User talk:P.T. Aufrette/archive3

• archive2

• archive1

"English Wikipedia"

Hi, I just clicked through on your second mention of:

I'll bring it up again: Zoë Baird. Not an entertainment figure, and therefore the "stage name" theory doesn't apply. Not one of those darn foreigners, either. To borrow your metaphor, if you think the "ë" is a weed, then you're not tending your own garden unless you make the effort to uproot it. -- P.T. Aufrette (talk) 17:21, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

In time, those non-English symbols will be removed. GoodDay (talk) 17:29, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

It now amusingly has a Saša Hiršzon style "Zoë Baird (English Zoe Baird)" tennis lede :). Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:12, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm speechless. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 03:21, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

PLEASE stop stalking my edits, PT. GoodDay (talk) 04:27, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Please explain this edit. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 04:47, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

No diacritics in the English alphabet & this is the ENGLISH language Wikipedia. GoodDay (talk) 04:49, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

The person in question is a (presumably native-born) English-speaking American. There is no need to transliterate her name from English to English. PS, it is unhelpful to delete messages on your talk page. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 05:13, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Cities and towns in Quebec

Let me tell you about the category. You don't need to put the Category:Cities and towns in Quebec on every city name for article titles. The category:Cities and towns in Quebec is always on every eponymous category title. For example the category title Category:Gatineau should be as always on Category:Cities and towns in Quebec not on the article. Do not put the Category:Cities and towns in Quebec in article titles that already has eponymous categories. OK? Don't do double categorize. Thanks. Steam5 (talk) 14:46, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Please read the message I posted on your talk page (sorry for the screwup where I forgot to put a ":" before "Category" in the link, I have now reposted). The real issue is that the eponymous categories don't belong under Category:Cities and towns in Quebec, as they already have their own separate category hierarchy. Most of the things under Category:Gatineau are not cities or towns, and therefore this should not be a subcategory of the cities and towns category. The "real" name of "Category:Gatineau" would be "Miscellaneous things associated in some way with the city of Gatineau", which would make it clearer that this should not be subcategorized under cities and towns. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 15:39, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Arbitration case opened

An arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GoodDay. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GoodDay/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 3, 2012, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GoodDay/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 22:02, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

In some ways I think GoodDay is just a victim here, having to some extent been egged on. The cleverer anti-French/Czech names (or anti-highMOS or whatever it is) editors strive to keep clear examples out of MOS and related pages which only prolongs debate and disruption. If there was a decent clear instruction to simply (a) spell peoples' names correctly, (b) use spelling-reliable sources, then GoodDay's spectacular car crash could have been avoided. So I have made a pre-proposal on WT:MOS to add Zoë Baird to WP:DIACRITICS as an example to prevent this sort of User meltdown happening again. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:30, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Article titles & intros

Will you please stop with the double standard crap? GoodDay (talk) 01:00, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Why are you being such a dick, about this? GoodDay (talk) 01:07, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

You just keep on adding evidence bud. You're only prooving to me that you're out to bait me & hound me out of Wikipedia. Just keep up with your weazleness, PT. GoodDay (talk) 01:29, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Now you're really spitting venom, please continue. GoodDay (talk) 03:11, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

The only edit I made between your two edits above was here. I hardly think most people would call that spitting venom. Your prior message above (at 1:29) was apparently in response to this edit, which merely added a single additional reference to a list of other references. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 03:25, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Your charge that I've breached my British/Irish ban, is baseless. I haven't edited or appeared on any British/Irish political article. GoodDay (talk) 03:29, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

You didn't breach the ban. But it did look like you were perhaps trying to bait the person. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 03:32, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

I've reverted my message on Daicaregos' page, though I do have legitimate concerns about his returning to Wikipedia. Sorry I can't elaborate. GoodDay (talk) 03:34, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

OK I took out the part about that. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 03:39, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Cool. GoodDay (talk) 03:42, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Murder of Lin Jun

I have reverted your edit, with the comment "Undo. WP:FORK doesnt apply as this is not a POV fork, its if anything an NPOV fork". Regards, -Stevertigo (t | c) 04:17, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I meant Wikipedia:Content forking rather than WP:FORK (which is about mirrors). However, it's not just POV forks that are listed as unacceptable, but also "redundant content forking". — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 04:33, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Repeated forking of the Luka Magnotta article

It appears that, once again, someone has attempted to fork the Luka Magnotta article with the recreation of Murder of Lin Jun. I'm opposed to this for several reasons: #1, We have a clear majority of Oppose votes to move the article there, and #2, having two articles covering much of the same information means that, if/when we reach a final consensus with regards to whether we should keep the article here, there, or "split" them, people's work and research will be spread around over two articles, requiring a complete rewrite. It's not a smart idea to take it upon oneself to begin spreading information out over two articles without clear consensus IMO. Would you please offer your opinion on the discussion at Talk:Luka Magnotta? Thank you. --- Crakkerjakk (talk) 04:25, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Perth primacy issue

Hi, PTA. I'm normally averse to questioning competent editors, but your comment here seems to be a misrepresentation and maybe, even, a slur on my integrity as a Wikipedian. In expressing my view, I may not have used WP's bureaucratic language (which I constantly strive to avoid while happily accepting it from others), but methinks I have simply made it plain that I see neither the Australian nor the Scottish city as a valid 'primary topic' for any reason, and that this view has been shared and adopted by WP colleagues for a good many years. My support was therefore, quite unemotionally for the status quo, notwithstanding that I myself happen to be a proud resident of Perth, Western Australia. So, how on earth could you reasonably impute and attribute to me a belief 'that national pride would be wounded by determination of a primary topic, as though it were some kind of perceived "demotion"'? Anyway, I'll get along out of this, resolving to resist joining such pointless disputation. There are constructive matters to attend to. Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 04:49, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I am genuinely surprised that you interpreted my words this way. You yourself referred to prior "emotional debate", implying that others had at times gotten emotional over this issue in the past. My point was simply that such debates should not become emotional; it should be entirely possible to have a debate and leave emotion out of it. So the existence of a prior emotional debate in the past should not preclude having a debate today; some years have gone by since 2004 and there can be a fresh take on the subject with some new participants. I was not implying that you yourself were being emotional or irrational. I did find it a bit frustrating, though, that you chose to limit your response to, basically, "Let's not talk about this. Both Perths are really glorious." rather than delving into the nitty-gritty of "here's how I would apply and interpret the specific criteria such as WP:PRIMARYTOPIC to this particular case". Maybe I read that as "Let's not talk about this because both Perths are really glorious." which would suggest that the reason for avoiding the discussion would be because to do so would infringe on the glory of one or the other, or "demote" it, as it were. I guess it's clear in hindsight that this was not the point you were trying to make. Sorry about that. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 05:24, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Move review for Perth, Western Australia

I have asked for a Move review of Perth, Western Australia. Because you closed the move discussion for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the move review. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:50, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Perth RFAR opened

An arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Perth. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Perth/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 28, 2012, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Perth/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Lord Roem (talk) 17:57, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Help Survey

Hi there, my name's Peter Coombe and I'm a Wikimedia Community Fellow working on a project to improve Wikipedia's help system. At the moment I'm trying to learn more about how people use and find the current help pages. If you could help by filling out this brief survey about your experiences, I'd be very grateful. It should take less than 10 minutes, and your responses will not be tied to your username in any way.

Thank you for your time,
the wub (talk) 18:17, 14 June 2012 (UTC) (Delivered using Global message delivery)

Quebec hockey RMs

Thank you for having opened those two. Cleans up part of the legacy of disruption in this area. Odd that the bot misfired and listed the RM at the bottom with no date. If you can reinstall the date manually you may wish to amend Stephane Roy to move to Stéphane Roy (ice hockey b. 1967) since following your tracks I found that there are two, fr.wp has a different one, which I translated back to en.wp so now a disambiguator "b. 1967" is needed, thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:01, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

OK, I made the change. But in any case the "b. 1967" would be an uncontroversial change even if it were applied after the fact. Re: the date, I tried fixing it and the RM bot simply restored it back to the erroneous version. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 06:18, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes it would have been. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:47, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

As they sit in the backlog you may wish to raise an eyebrow at the objected to WP:Naming conventions (Czech) and (no one objected) WP:Naming conventions (French). Maybe you already knew of these. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:00, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Editing pages moves

Hello P.T.

It's pointless to edit Wikipedia:Requested moves/Current discussions (alt) and Wikipedia:Requested moves/Current discussions, as these pages are maintained by a bot. Your edits will only be reversed by the next run of the bot.

If you want to fix the typo, you have to edit the page where the move request is instead, as pages with move requests are input to the bot.

Regards

HandsomeFella (talk) 16:10, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Can you please take a look at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (use English) ‎In ictu oculi (talk) 13:02, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, P.T. Aufrette. You have new messages at Ww2censor's talk page.
Message added 05:08, 26 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ww2censor (talk) 05:08, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi again

FYI since your comment on Father Hambye's RM, an Indian Catholic who knew him left a comment on my Talk page which I moved there. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:33, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

No worries. Glad to see you're still around :). In ictu oculi (talk) 04:21, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

• It's been relisted - could you clarify whether you support Édouard Hambye? It's clearish but.. Thanks In ictu oculi (talk) 00:27, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Cote d'Ivoire move review

Will you be starting one then? Silverseren^C 20:08, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm considering it, yes, per discussion. I'll wait a bit hoping for a more detailed reply. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 21:14, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

His responses seem to be making it every more evident that it was a personal opinion that made him close it as Keep. Silverseren^C 22:02, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

It's been started (by another user, as it turns out). — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 08:48, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Discussion at User_talk:Karl.brown#French_etc.

You are invited to join the discussion at User_talk:Karl.brown#French_etc.. KarlB (talk) 16:19, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Qc college - notable?

You may care to note user talk:RHaworth#Collège d'enseignement en immobilier. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:30, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Bắt đầu từ nay

You just made a reasonable point, Bắt đầu từ nay isn't as straightforward as restoring the 4x cuisine ones Cơm tấm, Bánh bò Bún chả bún bò Huế, however vn exists as a language in HK as well and the announcement was also communicated to Vietnamese in detention centres in Hong Kong, and therefore is notable to Vietnamese irrelevant of how HK people thought it funny. I've added a source by Hong Kong-Vietnamese nun Soeur Christine Mỹ Hạnh of the Chi Ma Wan Detention Centre into the article that addresses your point. I'd agree the article is overweight to the 'fun' element. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:14, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I have now put Cantonese as second option. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:28, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello, P.T. Aufrette. You have new messages at Talk:Bat lau dung laai.
Message added 10:07, 17 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Perth closed

An arbitration case involving the article Perth has been closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

1. JHunterJ is advised to respond calmly and courteously to queries regarding Wikipedia-related conduct and administrator actions.
2. Deacon of Pndapetzim is admonished for use of administrative tools while involved, and for reversing another administrator's legitimate administrative action without first entering into discussion.
3. Kwamikagami is desysopped for use of administrative tools while involved in an editing dispute, and for reinstating a reverted administrative action without clear discussion leading to a consensus decision. He may regain the admin toolkit through a fresh request for adminship.
4. Gnangarra is admonished for use of administrative tools while involved in an editing dispute, and for reinstating a reverted administrative action without clear discussion leading to a consensus decision.

For the Arbitration Committee, Lord Roem (talk) 14:40, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(Vietnamese)#RfC_on_spelling

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(Vietnamese)#RfC_on_spelling. KarlB (talk) 13:44, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit war/close at Jelena Janković

As you have been a recent participant in a content dispute regarding diacritics at Jelena Janković, I would ask that you read the close I made earlier today at Talk:Jelena_Janković#Full_protection. The edit war on that particular question of the lead wording is, across a wide range of articles, as I previously stated, not acceptable, and violates WP:EW.

Any further reversions (of articles), in either direction on this question on talk and policy pages, will likely be seen as a continuation of that edit war. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. --j⚛e decker^talk 06:49, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Update: Apologies for the belated notice, related to this, I have started an RfC on the accent/lead question, which you may wish to participate in, at [1]. My previous note was very poorly worded, and was meant to stop reversions on the articles themselves. Thanks! --j⚛e decker^talk 14:42, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

And now at ANI. Names of the 20 who corrected Fyunck's ledes not mentioned, except I mentioned Joy. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:23, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Bot substitute

Hello P.T. I just wanted to say that you're doing a great job as a substitute for the RM bot. Cheers. HandsomeFella (talk) 16:01, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, why aren't there a cluster of barnstars here? In ictu oculi (talk) 02:22, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Will split Perrig Quéméneur out of cyclists. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:28, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, that makes sense. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 14:30, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Mm, makes trouble for you. Will move Adelin Benoît to 1st in list.In ictu oculi (talk) 14:33, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

done. Done everything except fixed the central RM listing. Thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:46, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

WP:RM listings

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	For your assiduous work in keeping the discussion listing end of the requested moves' process afloat while the bot is down.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:38, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

	The Hard Worker's Barnstar
	I really appreciated your work on RM/CD while I was debugging the replacement bot. Thanks for your patience and sorry it took me a month to get RMCD bot up and automated. Wbm1058 (talk) 15:06, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for all your efforts in writing the bot, which certainly took more non-routine effort. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 03:49, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Equivalent territory

Hello, P.T.

We are talking about Mirabel, and it's territory equivalent to a regional county municipality on fr.wikipedia. It's here fr:Discussion_Projet:Québec you might be able to help us understand all this confusion. Maybe you have some sources to suggest ?

A translation of your article would also be great on FR. Iluvalar (talk) 16:00, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Comment on the RfC move from Burma to Myanmar

You are very lucky that your action in starting an RfC over a move of an article from Burma to Myanmar has not landed you at ANI for disruption (and for all I know it may still). It is only by assuming good will, and drawing the conclusion that you have not read the current RfC at Wikipedia talk:Article titles#RM not required, that your action over this move can be seen as non disruptive. I had not noticed the date for the start of the RfC, and had assumed it was recent So I have struck out the comment. However see the current RfC at Wikipedia talk:Article titles#RM not required, such requested moves should be advertised at WP:RM so

I have now created an RM process, but if you do not add a valid reason for this requested move before you make another edit to Wikipedia, I will ask for the survey to be closed on procedural grounds.

--PBS (talk) 08:45, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

There seems to be some confusion. I am not the proposer for the Burma/Myanmar move. That was initiated as an RM by Marcus Qwertyus.[2] I felt that a controversial RM needed to be publicized a little more widely, beyond the usual crowd who participate in RMs, so I put notifications at Village pump (miscellaneous), at the WikiProject for Burma and neighboring countries, and at RfC for history and politics, etc. The mechanism for doing the RfC notification was simply to put the RfC header above the pre-existing RM. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 15:51, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand your statement at Talk:Burma that "I have placed this request here so that this move is run under the auspices of the WP:RM process", nor your statement above that "I have now created an RM process". It was always an RM process, from the start, initiated by Marcus Qwertyus, see [3], and it was advertised in WP:RM. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 16:00, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Upon further investigation, I figured out what happened. The original WP:RM was listed on August 8, but became delisted on August 16, as the end result of a series of edits by several different users. I created a timeline of events at Talk:Burma, please take a look. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 16:42, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Timeline of events

• 19:58, 8 August 2012: Marcus Qwertyus created a WP:RM for Burma → Myanmar.[4]
• 22:28, 8 August 2012: I myself added the WP:RM notification.[5] As you know, the RM bot is no longer functional as of July 18 and Wikipedia:Requested moves/Current discussions has been being updated manually, as a stopgap solution.
• 23:07, 8 August 2012: In order to publicize this potentially controversial WP:RM, I put a notification in RfC under both history/geography and politics/government/law [6]. It was also advertised in Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) [7], WikiProject Geography, WikiProject Politics, the WikiProjects for Burma/Myanmar and its neighboring countries, etc.
• 23:17, 9 August 2012: Marcus Qwertyus attempted to withdraw the RM and in doing so, removed the {{requested move/dated}} template [8].
• 02:38, 10 August 2012: It was revived within a few hours by Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington,[9] but he forgot to re-add the {{requested move/dated}} template.
• 16:11, 16 August 2012: It was removed from WP:RM by Wbm1058 [10] with edit summary "although there is a long ongoing discussion at talk:Burma, it is no longer tagged with template:requested move/dated, which it must be to appear on this page". It seems nobody noticed.
• Today: User:PBS relisted this at WP:RM, unaware that it had been listed earlier.
• — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 17:41, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, What a mess! We can not use the original proposal because it was withdrawn (so I have modified the same section putting in User:Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington and commenting out your addition. See User talk:Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington#Talk Burma for clarification. -- PBS (talk) 18:42, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Pedro III of Portugal

I was amazed and outraged once I learned that Qwyrxian closed the move request for Pedro III of Portugal claiming lack of consensus.[11] Twelve editors supported the move and only four opposed. I complained to him about how unfair and absurd was his action and that he should accept the will of the vast majority or at least reopen the move request. I'd like to ask you to share your thoughts about it on his talk page. Thank you, --Lecen (talk) 16:50, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I would suggest you try Wikipedia:Move review. The close does seem a bit of an outlier. Right now, I personally don't have the time to pursue it myself, I'm not currently able to devote much time to Wikipedia except for simple routine edits lately. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 06:50, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

• Hi, this is a mass-produced message which means it may duplicate a message already on your Talk:page. As a result of the lack of reference to specific sources or guidelines such as WP:SOVEREIGN, User:Qwyrxian closed the RM at Talk:Peter III of Portugal but said a new RM could be started if new evidence was presented. This I have done after discussion with Qwyrxian and User:Lecen. This means that your previous support or oppose will not be counted, and must be resubmitted. However please note Qwyrxian's request that support/oppose be made with reference to specific arguments guidelines or sources, and (quote) especially recommend that people don't do the "Support per person X and Y", as such comments are close to useless, (unquote). Thanks for your time. Best regards. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:29, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

+ PT, I see you must be busy if you're missing things on WP:RM list :) In ictu oculi (talk) 01:29, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Mount Royal, Quebec requested move

Hi P.T., I wanted to ask you a favour. There is an article Mount Royal, Quebec is propose renaming to the new title called Town of Mount Royal, Quebec at the talk page. The new title is propose by the user named User:Tanneryvillage. I know you editing a lot of Quebec related articles. On the Mount Royal talk page under requested move, I already voted "super strong oppose" for renaming the propose title. If you're free from editing feel free to comment at Mount Royal, Quebec talk page under the section "requested move" for propose new title. I will see you at the Mount Royal, Quebec talk page. Steam5 (talk) 05:39, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

New Canadian election result template

I've created Template:CANelec to act as Template:Canadian election result, except with jurisdiction as the first parameter. Observe:

2012 Example election
Party	Candidate	Votes
	Bloc Québécois	John	123
	Liberal	Brian	123
	New Democratic	Kim	123
	Coalition Avenir Québec	Jean	123
	Progressive Conservative	Paul	123
	Conservative	Stephen	123

If you have any proposed changes, let me know. I'll ask a bot to start switching to the new template in a few days. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 06:32, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

caisse

Can you record the pronunciation of the word caisse please ? Fête (talk) 21:26, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Trinity House Masters

Hi, P.T. Aufrette, I was searching for information on Captain A.R.H. Morrell and it took me to your sandbox draft on Trinity House Masters and Deputy Masters. I've created a stub article on Morrell. Please feel free to link to it in your draft, to increase the number of "what links here" hits that it gets. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 20:20, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

I've also created a new category: Members of Trinity House. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 22:18, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

₹ :D

I noticed that back in December 2011, you decided to change the INR template from the ugly and problematic image file to the Unicode symbol ₹. I've now changed Template:INR to be the unicode symbol, as you had done, noticing that the idea was to try again in 6-12 months. For the record, my non-Indian laptop is two years old (albeit running a fairly modern version of Linux Mint), so I felt this was now the appropriate time to make the change, especially as it seemed you intended to revisit the matter in 6-12 months :D Xmoogle (talk) 23:01, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for not replying sooner, I have been offline for some time, and will probably remain somewhat inactive for a while yet. If I recall correctly, one issue reported was that some old smartphones do not get any operating system upgrades by the manufacturer (in particular Android-based phones), and therefore were not capable of displaying the relatively new Unicode symbol. So it may take more patience than originally expected. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 18:52, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Bromont, Quebec RCM Map

Hi there. Haven't done an edit since 2009, so I'll try to find the pertinent map files which are in storage in another computer. Thanks! Gordalmighty (talk) 00:27, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Inter Milan#Requested move 3

Join the discussion!--Dipralb (talk) 12:29, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Vietnamese provinces; renaming discussion

Hello - I'm contacting you because you participated in the discussion on the proposed renaming of Cà Mau and/or An Giang Province. This is to let you know that a discussion on a number of similar proposed moves is taking place at Talk:Bac Ninh Province. Colonies Chris (talk) 12:30, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

First Crimean War listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect First Crimean War. Since you had some involvement with the First Crimean War redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. —rybec 15:23, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

User BetterThanSuchAsYou (talk · contribs) renamed this article without consensus and I moved it back. This automatically created a redirect, which can be routinely cleaned up. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 02:36, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Second Crimean War listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Second Crimean War. Since you had some involvement with the Second Crimean War redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. —rybec 15:39, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

User BetterThanSuchAsYou (talk · contribs) renamed this article without consensus and I moved it back. This automatically created a redirect, which can be routinely cleaned up. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 02:36, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Thoughts on Canadian Senate

I'm thinking about picking up the project again to help fill out the remaining lists needed. I'm debating about including numbered Senate divisions (ie, Quebec 24, etc), in order to track the continuity of a particular senate seat as well as vacancies over time. Some of the vacancies have significance to Canadian history (in both being left vacant and the eventual Senator appointed), and numbering them would help track this. Thoughts? I'm aware these would merely be placeholders and have no actual significance. Benkenobi18 (talk) 15:17, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

I haven't been actively editing much lately, so I don't really have any thoughts to offer about that, sorry. -- P.T. Aufrette (talk) 07:40, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

User name

One of the most stylish user names I've ever seen on here. Sounds like a French Canadian scholar/writer. It is your real name?♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:32, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

No, it's actually just a joke name, sorry. -- P.T. Aufrette (talk) 11:19, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ivy Low Litvinov, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George Kennan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Changes to WP:QC

You are receiving this message because you are listed in the active members list of WikiProject Quebec.

I have made a number of drastic changes to the project in an effort to bring some more life to it. I would appreciate hearing your feedback on these changes here. Thanks! - Sweet Nightmares 19:57, 15 July 2014 (UTC)