User talk:Nightstallion/ε

WP:RM re Cavalier

Hello Nightstallion,

I noticed that relating to the move of Cavalier to Cavaliers (royalists) that it was reverted back to Cavalier per WP:RM, according to your edit summary. I've visited that page and am unable to find reference to the discussion. I noticed the primary objection, over 400 pages linking to Cavaliers, which I've mostly pointed to the Cavalier specific page for royalists. However if there is still sufficient reason to leave it as Cavalier please advise. I noticed three supports and two objections (mine admittedly was a day or two late) so unsure if that established consensus. It protocol is to petition a page move also please advise and I'll gladly do this. Thanks for your assistance. NetK 02:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Please move the page "Cavaliers (royalists)" back to "Cavalier" ASAP otherwise it makes a mockery of WP:RM.

It was four opinions in favour not three, User:Netkinetic forgot to count my opinion as proposer as in favour. Also I informed him/her of the WP:RM on the day that I proposed the move [1] his/her reply on my talk page [2]. See the requested move for details but the name "Cavaliers (royalists)" was a new page name created by Netkinetic in the 48 hours before I put in the request, The links were changed from Cavalier and Cavaliers in the main using a bot while the WP:RM was ongoing [3] When I have time I will move them all over to Cavalier but for the time being the redirect was working fine! --Philip Baird Shearer 08:55, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Please note: One of the "support" votes, from Laserbeamcrossfire, read as follows: "That's a good idea to move it. It's very silly for cavalier to redirect to one particulary form of it." His comment can be interpreted to address the perspective I myself share that view as indeed, it IS silly for cavalier to redirect to ONE particular form (royalists). It *should* redirect to a disambiguation page, IMHO. Perhaps we can obtain clarification from him/her relating to his actual viewpoint on this matter. The criteria for opposition towards a page move, relating to 400 odd links, has been addressed already per above. Although I concede that this is allegedly the first and most prominent usage of the term, I fail to see why one derivation of cavalier should be singled out above the other various derivations. NetK 19:47, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

There was clear consensus for Cavalier to be the royalist-related article; I've re-done the move, please don't revert it again. —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 09:51, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Re the whole de-bureaucrating thing

Hi, I never came to thank you for the message you left for me a month ago when I stepped down from being a bureaucrat. Thank you for the things you said, it's good to know there are still plenty of good people about in this project. I do not see myself standing for bureaucrat again anytime soon though who knows what the future may bring! Thank you once again. -- Francs2000 09:47, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Gladly! —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 09:51, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

This is Moe

Hello Nightstallion, just thought I would let you know that I was leaving Wikipedia, but before I left, I finally got a picture of thyself onto Wikipedia. (I know great timing for me to post a picture of myself, right?) This is my final gift to my friends. Later! PS. Try not to laugh to hard at my ugly mug ok? Moe ε 16:10, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

I certainly won't laugh, and am sorry to see you go (again); maybe we should try to work out together what exactly it is that keeps you leavning so often...? —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 09:51, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Random acts of kindness

Hello Nightstallion. As per Wikipedia:Random Acts of Kindness, I will give 1 hour nonstop towards any wiki-related task. I will cease after an hour, no matter how complete the task is. Anything that I can do for one hour? I'm asking you because you are the most recent admin to delete a page, so I assume you're online. Reply here if you wish. --Dangherous 10:36, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know, WP:DPL can always use help... Thanks! =] —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 10:38, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you, dear Nightstallion!

Your concern in my absence and your get-well wishes really mean a lot to me. Sometimes, well - life can be tough on us, but as long as good friends like you are there, I'll always have a reason to cheer up. Thank you, my sweet, dear NS!!

Phædriel ♥ ^{tell me} - 17:39, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Why is it that every time I read your words, you make me giggle as if I was 12 years old, NS? :) Phædriel ♥ ^{tell me} - 17:48, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure. Maybe it's my natural charm? =] —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 17:51, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely! Now I realize why I've missed you so much ;) Phædriel ♥ ^{tell me} - 18:04, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Clearly you must have missed me so much you couldn't help it – you had to return. (Yay!) ;) —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 18:07, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppets

Hi Nightstallion;

Do you do sockpuppet checks? There is a hoax article up for deletion and there are two posters whose only edits related to the hoax in question. The users are Charly and FERS. Although there is a small chance they may indeed be two seperate people, would it be possible to check? The pages in question are Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Concepción Heredia-Rosas, Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Concepción Heredia-Rosas, Concepción Heredia-Rosas, Gueroust Palace and Talk:Gueroust Palace. Thanks. Charles 18:57, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid CheckUser rights are way beyond my privileges. ;) You'll have to ask at WP:RCU for that. Good luck! —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 19:16, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 1st.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 18	1 May 2006	About the Signpost

Campaign manager resigns over Wikipedia edit	Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages
Assorted honors for Jimmy Wales	News and Notes: 4 million articles, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report On Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Thanks for the WP:RM but...

Thanks for moving The West Wing presidential election, 2006 to its new home. For future reference, be sure to follow through on the tidying up guidelines as well. In particular, there were a number of Wikipedia:Double redirects to deal with after the move, and as the page states, "it is the responsibility of the admin doing the move to fix these"... I just finished that job, however, so no further action on the 2006 page is required.

FYI, I ran out of time before tackling the double redirects for the much less-referenced The West Wing presidential election, 2002. 66.167.139.88 10:38, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 10:44, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

California Unit Moves

Can you point out where you got consensus for your page name changes for the PA 71st? --evrik 13:43, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

There was no opposition voiced, and standardisation seemed in order. —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 15:53, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

WATL

You told me to contact you at the Talk:WATL (TV) page if I still wanted someone to to move this.....what I did is created WATL (disambiguation) to appease the people who wanted the other meaning of "WATL" to be listed as a disambig. Could you move "WATL (TV)" to "WATL" now? CFIF (talk to me) 15:01, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Looks like there's nothing on Wisconsin Academy of Trial Lawyers. So can you move it to WATL please? Thanks. --CFIF (talk to me) 19:31, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Done. —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 05:55, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Requested Move

Hello, Nightstallion. You recently post on the Extreme Championship Wrestling that the page was not moved as there was no consensus, however, the requested move section was added only a few days ago, why not provide a little bit of time for individuals to support or oppose. Thank you. Kyros 19:33, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

For two reasons:

• The entry on WP:RM was due to be processed today, which is what I did.
• Had the outcome been in favour, I would have had no choice but to follow official policies over editor consensus in this matter; there's no good reason to displace a good TLA dab page with something which is also commonly known by its full name. —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 19:37, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

RE: Azarbaijan (Iran), et al.

Hi there! I hope you're well. As affirmed by your recent move, there was a consensus to move the article Iranian Azerbaijan initially – to Azarbaijan (Iran) – for various reasons; however, there apparently is not a consensus for another move to Azerbaijan (Iran). Moreover, I and at least one other have taken issue with both the compiled tally (which in prior form split the pro -a- vote) or varied interpretations of the vote and, particularly, the user who compiled the later tally (who has (re-)interpreted votes any which way to promulgate his viewpoint). Of course, the converse may also be true. Anyhow, I believe the current rendition has been reaffirmed through the lack of consensus for the 2nd move; please advise.

On other matters: I'll let you know when I strike the 'hydrography' wikiproject. Relatedly, I've recently joined the WikiProject 1.0 endeavour, specifically geography, which aims to produce a static version of Wp. Would you like to help (me)? :) In any event, let me know if you've any questions. Thanks again! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 16:52, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi! I think it's okay as it stands – there's no consensus on whether to write it with a or with e, so we'll leave it where it's currently at.

Regarding WP1.0, I'm afraid I'm unlikely to contribute, first and foremost due to the fact that my Wikipedia time is stretched thinly as it is; additionally, I don't really believe in static content as a solution, but rather an additional problem for Wikipedia, but it appears I'm in the minority with that opinion.

Looking forward to the Hydrography/Oceanology WikiProject! Yours, —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 05:41, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for the feedback. Agreed: no matter which way you skin the cat, though, there was apparently a consensus for the first move proposed. :) I feel, though, that the Az title situation might escalate as a NPOV issue ... hence clarifying results and positioning before that time, if at all.

As well, thanks; I understand your constraints and commitments. No problem. I don't think Wp 1.0 is a 'solution' to anything per se: I support having a regular static version of Wp for future reference and posterity (e.g., in book form), which Wp 1.0 is a valiant attempt at; this would complement, not replace, the familiar Wp. It may also help to garner funds for the (non-profit) parent foundation. I've been tasked with assisting with geography aspects and, as well, will enhance the topic tree proposed. Fun! In any event, I'll keep you posted.

Don't worry, I'll keep you apprised about the hydro/geo project. Somewhat relatedly: in the interim, are you able to release the lock on Republic of Macedonia? There is clearly support for one rendition in the lead – Option #2 (the version more or less in the locked version) – and I've yet to run the vote result by a bureaucrat, but I don't foresee a problem and this will at least enable us to continue editing the article ... hopefully in other productive ways. I'm also hopeful that the respective editors, given the vote, will play nice. Thoughts? Thanks again! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 13:41, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Regarding WP1.0, I've got to clarify my stance – I think stable versions are a bad idea for the project, the goal of having good articles about basic topics is a good idea, of course. Looking forward to Hydrography, and I've changed the protection status of North Macedonia to semi-protection. Hope that's alright. Take care, —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 15:21, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

No problem; remember: articles are only static per se until a subsequent release. And yes: thanks for the semi-protect. As for extraneous commentary regarding this talk sxn header, well no comment. Thanks! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 00:22, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I was hoping to attract outside opinion, as mine was; but I think your previous close was over-hasty. There were three choices then:

1. The original placement: Iranian Azerbaijan
2. The present placement; Azarbaijan (Iran)
3. The preference of several voters: Azerbaijan (Iran)

I think the third choice has attracted the most support of the three; the arguments for the second choice are:

• Azarbaijan is equally acceptable as an English name, which is unsubstantiated (and, I think, false).
• Azarbaijan is the Persian name, which should be irrelevant. Septentrionalis 20:15, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

List of legislatures by country

I am eager to start editing the list of legislatures by country article, but some of my proposed edits involve “wiki programming” that I do not know how to do. One of my propositions is organizing the page like this:

Country	Overall name of legislature
	Lower house	Upper house

The problem is that I don’t know how (or if it is even possible) to organize an entire wikitable like this. The above is an example not in the format that the entire table would be in. Since I saw your cool userbox page I thought I should ask you about template editing. So please let me know if you can show me a way in which this can be done, that is if you approve of my ideas. Once I get this out of the way I plan to add flags too. Thanks for all the help. – Zntrip 00:13, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Certainly that's possible, what's the problem? See:

Country	Overall name of legislature
	Lower house	Upper house
Austria	Federal Assembly of Austria
	National Council of Austria	Federal Council of Austria

... and so on... D'accord? A minor change: "colspan=2" instead of "colspan=3", you don't need a third column. ;) —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 04:23, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

¡Thank you very much! – Zntrip 05:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Glad to have been of help! Have fun with the article, can't wait to see how it turns out. ;) —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 05:38, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Uh, sorry, but I have another problem. How do I fix this?

Country	Overall name of legislature
	Lower house	Upper house
Afghanistan	National Assembly
	Wolesi Jirga	Meshrano Jirga
Albania	Assembly of Albania
	Algeria	Parliament
National People's Assembly		Council of the Nation

Don't wan't to bother you too much. ^_^ – Zntrip 00:42, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Like this:

Country	Overall name of legislature
	Lower house	Upper house
Afghanistan	National Assembly
	Wolesi Jirga	Meshrano Jirga
Albania	Assembly of Albania
Algeria	Parliament
	National People's Assembly	Council of the Nation

And you're not bothering me at all, nice to see someone do something useful with that page. ;) Take care! —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 05:51, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks again :) – Zntrip 22:22, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I have another question, but this time it is not about templates. For the list, I’m going to add territories with any autonomy. I thought I would ask you about French territories, because you have that page about dependencies. I my question is: “Which French overseas territories have full or partial autonomy?” Thanks again for all the help. – Zntrip 02:59, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

More or less all of them except for the integrated overseas regions (Guadeloupe, Martinique, Réunion, French Guyana). —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 05:54, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks again. – Zntrip 22:30, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

daredevil move close

I'm looking at Talk:Daredevil (Marvel Comics)#Requested move and I'm not understanding your close. Your comments don't seem to support the decision in your close to move Daredevil (Marvel Comics) → Daredevil (comics), and I can't see a consensus to move either. It'd also be somewhat counter to WP:NCCom, which seems to direct that publisher names should be used in disambig phrases when dual characters of the same name have been published. I'm not saying we have to blindly follow the conventions, but I'd prefer a stronger consensus to exist before a decision not to follow them is made. Steve block Talk 18:58, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, that was a typo. I meant "don't move"; technically, it was a "no consensus", but policies and dab guidelines clearly state that the current situation should remain. Sorry for the confusion. —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 21:34, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I thought that's what you meant, thanks for clarifying. Steve block Talk 21:38, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Speedy rename request

Hi Nightstallion,
I goofed while trying to rename Gabriel Montgomery; would it be too cheeky to ask you to speedy my request to move Gabriel , comte de Montgomery to Gabriel, comte de Montgomery?  Hoping not, David Kernow 05:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Done. =] —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 05:51, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!  David 12:45, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Col. Hauler/StarCraft II - Don't you see, Blizzard need it?

Having a Wikipedia article is important, Wikipedia tends to come up first or near-first on Google and other search engines - Having all the information listed in one place is definitely a good thing, and makes very public Blizzard's various promises, encouraging them to make good on them. It also gets more publicity, which again means more and more likely they'll get around to making the game.

I encourage you to change your vote at Wikipedia:Deletion_review#StarCraft_II_.28Talk:StarCraft_II.29 (I mean, look at the external links too...) ... but meh. --Col. Hauler 12:43, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I sympathise with your reasoning, but that doesn't change anything about the fact that we still have to follow Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and according to those, this is barely verifiable, and most certainly not notable. You might be able to get a section in StarCraft to stay, but its own article is out of the question until it's announced, I'm afraid... Good luck, though. Take care, —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 12:46, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for moving Newark Castle, Port Glasgow

Thanks very much for carrying out the move of Newark Castle, Port Glasgow back to its original title in accordance with the result of the debate. Nicely done! ..dave souza, talk 13:22, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Gladly. —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 13:24, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Question, ATLAS

Shouldn't ATLAS be at ATLAS (disambiguation), like Atlas/Atlas (disambiguation) is? I can't move stuff since this account is too new (my last one was banned for being too inappropriate. Apparently it's illegal to say that lesbians are awesome here) --Col. Hauler 13:32, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

No, it shouldn't; Atlas is at Atlas because it's the primary topic. Since there's no primary topic for ATLAS, the disambiguation page is at ATLAS, while Atlas (disambiguation) has the (dab) clarifier added because the primary topic gets the parentheses-less title. Got it? ;) —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 13:36, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

RE: Rf/Admin

Hi there! Don't worry about it; I'll keep the hounds at bay. ;) As with others, I've replied to the two recent inquiring minds. When I decide to pursue this – and likely I won't be ready for this in June, if at all – you'll be the first to know. Thanks again for your continued confidence in me! :) E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 00:36, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey, if there'd only be a single user not yet an admin whom I'd be allowed to nominate to become, it'd be you. =] Take care, —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 00:39, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Requesting an explanation

Hello! I am speaking about article's Ludmilla Turischeva proposed move. Could you,please, provide more explanations of no consensus decision? Because on the talk page 2 votes was in favor of the move (Cmapm, Mademoiselle Sabina) and one vote was initially against, but that user did not respond to our arguments, and therefore it may be considered "undefined". And on the page Wikipedia:Requested moves is stated, that more than 60% in favor is generally enough. Cmapm 13:45, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

The quorum was very small, the explanations hazy, the Google Search inconclusive... Feel free to file an WP:RfC and see if more agree with your reasoning, but as it stands, it's not really clear enough for me. —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 13:47, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, as you can see it was underlined by me on that page, that Google searches are not reliable. But my arguments were based on reliable sources, I cited them in the paragraph "my points with references...". Do you call them hazy? For "Larisa Latynina" move to "Larissa Latynina" only I voted, and the quorum was not considered small... I'll not file the RfC, but I thought, that person's Pan_Gerwazy "against" arguments were hazy - no sources cited at all, just relied on (strange!) Google search. Cmapm 14:00, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Mh. Fair enough. —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 14:04, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for reconsidering your decision and fast responses. Cmapm 14:12, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Ronaldo move

Hi Nightstallion,

I think there is something still wrong..Talk:Ronaldo (disambiguation) redirects to Talk:Ronaldo Luís Nazário de Lima. Can you please have a look? Thanks. -Aabha (talk) 13:50, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Fixed. —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 13:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

User talk pages

Hi Nightstallion;

Do you delete user talk pages? I've been looking through WP policies on user pages and have found no provisions for them. It is a matter for me of removing personal information. I want to leave WP but not have personal vestiges left behind. Charles 17:57, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #3

Administrator Coaching The Administrator Coaching program is a program aimed at preparing Wikipedians for Adminship or helping them understand the intricacies of Wikipedia better. Recently, changes have been made to the requirements of coachees. Please review them before requesting this service. This would be something like the Welcoming Committee, but for people who have figured out the basics of editing articles; they're not newcomers any more, but they might want some help in learning new roles. Some might like suggestions about how to learn vandal patrol, or mentoring on taking an article to featured status, or guidance with a proposal they plan to make at the Village Pump, for example. In this way, Esperanza would help keep hope alive for Wikipedia because we would always be grooming the next generation of admins. Stressbusters The Stressbusters are a subset of Esperanza aiming to investigate the causes of stress. New eyes on the situation are always welcome! Note from the editor As always, MiszaBot handled this delivery. Thank you! Also, congratulations go to Pschemp, Titoxd and Freakofnurture for being elected in the last elections! An Esperanzial May to all of the readership!

The last AC meeting (full log) Posting logs of the Esperanza IRC channel are explicitly banned anywhere. Violation of this rule results in deletion and a ban from the channel. A disclaimer is going to be added to the Esperanza main page. We are humans and, as such, are imperfect. Various revisions have been made to the Code of Conduct. Please see them, as the proposal is ready to be ratified by the community and enacted. All members will members to have to re-confirm their membership after accepting the Code of Conduct. Referendums are to be held on whether terms of AC members should be lengthened and whether we should abolish votes full stop. Admin Coaching reform is agreed upon. Signed... Celestianpower, JoanneB, Titoxd, Pschemp and Freakofnurture 20:29, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Still the same old problem without a solution

Hi again.

On the page Talk:Pope_Stephen_III you wrote :

I don't think this is a case for a WP:RM, but rather something you should work out consensually. Come back to me or any other admin (unless one of you is one) if you need help after having found a solution. Cheers! —Nightstallion (?) 09:33, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

And nothing have changed since. So I "come back to you", even if I have no new solution, since my old one is the best one. I'll ask again for the renaming of the page and the other pope Stephen pages. Do you think there is somewhere a chance the article currently known as Pope Stephen X has a chance to be one fine day renamed into Pope Stephen IX, as everybody agrees it was the name he used during his reign, the name written on his tomb, the name the Church calls him and the name every encyclopedia use to call him since forty years? I mean — do we really need a consensual decision on such a subject? No-one on Wikipedia contests the fact he's called Stephen IX, but still there is an opposition to rename the article...

Švitrigaila 22:12, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

As far as I've seen, it seems rather likely your latest move request will go through; then we'll have solved the problem. ;) —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 11:22, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I think I have found the solution : I saw there was another debate about another article with several possible names : Talk:Władysław II Jagiełło. This debate has certain similarities with the Popes Stephen's case. So I sent to everyone who voted against Władysław II Jagiełło's move the same message asking them to express an opinion about Popes Stephen's move (you can see my request here, for exemple). The answers are now on Talk:Pope Stephen X. Because of the process I use, most of the voters are Polish, but I don't think it's a problem — afeter all, Jerzy is a Polish name too! >op

If finally you decide the move can take place, I think it's better to move at first only Pope Stephen III into Pope Stephen II and warn me. I'll check one by one all the links pointing to this article and correct those which must be corrected and let the others. And then you can move Pope Stephen IV into Pope Stephen III, and so on...

Don't forget to vote yourself. I think an administrator can vote if (s)he has something to say. Thank you for all.

Švitrigaila 17:49, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Aye, that will turn out fine. I'll try to remember only to move them on a one-by-one basis. ;) Take care, —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 17:51, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Pope moves

I've moved S3 to S2 now. Please tell me as soon as you've sorted out the links, so that I can move S4 to S3 next. Cheers, —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 08:48, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much! :o)))) I've sorted all the links out. I've left only 8 links to Pope Stephen III because they point effectively to this pope. I've left all the links from talk pages and user pages, for historical reasons. I've even sorted interwikis. The only problem will be with this template. I don't know how to modify it and I think it's better to wait all the other moves have been made. I'm ready for the next step: S4 ---> S3 Švitrigaila 11:25, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I've moved S4 to S3 now. —Nightstallion (?) 11:41, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Excuse me if I'm slow, but I am working. I'm ready for the next step: S5 ---> S4. Švitrigaila 12:49, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

No problem at all, take your time. S5 to S4 has been done. :) —Nightstallion (?) 12:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Done. ... It's a bit tiring ... What kind of weather do you have in Austria? ... Oh, back to work again, no time to breath? ... Then, next step: S6 --> S5. Švitrigaila 13:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I'd expect it to be tiring, yeah... Thanks for doing it, BTW. =] The weather is pretty spring-like in Austria currently, maybe a bit warmer than I'd prefer (around 24°C, I guess; I'd prefer 15°C–18°C =]). And in France? S6 to S5 has been done. —Nightstallion (?) 14:01, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Das war ein Stückarbeit. Ich weiß nicht sicherlich, was es meint, aber es scheint gut. ... Hier im Zentrum des Paris ist das Wetter heiß. Vielleicht zu heiß, aber es gibt hier ein Proverb: Mann soll wissen, was er will. ... Next step, please: S7 ---> S6 (a big one, I'm afraid). Švitrigaila 14:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure I've understood all of that (I've tried translating it into English literally and then translating it into proper German =]), but... erm... Yes. Anyway. S7 is now S6. We're close to the end... ;) —Nightstallion (?) 15:44, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

My German is very poor. But my Austrian is worse. I'm ready for the next move : S8 ---> S7. I hope we'll have finished before Stephen X's election. Švitrigaila 22:37, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I hope so, too; S8 to S7 has been done. =] —Nightstallion (?) 13:04, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Done. Ещё раз! S9 ---> S8. Švitrigaila 14:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

S9 to S8 has been done, and we're almost done, too. ;) —Nightstallion (?) 17:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

It's done! The last one now! S10 ---> S9. And you will offer the Champagne! :o) Švitrigaila 19:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Finally! ::opens the champagne, and orange juice for himself:: =] —Nightstallion (?) 20:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

F I N I S H E D ! ! ! Finally, I'll take an orange juice too. Champagne is too hard for me. Just one orange juice, with two doses of vodka in it. It's really finished... until we learn the next pope finally decides to be Stephen XI. I've finished with this mill. I must find another crusade. I'll ask to change entirely the naming conventions. I want pope Benedict XVI to be renamed only Benedict XVI because there is no ambiguity... Are you ready to support me? :o)) Švitrigaila 21:20, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

As I've said before, I don't vote in WP:RM, since I'm almost always the closing admin. ;) But I agree in principle, yes. =] —Nightstallion (?) 05:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

BAT

First, Congratulations about the source links that you added to the "EU members list" page - about would-be and would-be-not candidates!

And about the British Antarctic Territory:

• Yes, I don't argue that this claim is suspended (by the Antarctic Treaty System),
• but on the BAT page itself it is written that at least some countries recognize the claim (these of the claimants that don't have overlapping with BAT - Norway, France, Australia, New Zealand.
• Also the French South and Antarctic Territories are listed as "excluded" on the EU members list. Even without the "antarctic" part of the name the territory is listed...
• The BAT is EXPLICITELY listed here: [4] as OCT. Thus it is "excluded" from the EU (I don't know if there is anywhere a better list... most treatries state wich territories are INCLUDED, so to me the most logical thing is that what is NOT INCLUDED is EXCLUDED).

Alinor 17:02, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the congratulations. I try to do my work thoroughly, when I actually have time to work on featured candidates. ;)

I can see your points for inclusion of the Antarctic territories, but I'd really prefer not to include them; for one, they are officially covered by the iso code ATA, and not in "French Southern Territories" or the British Antarctic Territory, which doesn't even exist as far as ISO is concerned; therefore, it'd be rather important for me not to include territory which is officially considered to be international and not under the sovereignty of any EU member state as far as the UN and ISO are concerned. Will that be okay for you? —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 17:27, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

ISO is good, but I don't think that we should totaly rely only on its classification in this case. On the "include/exclude list" there are other entries without ISO-code (Akrotiri and Dhekelia). And consider that BAT has OCT status... IMHO the EU members list should draw more from the EU documents than from the UN/ISO documents, don't you think so? Alinor 18:34, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Mh. I'd still say there's a difference between A&D and the BAT, since the latter is not recognised to exist by the majority of nations under the Antarctic Treaty... Mh. ::scratches head:: Let me think about it a bit, okay? Thanks! —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 05:56, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, they are different. But never mind A&D, let's stay focused on BAT ;). Maybe we should check in the UK Act of Accession (and subsequent changes, protocols, annexes, etc. during the years) - to see how this inclusion/exclusion is structured - if BAT is mentioned (eg. listing excluded territories) or not (eg. listing included territories). The OCT thing is related to this - we should check for the exact phrase where BAT is given OCT status... Alinor 20:44, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

And, while we are at it - I think that your citations on the EU members list page would fit very nicely in the Enlargement of the European Union. Alinor 21:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

We probably should check that, yes. Would you be so kind as to link to what you find? I'm a little hard-pressed for time currently, I'm afraid... —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 05:50, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, I will try. Also I was going to check for the status of the UN Buffer Zone on Cyprus too (there are some explicit mentioning about "Green Line EC regulation" and similar things, so that we may fill the blanks in the table of the "Special member state territories..." article) Alinor 07:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that would be a good idea; as far as I know, the Turkish Cypriot territories and the Buffer Zone are explicitly mentioned as places where EU law is not yet applied, but I'm sure you'll find something a bit more definitive. ;) —Nightstallion (?) 13:04, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Here [5] there is the "updated" text of the "Treaty establishing the European Community (consolidated text)" - from the Official Journal C 325 of 24 December 2002. In Article 299 are listed the "included" parts and some of the excluded (SBA, Faroe) and that OCTs (excluded) are listed in Annex II. The annex is here [6]. It explicitly lists BAT and FSAT as "Southern and Antarctic", so it looks that in the EU Law the UK and France sectors are clearly recognised... About Green Line regulation I have not looked yet - it is in another documents. Alinor 18:56, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I expected that. However, international bodies don't recognise these claims, and per NPOV, we shouldn't present them as inquestionably valid, either, should we? —Nightstallion (?) 20:23, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, I don't argue that EU semi-recognition ammounts to "international recognition". But I think that the fact that these territories are listed in the EU treaties shows, that the "EU Law" acknowledges AT LEAST the claims of France/UK; their suspension (under ATS) is obviously also recognised (as both France and UK have signed/ratified the ATS, as well as maybe all other 23 EU members), but SUSPENSION (for undefined time period) of a claim does not mean DROPPING of this claim. Maybe sometime in the future the ATS would be reworked and the claims totaly dropped or again rised. This doesn't matter in our case, I think. We have to take a decision about "Should we list these territories or not on page "List of EU ..."?". Let's look at one hypothetical example: there is a Caribbean Treaty System and all claims to Caribbean islands are suspended. There is also a EU Treaty that states: "The EU Law does not apply to Faroes islands and New Polynesia. The EU Law applies to Gibraltar, Azores, Guadeloupe and Bermuda." Would we then list Guadeloupe and Bermuda as "included", even when claims over them are suspended? I think that we should. It the case of BAT it is "easier" to be removed, becouse it is "excluded from EU Law application". But what if it was "included"?

Regardless of the status of the claim, the territory is covered or not covered by EU law application. The claim status and EU coverage are two different things. Of course a note about ATS/claim suspension can/should be added... Alinor 08:58, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Could you check my changes and see whether you're okay with them? —Nightstallion (?) 09:59, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 8th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 19	8 May 2006	About the Signpost

New worldwide rankings show Wikipedia strength outside US	Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages
News and Notes: Milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report On Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Toledo, Spain

Greetings, Nightstallion! I'm afraid I don't see the point in your adding commentary to the debate over moving Toledo, Spain to Toledo after you closed the same. While I try to assume good faith, I'm having a hard time understanding what would have persuaded you to do this, aside from such bad faith reasons as trying to get the last word in, or persuade people to take an "Old World" bias for the next such debate. (I've learned from Dartmouth and Windsor that these issues arise rather frequently.) Can you elucidate? -- SwissCelt 14:34, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

What exactly is the problem with me adding a personal opinion? I don't vote in WP:RM, precisely for the reason that I don't want to have the decisive vote in any proposition, but I don't think ethics prohibit me from adding my personal thoughts on the proposal as soon as it's closed. —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 14:37, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, I think the problem was that you added these thoughts as soon as the vote was closed. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think other editors would have that luxury. A closed vote is just that: Closed, and the matter presumably resolved. While I won't say that the closing admin shouldn't have a personal opinion on the matter, I question the wisdom of sharing that opinion immediately after voting has concluded. Please understand, too, that I'm not accusing you of any impropriety. (Indeed, you deserve praise for concluding the matter counter to your own opinion!) I simply want to come to an understanding on the matter. -- SwissCelt 18:53, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Mh, I can see your point, but I explicitly placed my comment outside the "off-limits" area of the original vote – you can still tell me that you think my opinion sucks or that you simply don't agree or whatever, I just closed the vote *and* added an opinion in the same edit. Would you prefer if I did that in two distinct, subsequent edits in the future to make it clear that I'm speaking as a normal user, and not as the closing admin? —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 05:50, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

U.S. Route 101

When you make moves, please fix double redirects. Thanks. --SPUI (T - C - RFC) 23:37, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Usually, I do. (Check my contributions, everything labelled "dblrdr" or similar is exactly that.) If I don't, it would most likely be quicker to do it yourself than to tell me to do it. Still, thanks for reminding me. —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 05:50, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Bath Impact

Just wanted to thank you for moving Bath Impact. The old name looked kind of strange! Trampled

Wikipedia talk:German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board#Magyars of Burgenland

Somebody asked for input regarding a naming convention. As you are both Austrian and interested in naming conventions, I was wondering whether you could help? I'm not certain we actually have Austrians reading the noticeboard, so I thought I'd write an extra message. Kusma (討論) 16:28, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Move of Okino Torishima to Okinotori

This is very nonsense as a name of an island. Please refer to Google Scholar. Okino Torishima is the most commonly used name in scientific articles. Should be at least Okinotori Island. I didn't even know such a foolish vote is ongoing. Isorhiza 17:25, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Community Justice Newsletter

Welcome Previously, various notices regarding Community Justice have gone out to our members; though this is the first actual newsletter. This issue will contain information regarding decisions made on the first meeting, our new council, and more...! If you wish to unsubscribe to future newsletters, please add your name to Wikipedia:Community Justice/Do Not Spam. New Council Following our first elections, a new council has been elected.Computerjoe and Ian13 remain as chairman and chief executive (respectively); while Eddieh, Wiki alf and Xchrisblackx are replaced as councillors by Ilyanep, Osbus and Covington. The Giant Puffin and Pureblade remain as councillors. Member Conduct In the last meeting, the conduct of 4 members was discussed. Ethnopunk will be put on probation, supervised by Ian13, if he/she is incivil during this probation, he/she will be expelled from WP:CJ; the same was decided for Misza13 (voluntarily), and his probation will be supervised by Computerjoe. No action will be taken against Computerjoe. Barnstar The Civility Barnstar which our members have designed has been sent to Barnstar and award proposals. We'd appreciate your feedback! Also, we are planning to make a Community Justice barnstar to give to hard-working CJ members. If you're a budding designer, consider trying to make it, then post your proposal to WT:CJ! Name and logo change There has been no consensus reached regarding changing our name and/or logo neither at WT:CJ nor at WT:CJ/M/1. While suggestions are still welcome, no action will be taken at this time. Programs We are going to try to create programs to more actively involve our members. If you have any ideas, please drop a line at WT:CJ. We will try to work with WP:ESP on one of these programs, at some point in the future. Thanks! Thank you for your time. If you need anything, feel free to comment at WT:CJ or come into our IRC channel [7]. Computerjoe wishes to extend his thanks to User:Robchurch, a non-member who assisted in making {{tracker}} redundant, as well as Misza13 for his continued support and to the whole of this and the previous council. This newsletter was delivered by CJBot, written by Computerjoe, with technical help from Misza13. Computerjoe's talk 19:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Chlodwig, Prince Hohenlohe?

A user unilaterally moved this page without discussion. The page had come up for move before and the consensus was don't move, so obviously it needs discussion. Can you move it back? Charles 23:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC) (btw, I used the add new message link and it stuck me in this newsletter thing)

Please allow the page be where it is now. If any other name is better, Cfvh could make a new move request. - I did not see that there had been a discussion, but having now seen it, I conclude that there was no binding decision, the poll is already quite old, NC discussion went stale, and the name to which I moved it is quite good. There are always natives of some language who are in difficulty if asked to use English in regard to terms and names known to them in their own language, such as biographies of Germans to German-speakers, and we may be stuck with their possibly erroneous perceptions. There is the policy of BE BOLD, and I think for moving the page in question it was quite good instruction. Shilkanni 04:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I would tend to agree that the earlier WP:RM discussion is not relevant to *this* move; it would have been better if you had checked the talk page first, Shilkanni, but I don't think this was done in bad faith; if you really believe it should be moved back, Charles, you can always get input from other editors interested via an RM. 's that okay? —Nightstallion (?) 05:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 15th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 20	15 May 2006	About the Signpost

Publicity surrounds Chinese site reusing Wikipedia content	German chapter prevails in Tron appeal
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages	News and Notes: Time 100 Gala, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report On Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

ISO 8601

you state you like ISO standards. how about ISO 8601? Additionally, ISO 639 contains differents codes, and if you use the two letter codes you cannot code very much languages. So I use ISO 639-3 even if it is still a draft. It's also used by SIL/ethnologue now. I would like WP to switch to 639-3 and to abandon the mixture of 639-1 with 639-2 and self defined codes. Isn't is discriminating that some language WP's have to use three letter codes while some can use two only? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 12:34, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I prefer to write out months in letters, but apart from that, 8601 is quite solid, if a bit complicated for practical use. As soon as 639-3 is out of the drafting phase, I'd also advocate a switch from the current Wikimedia system to a consistent one, keeping redirects to the new locations in place for some time, of course. If you need my help with campaigning for that switch to happen, just tell me so. ;) —Nightstallion (?) 12:49, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

great :-). We would need to improve meta:Language_codes and ISO 639-3. And then gather support maybe especially among speakers of non-two-letter-code-having languages. E.g. Cebuano. I saw other WP in Philippine languages, can't remember now. Another idea I once had was meta:Single domain and getting rid of the "wiki" in the URL path. Currently I would favor <projectname>.wikimedia.org/<lang>/<articlename>. Maybe you like to have a look overthere. best regards Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:48, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

the EU flag at the left bottom sometimes hides parts of the left hand navigation. I use the old skin. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:50, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Scrolling down helps. ;) —Nightstallion (?) 06:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

can you do it for me as default? :-? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 14:30, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

move arpad d.

Could you kindly move House of Arpad to Arpad dynasty. I mean "Arpad dynasty" without diacriticals. I would otherwise do it by myself, but there is alreafy a page with a slight edit history. Shilkanni 22:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Done (with diacritics). —Nightstallion (?) 06:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey... (Euopean Union)

For the article that lists the nations of the European Union, I added that Bosnia along with Serbia are in the preliminary stages of European entry. For example talks over European entry for Serbia are stopped until Mladic and Karadic are apprehended. I just wanted to point that out that talks have begun. The same goes for BiH, It has also started talks. I will send you some links to verify this.

Thanks, Kseferovic 23:51, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I've reverted, because

1. the information is in the second table and
2. your change was factually wrong: Albania is actually closer to EU membership than BiH and SiM.

—Nightstallion (?) 06:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Pretenders Ernst August

Please see Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (names and titles)#Ernest Aug. and constibute to the discussion there. I look forward to people assessing UE:should English be used in all these cases and how; would any sort of numeral be acceptable; Is there any other sustainable way to disambiguate these systematically. Shilkanni 10:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

move from Sidhoji rao shitole to Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath

Nightstallion, I think you made that move prematurely without taking a look at what was going on. This was a deep-seated, long standing issue. I asked that it be a simple redirect, not a move which deletes the edit history of the original page, as that page was protected from editing. The only reason they asked for a move was in order to subvert the protection of that original page, since they couldn't edit it directly. I'd like to ask you to take a look at the talk page of the Sidhoji Rao Shitole page carefully to understand that this move was not fully supported, and admin Jossi was still mediating the interaction. Please reinstate the full edit history of the original Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath page before the move. Hamsacharya dan 17:52, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: Userboxes (yet another proposal)

Seeing how you opposed the first question on Mackensen's Poll (arguably the most important), I would like to show you my essay on what should be done with userboxes. It is hopefully a new and unseen way of resolving this conflict.

Thanks,
// ^The True _Sora 20:08, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Move advice

Hi. You moved Quebec City, Quebec to Quebec City in January 2006, pursuant to a RM. Earlier today, the article was unilaterally moved back, without explanation. Is there some version of "speedy RM", or do you recommend that I initiate a regular RM request to reverse the move? Thanks. --Skeezix1000 17:35, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank-you

The count is in, and now I join the crew who wield the mops and pails. Thanks for your support! I pledge to serve both you and Jimbo Wales. If you have anything you need, then please don't think to hesitate. For I am the very model of a grateful admin designate! ♫Bucketsofg✐♪

Hi

I've dabble with WP and am looking make some contributions. I voted for you to because an admin a few months ago, how are things going for you? -- Mostly Rainy 01:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Quite fine, thanks. What areas would you like to participate and contribute in? —Nightstallion (?) 11:35, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, I generally have been working in the AFD pages. I actually learned how to close discussions with a keep consensous. I also created a few ref pages. Check my contribs. Mostly Rainy 06:29, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Keodrah

Hello nightstallion,

My name is Keodrah and I am wanting to write about Neo-gothism and post goth culture. I wanted to bring to your attention a movement that is happening in Denver Colorado with a figure named Dimitri Spanoa. His writings are rather progresive talking about the future of musical generas...I feel like he would be a great subject to cover in Neo-Gothism because he falls along the lines of Tim Burton and C.S. Lewis and the Chronicles of Narnia. He has also created a few bands with a dark fantasy model that introduces the bands as fiction, but release real world products. It is very exciting becuase they are now working on a music video and plan to have a film company. All of this falls under the writings of Dimiti-The Blacklight Chronicles. Would you be interested in helping me write an article- that his works are enjoyed by more people? Also by drawing inspiration from this subject, I have written an article called 'Post Goth and the evolution of subcultures'. This article will be published in Dark Culture Magazine in a few days. Thank you so much! I enjoyed reading this article.

-Keodrah

Signpost updated for May 22nd.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 21	22 May 2006	About the Signpost

Project statistics updated, except for Wikipedia	Deletion of metadata icons debated
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages	News and Notes: Wikimedia chapters report, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report On Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Alexander, Prince of Yugoslavia

Hi Nightstallion;

Could you move this page to Prince Alexander of Yugoslavia? All the other members of the former royal family are under that format and it seems it would be a bit of a waste to go to WP:RM for it. Charles 16:01, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Userpage

Hello! Its been a while since I last sent a message. Just so you know, you might want to raise the floating European Flag by a bit; it currently overlaps with the yellow bar at the bottom of the page. SMURRAY|IN|CHESTER 20:04, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but... what yellow bar? —Nightstallion (?) 20:22, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Ancient Greek Wikisource

I understand from your userboxes you're interested in Ancient Greek. I've submitted a proposal to add an Ancient Greek Wikisource on Meta, and I'd be very grateful if you could assist me by either voting in Support of the proposal, or even adding your name as one of the contributors in the template. (NB: I'm posting this to a lot of people, so please reply to my talkpage or to Meta) --Nema Fakei 20:28, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I've supported it. Keep me posted. —Nightstallion (?) 20:33, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Status

Thank you; it's good to be back. --Merovingian {T C @} 13:32, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Boilerplating active discussions at Talk:Beersheba

Hi. Please do not encompass active article talk page discussions with an RfM boilerplate. I did not participate in a RfM, yet your boilerplating suggests I did, and instructs editors —falsely— not to continue to contribute to those threaded discussions on the talk page. Thank you. El_C 17:52, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I haven't always got time to check the intricate details of the talk pages I visit when doing WP:RM, sorry. —Nightstallion (?) 17:59, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi again, and thanks for the prompt reply. No problem; please keep an eye for such an oversight in the future. Regards, El_C 18:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I'll try to. Thank for your understanding. —Nightstallion (?) 19:06, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Question from Evan Robidoux

Hi, Nightstallion. My name is Evan Robidoux. I noticed your name under the list of users that want to be reviewed (Wikipedia:Editor review.) I was wondering if you could do me a favour and review me. Thanks! --Evan Robidoux 00:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Montenegro

Thanks for separating Serbia and Montenegro in the EU member states article map; could you do the same for a number of other articles? Would be great. =] Just say if so, then I can give you a list. You should upload the new map on top of the old one, though, not under a new file name. —Nightstallion (?) 05:46, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Sure I'll do it (Change the maps) for all of the images. Just give me all of the article names and I will do it as soon as possible. Thanks, Kseferovic 11:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

It will take some time, though, since there's really a *lot* of maps to be updated, and not all are even categorised correctly... Another problem will be that we may run into trouble with people who think the maps should only be updated once Montenegro is entirely independent... We should probably wait until independence is offially proclaimed, aye? —Nightstallion (?) 11:47, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey, I got your messages. My map is correct. The image[[8]] shows Montenegro and Kosovo. Kosovo is currently controlled by the UN but technically it is still in Serbia. Kosovo is viewed as an autonomous province (entity) within Serbia. If it ever officially splits from Serbia then we will add it to the map. (Serbia has no control over Kosovo and only about 4% of Serbs live there, Albanians are the main ethnic group).

Thanks, Kseferovic 19:04, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

My point is that the borders differ in the two maps, and the Euro_accession.PNG map's borders look very much more correct to me... —Nightstallion (?) 19:44, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

On second thought, I'm not quite so sure any more which map's borders are more correct. sighs Complicated... —Nightstallion (?) 19:46, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Requested moves

Hi Nightstallion, a requested move of Gilo (neighborhood) --> Gilo (now a redirect) was deleted by you, along with everything from 2006-05-21, to the best of my knowledge without a resolution. As I'm a bit of a noob, could you explain to me how to proceed to achieve a move? Cheers, Tewfik^Talk 21:33, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

It seemed there was ongoing discussion on the issue, but no need or possibility for admin intervention, so I let it be. If there's any reason for me to step in, please just tell me, but it seemed you were just discussing happily. =] —Nightstallion (?) 21:37, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, we actually had (happily =]) agreed to move Gilo (neighborhood) to Gilo. If you don't mind making the move, we'd both appreciate it. All the best, Tewfik^Talk 22:33, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Sure, done. =] —Nightstallion (?) 22:36, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch, Cheers Tewfik^Talk 23:04, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Fianlly, an userbox compromise that seems popular

I think we've come up with something that's got overwhelming support. Please chime in here. --Dragon695 05:38, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Concordia Newsletter

Community Justice is no more. It has been reformed to Concordia. Membership has been transferred.

Concordia is an organization of editors on Wikipedia that strive to encourage civility and fair treatment among all editors in the Wikipedian community, from the Wikignome to the Wikiholic. The project was designed to have a friendly and helpful environment to support any unfortunate Wikipedians that have become victims of incivility, hostility, or continual disrespect.

We currently need help in getting going, and making the community understand our aims. We work for civility. Nothing more, nothing less.

If you have ideas, let us know at our talk page, or on the IRC channel. We aim to spread civility in every way we can.

Should you wish to unsubscribe to future newsletters, please add your name to Wikipedia:Concordia/Do Not Spam.

Thank you for your time. If you need anything, feel free to comment at WT:CCD or come into our IRC channel [9].

- The Concordia council. Delivered by Ian13 13:17, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Modifying a prtected page

Hi,

I've renamed Pope Eugenius IV into Pope Eugene IV. But I can't change the link that is in the protected page Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/January 24. Would you be kind enough to do it? Švitrigaila 14:36, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Done. —Nightstallion (?) 07:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Template:Country flag alias Mayotte

Just because it's official to France doesn't mean it's not "official" to the people of Mayotte. The CIA World Factbook usually doesn't include unofficial flags, so there has to be something behind this one being official to the people of Mayotte (perhaps a declaration by the overseas collectivity's parliament that it is the flag, but a declaration not recognized by France). This would make the flag more than just a popular but totally unofficial flag, and would make it acceptable to set as the flag of Mayotte on Wikipedia.  OZLAWYER  talk  15:40, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

That's of no importance. It's not the official flag, and therefore, it should and will not be used in the Wikipedia templates, as those use the official flags. —Nightstallion (?) 07:41, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

You'd better make a bunch of edits then. Mayotte's not the only one with an unofficial flag. Of course, as I said, "official" is a relative term. Official by who? If Mayotte finds it official, and you're speaking of Mayotte, it's official. If you're speaking of France, it's unofficial. I assume now you're going to go find them, change them, and then protect them so no one else can have any say on the matter like you did with Mayotte?  OZLAWYER  talk  14:01, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Mayotte is *part* of France. What's official in Mayotte is official in France; the regional council flag is not meant to represent the statistical entity of Mayotte, that's what the official (French) flag is for. The CIA World Fact Book is often horribly inaccurate. Anything else you want to know? —Nightstallion (?) 14:40, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

The only time a country flag alias for Mayotte is useful on Wikipedia is to differentiate it from France proper. If we're to consider it as nothing more than a part of France proper, which as an overseas collectivity it is not (cf. French Guiana), then there is no reason for it to have a country alias. But it does, because it's not France proper, and so it should be differentiated from France by using its flag (unofficial to France, official to Mayotte).  OZLAWYER  talk  15:53, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Do you have any evidence that it is an official flag? According to Flags of the World, "the only official flag in Mayotte is the French tricolore"... —Nightstallion (?) 16:02, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

It can never be truly "official" until France recognizes it, which it doesn't, so no, it is not "official".  OZLAWYER  talk  17:00, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

See? That's my point — it wasn't even adopted by the conseil regional of Mayotte, so it's not even inofficial, it's just de facto, and even then it's not really widely used... —Nightstallion (?) 18:12, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Deletion

I'm rather confused about the process for Deletion. There are two redirect pages that need to be deleted: ECW on Sci Fi and List of gangs (The Shield). What do i have to do Kyros 22:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I've deleted them for you. —Nightstallion (?) 07:44, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Kyros 17:22, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments in Lar's RfA!

We are here to build an encyclopedia!

Hi Nightstallion, and thank you for your support in my request for adminship! With a final tally of (109/5/1), I have been entrusted with adminship. It's been several weeks since the conclusion of the process, so hopefully you've had a chance to see me in action. Please let me know what you think! Thanks again! PS you have one of the slickest appearing talk pages I know... ++Lar: t/c 03:25, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Adverts: Like The Beatles?... Like LEGO?... In a WikiProject that classifies?... Are you an accountable admin?... Got DYK?...

Standard atmosphere models

I'm not sure I agree with your move of Atmospheric models to Standard atmosphere models -- Might make sense to discuss this there, but I wanted to bring it to your attention. Thanks! MFago 21:56, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Replied there. —Nightstallion (?) 06:19, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

RfA Notification

Hello! I noticed that you have interacted with User:MJCdetroit who is currently undergoing an RfA and thought that you might be interested in participating at Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/MJCdetroit. You have received this message without the endorsement of the candidate involved, and this is not a solicitation of support, it is only an effort to make RfA discussions better (for more information see user:ShortJason/Publicity). Thank you in advance for your participation. ShortJason 22:12, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. —Nightstallion (?) 06:19, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 29th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 22	29 May 2006	About the Signpost

Semi-protection tweaks prompt debate over ideals	Wikipedia administrator investigated after on-wiki dispute
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages	News and Notes: Wikimedia board resolutions, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report On Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

WAY too hasty with orthopedics move....

Please revert your move. 1) The matter needs more time; 2) You miscounted sentiment ("votes") on the matter. BrianinStockholm 11:06, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Septentrionalis said he had some doubts, not that he was against it; I counted that as neutral. Feel free to keep discussing, but after the usual 5-day deadline, sentiment seemed to be in favour to me, especially in light of evidence of official names even in the United States. —Nightstallion (?) 11:09, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I think it's difficult to read Septentrionalis' claims as worth counting as neutral ("I suspect that this Anglo-Americanism again combined with Anglophile snobbery.") If you count it as a partial "vote" against, we have 2 for, 1.x against. That's not clear enough to warrant a move. I strongly suggest reverting at once (before redirects are changed), and giving Septentrionalis a chance to clarify. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrianinStockholm (talk • contribs)

I've already changed the redirects, as I always do when I do WP:RM, and moving this is in the bounds of admin deliberation. If there happens to be substantial opposition now, I'll revert it, but as it stands, the evidence seems strongly in favour of keeping it as it is. Also, please sign your comments. —Nightstallion (?) 11:21, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't see how you get "strongly in favour". This sort of thing is bad for Wikipedia, in my view. BrianinStockholm 11:35, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Common usage is either "e" or "ae", official usage is prevalently "ae", so that seems to be in favour quite clearly. —Nightstallion (?) 11:38, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm trying to assume good faith here, but I don't get it. What, in Wikipedia's spelling policy [[10]], justifies the change? Note, 1) the ae spelling is only slightly more common, and while it might be -- might be; difficult to assess -- more than slightly more common in "official usage", there is nothing about "official usage" in Wikipedia's spelling policy. What counts here is the first spelling used (in an überstub article). This is clearly the "e" spelling. Given that nothing even approaching consensus about this was reached, the change seems clearly to have been mistaken. BrianinStockholm 11:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

WP:BOLD and WP:UCS; if you can't live with the knowledge that the article now uses the "ae" spelling, revert it, but I see no immense problems currently... —Nightstallion (?) 11:53, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

For your information... I am the one who requested the original move. Given the disagreement, I have asked if more people can contribute their views so that we can get a consensus that people will respect. See Talk:Orthopaedic surgery and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine#Spelling of orthopaedic .2F orthopedic. Arbitrary username 13:45, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I decided to follow NightStallion's advice ("Be bold!"). The -ped- spelling makes more sense as a default spelling. Hope you don't find my revert irritating. It seems like the right thing, at this juncture. (More thoughts at the Talk:Orthopaedic surgery -- let's stop clogging NS's talk page :) .) BrianinStockholm 14:18, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Our Lady of Lourdes

Nightstallion, thank you for moving Miracles at Lourdes to Our Lady of Lourdes. --WikiCats 08:23, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Gladly. —Nightstallion (?) 08:23, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Naastenliefde, Vrijheid en Diversiteit

Hi, not only is there currently a talk going on if there should be transliterated article title, but your move is also wrong [11], since the correct Dutch title is Naastenliefde, Vrijheid & Diversiteit. Can you revert the move and use the talk page. Thanks! Intangible 13:45, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

See my explanation there for why I will not revert it until some MediaWiki issues have been fixed. —Nightstallion (?) 14:15, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi (2)

Hi nightstallion and congratulations with your anniversary.Cameron Nedland 13:50, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! —Nightstallion (?) 13:58, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Template:EU countries and candidates

Hi. I must admit I have some difficulty understanding your position. Serbia and Montenegro had been given the status of "potential candidate country"; with the end of the federation this status should go only to Serbia, as successor state of the federation in all the obbligations (foreign debt) and institutions of the federations, exactly like Russia was successor of URSS. This means Montenegro will have to ask admission to all international organizations, starting from the UN, while Serbia probably won't. One thing is certain; the EU has made it repeatedly clear its unsatisfaction with Montenegro and especially its president, so it may never be even a "potential candidate country".--Aldux 21:43, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry to say this, but you have no clue in this. All countries in the Balkans are officially potential candidate countries, and Montenegro has already been assured it will be issued a mandate for separate SAA and EU membership negotiations. —Nightstallion (?) 22:19, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Flag of West Papua

Hi NS,

I removed the template because of the user's explanation here. Are they correct? —Khoikhoi 02:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't quite agree with that, but I won't insist on it if you prefer to remove the template. —Nightstallion (?) 02:58, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I would actually prefer to have the template re-added, but the article still needs a category since the user removed Category:National flags from the article. Also, I'm positive that the template shouldn't be at Kurdish flag as Kurdistan never was a country, it's a geographic & cultural region. Some people don't seem to get that, like all the IPs in Turkey that blank the page every now and then. :p —Khoikhoi 03:02, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Check usage

Hi! Nehm an, ich erreiche dich im Moment so eher als per mail... Bei mir steht da, wenn ich auf check usage click, immer:

"en.wikipedia.org: The database copy for this wiki is marked as broken, please check manually!"

Abgesehen davon, was ist der korrekte, neue Name?

lG — Shir Khan (?-"-!) — 03:03, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi sunshine!

*Ding ding*! Check your mailbox if you haven't already, sunshine! ;) Kisses, Phaedriel ♥ tell me - 18:37, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Already did, time to check yours. ;) Take care, —Nightstallion (?) 18:39, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Aww! *Smooch* Later! xxx Phaedriel ♥ tell me - 18:42, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Things change...

... sometimes just over personal concerns. --BD2412.

White Ensign

Not a criticism, just a question; Why do you prefer the graphic for "Naval Ensign" to the graphic for "White Ensign" because they both look the same to me. p.s. I like Piers Anthony too.--Anthony.bradbury 21:56, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Because it's the correct name, and follows the naming conventions of the WikiProject on flags. —Nightstallion (?) 23:35, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

It may well follow the naming conventions of Wikiproject, but it is not the correct name. The correct name in the UK is the White Ensign. The phrase "Naval Ensign" is American. I know that Wikipedia is America-based, but the Royal Navy, so far, is not.--Anthony.bradbury 21:01, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

In the UK we also have the Red Ensign, the flag of the Merchant Marine, and the Blue Ensign, flown by the Royal Naval Reserve. The White Ensign, incidentally, is also flown by the Royal Yacht Squadron, the only organisation apart from the Royal Navy authorised to do so.--Anthony.bradbury 23:35, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

It's still the official name according to our naming conventions; the official vexillogicial for the flag used by government vessels *is* "Naval Ensign", I'm afraid, so that's why it was moved. —Nightstallion (?) 05:48, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

If you insist; I did concede (see above) that it was a Wiki naming convention. It looks the same on the page anyway.--Anthony.bradbury 15:43, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

It looks the same because I simply reuploaded it under a different name. ;) Thanks for your understanding! —Nightstallion (?) 19:08, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

A very sad thank you

Thank you for your vote in my recent RFA. At 43/43/14, I decided it was best to withdraw. I will wait until another time for an RFA. Thanks again, ILovePlankton 03:19, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

A slightly belated thank you

I just wanted to give my thanks for your help over at the Russian Empire article, it needed to be moved. Anyways, thanks! Tev 06:05, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Gladly! —Nightstallion (?) 09:22, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

re:Hey welcome

Sorry for the belated response. I didn't see your message out of the bunch. ;-) Thanks for the welcome back, and I hope this time, it is permanent. Cheers! The King of Kings 23:18, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

:) —Nightstallion (?) 05:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Friedrich Wilhelm, Duke of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg

Hi Nightstallion;

Could you move Wilhelm, Duke of Glücksburg to Friedrich Wilhelm, Duke of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg? I reverted a move of Wilhelm, Duke of Glücksburg to Wilhelm, Duke of Glucksburg but really intended to move it all back to Friedrich Wilhelm, Duke of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg. It hasn't been determined if Wilhelm, Duke of Glücksburg is indeed appropriate usage. None of the associated moves by the previous editor were discussed and he/she received warning for it. Thanks. Charles 00:53, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Done. —Nightstallion (?) 05:41, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey... (Montenegro)

Hey, I did the map. However, since I am "too new" on Wikipedia Commons I had to place it under a new (but similar) name. Most likely you have the ability to change that if you are a long time Wikipedia Common's user. The map is correct. I will get to the other maps as soon as possible.

Link: Here is the map

Thanks, Kseferovic 02:34, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I've uploaded it at the correct place and nominated it for deletion at the other one. Good luck with all the other hundreds of maps, I'm glad there's someone who'll take care of it! :) —Nightstallion (?) 05:43, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 5th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 23	5 June 2006	About the Signpost

New revision-hiding feature added	Paper profiles Wales, slams Wikipedia business coverage
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages	New external tools
News and Notes: Wikimedia board resolutions, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report On Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Iguazu Falls

Hi. Why did you close the discussion at Talk:Iguazu Falls? The usuall voting time of one week has not yet been reached! What's more, you said there was no consensus, when most users voted for either Iguazu or Iguassu, some of which have even stated which one they preferred. In any case, another voting between the two most voted could be driven, but in no way should be the voting closed as no consensus!!! I'm reverting your changes. Mariano(t/c) 10:48, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

The usual voting time is five days, as is clearly state on WP:RM. But fair enough, I'll call a run-off... —Nightstallion (?) 10:50, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

User page

I like what you have done with you User page. Can you recommend some user name templates for the design challenged?

I'm not quite sure what you mean...? —Nightstallion (?) 05:48, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Requested moves

I requested moves of WTEN-TV to WTEN and WXYT-AM to WXYT for those are the official callsigns. Could you move those please? CoolKatt number 99999 04:16, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Done and done. —Nightstallion (?) 05:55, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Spy satellite -> Reconnaissance satellite

Hi. The debate at Talk:Spy satellite actually had three votes in favor of moving, and two against, yet you marked it as "No consensus." Please advise. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 14:38, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Page move

Hi Nightstallion, the page Władysław II Jagiełło was recently moved to Wladyslaw II Jagiellon of Poland without using WP:RM. This was followed a few hours later by a WP:RM proposal to move to another name. I tried to restore it to Władysław II Jagiełło pending the result of the vote but was unable to. Would you mind restoring it? Appleseed (Talk) 03:28, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

If you move a page, please do double redirect cleanup on the talk page too

You moved Wladyslaw II Jagiellon of Poland back to Władysław II Jagiełło. Cleaning up double redirects ...but as far as I can see not yet on the talk page: [12] - could you follow that up?

Further, I'd not recommend page moves during an active WP:RM... even if it started from the wrong page. At least not in an unilateral move like you did, for which:

{{MP3}}

--Francis Schonken 06:39, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

A no consensus result would have left the page where it currently was, which would be the wrong location. The original location prior to *ALL* unilateral moves should be the location where it's at, period.

I've never done double-redirect cleanup for the talk pages. It's never been necessary nor requested, and there's double-redirect cleanup bots for that, anyway. Article double-redirect cleanup makes sense to me, talk double-redirect cleanup doesn't. —Nightstallion (?) 06:49, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Not for the page move during the vote (which might be defendable, but I think I was right in concluding that that broke off the vote, I'm OK with that too), but for your refusal to do double redirect cleanup. You moved Talk:Wladyslaw II Jagiellon of Poland to Talk:Władysław II Jagiełło, after that you bluntly refuse to do the double redirect cleanup (the question is not whether you think it makes sense). Follow the guidance. period.

{{MP4}}

--Francis Schonken 07:17, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

If that's the case, then I'm seriously considering stopping handling WP:RM. That warning was clearly unnecessary and WP:POINTless. —Nightstallion (?) 08:01, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for restoring some order into this discussion. The fact that you received the warning messages for trying to help and fix other's errors is a good illustration of what some of us have to deal with and I certainly agree it is a POINT. Btw, could you comment on Wikipedia_talk:Requested_moves#What_to_do_in_.27no_consensus.2C_leaning_on_move.27.3F?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 18:58, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Need to change the naming conventions themselves

I have written something on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (names and titles) about this topic. If you support me, or if you have something to add, don't hesitate. :o) Švitrigaila 08:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Timeline EU

NightStallion, I really like your diagram of the EU. Neat and very informative. If you press me for remarks I can think of two suggestions:

• Green on yellow text is not so easy to read (depends on monitor gamma characteristics etc, so better on some, worse on others)
• I take it from the size of the diagram that you use 1280x1024 screen res or larger. Which few people do. With customary space for sidebars etc, image will not fit on 1024*768.

I hope you do more timelines like this one! Cheers Erik Zachte 03:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Would dark green be better than light green? And what size should the timeline be at most so that it works at least for people with 1024x768? Thamls for your comments! —Nightstallion (?) 05:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Voting on Tsushima vs Ulleung

We have changed the rules for this poll. The poll will continue until 08:57, 19 June 2006. Please see Talk:Tsushima Basin#Voting on Tsushima vs Ulleung. Can we remove the green box?--Endroit 10:06, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. I must've overread that. Certainly, carry on, I've reverted myself. —Nightstallion (?) 10:15, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you.--Endroit 10:16, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Tajik Wikipedia

I note you are active in taking Wikipedias down of the shelves, so to speak, would you be interested in doing the same for Tajik Wikipedia, it seems to suffer from the same problems as those others. - FrancisTyers · 13:35, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I assume that you mean that I generally support efforts to close inactive projects? Well, file a closing motion and I'll certainly support it if it's not active... —Nightstallion (?) 14:36, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I will think about it :) Thanks. - FrancisTyers · 14:49, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Gladly. =] —Nightstallion (?) 14:50, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Richard Harris

It appears that an inexperienced user was unaware of the consensus that was reached regarding the movement of Richard Harris (actor) to Richard Harris and has now moved it back to where it was. Would you mind moving it back again? Thanks. (P.S. I left a message on the user's talk page about his mistake.) —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 20:33, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Done and move-protected to avoid future problems. —Nightstallion (?) 10:09, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

User page

I would have to say, you're userpages is one of the best I have ever come across, literally. Congrats. Эйрон Кинни (t) 07:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! =] —Nightstallion (?) 10:08, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for moving Bayan Jabr

Much appreciated! AndrewRT 23:35, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Gladly! —Nightstallion (?) 05:39, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Japanese Wikinews!

Thank you for your sign up to Japanese Wikinews! We all welcome you. Please help our project while you don't speake Japanese.--っ, っ in jawp, 23:56, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! —Nightstallion (?) 05:34, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

When it is decided that the vote is over?

It is about Talk:Władysław II Jagiełło. Juraune 09:11, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Five days after it's been started. —Nightstallion (?) 09:14, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Flag of Kaliningrad Oblast

This is apparently the flag of Kaliningrad Oblast -- can you confirm this? FOTW doesn't mention anything, but then again, they haven't got any flag for Tambov yet, and AFAIK the flag in Tambov's article is correct... Thanks! —Nightstallion (?) 23:03, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Nope, it's not it, this is. Well, will be. The flag was accepted by the oblast duma last Thursday; however, it will not have official status until the Governor signs the law and the law is published. Shouldn't take too long (unless the governor refuses to sign off). I see someone already added the new flag to the Kaliningrad Oblast article; I have commented it out until the flag is truly official.—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) • (yo?); 13:38, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! What was the blue-yellow one, then? And any news on flags for Perm Kray, Novgorod Oblast and Pskov Oblast? —Nightstallion (?) 14:43, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I am not entirely sure, but if I remember correctly it is one of the 2005 drafts that had been voted down and declined. As for the Perm/Pskov/Novgorod, I have not heard anything, but I'll re-check the feeds when I return from vacation in about a week and will certainly let you if I find anything of interest.—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) • (yo?); 14:56, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, yet again. =] —Nightstallion (?) 14:59, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 12th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 24	12 June 2006	About the Signpost

From the editor: RSS returns
English Wikipedia reaches 1,000 Featured Articles	Administrator desysopped after sockpuppeting incident
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages	News and Notes: Wikimedia board resolutions, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report On Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Message delivered by Ralbot 01:37, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Undiscussed and messy moves

Hi Nightstallion;

Could you move Prince Wolfgang of Finland back to Prince Wolfgang of Hesse? All of the moves made were undiscussed, but I'll fix the other redirects. Charles 03:42, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Is this the way it works? Charles asks some personal favor or like? I think it never was at "Prince Wolfgang of Hesse", so it is misleading to allege it a "move back".

Where was it then? Or do you not know? It's easy to lose track when moves are undiscussed. Charles 05:45, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Anyway, I have somewhat wondered your treatment of moves. Some high-handedness towards some clear results of community opinion. And however certain ignorance of reasons behind NC for royals - you seem to apply some strict interpretations of such clauses that are not intended to read in that way. Added with your announced opinion that those NCs should be jettisoned. I am confused about are there any principles you respect. ObRoy 04:22, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Most common usage is one. A move to Prince Wolfgang of Finland cannot be backed up. The Prince is known mostly as Prince Wolfgang of Hesse. No one in the Hessian Grand Ducal/Landgravial family uses Finnish royal titles. Wolfgang was no exception. Indeed, Wolfgang's memoirs were published under the name Prinz Wolfgang von Hessen (i.e. Prince Wolfgang of Hesse). The move is a restorative action and is required for common usage. Charles 05:45, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

No, contrary to what you believe I tend to follow the rules, but those include WP:UCS and WP:IAR when it's sensible to do so. Why you think that you know how some rules "are meant to be read" simply because your interpretation differs from mine is beyond me; I do not claim to be beyond all doubt, but unfounded accusations are rather WP:POINTless and don't really smell of WP:AGF.

In this case, as there's a clear common name, I'll move it per the "common names" naming convention; Google doesn't find even a single link for "Wolfgang of Finland". —Nightstallion (?) 05:49, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Myroslav Lyubachivsky to Myroslav Ivan Cardinal Lyubachivsky

Howdy, I noticed You moved the article Myroslav Ivan Cardinal Lyubachivsky but it should be Lubachivsky not Lyubachivsky as per the move request.

You haven't even changed the article, so why should I change the title without any source? I'm not opposed to it, but I've got no proof, and the article contradicts you. —Nightstallion (?) 09:00, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Just try simple google search for "Cardinal Lyubachivsky" (I got 3 hits one of them being wikipedia as opposed to over 600), of course blindly relying on the majority is often wrong but here the pages that use this spelling include the English version of the website of the Ukrainian Church [13], of Roman Catholic Church in Ukraine [14] and many other reliable sources.

Perfect, that's what I was waiting for. =] Done! —Nightstallion (?) 09:29, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Occupation: civil servant (conscientious objector)

When you say you are a conscientious objector, does that mean you're doing civilian national service? Skinnyweed 09:07, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but I hadn't been able to find *any* translation for Zivildiener in English, so I used a literal translation. Is it usually called "civilian national service"? What's the word for one serving his CNS? —Nightstallion (?) 09:08, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

No, "civilian national service" was just a word I made up to describe it. I suppose the word "conscription" can be used to cover it. Skinnyweed 13:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, doesn't "conscription" only mean "military service"? —Nightstallion (?) 13:08, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

My signature

Très cool. —Nightstallion (?) 08:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! I like your signature, too. —THIS IS MESSEDOCKER (TALK) 10:53, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! You might want to change the PNG to have a transparent background, though; it looks funny on my talk page. ;) —Nightstallion (?) 10:55, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I have always wanted to do that, problem is that I really don't know how to. —THIS IS MESSEDOCKER (TALK) 11:21, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, I just did it for you. =] Still looks funny when one has been to your user page (purple text with blue R:), but I think it's better in general now. ;) —Nightstallion (?) 11:51, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I have an idea on how to fix the coloring of the text, so maybe I'll apply that later. I've also noticed that the signature looks a little different in Internet Exploder, but why they're using that browser is beyond me. —THIS IS MESSEDOCKER (TALK) 17:53, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Precisely; whoever voluntarily uses that "browser"... Ah well. —Nightstallion (?) 20:41, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Help with move

Hello, I made a posting to Wikipedia_talk:Requested_moves, for a move regarding J. J. Yeley that I think you administrated. Rather than duplicate it here, I'll ask that you take a look on the Requested moves talk page. Please feel free to reply here or there per your convienece. If you would prefer for me to move my question here from the linked page, please just let me know.--Brian G 22:31, 13 June 2006 (UTC)