User talk:Neutrality/Archive 21

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Ranking 2 Rex 3 Editor's Barnstar 4 Image:Nixon 5 Terri Schiavo 6 Saints 7 Page on Liberal Bias 8 User:Stereotek 9 shuff 06:48, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC) 10 Terri Schiavo 11 Mumbai 12 Easy bible quoting in Wikipedia 13 You're the lucky first admin I saw 14 Wikipedia:Recent additions 15 Autofellatio vandal abusing your name on Klingon wikipedia 16 Terry Schaivo edit conflict 17 Thank You! 18 WP:RM 19 Numbers 20 Bad maps 21 Treaties of Paris 22 Open Tasks 23 Arbcom case closing 24 Colorphobia 25 Kalmar Union 26 Please come and vote! 27 216@John Kerry 28 Zürich to Zurich 29 Dr Cranford on Terri Schiavo page 30 issues about school articles 31 Tkorrovi vs Paul Beardsell 32 User:216.153.214.94 33 You are invited to dialog 34 Vote for deletion 35 Reincarnation of User:100% Americanism 36 Template:In the news 37 National flag images 38 ITN 39 Copper(II) chloride naming 40 VP:VFD 41 Moving Glacier National Park (US) 42 Freedom of Information Act move 43 References for Parthenon

[edit] Ranking

Please advise me on my talk page, you already archived the material so you probably be reading it later. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 07:23, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC) See what I came up with on my user page for a possible ranking system. While ranks imply seniority they do not of course imply power. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 21:37, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rex

Rex is evidently quite unmellowed by his 4-month holiday. So far, in just a few days, he's vandalized your user page, picked up a 24-hour block for 3RR violation, and now vandalized my user page. I believe that, last fall, I was too slow to try to do anything about his harassment. I didn't want to waste time going through various procedures about him when I could be working on articles. As a result, he ended up wasting more of my time than if I'd acted earlier. Having learned from that mistake, I don't want to repeat it. I suggest that you and I, as victims of user page vandalisms, jointly request mediation over those and other instances of Rex's conduct. Given that the 4-month partial block didn't shake any sense into him, I can't be very optimistic about mediation, but we might as well give it a try. Let me know if you agree, and I'll assemble the evidence JamesMLane 16:37, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

What about the both of you two, without cause, attacking "Rex's" edits just becuase they are his? PS: Perhaps I'll just change my IP address by requesting a new one from my DSL provider. Then, as JML does, I can have multiple ID's. How does that sound, Feldspar? 216.153.214.94 23:11, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

After I left you that note, I thought more about it and became less interested in the idea of mediation. What's it supposed to accomplish? Rex already knows he's not supposed to vandalize other people's user pages. His comment above shows that he's completely unrepentant and will continue to be as obstructive and antagonistic as the proejct will let him. I don't understand your comment about his IP address, though. I assume it's not a dynamic IP that might be shared by other users. Gamaliel blocked it for 24 hours yesterday, so if Rex's goal was to escape responsibility for his own actions, it isn't working. Perhaps it would be appropriate to ask the ArbCom for a longer block. I'm going to start collecting evidence at User:JamesMLane/Rexlog. Feel free to let me know what you think the next step should be. If you prefer not to be a complainant, I'll bring the RfAr myself; I might as well mention his vandalism of your user page, since I assume you'd have to recuse yourself anyway. JamesMLane 00:22, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

JML provokes edit wars and hurls insults, then wonders why there is trouble. And what about you Neutrality?... you reverted my own user page on me the other day. Unless and until you guys start backing off and leave me be, there will not be a cessation of charges and counter- charges. 216.153.214.94 03:21, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Editor's Barnstar

I award you this Editor's Barnstar, for recent efforts at Terri Schiavo, for you have demonstrated that Wiki masters create value by removing that without. Gentgeen 07:27, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Nixon

Would you mind taking a look at Image:Nixon.jpg? My gut is telling me that this is vandalism (well, it's fairly obvious?) but nothing actually links to it from articles and I was wondering if I had really ought to revert this or just change copyright info (since that's obviously not PD, more like fair use) or just leave it alone or what? Sorry about the randomness of the request, but you're the first learned community member that came to mind. Thanks! -SocratesJedi | Talk 07:48, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Appreciate the help. Perhaps something good will come of it too. Found the picture under a different title (it seems the uploader over Nixon.jpg was an accident?) and added a link to it in the Nixon in Fiction section of the Richard Nixon article. Nice illustration methinks. In any case, always glad to have admin support when needed. Thanks! -SocratesJedi | Talk 08:08, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Terri Schiavo

I would appreciate it if you would consult the current talk page before removing the picture again. In the past, no consensus was reached. (If I'm wrong, feel free to point me to where it occurred.) At the moment, Gmaxwell (who previously opposed including the picture) has agreed with me that it is possible and desirable to include the picture and explain the issues about it.

The two sections in the talk where this has been discussed are titled "Photos" and "Inappropriate Removal of Photo." (The first one is where I think Gmaxwell and I reached agreement.)

Rather than removing the photo, why don't you suggest changes we can make to the caption to help aid in making it as NPOV as possible? I would think that the fact that the media is massively using this image in order to imply that Schiavo is responding as if she were in a better state than most people think she is in would be a fact that both sides would want reported.

Jdavidb 06:18, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thank you! I appreciate and agree with both the move and the change in wording. I'm confident that we can have this image appropriately included in the article. Jdavidb 06:45, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

C'mon, man. You played so nice on the photo issue. Now get on the talk page and discuss what the wording should be about Operation Rescue.

At the very least, you should NOT change this back without noting in the edit summary. That's deceptive, and against Wikipedia policy. Jdavidb 07:07, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, again! I understand the editing is flying fast and furious, and with all the sheer JUNK that is coming at that article (I could not believe the number of edits tonight as I tried to go back and find a change made earlier today) it's not always feasible to take the time to run every issue by the talk page. But when possible, it beats a revert war.

Hopefully the peer review request will bring some more eyes. (And policemen... :) ) Jdavidb 07:33, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Neutrality, why did you revert my edits? If they were POV, please change--don't wipe out. Thanks! 70.57.139.181 07:39, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Saints

Should the category "Saint" on your favorite/personal page be renamed to "Christian saints"? I mean, when deciding which was your favorite saints, did you include Buddhist saints or Sufi saints--if not, it seems inaccurate to give the generic name "saint" to a category which more correctly is "Christian saints". Thanks! 70.57.139.181 10:01, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Page on Liberal Bias

Thanks for watching the page on Liberal bias. We could certainly use more help from others like yourself. At the moment, I'm locked in an edit conflict in a few other pages as well, so I would like to thank you for helping watch that page. I won't allow others to insert POV material without first providing links or evidence to substantiate their claims. Ethereal 03:27, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] User:Stereotek

This user is agresively revering almost all my edits claiming its pov. How do you suggest I deal with this? Same user was suposively "mediating" Armenian Genocide article. The amount of armenian agression I recive should cease. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 04:10, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Under control.

[edit] shuff 06:48, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

was the schiavo thing not neutral? there actually is an active countereffort, reported by the news, to keep her alive, is that not plainly factual, and worth encyclopedizing, given the scope of the article?

peace,

shuff 06:48, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

no prob, dude, keep on rockin'. : )

shuff 06:50, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

right, you use the <sup> tag, but the problem is actually, how do you prevent the extraneous garbage from showing up?

i put this into the preferences box:

Shuffdog^talk

and this comes out when i type ~~~:

[[User:Shuffdog|Shuffdog^talk]]

[edit] Terri Schiavo

Hey Neutrality, I normally agree with your edits.. but you just came in and reverted almost all of today's changes to the Terri Schiavo article, many of which were pretty good, almost all of which were very neutral, and some of which were the product of some good back and forth discussion and agreement. If you disagree with some of the specific changes, please change those points one at a time rather than reverting the entire article.Gmaxwell 18:47, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mumbai

I've noticed that you rate Sarajevo as your best city article. I was wondering if I could wean you away to Mumbai, my latest FA, in the hope that Mumbai would be higher rated by u. In August last you had opposed the nomination, I worked on it this month providing a comprehensive article. Nichalp 20:34, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Easy bible quoting in Wikipedia

Hi, I'm interested in Wikipedia finding an easy way to reference bible quotes. They are often given in various forms, such as Deut 4:16 or Deut. 4-16 or Deuteronomy 4:16, etc, etc. Basically, there should be some sort of standard here, and secondly, there should be a way to wikify these to make links to the source text, or to a page listing alternative source texts (such as KJV, Hebrew at Mechon Mamre [1], Greek LXX, JPS 1917 edition at Mechon Mamre, etc.) for that verse. I was wondering where you would suggest to propose this, and what you thought of this idea. A page like 613 Mitzvot could really do with it. --jnothman 04:14, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Unbound Bible has a nice comparison. The best way would be if you could include the initials for the version (such as KJV or NIV or YL), and it would link to that version. All you really need to do is find a site that includes the chapter name and verses in its URL, and you can make it work. -- BRIAN0918  04:25, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • It looks like BibleGateway.com will do this. All you need to do is make a template that makes a URL, and list on the talk page what the different version numbers correspond to. -- BRIAN0918  04:31, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm writing up a template now, let's see if it works. Check out: {{bibleverse}} -- BRIAN0918  04:34, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Thanks for your welcome, Neutral, although I've been around a while, I just have too many other committments to be particularly active. I'm not sure, Brian0918, about the use of biblegateway. In particular, from a Jewish and historical perspective, it is strange to provide a source without the Hebrew OT. Additionally, I'm not sure how templates work, but it would be useful to have a shorthand book name (Deut rather than Deuteronomy), and to display the citation as well as providing the link. --jnothman 04:38, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • You can use Deut and Sam instead of the full name. See the talk page for {{bibleverse}} for other comments. -- BRIAN0918  05:14, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] You're the lucky first admin I saw

Don't you feel special? Anyways, I couldn't find any wikipedia site for reporting trolls or suggesting members to ban or whatever, so I just picked the most visible admin. (Feel honoured?)

Anyways, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&hideminor=0&namespace=&target=24.19.81.7&limit=20&offset=0 (24.19.81.7) has "vandalized" the only two articles he's had any input on, both of them fairly obviously. (On one, basically stating "THis musician sucks, he's an arrogant prick, I hate him", on the other basically making up facts and removing actual facts about a Saudi minister I guess he has some feelings towards or something.)

Whatever, didn't see any benefit to him being allowed to continue ruining people's work and forcing me to visit his "contributions" page to revert his other article he ruined, so I'd be happy if you'd do whatever it is you admins do --Sherurcij 07:40, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Recent additions

While I appreciate your efforts in updating this page, I'd like to ask you to to take the items you add from the bottom of The archive section at Template talk:Did you know to avoid a number of items being skipped (which your edit did). Happy editing! 131.211.210.16 11:20, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Replies to MacGyverMagic, please!

[edit] Autofellatio vandal abusing your name on Klingon wikipedia

Well, the caption says is all - tlh:User:Neutrality replaced article on Klingon with the autofellatio image - now thanks to the deletion of the porn image just the drawing, but still annoying. I have reverted those edits, but now it needs an admin there to clean up some page move vandalism as well. I just noticed it as someone was redirected to the Thai wikipedia from Klingon, and left a confused note there - I am not interested in Klingon normally. Just thought I should let you know. andy 22:58, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Terry Schaivo edit conflict

Looks like about 4 people tried to report her death all at once but yours won... I'll back off for a few minutes to let you finish. Suggest you put the inuse tag on there! Cheers, Zerbey 15:04, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thank You!

Hi Neutrality,

I would like to thank you for your vote of support and confidence for my adminship, it has been much appreciated. If you need anything in future that requires my attention, please do not hesitate to contact me. :)

- Cheers, Mailer Diablo 18:27, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] WP:RM

Where do we go to vote on the Requested move? I was thinking about voting to support such a move. —ExplorerCDT 04:28, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• (Just kidding, while I'm inclined to delete the vandalism on the RM page, I can't while I'm still laughing at it —ExplorerCDT 04:37, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC))

[edit] Numbers

In the Schiavo article I found inconsistency of usage, with some numbers expressed in numerals and some in words. I made the usage consistent (as per the MoS), though I might have missed one or two. As normal English typographers' rules are to spell out words under 100, that was what I did. Do you have a particular argument against that approach? I'm going to bed now (sorry to leave a message and then run), but I'll get back to your reply as soon as I can. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:30, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Newspapers cut a lot of corners, of course, as they're under constant pressure of space. I've always been taught the over-100 rule, which is also to be found in Rees' Rules of Printed English:

202 Numbers under 100 should normally be spelt out.

203 Numbers of 100 and over should be expressed in figures.

The exception that I'd forgotten is when a number over 100 is associated with one under 100 ("Of every 100 children born, only 24 lived as long as a year"). Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 08:44, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

There are so many exceptions to this rule [2] that I wonder why it's worth one's getting into pxssing contest. Oh well, I guess that's just me. ;-) hydnjo talk 23:37, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Strunk & White says to use figures in nearly every case, so I do. — Xiong熊talk 18:35, 2005 Apr 20 (UTC)

[edit] Bad maps

Your help and common sense is needed. User:Kelisi, has been producing some maps and trying to replace the CIA maps for several Caribbean and South American countries. In my opinion these new maps (which have more detail than the CIA maps) are vastly inferior. They use garish colours, terrible decorative fonts, use a horribly large pixel size and are generally ugly and crowded, and look terribly amateurish and like they were produced on a Commodore 64 or something. Here is a list of maps he has produced . http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AContributions&target=Kelisi&hideminor=0&namespace=6. Perhaps the worst example is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Brazilmap.gif . Bizarrly these maps seems to have support from a few people who have been trying to push through their inclusion on several pages. Please see talk:Panama and talk:Honduras. Jooler 09:16, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Treaties of Paris

Hi, just wondering if you were planning to add the text of the various Treaties of Paris to Wikisource, 'cause there not there now. Seems bad form to replace an existing link to text that works with one to a non-existent page. older≠wiser 03:30, Apr 3, 2005 (UTC)

I'd like to ask you to account for your votes on the proposed decision talk page of my arb case. Thank you. Everyking 21:55, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Open Tasks

When adding new requests to the open tasks, please move unfulfilled ones to the standby rather then just deleting them. That way they won't be lost forever. Or, better yet, you can just add your suggestions to the standby and they will be added after the next request are fulfilled. Thanks. --Dmcdevit 04:01, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Arbcom case closing

If you're going to close cases, please remember to update Template:ArbComOpenTasks, Template:ArbComCases, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Completed requests, and to notify all of the disputants involved that the case has closed (and that any users subject to a remedy are notified of the conditions that now apply to them). Oh, and don't forget Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Admin enforcement requested, either. It saves people like me from having to go around and tie up loose ends of this nature. Thanks. -- Grunt   ҈  14:26, 2005 Apr 4 (UTC)

[edit] Colorphobia

Hi Neutrality,

When starting the afrophobia article it led to the colorphobia article. First read the words colorphobia in a book by Frederick Douglass. He used it to describe the behavior of a "weak abolitionist". Since starting the afrophobia article noticed a number of articles that needed tending to such as starting one on William Wells Brown, Harriet Tubman's most famous quote was missing from her article, and the Slave Narrative article seems to be nearly all red links. Have started adding references sources that will be used to improve the colorphobia article as well. --Nazikiwe 00:36, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Kalmar Union

You seem to be attached to the wording "the Union was the period".

I wonder if that couldn't be improved.

This is the more relevant as the Union's significance, except as an catalysator for strifes and wars, is concentrated to Queen Margrete's reign.

--Johan Magnus 13:06, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Please come and vote!

Following the long discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese) regarding proper titling of ROC-/Taiwan-related topics, polls for each single case has now been started here. Please come and join the discussion, and cast your vote. Thanks. — Instantnood 06:24, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 216@John Kerry

Warning? Block? What's going on over there with the massive reverts? — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 02:49, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Oh, okay, makes sense. And thanks for the welcome :) — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 02:58, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It wasn't quite what everyone made it out to be :( lol — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 03:05, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Zürich to Zurich

Zürich has been nominated on Wikipedia:Requested moves for a page move to Zurich. Perhapse you might like to express your opinion about this proposed move on talk:Zürich. Philip Baird Shearer 10:30, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dr Cranford on Terri Schiavo page

Hey, I put in the mention that Dr. Cranford was a proponent of euthenasia because it seems to be supported by some links provided in the talk section for Terri Schiavo and because people are screaming bloody murder about POV in the article. i.e. pointing out problems of bias with the Schindler doctors but not pointing out that Cranford supports euthenasia. Maybe "euthenasia" isn't the right word, but if you remove it completely, some people are gonna bitch that it biases the article. He's a right to die advocate. Maybe that's the better phrase. I dunno. I can't even put a comma in the article without certain people complaining that it biases the article though. FuelWagon 00:30, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The talk page discusses Cranford's position and possible bias here [3]

FuelWagon 00:36, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] issues about school articles

In November 2003, there was a VfD debate over Sunset High School (Portland). The debate was archived under Talk:Sunset High School (Portland). What to do with the article is still being contested and has been recently re-nominated for VfD at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Sunset High School (Portland).

I am writing to you because you have participated in such debates before. There still does not exist a wikipedia policy (as far as i can tell) over what to do in regards to articles about specific U.S. public school. My hope is that a real consensus can come out of the debate, and a real policy can take shape. Take part if you are so willing. Kingturtle 02:36, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tkorrovi vs Paul Beardsell

User Chinasaur moved comments from Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Tkorrovi vs. Paul Beardsell, remaining his there and moving mine [4], just after I put a link on an evidence page to that page [5] because it contains important information. Also, he moved a question about his nationality to my talk page [6]. I understand the reason, but I demand for me an equal right, to remove mentioning my nationality against my will by Matthew Stannard from that page (unfortunately cannot provide diff, as the commentary was moved that after).Tkorrovi 02:54, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] User:216.153.214.94

Neutrality, can you explain the indefinite ban on the 216.153.214.94 account? I assume this has to do with the recent arbcom ruling on User:Rex071404. Unless I am mistaken, though, there is no current ban on Rex's editing of political articles (his last arbcom ruling ban ran out a while back, and his new arbcom ruling has yet to be decided). Can you comment on WP:AN under the thread that Rex has started? Cheers. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 18:25, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] You are invited to dialog

Please take note, I have dedicated a special page for dialog with you here: User:Rex071404/dialog.with.Neutrality.

I ask that prior to reverting any edits of mine or taking any administrative actions against me or regarding me, you leave me a message on the above page. Within reasonable limits, I will read and respond to every note or message you leave for me there. Also, I ask that you refrain from future reverts on my talk page such as these you made here:[7] and [8]

Thank you.

Rex071404 ^{216.153.214.94} 07:27, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I have left a reply to you on the "dialog page" User:Rex071404/dialog.with.Neutrality. Please watch that page as I intend to keep my full comments to you there. If our dialog goes well over time, I will cease to expect problems from you. Until then, I have reservations. Rex071404 ^{216.153.214.94} 14:10, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

New message for you, see: User:Rex071404/dialog.with.Neutrality

Rex071404 ^{216.153.214.94} 16:38, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Vote for deletion

Hi, see the {{vfd}} ("Vote for Deletion") concerning the various sub-categories for Jewish people at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion#Re:Sub-Categories of Jewish people [9]. Thank you. IZAK 10:09, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Reincarnation of User:100% Americanism

I was patrolling recent changes and caught User:Freedom's avenger vandalizing User_talk:Curps with a hammer and sickle. I reverted the vandalism and gave him a warning on his talk page. I think that User:Freedom's avenger is a reincarnation of User:100% Americanism whom you just banned. He made the same edit claiming that a newspaper's editorial leanings were "communist". Can we also delete User:100% Americanism's offensive user page? Firebug 02:26, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Now he's calling himself User:Operation Wikipedian Freedom and vandalizing again in the exact same manner. Can you block his IP address? Firebug 02:28, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Template:In the news

Hi Neutrality :) I reverted you on {{In the news}} because I think you accidentally copied+pasted something. No hard feelings? Feel free to try to do whatever you wanted to do again, I just wanted to make sure the main page looked okay. -Frazzydee|✍ 17:06, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] National flag images

You created a number of templates concerning national flags and asserted in those templates that images of national flags cannot be copyrighted. From my understanding of copyright you were incorrect in doing that. Whilst the flags themselves may not be copyrightable, images of them are independent works for copyright purposes and can thus be copyrighted. Such images are often not slavish reproductions and thus qualify for copyright protection in the US. I've created some new templates to allow more accurate labelling of flag images, but there are still many, many of them that need going through and sorting out. For example, for those from the CIA World Factbook, which really are public domain, we need to put the appropriate categorising tag in place. David Newton 23:10, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in here. If there are some flags over which doubt reigns, we can take undoubtedly PD images from Openclipart.org. If someone drops me a note, I can render a PNG of any flag there (it's pretty comprehensive) at any size required. -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 23:17, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

That's one of the reasons I introduced the Open Clipart labelling tag on the copyright tags page. Also if you look at the large British flag you should find that there's SVG source that should reliably reproduce the British Union Flag. I made it earlier today a licensed it under the GFDL. David Newton 00:18, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] ITN

Good job for including the mention of textbook demonstrations, but why the empasis on anti-Japanese sentiment? Protesting a government policy is not the same as harboring anti-ethnic sentiment, so why the mis-emphasis? -SV|t|add 00:19, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Copper(II) chloride naming

Neutrality,

I notice that you moved the copper(II) chloride page to copper (II) chloride. This new name goes against the IUPAC system of inorganic naming described here. The Stock naming system with Roman numerals needs to have the (II) next to the copper to make it clear that the II relates to the copper, not to the chloride. You can see that the German version of this page follows this system as well. I realise that this goes against normal rules of English, but who said that chemists were normal?!

Please can you move it back, as now this page is out of style compared with iron(III) chloride, copper(I) chloride, manganese(II) chloride, cobalt(II) chloride etc. Thanks, Walkerma 18:22, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Walkerma 15:08, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] VP:VFD

Neutrality, if you are going to delete pages from WP:VFD, then please close the discussions (see Wikipedia:Deletion process). Thanks. – ABCD 01:11, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Moving Glacier National Park (US)

Hi, Neutrality. The suffix (US) for the article was discussed at Wikipedia Talk:Naming conventions (acronyms)#Changing article titles from XXXXX (US) to XXXXX (United States). The consensus from that discussion, codified at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (acronyms), preferred (US) to other forms such as (U.S.) and (United States). I then went through and tried to fix a lot of the links.

Would you consider undoing your article move, since it contravenes the codified consensus? Thanks! -- hike395 04:54, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Freedom of Information Act move

The placement of the article at Freedom of Information Act (United States) was the result of a vote on "Request for Move". Please move the article back from Freedom of Information Act so that Freedom of Information Act be a disambiguation page. Jooler 07:24, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Please ignore. The issue is now resolved. Jooler

[edit] References for Parthenon

Hi, you added the sources and further reading section with this edit. I can't see anywhere conversation about those being used properly, but I assume you did. But since further reading can just be any work, not used at all, listed to be made available for more information, that section should be split or renamed to correct the situation. Can you take care of that since you added them? Thanks - Taxman 16:58, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)