okt 2006 02:44 (CEST)

Fair use images in lists

Hello, I see you have contributed your thoughts to Wikipedia talk:Fair use/Fair use images in lists. It's been dead for a while, but I have archived it and taken a new fresh start. I hope this time we will be able to achieve something as I have summarized the main points of both sides (feel free to improve them) and I call you to express your support or oppose on the concrete proposal that I have formulated. Thanks, Renata 02:20, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transmutation circle

Hello there. --Cat out 08:32, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? State Alchemist^-talk- 16:47, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not to sound rude or anything, but what was that all about? So confused...o_O State Alchemist^-talk- 16:46, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say hi to a fellow fullmetal fan. :) --Cat out 16:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you spotted either A: My username B: Me in a category page, or C: One of my userboxes (least likely.) State Alchemist^-talk- 22:00, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I actualy noticed your userbox first. I noticed your username at random while accidentaly viewing the entier wikipedia edit feed. ;) --Cat out 19:59, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, the Fullmetal box, automail box, or just me playing with them in general? State Alchemist^-talk- 20:11, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not remember but you were probably doing something irrelevant to fullmetal or your userboxes. Likely your edits to Bahaumaunt's userspace. Like I said I noticed it randomly. --Cat out 01:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ping!

Two new issues here when you have a moment – apologies in advance if the second is something simple I've overlooked. Hope all well, David Kernow (talk) 13:22, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MADLAX

Hello, fellow MADLAX fan. :) I've noticed you've put following into the template: "Someday, somewhere, anytime, anyplace." Is it a quote I don't recognize? :) More importantly, as you may have noticed, I have recently translated the Russian featured article about MADLAX, and now I'd really like to know your opinion. :) --Koveras ^☭ 17:13, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The quote is from the "yammani" theme song. I'll review the russian translation later. --Cat out 19:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes, now I remember, thank you. :) It's just that I don't particularly like "nowhere". %) As for the translation, unfortunately, I must inform you that my request is outdated by now. :( --Koveras ^☭ 20:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

bot help?

hey, there's no bot reporting in vandalism-en-wp. Can you help? Thanks much, delldot | talk 14:42, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Me and my bot has been banned from that channel indefinately as per essjays supreme authority. I cannot join that channel.

The bots code requires the channel name to be spesific. I can gladly provide bot assistance if the original channel ( #wikipedia-en-vandalism ) becomes avalible again. Otherwise the code wouldn't work.

--Cat out 19:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

For reverting the vandalism on Kurdish literature. Çok Teşekürler :)Heja Helweda 04:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]