User talk:Wally

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note: if you have issues related to my current AMA advocacies, please see the following pages:

El_C Advocacy Instantnood Advocacy (concluded)


You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Maintenance or the Task Center for further information.)

Help counter systemic bias by creating new articles on important women.

Help improve popular pages, especially those of low quality.


First Archive, through 25 January 2005 Second Archive, through 5 January 2006

AMA[edit]

Hello, you are receiving this message because your name is on the list of members of the Association of Members' Advocates. There is a poll being held at Wikipedia talk:Association of Members' Advocates for approval of a proposal for the revitalisation of the association. You are eligible to vote and your vote and input are welcome. Izehar 22:33, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back![edit]

With the promise of tuna (and more tuna to come!), I've been sent to welcome you back and to wish you a Happy belated Christmas and bestest New year! While we never met, I feel like I know you pretty well. My owner speaks very highly of you (though he is an idiot, but I'll give him the benefit of doubt). Cordially & sincerely yours, Kitty 22:Θ4, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

AMA[edit]

I'd be humbled to have my name considered for such a role, so I won't decline. But personally I'd be more inclined to put up you, Sam, or Neigel. :) I fear I might suffer from a certain lack of activity in the actual AMA role. Then again, that puts me above a fair number of people too, it seems. Yes, things smack of entryism. By whom exactly, I don't fully understand. But I fear there is enough entryism to make a coordinator election not helpful to maintaining the core function of AMA. - Keith D. Tyler 19:08, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've not made many friends on AMA talk pages myself, that's for sure. :) I guess then worrying about that is not productive. - Keith D. Tyler 19:29, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like it better than Gator's proposal. I fear the "must have been involved in at least one case" will not close the entryism hole, because people will now just hop on some case in order to qualify. I admit, I don't know how to resolve that without setting an arbitrary time-of-membership bar (maybe a bar as of the point in time at which a coordinator election was supposed to happen would have the best legitimacy). - Keith D. Tyler 21:39, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re mass message: Yes, I don't see why not, when Gator did the same, and Alex did that to announce his resignation. Seems like a suitable and accepted trend. Maybe avoid massing those who have voted. I can foresee some people complaining that the AMA is being "bogged down" by mass messages. - Keith D. Tyler 18:34, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was a pleasure[edit]

..to meet you. εγκυκλοπαίδεια* 22:16, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No apology needed of course[edit]

Sorry about my shouting friend at Panera today. She knew I wrote for Wikipedia and we noticed the meet-up going on, and then as we were leaving you passed by and I noted it to her. She, to take revenge for my shouting at a professor of hers a couple weeks ago to embarass her, decided to put me on the spot by calling yours and then ducking away. She found it funny, but I felt an explanation desirable.

Yours,

Wally 21:20, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Dude, it was very very funny as a matter of fact. You should have popped in for the meetup. Anyway the woman I was walking with was a reporter for the New York Times and now I'm sure she thinks that I'm much more of a celebrity than I actually am. This was the first time anyone ever randomly recognized me on the street.--Jimbo Wales 08:48, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Actually, there won't be an article about it. Jenny was just there as a friend of mine who happened to be in town.--Jimbo Wales 16:38, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Time to archive?[edit]

Just a thought - I think it might be time to archive this page. It's getting big. Just a thought. The Neokid Talk 18:59, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note from the outgoing AMA Coordinator[edit]

Just want to let you know that I have just resigned as Coordinator of the AMA opening the way for an election. If you want to see my statement check the Coodinator's page: Wikipedia:AMA Coordinator. Alex756 18:58, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment, Wally. Alex756 00:30, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Claude Auchinleck[edit]

I am glad you reverted your claim that his wife ran off with my grandfather, otherwise I would have had to ask your seconds to arrange a meeting for pistols at dawn. Dabbler 23:23, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for voting![edit]

Hello there! I wanted to thank you for taking the time to vote on my arbitration commitee nomination. Although it was not successful, I appreciate the time you spent to read my statement and questions and for then voting, either positively or negativly. Again, thank you! Páll (Die pienk olifant) 22:30, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AMA[edit]

I agree that everyone should have a voice. A vote right now is different (as discussed) and not everyone should be able to run if they just joined. A voice though? That's more than OK. Thanks for the compliment.Gator (talk) 20:26, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me, just be careful that it doesn;t get protected with his version. (he'll revert again, I'm sure)Gator (talk) 21:29, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I consider Hip's section regarding "bad advocacy" a personal attack and plain old mean. I want to see it removed. But if I do it...well you know. Mind helping me out? Thanks.Gator (talk) 21:48, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leo Ryan[edit]

I got interested in Wikipedia because of Leo Ryan. He and my dad went to and graduated from Campion High School.In fact I started the Campion High School article before I signed on Wikipedia.I am the one who did some editing on the Leo Ryan article.The article about Archbishop Raymond Leo Burke also got myself interested in Wikipedia.Thank you-RFD 13:39, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AMA Coordinator Election[edit]

Dear AMA Member,

You are entitled to vote in the AMA Coordinator election, set to begin at midnight on 3 February 2006. Please see the pages on the election and its candidates and the procedure and policy and cast a vote by e-mail!

Wally 11:38, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Voting by e-mail?[edit]

Hello Wally,

Regarding the AMA Coordinator Election, - I'm a bit worried by submission of votes by e-mail, rather than via Wiki, after user login.

Wikipedia accounts can be "anonymous", simply registering a username (In view of the not-infrequent "flame wars" etc, it's not surprising that people don't always wish to divulge anything more than a username). The wikipedians on the electoral roll are listed in a public area, by their wiki username, as is the voting address.

What's to stop ill-intentioned people from voting simply by sending a vote to the appropriate address and signing it with one of the names from the voters list?

Sorry I didn't pick up on this sooner. Wikityke 14:36, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a life or death decision. Both candidates are uncontoversial. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 19:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Results[edit]

Both candidates got exactly the same number of votes. I don't know if you had any kind of plan for this. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 19:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wally, I see you noted my response to the discussion on the AMA talk page about the tie. Perhaps you and Sam (as mediators?) in discussion with Ambi and Keith can come to an agreement about the outcome that will resolve it. If Keith has any objections to perhaps they could be discussed? Certainly if he does not object I think that Ambi they could take the position. It does not suprise me that the AMA could not even have an normal election! Alex756 16:48, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Any definitive news on the results? Wikityke 01:18, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So, was Alex's indication that he would have voted for Ambi used as the deciding factor? I never got the memo and had to infer this from the talk page. (Which talk page exactly, I can hardly remember.) Seems like WT is also in the same boat. Anyway, cheers. - Keith D. Tyler 21:25, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Advocacy[edit]

I'm interested in your advocacy services. I see that you're relatively new to the AMA, but you seem to be thorough and I like your statement. Please advise what would be the best way to go about things. uriah923(talk) 07:22, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're of course free to do that, but I would request you become fully informed on the scope of the problem by reading the full history of uriah923's talk page, the full history of User:Uriah923/ON, and the various pages Uriah spread the conversation out to including two relevant sections on Talk:iTunes. - Taxman Talk 14:33, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps it would be better to discuss this over email? Feel free to contact me at buhansen@gmail.com. uriah923(talk) 15:21, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for members advocate[edit]

Dear Wally, I am looking for an advocate. Are you available? You can read about the dispute on my talk page. Otto 18:14, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfC Woggly / Harassment / Request Unblock[edit]

I am seeking a RfC from User:Woggly but have been told that it has not been filed. Could you kindly assist me in filing this RfC and defending me / being free of her and her friends' open, destructive harassment which now includes my first block! As a professional international journalist of 25 years I have never been censored in any forum (except for Syria and Iran), till now :< Thank you. IsraelBeach 21:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

john Hobhouse, 1st Baron Broughton[edit]

"His barony died with him, as he had no direct heirs, whilst the baronetcy — under an older and more lenient patent — passed to a more distant relative."

I don't quite follow this, didn't the baronetcy decended in the normal fashon from his father first to him then to his nephew Charles Parry Hobhouse which is normal heirs male.Alci12 12:47, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

George Harbottle[edit]

This article is being considered for deletion; I noticed on its talk page that you have made some contributions to it. Perhaps you would like to join the discussion? It's here. Cheers, David Sneek 15:03, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's interesting. The comments were made by someone who was not logged on and who added the signature later [1]; and it's exactly in the edits from that IP-address that the information first appeared which some of those who participate in the AfD discussion find untrustworthy... David Sneek 18:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My guess is that our anonymous friend from the University of Queensland ( [2]) did not choose you for a reason, but just randomly picked a user name; the other Queensland edit that day [3] was signed by User:Tetris - who does not exist. David Sneek 22:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Susan, (Dowager) Countess of Swinton[edit]

Hi, I wondered if you have a reference that shows Lady Swinton using the title of "Dowager". It's quite unusual nowadays! I'm not sure some of those from Wikiproject Peerage will like it appearing in the opening sentence, but the "Titles from birth" section should list the form she actually uses. JRawle (Talk) 17:32, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proper form is that if a peer dies and someone succeeds to the title, the peer's spouse is referred to as the Dowager "Title of X," yes? In any event, as the article and the titling thereof makes clear, she has not used the Swinton title in any form for quite some time, preferring to be referred to be her life barony. I merely made the change I did to indicate her strictly de jure title, since it's clear what she uses in practice.
The widow can be known as "The Dowager Title of X", but may alternatively choose the style "Forename, Title of X", which tends to be more popular now (because of the negative connotations of the word "Dowager", according to the article on Courtesy title). So generally, articles on Wikipedia just start "Name, Countess of X" even for widows (otherwise what happens when a widow herself dies?).
Lady Swinton does use the title of Countess socially (or at least did before her husband's death). You are right that this is a bit of a difficult case – wives of peers holding lower titles of their own have been much discussed in recent months. JRawle (Talk) 19:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's tricky. My initial reaction was to go to remove it. Other PP members may see it differently but using Dowager - even where the subject doesn't use it - is much the same as our use of Baron not Lord in the name. The use of forename+title is afaik a matter of social use, that of dowager+title a matter of 600yrs of common law. The question we need to ask is probably is anyone being confused by not including this form of disambiguation to the entry. I doubt they are. Alci12 11:03, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Honorifics[edit]

See MoS:BIO#Honorific_prefixes for my edit to Cunningham Alci12 11:11, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I need an advocate and help with mediation[edit]

Greetings,

I need an advocate who will walk me through the mediation process.

I am trying to get the following added to the Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Max Tegark is a renown physicist and a PhD profressor of cosmology at MIT. He agrees with my addition.

I am having problem with an editor by the name of Lethe who follows me around Wikipedia reverting all my edits without commentary.

I have tried reasoning with him on discussion pages, but he refuses to read what I write.

Advantages of MWI

If Hugh Everett's theory was just another interpretation of Quantum Mechanics it would have no followers, especially since it proposes the existence of countless other universes which theoretically can never be observed. Because it is not falsifiable it seemingly violates Popper's criteria for a good scientific theory. The reason it has so many adherents is because it offers numerous advantages over the Copenhagen Interpretation, among which are the following:

1. Quantum mechanics becomes a deterministic theory making it more compatible with the theory of relativity and all other physics theory to date which are all deterministic. The Copenhagen Interpretation introduced indeterminacy and randomness into science. Aside from the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics there is no scientific theory that includes indeterminacy or randomness. Einstein particularly objected to this aspect of the Copenhagen Interpretation. In response to it, he said, "God does not play dice with the universe."

2. It eliminates the "measurement problem."

3. It eliminates Von Neumann's "boundary problem": where to draw the line between the micro world where quantum mechanics applies, and the macro world where it does not. Shortly before his death in 1953, Albert Einstein wrote: "Like the moon has a definite position whether or not we look at the moon, the same must also hold for the atomic objects, as there is no sharp distinction possible between these and macroscopic objects."

4. It eliminates the special place for an observer and human consciousness.

5. It restores objective reality of the universe between measurements. Shortly before his death, Albert Einstein also wrote: "Observation cannot CREATE an element of reality like a position, there must be something contained in the complete description of physical reality which corresponds to the possibility of observing a position, already before the observation has been actually made."

6. The wave-particle duality paradox evaporates. It simply and naturally explains the double-slit experiment. Richard Feynman said, "[the double-slit experiment] has in it the heart of quantum mechanics. In reality it contains the only mystery." David Deutcsh wrote: ". . . the argument for the many worlds was won with the double-slit experiment."

7. Schrodinger's Cat paradox evaporates.

It seems Einstein's main objections with quantum mechanics had more to do with the Copenhagen Interpretation, than with quantum mechanics itself. While MWI does not quite generate the kinds of worlds necessary to justify the anthropic principle, it is a step on the way to Stephen Hawking's No Boundary Proposal and Max Tegmark's All Universe Hypothesis which do justify the anthropic principle.

Michael D. Wolok 18:22, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism of your talk page[edit]

Please see the 'Bobby Sands' section on Kittybrewster's talk page. I'm not quite sure what the difficulty is and which of us, me or Kittybrewster, you are blaming. --Major Bonkers 16:13, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AMA Roll Call[edit]

There is currently an AMA Roll Call going on. Please visit the page and sign next to your name to indicate whether or not you're still active. :-) אמר Steve Caruso (desk/poll) 18:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Duke's Men change[edit]

Re the Duke's Men change: do you think not? Really? Cause they sang there. Stirlazy 22:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See: Talk:Italian general election, 1948[edit]

You added:

"Perhaps because of this campaign, the Christian Democrats won the 1948 election with 48 percent of the vote, while the FDP only received 31 percent. The FDP would not win a general election for the next 40 years."[4]

As a comprimise I made with someone who probably does not share your POV, this section will be deleted in a week because it lacks sources. Travb (talk) 22:40, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for response on my talk page. Hey hey, you have defcon icon. Travb (talk) 00:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your AMA statement was deleted[edit]

Your AMA statement was deleted apparently carelessly from the AMA statements page (see this edit)if your statement needs to be restored, the text is at User:Pedant/AMA error Pedant 02:04, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Advocacy request[edit]

Heyo, Steve Caruso here. There is a Request for assistance by bongo1234 (talk) on Cake_Media. Would you be willing to take their case? If you will, please leave a note and sign under the entry on WP:AMARQ and change "(pending)" in the heading to "(open)." When you're finished with the case, set it to "(closed)". If you're not able to take the case, please leave me a message on my talk page so I can continue searching for a willing Advocate. Many thanks! אמר Steve Caruso (desk/AMA) 16:26, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Use of own pictures on Wikipedia[edit]

Hi Wally. Selected you from the list.

Once again my apologies. This has belatedly been put at the head of this request. I guess I missed that you should have been asked whether you are willing to get involved with this? Best wishes, Des Kilfeather Desk1 21:59, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am very much new with Wikipedia, and enthusiastic about its mission. But have had a discouraging start. However not wanting to wimp out of Wikipedia I need to check some facts to be sure of my ground. 2 x users have been giving a tough and less than constructive time, which "hopefully I do not qualify for". Astrotrain and Berks105. Sorry I have not yet mastered the links, just picking all these complexities up as I go along.

My personal mission as a professional photographer is to help raise awareness of the UK maritime community, its global contribution and value. As part of this mission I spent a year producing pictures and publishing them in my book Trafalgar 200 Through the Lens Queen Elizabeth II 80th Birthday Edition. The book has been accepted by UK Maritime Institutions including the Royal Navy's newspaper and its museum as a worth while contribution. I have been independently nominated for the Desmond Wettern Media award for this work. I am trying to play this down a bit as I do not want to stick my chin out too much with aggessive users.

My intention is to populate relevant articles in Wikipedia with appropriate pictures from my book and provide short background texts. These pictures are generally unique and not available elsewhere. In my first attempt at this I admit I made a mistake and made too much play on my own ownership of the pictures and overtly added links. Of course as is normal practice I added copyright information and links on the image page, plus an ISBN for source data. Additionally I noted the book and ISBN on the further reading or reference part of articles where one existed already. Astrotrain and Berks105 between them immediately followed every single article I had worked on and fully deleted them calling them spam. Its not as if they just deleted the links they cut the whole lot. Astrotrain even issued a spam warning when I reverted some work back.

I have tried negotiating with both parties without success and have come up with compromise suggestions which have been turned down flat. Astrotrain has also made further deletions stating full entitlement to delete anything, e.g. USS Saipan (LHA-2). Interestingly some other users have been very kindly following me around fixing my links and tidying up my images and some remain, so not everyone is against the idea.

Anyway where I am totally unsure of myself is: can Astrotrain and Berks105 be right? Wikipedia is not interested in publishing users own images as a matter of policy? Or users are breaking all the guidelines by putting source reference book details and photographer web links in the image page? I notice lots of images have links to the photographer and background information to the images so this Astrotrain Berks105 rule must only be applying to people presenting their own work.

The following is an example Trafalgar 200 from this article the exchange of opinions and attempted negotiation can be follow on each of our talk pages. Once again sorry about the way the information is spread about, afraid I got confused by all the aggression. Can Astrotrain just totally delete any work as an established editor, as claimed? I do not have any reason to want a problem with Astrotrain or Berks105, they put in a lot of work to Wikipedia.

Well, thank you for reading this. I am accutely aware that Wikipedia is being supported by some very eminent academics and I certainly do not fall into this category, but nevertheless am confident my contributions are relevant and of interest to those following the subject.

Best wishes DP Kilfeather Desk1 16:06, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again Wally. Astrotrain has now tagged all my images as having licence problems. I have emailed Wikipedia asking advice on which licence I need to use. Interestingly the licence help section makes it clear that Wikipedia is grateful to photographers for supply work free of charge. Des Desk1 17:00, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply] 

   Hi Wally, not sure if you are picking things up on my talk page, so talking with you here.

Thanks for your rapid response. Proper thanks given on my talk page where you left feedback.

The User Astrotrain is still vandalising my work. To try and shake him off my tail I have given him notice that he is violating Trade Marks, the word Astrotrain is a Trade Mark of Katara in Japan, but that user still persists in attacking my work using that illegal user name.

I think agreement has been reached with other users by removing all personal links from my image pages pending a decision from Wikipedia image licencing specialists and you as a mediator even though I have not mentioned your user name. One user ALR has been very good in tidying up the presentation of one of my images, after initally attacking me.

But Astrotrain is just deleting my work anyway. I do not know how to proceed with recommending the blocking of Astrotrain but that user is violating international law on the use of Trade Marks and possibly exposing Wikipedia to legal action from Katara's lawers. Astrotrain needs to be blocked for legal reasons, but it would probably also be useful for that user to go through the process of starting again. That user has a documented history of destroying other peoples work and holding back the development of Wikipedia on several articles there is a need for that user to re-evaluate its contribution to Wikipedia and personal agenda. I wish Astrotrain well with a new user name.

Anyway. It occurs to me that there must be thousands of photographers in the world, many-many much more competent than me, who would be willing to release their prized pictures to Wikipedia for free Wikipedia use only. Much of the world is lacking in education and information. The world's poorest only hope in the short term is "technology leap" e.g. skipping the benefit of a free national press and going straight to the Internet with Wikipedia being a prime source of unbiased information. But not making pictures and information available from the professionals ensures that third world countries will only get second rate information, this will not help them. And on the contrary could be counterproductive to their development by holding back information. Photographers often appear an arrogant breed, but deep down they are artists; caring people. Perhaps Wikipedia should be calling on photographers around the world to make their contribution to the eradication of starvation and improved standards of living through education and Wikipedia. Hopefully this is not just soapbox but a constructive suggestion that can be the seed of something useful. Des Desk1 21:29, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Request for Advise[edit]

HEy Wally, if you can, would you e-mail me at mystar@chartermi.net I am in need of some advise. As I am being Wikistalked, my contribs are being read/stalked. I do not wish to discuss my opinion on here yet.

Thanx

mystar aka Ron

Regarding Association of Members' Advocates[edit]

Hi, you are receiving this message because you have listed yourself as an active member of WP:AMA. If you aren't currently accepting inquiries for AMA, or if you have resigned, please de-list yourself from Wikipedia:AMA Members. If you are still active, please consider tending to any new requests that may appear on Category:AMA Requests for Assistance. We're going to put AMA on wheels. :) Sorry for the template spamming - we're just trying to update our records, after we had a huge backlog earlier in the week (if you've been taking cases, then sorry, and please ignore this :)). Again, sorry, and thanks! Martinp23 21:10, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help this newbie[edit]

I saw your notes at AMA and decided to post this with you (even though your are busy). If you are not an aspirant and if you can take on an arbcom member, please try to help this newbie. She is really in need of help and has been treated unfairly, possibly in violation some privacy/checkuser policies. Dakshayani 08:14, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mordechai Vanunu FAR[edit]

Mordechai Vanunu has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. LuciferMorgan 18:48, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Siege[edit]

Many thanks for your kind note. That article was a turning point for me: after working on it, I decided to concentrate on individual articles rather than scattering handfuls of gradualism here and there. I was only able to reference about 75% of the material that remains (I removed the obviously debatable stuff), and so there is still work to be done by someone who can locate further sources. All the best. qp10qp 17:16, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Targets in next UK election[edit]

Hey Wally. I don't know if you've caught the answer to your Targets question, but in a nutshell, due to boundary changes, some constituencies have been calculated as being "won" at the last election by parties other than those who actually did. Thus Solihull, for example, will be a LibDem "gain" if they "hold" next time.

doktorb wordsdeeds 17:50, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Subpages[edit]

Please note that to create subpages, so should use a forward slash "/", rather than a backward slash "\". I've fixed this with your user talk archives and advocacy pages (hope you don't mind): recently a lot of these pages have been deleted. Regards, --RFBailey (talk) 19:14, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hattie Harperson[edit]

Hello there! Pardon me if this isn't the right place to be doing this, but I am very new to this!

I made my first ever contribution to Wikipedia recently, adding a short edit to the article on Harriet Harman, namely "Has acquired the nickname of Hattie Harperson, due to her politically-correct stance". I checked the page today and found this had been removed, by you, if I understand the page edit history correctly. Apologies if I am meant to be referring to this on the page, but I couldn't quite work out how!

I wondered why you had removed this edit? I can point you to a considerable number of references that refer to HH as Hattie Harperson, and it seems an appropriate addition to me. The nickname has been used for several months at least. Boris Johnson refers to HH by this name at:

http://www.boris-johnson.com/2008/07/29/between-the-thought-and-the-action/

Don't know who coined it, but I could have a looky!

Best wishes from Cambro-Norman. Cambro-norman (talk) 13:09, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Republican Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2004[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Republican Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2004, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

It should be merged into the main article of 2004 Presidential Election because the Republican primaries had no significance considering Bush really won unopposed.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Jerzeykydd (talk) 01:40, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Football Manager 2012[edit]

The update section lists stuff verbatim (or near-bverbatim) from the site. Stuff like thats usually flaggedLihaas (talk) 05:02, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wally&oldid=1143859310"