User talk:Renamed user ixgysjijel/Archive 16

text of original logo

The thread got bumped recently: Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia logos#text of original logo. (I've left his talkpage link red, in case you want to welcome him yourself :) -- Quiddity (talk) 22:38, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. He has one of the most uniquely geeky bar pickup lines ever - "So... ladies, I don't know if you recognize me, but I created Wikipedia's first ever logo." It's awesome!

Thanks for the note. I dropped him a short post. - Banyan Tree 00:43, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shifta War

Hi. Thanks for contacting me. The following sentences were a mistake that I did not intend to add; I was trying to source a statement that had been removed and to format some text but I was working on the wrong edit version of the article:

"Both governments realised it was necessary if they were to hold onto the Somali lands, they had to sign a defence pact as the Somalis were far superior in military strength."

"All those measures were in direct contradiction to the Geneva Human Rights Convention."

The above sentences were apparently part of a previous editor's changes, which I noticed you partially reverted. However, they're somewhat redundant since the text already more or less covers the same material further down that same section of the article; so I agree that they're not particularly necessary. Regards, Middayexpress (talk) 21:46, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. Cheers, Banyan Tree 03:12, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Solid Surface

I am regular usr of Wiki but not a contributor. In October 2007 I had written an article on Solid surface. It got deleted. I found the explantion for that today but, am not sure about it.

Solid surface is a new composite material and as such people have right to know what it is. How can we introduce this entry again? --Shehabi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shehabi (talk • contribs) 11:58, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, two submissions for the title Solid surface, yours and another user's, were deleted for being written as an advertisement, for failing to provide sources proving that the term was one of general use rather than something thought up by one person, or both, as well as being written in a manner so outside the style standards of the site that it was easier to delete them and wait for a submission that met the standards than ask a volunteer to fix them. It appears that the current article Solid surface is on the same topic as your submission, so the current article will need to be improved and added to.

If you wish, I can put a copy of your deleted submission in a user subpage so you can use it as reference while improving the article. However, replacing current article with your old submission will likely result in one of two outcomes: deletion of the article or, if a user realizes what happened, reversion of your edit and a warning issued against you not to vandalize the site. Wikipedia editors tend to have low tolerance for articles about a commercially produced form of tabletop that begin "Before the beginning of civilization..."

Before further editing the site, I encourage you to revisit Wikipedia:Tutorial as submissions that are simply unformatted masses of text obviously pasted from another source are the most likely to draw the unwelcome attention of administrators. Similarly, I recommend Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. - Banyan Tree 01:30, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From Shehabi: May be the style of the article written was not as desired on Wiki, however it was a generic article that I had written for a construction magazine. It generally explained the material, its composition and various standard (codes) that currently guide the production. In my view it was more general than the current article.Shehabi (talk) 15:26, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, please make sure you own the copyright of the material you submitted to the magazine. Under the terms of submission, it is sometimes the case that the magazine owns the material it publishes, in which case you would no longer be able to use it verbatim without infringing on their copyright over the article. - Banyan Tree 03:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dambisa Moyo

Ok I will read the information that you have sent me and will try to learn how to code the references better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.104.68.126 (talk) 09:46, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Rwenzururu

On June 10, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Rwenzururu, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Giants27 11:28, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Need copy edits and comments

I noticed you made these comments on [Sino-African relations], this lead me to think you are in a good situation to help Onopearls to copyedit and comment on Chinese involvement in Africa. I wrote this larger article with my poor English (I'm French). After Onopearls and others' copyedit, it is planed to improve the scope of each [Sino-African_relations] and [Chinese involvement in Africa], to avoid overlapping. Your copyedit and comments are welcome, hoping you may enjoy this interesting reading ;) Yug (talk) 12:49, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yug, I would like to see how the merger discussion regarding Involvement of the PRC in Africa goes before putting in some effort. I would feel silly if I spent several hours copyediting something that is subsequently merged and rewritten. Thanks, Banyan Tree 12:54, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lord's Resistance Army insurgency at FAR

I have nominated Lord's Resistance Army insurgency for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.Cirt (talk) 00:48, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh - Banyan Tree 08:01, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hey, BanyanTree, thanks for the message. I'm glad to be part of Wikipedia, and I hope to add as much as I can. It's always nice being welcomed...thanks again! Tonysdg14 (talk) 15:11, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you remember why?

Hi, looking at the Talk:Ojibwa, you were on the discussion for merging Chippewa with Ojibwa. Do you remember why Ojibwa and not Ojibwe? CJLippert (talk) 22:04, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I assumed you're referring to my terse "Yup" in 2005?

No, I'm afraid I don't recall, but I would assume it was for the idea of merging with Chippewa, rather than an particular approval for the destination title. I've been following the ongoing merge discussion at Talk:Ojibwa and it's all beyond me. - Banyan Tree 23:01, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology of recent TFA root

Hi BT, just wanted to pass on my thanks for your edit giving possible etymology of queen/gynaecology, and how it doesn't appear to relate to that word. Careful With That Axe, Eugene ^Talk 13:52, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I was interested in the claimed connection so it was an enjoyable bit of casual research. Cheers, Banyan Tree 01:53, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Abyei

Can the NPOV tag issues be addressed as the article Abyei could be one of those featured in the ITN category on wikipedia's main page without a tag.... "The Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague issues a decision on the borders of Abyei, a region subject to violent contention in Sudan. (BBC)" Kind Regards SriMesh | talk 15:04, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Abyei#Original inhabitants of region (NPOV?). Thanks, Banyan Tree 01:10, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ITN for Abyei

On 23 July, 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Abyei, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 05:17, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks muchly. - Banyan Tree 11:16, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

moved from my user page

Vandermeeren = Conspirationist : Thanks for this attribute . I would , like many, read the Truth on items like Kigali 1994. I see the battle in Wikipedia. But This is impossible. Why ? Truth is scientific ...impossible and always perceptional and because unkwown forces prepared the Battle in Rwanda etc.. and they cover theirs paths...still in 2009. Paranoia ? Yes and I am proud to be paranoiac in this "open society"; this is my technic of Falsification ( see Popper and Salvador Dali).

Other version : there was no preparation for Kigali-Rwanda etc... all falls without reason out the air... : normal attitude of normal person

It is interesting to see sometimes some reactions on my falsifications and other interventions .

I appreciate your work in one of the mysteries of this world-désordre.Vandermeeren (talk) 09:47, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

more on Lubna

Hi, I have commented on my talkpage. BrainyBabe (talk) 20:03, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there. - Banyan Tree 01:46, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haha

Perhaps you can add this to the ego boost section on your talk page? [1] :) ceranthor 13:46, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhh, that's worth going in the lead, especially as I can link straight to Wikisource. People can always do with a little more Tagore. Thank you very much. People occasionally drop by with their ideas about my username, but this may be the most pleasant. Cheers, Banyan Tree 14:09, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you're very welcome. I'm glad you liked it! ceranthor 14:11, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

		*The Signpost* Barnstar**
		For outstanding contributions to The Wikipedia Signpost, especially coverage of flagged revisions, I award BanyanTree the Signpost Barnstar. --ragesoss (talk) 16:53, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Like Ragesoss, I just wanted to pop in here too to say thanks and that both of your recent Signpost articles on Flagged Revs were possibly the best Signpost articles I've seen since I've started editing. Bsimmons666 (talk) 18:19, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! I totally did not expect that! I guess I should get absurdly over involved in stuff more often. Thanks so much. - Banyan Tree 02:27, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ugandan tables

Hi, please don't remove the tables entirely. Just remove the future population figures. Himalayan 10:05, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The figures are wrong. Keeping with the Kitgum example I used at User talk:Fsmatovu‎, the table states that the population of the town was 47,043 in 2005, not 47042 or 47044. To get this figure it uses circular logic; it takes the actual measurements from 2002 and 2008 and then assumes constant growth for all the years in-between, figures out the rate of that assumed growth, and then reports what the population would have been under the assumption of unchanging growth. It thus gives a false sense of certainty for something that is uncertain, which will either annoy people who think about the assumption being made or deceive those who don't. It's misleading at best and borderline original research at worst.

The proper way to handle this is to provide the sourced numbers, and that's all. Readers who aren't idiots will be able to make a rough approximation in their heads of the population figures of the years in-between, but it would be their problem if they're wrong, and not Wikipedia's. I'm of the opinion that we should assume non-idiocy of readers. - Banyan Tree 10:41, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The numbers are estimates. If it contravenes Wikipedia policy to make estimates, I will go back and re-write the articles without the tables. No problem.Fsmatovu (talk) 12:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not an estimate. An estimate is "around 47000" or "between 45000 and 50000". "47,043" is precise. There's no ambiguity whatsoever about that number. It would be one thing if it is someone else's estimate, whom you could source, but it's your estimate under your assumptions of constant growth year-on-year. Just use the numbers you can source externally, and let the reader make the assumptions. That way you or the site aren't at fault if the assumption is wrong.

This is probably not the most pressing issue, but I will put removal of the tables on my to-do list for the articles I wander through. Thanks, Banyan Tree 01:37, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see that you already did so. Thanks, Banyan Tree 01:38, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Date of birth unknown

About your comment. You can read instructions Category:Date of birth unknown. It reads: This category is intended for the discussion pages of articles about deceased individuals, primarily from antiquity (although, in some cases, reaching into the 19th century). This is not a category for living people. This is also written clearly: This category should not include individuals in Category:Living people.

In User:Yobot I have a guide of how all these categories apply. If you still have questions you can conctact me.

Thanks and happy editing, Magioladitis (talk) 08:52, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are right on that. I was planning to add the year of birth missing category after the removal. That's what I originally do. Checik [2] for example. I should trust my bot scripts more than my manual edits. Thanks for contacting. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:57, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bukunzi

Hi BT,

I hope you're well. Good to see some new Rwandan related content on WP :-) I have to admit I didn't even know anythign about the Bukunzi and other small kingdoms on the periphery. Rwandan history tends to focus so much on the genocide that other aspects are forgotten.

SteveRwanda (talk) 09:31, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Steve,

It's good to hear from you. Your baby girl must be no longer a baby at this point!

I'm ashamed to admit that's my first new article in many months. It was actually my readings on the genocide that got me on this topic. Once I dug into the background of the Akazu, much of the political role of the Bakiga (labelled "northern Hutu" in a lot of contemporary sources) becomes clear, and their political peculiarities are linked into the fact that they, like the southwestern kingdoms, avoided the consolidation under Rwabugiri and were forced into the nation by the colonial power. I keep intending to wade into Rwandan Genocide and the Congo wars, but right now I think I'm more interested in expanding Rwabugiri and clarifying the role of uburetwa/ubuhake from pre-Rwabugiri through the colonial period.

This is all assuming that I don't spend another three months mostly off-wiki, of course, which is much more likely than some sort of productive period. ;)

Best, Banyan Tree 10:04, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed - we're into the terrible twos now, though she's still mostly a delight when not drawing on the walls or unpacking the entire contents of drawers!

I've been in a similar wiki-limbo to yourself for pretty much two years now, always with this notion that I'm going to dive in and get a second FA to my name at some point (preferably to the Rwanda article, with original inspiration from User:Amcaja's promotion of Cameroon). One of these days! In the mean time I'll content myself with reading the interesting new content that you've added about the peripheral kingdoms (and consider abstractly how the whole lot might be synthesized into one paragraph for the purposes of the succinct history in Rwanda). SteveRwanda (talk) 17:25, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sylvestre Mudacumura

I reckon we ought to create an article on this really nice kind helpful chap, who's been thoroughly misrepresented by the world media :-(!! Prunier 2009 doesn't even mention him in his index. Do you have any material on him? Buckshot06 (talk) 06:38, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... not even the slightest mention of him in my book indices. The New Times states he was part of the Rwandan Presidential Guard during the genocide and Wilson Center says: "he was the deputy commander of the presidential guard of the FAR during the 1994 genocide.", so I even looked up occurrences of "presidential guard" as well as "Mudacumura" and skimmed pages with "FDLR" and nothing. He seems to have been sufficiently mid-level that, even if he is mentioned, nobody bothered to put him in the index. Just so you don't double the work, I went through The Congo Wars by Turner, The Dynamics of Violence in Central Africa by Lemarchand, When Victims Become Killers by Mamdani, The Troubled Heart of Africa by Edgerton, Eyewitness to a Genocide by Barnett, Conspiracy to Genocide by Melvern and, as a last desperate attempt, Shake Hands with the Devil by Dallaire.

Still there's enough out there for a stub. I'll put it on my to-do list if you don't handle it first.

Cheers, Banyan Tree 08:35, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, due seeing Romkena's piece, knew his background, but information on him prior to 1994 seems very scant. Went through Shake Hands With the Devil myself. What about that 'standard' work by that HRW worker - can't remember the name. Something about 'piled bodies'? By the way, have you seen S/2009/603, dated 9 November 2009, the leaked report of the Group of Experts? It's at [3] Addendum: the book I was thinking of, listed in Dallaire's bibliography, was Alison Des Forges' Leave None to Tell the Story. I'm trying to think where I might get that. Buckshot06 (talk) 03:57, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pulled from my bookshelf userpage: Des Forges, Alison (1999). Leave None to Tell the Story: Genocide in Rwanda. Human Rights Watch. ISBN 978-1564321718.

I've used the online edition myself for articles, though you could use the ISBN link to find a copy to buy, I suppose.

"Mudacura" does not occur in Des Forges. The HRW report I just used as a source for Military of the Democratic Republic of the Congo has several paragraphs on Mudacura that basically boil down to "He really is the FDLR leader and he should be nicer." He's a bit of an enigma apparently. - Banyan Tree 04:46, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neither does Prunier, The Rwanda Genocide 1959-1994, mention him. Anyway the draft is at User:Buckshot06/Sylvestre Mudacumura - please feel free to edit it at any time. Romkena and Vennhoop say 'he has a well documented genocide file' which ICTR would have some of, no doubt. Buckshot06 (talk) 07:08, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since you've been looking at academics, would you mind giving me your opinion of the notability of Francis Beer? Buckshot06 (talk) 07:41, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[undent] Meh, never heard of him, or at least not often or prominently enough to remember hearing about him. References to him in Google books ([4] & [5]) seem to indicate that he is not "more notable than the average college instructor/professor", which is probably the standard one would have to fall back on. That said, while I'm an eventualist in most things wiki, I'm an outright inclusionist for academic journals and academics, as I believe they're valuable as bluelinks in references. So even if I wouldn't start an article on him, I'm not tempted do anything besides trim it down to a a paragraph or two of bio and academic description and list of works to remove the COI self congratulations. Like I said, meh. - Banyan Tree 10:23, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, also it looks like you're still cutting and pasting from different sources for the draft Sylvestre Mudacumura article before smoothing it out and rewording. I'll wait until there's a live version to see if there's anything I should add. Thanks, Banyan Tree 10:32, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've now got hold of Leave None to Tell the Story, and the presidential guard commander was a major, which could make Mudacumura a captain, which might well explain why he isn't mentioned. On another front, do you know anything of the town of Ngerengere in Tanzania? We have an article for the river, but not the town. The reason is the Tanzanians' only flying jet fighters, Shenyang F-6s, are reported at that airfield by Air Forces Monthly, November 2009, p.29. Cheers and best wishes for Christmas, Buckshot06 (talk) 01:21, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at Google Maps, that doesn't look like an actual town at all. A single runway (with fighters on both the north and south ends), maybe one hanger, and groupings of buildings that are too large and well organized to be a real village, so I'm assuming it's barracks, housing, and administrative and maintenance buildings supporting the planes. Seems to be an air base only, rather than a town with neighboring base. Happy holidays, Banyan Tree 01:09, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you had a good Christmas and new year's as well. Sylvestre Mudacumura is live now, so please contribute when you can. Best wishes for 2010.. Buckshot06 (talk) 01:22, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey thanks for cleaning that up - it was very rough, bordering on copyvios, but thought we needed to have the information. Thanks again, Buckshot06 (talk) 02:37, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Anytime. - Banyan Tree 03:09, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Veined Octopus

I nominated it on WP:ITN/C. Please feel free to make comments. --BorgQueen (talk) 09:00, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Derm

Do you have an interest in dermatology-related content? If so, I am always looking for more help ;) ---kilbad (talk) 05:01, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, no. I was simply looking at the gruesome conditions I might expect now that I'm considering running more than 15K weekly, and saw an edit that seemed helpful. Thanks for the invite though. - Banyan Tree 05:20, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Harold Brathwaite Secondary School

In 2007, you deleted Harold Brathwaite Secondary School as unduly promotional. Could you please restore it, either to my userspace or to article space? These days, most high school articles are kept at AfD, and unduly promotional text in them is dealt with by cutting the article down as much as necessary rather than deleting it (at least, that's how I prefer to deal with it. It's possible that an earlier version of the article was less promotional. – Eastmain (talk) 04:20, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been restored and moved to User:Eastmain/Harold Brathwaite Secondary School. I agree that it likely wouldn't have been deleted outright if nominated today. Please improve the article to the necessary standard before moving it back into the main namespace. Cheers, Banyan Tree 14:21, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello BanyanTree! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 34 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Salva Kiir Mayardit - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Beres Hammond - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 21:28, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for taking the time to comment at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people, which will delete the vast majority of 50,000 articles created by 17,400 editors, mostly new editors. Good luck fixing your two BLPs. Ikip 04:40, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Though I'm really only interesting in the Kiir article. I'll be interested to see if the Hammond article gets deleted under the "unsourced is assumed to be contentious" rationale the BLP crusaders seem to be pushing these days. - Banyan Tree 03:51, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion invitation

Click here to
automatically
add this project
to your
watchlist

Hi Renamed user ixgysjijel/Archive 16, I would like to invite you and anyone watching who shares an interest in moving forward constructively to a discussion about Biographies of Living People

New editors' lack of understanding of Wikipedia processes has resulted in thousands of BLPs being created over the last few years that do not meet BLP requirements. We are currently seeking constructive proposals on how to help newcomers better understand what is expected, and how to improve some 48,000 articles about living people as created by those 17,500 editors, through our proper cleanup, expansion, and sourcing.

These constructive proposals might then be considered by the community as a whole at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people.

Please help us:

>> User:Ikip/Discussion about creation of possible Wikiproject:New Users and BLPs <<

Ikip 05:06, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(refactored) Ikip 04:42, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As Groucho Marx said, "I wouldn't join any club that would have me as a member." Please take me off whatever spam list you put me on. - Banyan Tree 05:05, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, refactored, i was naive to do that, and you wont get anymore messages from me :) Ikip 04:42, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

John Numbi

Another really helpful, kind chap that is misportrayed by most of the media. Do your sources have anything on him? I think he deserves an article. Buckshot06 (talk) 02:01, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I started an article at John Numbi. Only Prunier seems to mention him, but he says that Numbi is part of the small ruling clique. (It's rather sad that this is the first article on one of those members.) I can't find anything on his early history, in particular how we went from head of Katangan youth thugs to the elder Kabila's inner circle. There's obviously a connection that is not being explained. In any case, he's an interesting fellow.

Can I ask you to look at the article by Snow I tucked into the footnotes? I can't figure out if he's a credible source or one of those 'experts' who relates every rumor he hears on the street in Goma as gospel truth. Thanks, Banyan Tree 04:02, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I just found an stub for a member of Prunier's inner circle under a different title: Denis Kalume Numbi. Assuming that the Numbi surname isn't the result of someone conflating him with John Numbi, that implies a close relationship, probably the same lineage line within the Lubakat. Interesting. I wonder if all of the members are also Lubakat. - Banyan Tree 05:57, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the ICG's list of district commanders back in 01 (99?) listed a Dennis Numbi. It's a separate person. I'll look up the reference for the details at some point - right now I'm crashing on a deadline. Keep up all your (much appreciated!) hard work!! Buckshot06 (talk) 04:05, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum - you got the list of district commanders I was meaning in ref 1. I'll look into the Snow article. Buckshot06 (talk) 11:06, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your Ridiculous Accusation

[6] Are you accusing me of blanking my own talk page? Your accusation is quite ridiculous. The discussion is carried on in the talk pages of the relevant articles. Do I need you permission to clean up my talk page? I believe, due to your own policy, you will not delete this comment until the dispute between you and me is settled.218.216.99.67 (talk) 08:51, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can probably count the number of times I've blanked something on my own talk page over the past five years on one hand, and this hardly rises to the level required.

The last edit by another user to your talk page was a warning that you were violating WP:3RR. Two hours later, you removed that warning, along with other various discussions indicating a pattern of disruptive and/or tendentious editing, without an attempt to respond to the issues raised. It certainly gives the appearance that you are removing content from your discussion page that portray you in a bad light, which is most of the discussions.

So yes, I will continue to revert attempts by you to remove current or recent disputes/warnings from your own talk page. If you continue, I will treat it like any other vandalism, including by removing your editing privileges. I consider that fair warning. Also, I encourage you to use the system described at Help:Archiving a talk page when your talk page becomes overly long. Blanking old discussion, even by users who don't habitually get into disputes, is considered somewhat anti-social. Thanks, Banyan Tree 09:47, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, read wiki policy. WP:DRC

"If a user removes a comment from their own talk page it should not be restored."

WP:UP#CMT

"Policy does not prohibit users, including both registered and anonymous users, from removing comments from their own talk pages, although archiving is preferred. The removal of a warning is taken as evidence that the warning has been read by the user. Deleted warnings can still be found in the page history. Repeatedly restoring warnings does nothing but antagonize users, and can encourage further disruption; removal of template warnings is rarely an urgent or important matter, and it is often best to simply let the matter rest if other disruption stops."

I can also count the number of blanking of my talk page. Once. You can see here. [7] In the entire history of my talk page, the size decreased only three times. Once by you, once by Caspian blue and once by myself. Are you saying cleaning up once is too much?

Lets see what I deleted on February 1. [8]

-I deleted a welcome message.

-I deleted a 2 year old comment by Wikipeditor, who asked for a source which has been provided.

-I deleted comments by User talk:Caspian blue about mimizuka. The topic was extensively discussed in the talk page of mimizuka. If you read the page, you can see his accusation was baseless.

-I deleted 3RR by Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) about Japanese addressing system. The topic is discussed in the talk:Japanese addressing system. I did not reverted 3 times, in the first place.

Your comment on Battle of Nicopolis is left there, because that was about a contribution by someone who happens to share the ID with me.

You wrote, "indicating a pattern of disruptive and/or tendentious editing, without an attempt to respond to the issues raised." You are wrong. I responded at the relevant talk page or the talk page of the user.

If you revert my talk page again, I will call a real administrator of your behavior against wiki policy.218.216.99.67 (talk) 12:13, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

218.216.99.67, even a short edit summary, to say "issues resolved", would have averted this. Wizzy…☎ 12:28, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wizzy, while I appreciate the sentiment, I don't feel the need to be defended here. None of the pages quoted by 218 above has reached the consensus required for policy, being either a guideline or essay, and the encouragement to use common sense in interpreting guidelines seems to easily cover users who respond to warnings that may lead them to being blocked by immediately removing them without comment.

I for one do not go through every user talk page page history when evaluating whether a block is warranted to see if warnings have just disappeared, and I very much doubt most admins do either. If 218 feels that he has addressed his concerns elsewhere on the wiki, he can either note those related discussions in his talk page sections, or in his edit summaries. But I will continue to treat users who blank warning-filled talk pages without remark, esp current warnings, as being disruptive and subject to the same warning progression, escalating blocks, page protections, etc as any other vandal.

I am not attached to my adminship, and there is very little keeping me editing but momentum. 218 has nothing to hold over me. (Well, he could waste the little time I spend on-wiki with administrative drama, but I think he was looking for something a bit more fear-inducing.) - Banyan Tree 16:09, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be stubborn. Let us see what other people think of your policy. You wrote in my talk page, "Please do not blank your page when there are current discussions, especially discussions involving possible disruption."[9]

Yes, I deleted comments by Caspian blue and Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) in my talk page. But they also deleted my comments in their talk pages.[10][11]

I think they have rights to delete my comments there, but you would disagree.

Why do not you go to their talk pages and restore my comments there? Let us see what their reaction will be against your policy.218.216.99.67 (talk) 01:47, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take that as a compliment.

You really don't understand that users are judged by how they act? I recognize Kintetsubuffalo as a long time editor with many valued contributions, though I don't think we've interacted in several years. I'm vaguely familiar with Caspian blue, though his or her user page and user talk page confirms my initial impression of a long time user with a deep history of contributions and collaborations. You may think that you're a constructive editor being victimized by a power mad admin, but your talk page is that of someone who repeatedly runs right up to the edge of disruption, and then a little over, and then ignores warnings. In other words, someone who has run through the supply of good faith given to newcomers and hasn't bothered to build any credibility of his own. This is particularly the case as the only constructive interaction on your user talk page (the one with me) is, by your assertion, not even with you. If you want to be treated like you've been around for years and have a load of constructive contributions to use for social credibility, you're going to have to contribute constructively for years.

You can see Kintetsubuffalo's reasons for removing sections without comment at the top of his page. Which do you think he found your post: irrelevant, preachy, or pedantic? As for Caspian blue, do you think he finds you among the "socks, vandals, trolls, stalkers, jerks, and all sort of disruptive people"? In other words, you think you've been treated like any other user when you've had your posts removed, when you've actually been treated like a marginal editor who hasn't yet done anything to merit blocking or banning. You might want to rethink your approach if you want others to think your opinion worth listening to.

You have plenty of options that allow you to move forward: you can blank your page linking to this discussion "User talk:BanyanTree#Your Ridiculous Accusation" in your edit summary, which is still anti-social but at least provides visitors with an explanation if they're looking for one; you can add links to the related discussions in the sections of your own user page so other visitors to your page can easily find explanations; or you can start an account and walk away from this whole business, which will also remove the confusion between you and the other person on your IP address. You might also want to continue trying to engage me in argument rather than taking any of these constructive options, but that will likely not have the effect you desire. - Banyan Tree 05:01, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your behavior is double standard. Why do not you apply your policy to Caspian blue and Kintesu? The answer is obvious. If you ever do that, they will be mad at you. Anyone will get offended if someone restores deleted comment in his/her talk page. Such kind of offending behavior is called anti-social, which you love to do.

Let me add some more wiki policies about user talk page, which you seem to ignore.

-WP:HUSH"Placing numerous false or questionable "warnings" on a user's talk page, 'restoring such comments after a user has removed them, placing "suspected sockpuppet" and similar tags on the user page of active contributors, and otherwise trying to display material the user may find annoying or embarrassing in their user space is a common form of harassment."

-WP:VAN#Types_of_vandalism Discussion page vandalism "Note: The above rules do not apply to a user's own talk page. Editors are granted considerable latitude over editing their own userspace pages (including talk pages), and blanking one's own user talk page is specifically not prohibited. A policy of prohibiting users from removing warnings from their own talk pages was considered and rejected on the grounds that it would create more issues than it would solve."

-WP:UW/FAQ#How_about_creating_a_user_warning_template_... "There is consensus that users are free to remove content from their talk page. Previous templates that did warn users not to remove warnings were deleted based on this consensus. This consensus is also reflected in the defeat of a proposal to prohibit users from removing warnings. Even if deleted, warnings given to a user can be found in the history of the user's talk page." 218.216.99.67 (talk) 07:46, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:TALK#User talk pages and Admin reverted the restoration.―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 08:43, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I state above, that's a guideline, not policy, subject to common sense interpretation. It is common sense that removing recent/current warnings makes the task of subsequent users who may be adding escalating warnings or admins evaluating the suitability for a block more difficult and should be reverted. I have done so in the past and intend to do so in the future, until such time that the community decides that admins are expected to use their brains even less than they are now and reaches a consensus on a policy spelling out the right of potential vandals to bury evidence of their apparent disruption in the page history. I don't think I can be any clearer than that. Cheers, Banyan Tree 09:02, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Abraham Shakespeare

On February 14, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Abraham Shakespeare, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 06:01, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for John Numbi

On February 16, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article John Numbi, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 06:18, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BanyanTree, hope you're well. What do you think of this [12] accusatory review of Prunier? How solid can we really trust him? Buckshot06 (talk) 00:10, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Buckshot06. I have been well, though largely inactive on the wiki since I cleared my watchlist over a month ago.

I actually had to evaluate Odom vs Prunier while expanding Kibeho Massacre, where I saw his one star review that points to his Small Wars Journal review, and in particular Gersony Report, where Odom casts aspersions on both Prunier and Alison des Forges. The Kibeho Massacre is what is being referred to to in the line, "In exile, [Seth] Sendashonga pandered a story of RPF killings that challenged credibility." Of des Forges HRW report, Odom states, "I would rate her entire chapter on the RPF and RPA at the end of the book very poorly because it is largely hyperbolic guesswork built on doubtful sources." Among people who treat des Forges as gospel are René Lemarchand (The Dynamics of Violence in Central Africa). Marie Béatrice Umutesi, whose 2000 memoir (Surviving the slaughter: the ordeal of a Rwandan refugee in Zaire) I recently finished and which has a foreword by Catharine Newbury (political scientist and wife of fellow Rwanda scholar luminary David Newbury), is least credible when discussing big picture events in which she is not directly involved but still states an 8000 dead figure at Kibeho repeatedly.

So, all in all, I got Odom on one side of the Kibeho/Sendashonga/Gersony issue. On the other side, we have explicit contradiction by Prunier and des Forges, with secondary support by Lemarchand and the doubtful support of Umutesi. In my mind, based purely on credentials, Odom loses any argument in which he goes up against that sort of academic firepower. As a military attache tasked with carrying out assistance to and joint activities with the RPA, Odom had very good access for some issues but he doesn't strike me as someone who would have even talked to the dissidents and Hutu peasants he would need to in order to evaluate claims of mass killings, rather than the Kigali-based diplomats and RPA officers that would have been his natural circle of contacts. Odom praises Prunier and des Forges in general but lambasts them in particular, and does the same with the line comparing Prunier's earlier book, "In contrast to those efforts, this book is neither good history nor good journalism." My overall impression is that Odom thinks scholarship is good when he agrees with it and bad when he disagrees.

This is not to say that I think Prunier is right in all aspects. I actually saw a few points relating to my own area of in-depth knowledge that were off. Nothing major, but some out-of-order series of loosely connected events and such, which are understandable given the scope of the work. In my first read through, I had actually looked up the footnote for the American mercenary item that Odom pounces on and decided then and there not to include it on the wiki unless I could find a separate piece of backing evidence. Definitely worth a raised eyebrow, but no more than Odom's insistence that the RPA never killed anybody before the AFDL invasion because it was all the fault of Hutu Power insurgents and, even if the RPA did kill civilians, they were forced into it by the Hutu Power insurgents and it isn't really a big deal anyway because what's a few thousand Hutu in a genocide of 800,000?

Generally speaking, I feel comfortable using Prunier in general and including points of disagreement, from Odom and others, where they exist and seem well-grounded, though how I weight my phrasing changes from case to case. As Wikipedia editors are never supposed to let personal judgment affect their writing, don't tell on me. ;) Banyan Tree 11:06, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for that solid discussion. I'm not specialising in the genocide at all, so I very much appreciate your evaluation. Stay well and have fun!! Buckshot06 (talk) 19:16, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Final discussion for Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 02:03, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Flood picture date

Hi. That picture is probably from April 6th; the EXIF dates may be wrong (e.g. see the description of [13])~~, but I forgot to correct that particular page~~. --AVRS (talk) 11:17, 8 April 2010 (UTC), 11:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that's quite confusing, isn't it? Thanks for straightening it out. - Banyan Tree 02:29, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I've asked the author: http://www.flickr.com/photos/xper/4497205894/#comment72157623679199633. Since this flood was the biggest one, that must mean the EXIF dates are wrong. --AVRS (talk) 10:13, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Berti Language

Hi,

you put an article in 2006 about Berti Language on wiki.

I need to get in contact with someone who has knowledge about the Berti extinct language.

Can you help? Thanks, Monike —Preceding unsigned comment added by MonikeMMPA (talk • contribs) 15:15, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry. All of my knowledge is strictly academic from various sources that mention it is passing and pretty much all that I know is already in the article Berti language. I see you have already received a response at User talk:Kwamikagami#Berti / Berti Language. Kwamikagami and the editors he normally hangs out with tend to specialize in African languages and ethnic groups, so Akerbeltz's suggestion is probably your best lead. I tend to flit from subject to subject.

As for your question about when the language went extinct, please see the citation found at the end of that paragraph in the article for more. I seem to have pulled "1990s" out from the lines "Of other peoples living in Darfur in the 1990s who spoke Nilo-Saharan languages and were at least nominally Muslim, the most important were the Masalit, Daju, and Berti. ... The Berti tongue had largely given way to Arabic as a home language." Looking at it again, I may have expanded a sentence meant to apply only to the group northeast of Al Fashir to all Berti. Go ahead and fix it if it turns out that that is the case.

Good luck, Banyan Tree 16:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:UNAMIR ribbon.gif

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:UNAMIR ribbon.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:19, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See User talk:RaptureBot#Hydro-Québec logo for more. - Banyan Tree 10:19, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Country Turtle Records

Hi BanyanTree, could you please be so kind as to have a look at this and tell me if I'm completely wrong in my opinion about that label's notability !?! StefanWirz (talk) 09:46, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Stefan,

Sorry to say, but I think you're going to lose that argument. Do you know of any sources, including written sources offline, that address the importance the label? A mention in any book that says, "Country Turtle Records published/reissued [Important Artist X]" or "... is important for action Y"? At that point, the argument will be about if that book or source is credible. Right now you're arguing "I know it's important so you have to trust me", which tends to not do very well in deletion discussions. - Banyan Tree 10:17, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your quick answer, which I was afraid of ... (therefore I "asked" and didn't holler for help ;-) StefanWirz (talk) 10:24, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Rather interesting"

Yes, could be unequivocal from a reviewer; but it was the nominator who introduced the nomination like that! Tony (talk) 04:23, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I figured, which makes it even funnier. I love the way an editor who spends days or weeks on an article will put it out for review diffidently. - Banyan Tree 04:35, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Banyan, if you're interested in being in the copy-editing team at The Signpost, you'd be welcome. Only problem is, the rush happens each week just on Mondays and Tuesdays, and often just before HaeB launches the publication. It's dramatic! Tony (talk) 12:13, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the offer, but I'm still barely on the wiki these days. I think I've got more edits in the past day than in the past month but am a long way from considering myself active. I'll be sure to keep up the copyediting whenever I catch the Signpost early. Cheers, Banyan Tree 23:24, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ITN for July 2010 Kampala attacks

On 12 July 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article July 2010 Kampala attacks, which you created. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--Nicely done. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:27, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks muchly. - Banyan Tree 02:29, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey?

It is not your place to revert my edits.--Cool150 (talk) 06:53, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Buried vandalism

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

Julia Roberts

Hi. I reverted the rowspans you added back; please don't do that, as it breaks the sorting. Cheers, Jack Merridew 02:12, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's silly. Hopefully someone has told the devs. - Banyan Tree 02:17, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of idle curiosity, what benefit does sorting have that overrides the cleaner style of grouping years? I can't think of any way I read a filmography where I have wanted to sort by character, etc, rather than year. - Banyan Tree 02:23, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not really a dev issue; the sort code is around here, somewhere. I think. It's not something that can readily be fixed, either. Consider sorting by title; all the 2007, for example, will be scattered to non-consecutive spots. But with rowspans, there's only one copy of the year. The sorting code would have to dynamically create the missing cells on the fly. I'm not holding my breath. There is a parallel reason to do it this way, too: accessibility. See User:RexxS/Accessibility for an example of a text to speech system getting all lost because some of the data is simply absent. Sorting by character name is somewhat problematic, I'll admit; some chars only have a first name, or something like "The Man". See the {{sortname}} usages in there for the titles, which is useful. Cheers, Jack Merridew 02:58, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply and the links. - Banyan Tree 03:15, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, and pleased to meet you. I've occasionally seen your user name go by but don't recall talking with you, before. Mebbe long ago, with one of my other accounts. I've been here a long time; a bit longer than you have. User:Rossrs and I are cleaning-up a lot of articles in this manner and we could use eyes on actor bios. There's been months of discussion leading up to this, but there's a lot of low-level push back from accounts and anons that have not ever heard any of it. I'm sure a bit of it is a few of the regular trolls trotting at my heels; they like to get caught-out that way. fyi, I've seen a lot of awesome Banyan trees. Cheers, Jack Merridew 03:37, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just to say hello

Greetings Banyan, long time no talk-page talk. I do not know what you do for a living, but I see you as a dedicated and selfless wiki-teacher, standing under a Banyan tree, telling the world about Africa. Wewe ni mwalimu mzuri sana. Ezeu (talk) 00:37, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ezeu! That's very kind, and it's good to talk to you again. Though I must be getting old in my wiki-age as I find adding content so much more strenuous than just passing through to format tables. Sigh. Hopefully someday I'll get some of the content from the books on my shelves onto the wiki. - Banyan Tree 04:40, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you are quite productive. Anyway, a good thing about Wikipedia is that one can contribute as much or little as one chooses, no pressure, not even for an admin. Few arrangements give that freedom. Ezeu (talk) 07:40, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A request

I have a request, can you please delete files that I was uploaded here, here and here. I am Corey.7.11.1992. I think that there is no need to be there, and because of that I want to be deleted. In the last two is a two files that I was uploaded by mistake and if you can just delete all I will be very grateful to you. Thanks in advance. Corey.7.11.1992 12:07, August 24, 2010 (UTC)

I have deleted the file revisions you uploaded. Cheers, Banyan Tree 03:45, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, that was exactly what I wanted. Thanks again. Corey.7.11.1992 11:09, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to disturb you again but I have another request if you can do because I asked another administrator and he replied that he does not know how to do that. Can you please delete everything I have in the view history here, here, here and here. I'm very sorry for that and I do not want that to be there. If you could just delete it or completely erase the view history, I will be again very grateful to you, and I will no more disturb you. Thank you. Corey.7.11.1992 8:38, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but deleting revisions from actual articles is subject to Wikipedia:Revision deletion#Criteria for redaction, under which I am allowed to delete article revisions. I do not believe that your request qualifies.

If you wouldn't mind me giving some advice - every editor spends a lot of time making mistakes, especially when they first start. It's the not the end of the world if there's a revision in the article history that shows that you messed up. If you really want to reduce the number of mistakes in the article history, I recommend using the "Show preview" button rather than "Save page" button. I usually preview 2-4 times before hitting save and almost all the edits I've made that I regret were made when I was too rushed to preview. The wiki will still be around if you take a few seconds to double check that you really want to say what you wrote. - Banyan Tree 03:32, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, then if you can't delete revisions from articles then delete just here and here. That are not articles, they are uploaded files like those where I also asked you to delete in my first request. You are deleted revisions from that uploaded files, can you do that also just here because I know that everybody makes mistakes but I can live with knowing that there are my mistakes. Thank you again and accept my sincere apology for the harassment. Corey.7.11.1992 6:16, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, been off wiki for a bit. Though it looks like it's all been either deleted or reverted, so there's no need for further action. Please note that even deletion of file revisions is quite unusual as normally everything stay public. I think it falls under the broad aegis of Wikipedia:Don't bite the newcomers, as enthusiastic new editors do all sorts of weird things. But it's certainly not something that I would make to make a habit of. - Banyan Tree 07:48, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Still I Rise

Hi, now that Still I Rise is a disambig page, could you help clean up the links that now point to the disambig per WP:FIXDABLINKS? Thanks, --JaGa^talk 13:00, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I thought I had seen someone with an automated or semi-automated process handling these sometime back but maybe they wandered off. I also had totally forgotten about the fair use image. Very bad editing.

Otherwise, most of these seem to be linked from either Template:Outlawz or Template:Tupac Shakur, the links for which back when I moved the title. I think some sort of cache may be kept or possibly there's another link on the template that I'm just missing. I tried purging the server cache for both the template and the 'what links here' page, as well as clearing my recent browsing history, to no effect. Otherwise, I'm stumped as to why they are still appearing. Can you take a second look and see if I'm missing something obvious? Cheers, Banyan Tree 03:16, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you've taken care of it. What's happening is, if you fix a link in a template, it takes a few days for the Wikipedia servers to refresh the page link lists from the pages that transclude that template. You can force it with a null edit on one of the "what links here" articles, but there's really no need - the servers will refresh the links eventually. Thanks much! --JaGa^talk 08:51, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chad

Could we give the article a try of unprotection, from June to August they were not much vandalism as other pages on PC. Thanks Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 03:29, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'm willing to give it a try, though I expect the rate of vandalism by children who know someone named Chad to jump once everyone is back in school after summer break. Aldux appears to be the only editor knowledgeable in the subject, so we're entirely reliant on him to catch non-obvious mistakes, which is a sad state of affairs for a featured article with a title that attracts vandals. We'll see. - Banyan Tree 05:22, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]