User talk:Zvar

Archived content - Zvar 10:56, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Ruff

I'm not sure of the logic of having Ruff (bird) instead of Ruff. The bird has more links than the article of clothing, and the name of the neck ruff is derived from the bird. The present situation is now that someone searching for either of the non-trivial uses of ruff will find a disamb, whereas at least previously the main and original use came up directly. Jimfbleak 19:34, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Pioneer

What's the deal with changing all the pages that have a link to "pioneer?" It was very obvious the original page had errors and now reflects a modern definition that would have been apparent to anyone ever using the word "pioneer." You may have a job to do about changing all your revisions. FWIW Bzuk 21:14, 28 June 2007 (UTC).

Read the advice that was given to you, if you continue to insist that pioneer is not defined as a word then link it to a wikidictionary. I consider this as nothing more than vandalism since the article has stood up with that term for over a year. FWIW Bzuk 19:36, 2 July 2007 (UTC).

Can you NOT read the links I provided in your talk page? - Zvar 19:40, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Maybe I should explain the context of why I am so testy about this particular word; a raging argument that went on for months and involved calling in a series of administrators all revolved around the word "pioneer" as relating to Amelia Earhart. A concentrated effort was made by a group of editors to retain the word in context to Amelia and after a tremendous struggle with one particular editor, it was retained. I understand fully your contention but the way that the group of editors finally prevailed was to link some of the key words to wikilinks and citations. I am removing the wikilink for the present but now you know the reason why I did not want to revive this argument and wanted to keep the particular passage as it was established by the tribunal effort. FWIWBzuk 19:52, 2 July 2007 (UTC).

Further to USNS Amelia Earhart (T-AKE-6), this was also the cause of some editwars as one editor did not want to link it to the Earhart page. Now that you have got some background, bare in mind, you have now been tasked- provide an adequate dictionary link to AE so that the wars do not start again. FWIW (BTW, if you want a hoot, start going through the Earhart talk pages and you will get a feel for what is really going on here) Bzuk 19:57, 2 July 2007 (UTC).

Smile!

Hello Zvar, WarthogDemon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

-WarthogDemon 06:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Disambiguating Universal

Hi. I was about to start working on disambiguating Universal when I notice you'd grabbed it (great minds think alike?). Go for it! But if you change your mind, please let me know and I'll pick up wherever you've left off.

I noticed that Universal constructor is itself a dab page, so you might want to consider doing it at the same time, and/or merging it into Universal? Regards, Paddles ^T_C 13:50, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Cool, thanks for the heads up. I didn't even notice that yet. :) And actually if you look at the done section, you'll notice I simply start from the top and work my way down. I do pass up the ones I have no clue of though. (Seems there are several cities this dump like Halifax.) - Zvar 15:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Redirect of Drew J Cormack

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Drew J Cormack, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Drew J Cormack is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Drew J Cormack, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 04:20, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Disambiguation link fixing one-day contest

I have decided to put on a mini-contest within the November 2013 monthly disambiguation contest, on Saturday, November 23 (UTC). I will personally give a $20 Amazon.com gift card to the disambiguator who fixes the most links on that server-day (see the project page for details on scoring points). Since we are not geared up to do an automated count for that day, at 00:00, 23 November 2013 (UTC) (which is 7:00 PM on November 22, EST), I'll take a screenshot of the project page leaderboard. I will presume that anyone who is not already listed on the leaderboard has precisely nine edits. At 01:00, 24 November 2013 (UTC) (8:00 PM on November 23, EST), I'll take a screenshot of the leaderboard at that time (the extra hour is to give the board time to update), and I will determine from that who our winner is. I will credit links fixed by turning a WP:DABCONCEPT page into an article, but you'll have to let me know me that you did so. Here's to a fun contest. Note that according to the Daily Disambig, we currently have under 256,000 disambiguation links to be fixed. If everyone in the disambiguation link fixers category were to fix 500 links, we would have them all done - so aim high! Cheers! bd2412 T 02:22, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)