User talk:WilliamH/Archive 3

Re:thanks

No problem..... good luck. Also i see you live in suffolk.... I DO TO (-=Itfc+canes=me (talk) 16:21, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Bujinkan

Dear WilliamH,

The lock you put on the Bujinkan article is unjustified. Considering the fact if you read the discussion page on the Bujinkan, a compromise between me and user Jikaku and Nate was reached. But unfortunately user Jikaku and Nate have gone back on their word and repeated refused to honor the compromise that we had reached. I strongly urge you to reverse the lock. And I give you a few days to consider before I must take this matter to a higher authority. It is a known fact that the Bujinkan teaches Ninjutsu, and user Jikaku and Nate repeatedly put POV edits to make it look like Bujinkan is not teaching ninjutsu. Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 18:15, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

*cough* um when did I put they were not teaching what they describe as ninjutsu? The dispute was over if the bujinkan was a ninja organisation, and all I have done for the last two weeks is fix formatting issues, please check the history. --Nate1481(^t/_c) 19:53, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

The User Jikaku and Nate1481 had repeatedly reverted to a non-agreed upon version of the Bujinkan article despite us reaching a compromise. Please take a look at edit history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.179.120 (talk) 20:55, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I think Nate1481 and I both would welcome an admin review of the edits, as well as the exchanges on the talk page. All edits made by either of us, as well as other editors have only been in an effort to improve the article - whereas all edits by 140.232.150.91 have been to ram through a personal agenda. I note that this has happened with him on other articles as well, and even resulted in a temporary ban on his IP. He has shown nothing but an unwillingness to compromise (his idea of compromise - we must all accept his changes as "UNDENIABLE FACT!"), and a complete disregard for wikipedia itself. He's put forth no effort to set up an account, or even sign his comments, though people have asked himto and shown him how numerous times. Learning how to positively contribute to and be a part of wikipedia is something he's not interested in - he merely wants to use wikipedia to advance his own personal opinion and shout down anyone who disagrees. --Jikaku (talk) 15:18, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I thought I should note that the user at IP 140.232.150.91 (talk), who was temporarily banned with that IP as well as 140.232.179.120 (talk), is now back making the same edits with a new IP: 65.4.79.45 (talk). --Jikaku (talk) 00:21, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

rollback

Thanks. I'll sure to use it wisely. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 11:18, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Glimpse of the Garden

Dear Mr. WilliamH,

It is beyond me as to why you deleted Glimpse of the Garden and also called it blatant plagiarism?

I did create that page as a work to build upon.

I believed I was within the Wiki rules when I copied and quoted some information concerning the review. I provided attribution to the author who wrote the review and also provided the outside website from which the information originated.

I grant it was not quoted from a book or publication, but at no time did I ever assert that the copied materials were my own.

If you continue to make assertions of plagiarism to every article on Wikipedia under the same premiss as you used here, there would be no Wikipedia.

I know you really wont care what I say, but I think you are completely out of line.

Regarding the image of the Brussels Bronze medal, I went through much trouble in placing the image onto this server. The least that you should have done is spent the energy to try to preserve or improve the page instead of destroying it.

There are plenty of trigger happy people like you around here. Your actions place you in the same category as a vandal, and I am being polite to you! Shame on you, Shame on you!Bigjoe5216 (talk) 04:18, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Dear Mr. WilliamH,

I read your message regarding the deletion. Forget about it. It's OK.Bigjoe5216 (talk) 02:14, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for Rollback, I'll do my best to protect Wikipedia.   ■ MMXX^c.t  12:54, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

..

Ha, that's just an excuse and you know it. The site was being deleted and I being threatened far before there were ANY videos on there at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by W99 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

12:37, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey Will, I just signed up because I want to help the community of Wikipedia (like it's helped me). I'm already using the Lupin script to find vandalism and have been undoing them the hard way (at least until someone grants a rollback button :D).

Thanks for your time, —Preceding unsigned comment added by VanMavus (talk • contribs) 12:37, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

• I have declined your request for rollback - so far so good, you just don't have enough experience. Both your reversions in the article space are accurate discernment of bad faith edits...but that's the catch, you only have two. Please do not hesitate to contact me whether you need help from an admin or just another editor, and in a couple of weeks for instance, if you drop a note on my talk page, I will happily reconsider your request. Regards, WilliamH (talk) 12:43, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

• That's fine, :) you won't stop me from my goal of trying to make Wikipedia a better place. Anyway. VanMavus (talk) 12:49, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0

Hi there WilliamH,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up if you are located near london at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon!

Thanks for reading.

·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 08:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 4 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Oswald Kaduk, 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.

--Victuallers (talk) 10:23, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for checking out my application. I'll reapply in a few weeks, when I complete more edits. Antivenin (talk) 15:02, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

ACC

How do you help people to create account then? I am really confused by what is being said about hitting the 6 account limit? Can you explain please. BountyHunter2008 (talk) 18:33, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

• The amount of accounts a user can make is limited to 6 in a 24 hour period. Users who assist in the creation of requested accounts via the interface can request an administrator to give them the account creator right. This removes the limit. It is only granted to users who demonstrate a need for it, i.e., they have hit the limit. I notice that your request to use the account creation interface was rejected, so having this flag would be inconsequential anyway. WilliamH (talk) 18:48, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

• This is going to sound so stupid but how do I help create the accounts without having the account creator tool? BountyHunter2008 (talk) 19:15, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

You don't. It'd be like me giving rollback to a blocked user = completely inconsequential. WilliamH (talk) 20:01, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

rollback request

Hi William, I was wandering whether it would be possible to be granted rollback privileges. As a frequent user of TWINKLE, I have experience with rollbacking, however TWINKLE per se does not suffice, especially when trying to undo Vandalism to recently created pages. I'm a member of the Counter Vandalism Unit, and a frequent New Pages patroller, and I'm simply requesting rollbacking to make my effort less tedious and more efficient (e.g. Rather having to go through an article's history to revert vandalism) Cheers! --Fatal!ty ^(T☠LK) 16:38, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

• I cannot grant this request. Of all of your edits, I can only find one marked as the reversion of vandalism. In regards to your page patrolling and perhaps later requests, I would advise you to rehash your understanding of CSD policy, for instance, I have yet to find one of your G1 taggings that actually satisfies that criteria. Sorry, but Philosopher's comments here still stand. Regards, WilliamH (talk) 17:01, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Question

Hi, when someone creates a talk page for an article or image and its vandalism like this, is it best to just blank the page or put it up for speedy delete? Whats your opinion? Thanks Monster Under Your Bed ^(talk) 14:34, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

• I've blanked the page. There was nothing attacky/ad hominem there. WilliamH (talk) 14:54, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

List of Bloc Party awards

Heya, I'm curious: Are you planning on bringing this article to FLC anytime soon? It's probably ready by now. Gary King (talk) 05:12, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

• Been there done that I'm afraid. Thanks for asking anyway. :) WilliamH (talk) 16:57, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, there were no supports or opposes; it can still go again for another turn. Gary King (talk) 18:46, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

If you don't mind, then perhaps I could work on it then nominate it with you. They're one of my favorite bands so I'd love to get this one done :) Gary King (talk) 19:51, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

What would you suggest be done in order to get it over the hill? WilliamH (talk) 11:03, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I think you should just resubmit it. It was archived last time because it did not receive any more comments, not because it didn't meet the criteria. Gary King (talk) 14:35, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:AIV

There are some issues on WP:AIV that have not been dealt with for a while now, I noticed you blocking on recent changes so I thought that you could deal with these as an Administrator has not already done so. – Jerry^teps 10:33, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

• Cheers, I will take a look. WilliamH (talk) 10:35, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

OK, I've stemmed the tide somewhat. Can't help but get the feeling it's like painting the fourth bridge. :) WilliamH (talk) 11:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by that. (I've never heard that saying before). – Jerry^teps 00:41, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

SEREC

Dear William H.

May I please refer you to the attempted input "SEREC ETH Zurich" which you considered was "advertising".

Would you be so good as to provide me with access to the text as originally submitted on 28 August 2008 in order that I can edit it and hopefully remove your concerns. Please be aware that SEREC is a competence centre and network of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich (see please ETH Zurich) and a link will be made between the two sites. We are an academic research group and not a commercial company.

Thank you.

David B. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.132.20.134 (talk) 12:04, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

You will need to sign up for an account and enable e-mail in order for me to do this. Please consider the inclusion criteria, this may be useful reading. WilliamH (talk) 12:21, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the granted rollback. I'll do my best to use it effectively. Dessymona (talk) 15:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll take this well-placed header as an opportunity to also thank you for the rollback feature. I will use it only when 100% sure! :) --RazorICE 10:04, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

What can I do in future revisions of vandalism to better represent my ability to discern good-faith and bad-faith edits? There is a lot of back story to the vandalism that I have reverted in the past, which I understand more immediately as bad-faith than someone who is not familiar with the nature of the topics being repeatedly vandalized, understandably. I know I don't have a very extensive history correcting vandalism, and would appreciate any advice to become more established as being capable of doing so. Bmurphy (talk) 15:39, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

• Take a look at the recent changes patrol. If you would like to gain experience, that's pretty much the hub for tackling vandalism. WilliamH (talk) 10:06, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Bujinkan Again

Hi William, it seems that the edit war has commenced once more for the Bujinkan Wiki page. There appears to be the same single user who insists on forcing his personal definition of the Bujinkan, and has since you unprotected the article on the 4th, been replacing the intro blurb with the same blurb as before. Below are his/her edits. I think it would be good to get this article re-protected and re-initiate the dialogue, and it would be nice if this person would enter into it this time. Regards,

D.

09:38, 16 September 2008 24.123.146.3 The Bujinkan (武神館) is an international organization, first founded in Japan, that trains their students in the combat martial arts and unconventional warfare tactics of the Ninja. It is currently called Bujinkan Budō Taijutsu (武神館武道体術), and commonly referred to as ninjutsu. It is headed by the Sōke, or grandmaster, Masaaki Hatsumi (初見良昭). The Bujinkan is particularly known for practising koshijutsu, koppojutsu, jutaijutsu, dakentaijutsu, happo bikenjutsu and ninpo taijutsu (a.k.a. ninjutsu).

13:27, 15 September 2008 75.183.165.202 The Bujinkan (武神館) is an international organization that trains their students in the combat martial arts and unconventional warfare tactics of the Ninja. It is currently called Bujinkan Budō Taijutsu (武神館武道体術), and commonly referred to as ninjutsu. It is headed by the Sōke, or grandmaster, Masaaki Hatsumi (初見良昭). The Bujinkan is particularly known for practising koshijutsu, koppojutsu, jutaijutsu, dakentaijutsu, happo bikenjutsu and ninpo taijutsu (a.k.a. ninjutsu).

19:37, 14 September 2008 71.62.203.54 The Bujinkan (武神館) is an international organization that trains their students in the combat martial arts and unconventional warfare tactics of the Ninja. It is currently called Bujinkan Budō Taijutsu (武神館武道体術), and commonly referred to as ninjutsu. It is headed by the Sōke, or grandmaster, Masaaki Hatsumi (初見良昭). The Bujinkan is particularly known for practising koshijutsu, koppojutsu, jutaijutsu, dakentaijutsu, happo bikenjutsu and ninpo taijutsu (a.k.a. ninjutsu).

19:42, 13 September 2008 70.144.6.47 The Bujinkan (武神館) is an international organization that trains their students in the combat martial arts and unconventional warfare tactics of the Ninja. It is currently called Bujinkan Budō Taijutsu (武神館武道体術), and commonly referred to as ninjutsu. It is headed by the Sōke, or grandmaster, Masaaki Hatsumi (初見良昭). The Bujinkan is particularly known for practising koshijutsu, koppojutsu, jutaijutsu, dakentaijutsu, happo bikenjutsu and ninpo taijutsu (a.k.a. ninjutsu).

08:50, 13 September 2008 70.144.6.47 The Bujinkan (武神館) is an international organization that trains their students in the combat martial arts and unconventional warfare tactics of the Ninja. It is currently called Bujinkan Budō Taijutsu (武神館武道体術), and commonly referred to as ninjutsu. It is headed by the Sōke, or grandmaster, Masaaki Hatsumi (初見良昭). The Bujinkan is particularly known for practising koshijutsu, koppojutsu, jutaijutsu, dakentaijutsu, happo bikenjutsu and ninpo taijutsu (a.k.a. ninjutsu).

18:43, 11 September 2008 68.154.149.132 The Bujinkan (武神館) is an international organization that trains their students in the combat martial arts and unconventional warfare tactics of the Ninja. It is currently called Bujinkan Budō Taijutsu (武神館武道体術), commonly referred to as ninjutsu. It is headed by the Sōke, or grandmaster, Masaaki Hatsumi (初見良昭). The Bujinkan is particularly known for practising koshijutsu, koppojutsu, jutaijutsu, dakentaijutsu, happo bikenjutsu and ninpo taijutsu (a.k.a. ninjutsu).

06:20, 11 September 2008 68.154.149.132 The Bujinkan (武神館) is an international organization that trains their students in the combat martial arts and unconventional warfare tactics of the Ninja. It is currently called Bujinkan Budō Taijutsu (武神館武道体術), commonly referred to as ninjutsu. It is headed by the Sōke, or grandmaster, Masaaki Hatsumi (初見良昭). The Bujinkan is particularly known for practising koshijutsu, koppojutsu, jutaijutsu, dakentaijutsu, happo bikenjutsu and ninpo taijutsu (a.k.a. ninjutsu).

05:39, 11 September 2008 68.154.149.132 The Bujinkan (武神館) is an international organization that trains their students in the combat martial arts and unconventional warfare tactics of the Ninja. It is currently called Bujinkan Budō Taijutsu (武神館武道体術), commonly referred to as ninjutsu. It is headed by the Sōke, or grandmaster, Masaaki Hatsumi (初見良昭). The Bujinkan is particularly known for practising koshijutsu, koppojutsu, jutaijutsu, dakentaijutsu, happo bikenjutsu and ninpo taijutsu (a.k.a. ninjutsu).

• Noted, will be keeping a look out and acting accordingly. WilliamH (talk) 10:14, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Dear Mr. WilliamH,

Thank you very much for your concern in regards to this article on the Bujinkan! But the truth of the matter is quite simply that the above mentioned parties: User Jikaku and User Nate1481 apparently have quite an unreasonable habit of distorting the undeniable truth of the Bujinkan. It is an internationally established fact that the Bujinkan is teaching the martial art and warfare tactics that were first developed by the Ninja warriors, first in Tang Dynasty China based on the principles of the Art of War, written by the General and brilliant military strategist Sun-Tzu. These techniques were later transmitted to Feudal Japan by some of the Chinese soldiers and generals who were fleeing mainland China due to the loss of their patron Emperor's defeated kingdom. Numerous previous attempts at trying to establish rational dialogue with the above mention parties resulted in them not holding on their end of the negotiations. For they have repeatedly continued to revert and edit the page based on their own narrow minded biased view about the Bujinkan in order to make it appear as if the Bujinkan is NOT teaching Ninjutsu. It apparently seems to be motivated by some kind of competing mindset on their part as it is possible these two users may be members of some competing martial arts organization that conspires to downgrade the status of the Bujinkan. Nowhere else except on Wikipedia, has there ever been such an extensive and elaborate conspiracy by two or maybe more co-conspirators to portray the Bujinkan as only teaching martial art and NOT the warfare tactics of the Ninja, which is the actual truth. Everywhere in the world, from the British SAS, Navy Seals, to the FBI Hostage Rescue Team, various law enforcement SWAT Teams, to the Imperial Family of Japan recognize the ninjutsu contributions of modern day Ninja Master Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi, and his Bujinkan Ninja organization. This is confirmed by the numerous awards, honorary citizenship, and degrees given to Dr. Hatsumi for teaching the ways of the Ninja. I respectfully ask you to review the historical evidence that my colleagues and I are presenting to you and judge for yourself if the edits made by the aforementioned users are legitimate or not. Please watch the following videos:

1.) http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=4242971n
2.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=XxdLH0ax64I
3.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=lyvmhNFwjuo
4.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=LC0rwG5rR8Y

Thank You Very Much!
Most Sincerely,
SWAT Team Ninja —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.144.21.96 (talk) 01:35, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello!

Please watch the above videos that were post by the other user. Those videos prove that the Bujinkan is an Ninjutsu organization. Please stop unnecessary reversions and compromise to reach an agreeable version. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.154.151.187 (talk) 02:36, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

The "other" user? Really? Really? --Jikaku (talk) 02:47, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

• There is an agreed version. It just happens to be not the version you want it to be, and has been for a while now, both during your initial attempts to support your contention, and later your flat out refusal to do so. You are and have been the only person beating this horse - I think you'd be much better off dropping the stick. WilliamH (talk) 10:03, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

There is an on going discussion on changes to the lead section of the Bujinkan article Here --Nate1481 08:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Rollback request

Ignoring the inappropriately hostile nature of your denial, I just feel like I need to make a few things clear: while certain edits are made in good faith, they often do nothing but lengthen the article and degrade the grammar, which was the case in most of these. In other words, the reverts were perfectly valid as well. WP:AGF isn't an excuse to allow edits that compromise the overall quality of the article to stay un-reverted, and honestly, this wasn't cited, shown, or necessary. Don't feel it necessary to reply to this, but I didn't have much time to answer all of the stuff on the request and I'd just like to say these things in my defense. Suigetsu 23:46, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

• No disrespect meant to you of course from my somewhat terse response. I was just surprised to see someone disparaging good faith edits so much. Even if they weren't cited or necessary, calling them "stupid shit" is hardly helpful. No prejudice against you requesting rollback again when your edit summaries in discerning good and bad faith edits are more diplomatic. Regards, WilliamH (talk) 14:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

will do. 166.188.73.10 (talk) 22:33, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Neat talkback-template-thing, by the way. Never seen that used. Suigetsu 01:38, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Jill Nicolini

The 2716-byte version is the one that is vandalism-free. I am not sure how a 2637-byte version (with only some of the vandalism removed) got generated when I had attempted to revert to the 2716-byte version . Bwrs (talk) 15:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

• Got it thanks. The page was being vandalised at exactly the same time I was protecting, an absolute deluge of vandalism. WilliamH (talk) 15:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Nike Article

On all cases i apologies for the label of the restored page http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nike,_Inc.&diff=prev&oldid=241093595 i never thought the label option goes online i thought it is something internal in the browser , i got a little angry of all that happen last day from blanking and bad wording , i apologies again but i never thought my self "not a good faith" please reconsider my request i am sure that the label from now on will be took into consideration .Thanks --Jhabib (talk) 10:45, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

London meetup 14

I will be no doubt coming in on an early morning train, I can get there at ~12:45 and hold up something Wikipedia related if you'd like (noticed this in the comments). I'm presuming it is indeed you that I should be contacting about this? Also, when would you imagine it will go on until?  Asenine  22:11, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Casey Gardiner

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Casey Gardiner. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. ATPTennis (talk) 17:27, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

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

Rollback request (Backslash forwardslash)

Will reinstate it and mark it for the bot - my confusion arose because your comment on the user's talk page appeared to have been left yesterday...hence my removal and the edit summary. I can only imagine it's a problem in the templated "rollback granted" message? _Gb^T/c 12:22, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Did you subst a standard template to create your message? Or write it from scratch? Can't see that it resembles any of the standard templates - only checking in case there's an error in a template code that needs to be fixed, or if it was a one-off glitch..._Gb^T/c 12:27, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Mvjs

Hi Will. My RfA has been closed as unsuccessful, so whenever you're ready, I'm waiting at my talk page. MvjsTalking 23:07, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Bloc Party/archive1

Gary King (talk) 19:51, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Cheers thanks! Gary King (talk) 20:25, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Bombing of Dresden in World War II

You acted as a mediator in a previous discussion about the Bombing of Dresden in World War II if you have time I would appreciate it if you would look over the current discussion Talk:Bombing of Dresden in World War II#Far-right in Germany and add any thoughts you might have. --PBS (talk) 17:44, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

• Should I feel that my interjection would further the discussion then I would not hesitate in doing so, but I've been so tremendously busy lately and accordingly, given how a) huge the discussion is and b) how little understanding I have of it, I really don't think I can take it under my wing. Thanks for asking nonetheless. Best, WilliamH (talk) 11:56, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Extermination camps

Hi WillianH, I have made few changes there which should address your concerns. Please revue. Thanks--Jacurek (talk) 19:15, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Josef Klehr

On 12 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Josef Klehr, 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.

Backslash Forwardslash 12:02, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Request for adminship... 3?

Hi WilliamH, it's now been over half a year since my previous request for the mop, and reviewing that RfA reveals that you were one of my opposers last time round. I was wondering if you'd like to comment on my current status in the Wikipedia community, and if you believe I would be ready to run for adminship again in future? Please respond wherever you feel it is most appropriate. Kind regards. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 16:25, 8 February 2009 (UTC)