User talk:Batmanand

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

I archive as-and-when the page gets too long. I will reply on your talk page, and if the conversation is important, I will copy it all into my talk page as an easily-readable record for the future. I may reformat conversations to make them easier to read. I will not delete any comments made here unless they are obviously simple personal attacks against myself or anyone else; in that case, I will censor just those bits, leaving the rest of the message intact. I will never delete criticism of myself or any other user if it is made politely. If you wish to contact me more privately, I do have email enabled, although I hope that my conduct is such that this feature will be used sparingly.

Contents


Jan Smuts's youth - FAC[edit]

As someone who has expressed an interest in Jan Smuts in the past, I thought you might be interested to know that Jan Smuts's youth, covering his childhood and early adulthood (1870-1895), is under consideration for Featured Article status. Any contribution, whether a vote for/against or a suggestion for improvement, would be very much appreciated.

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Jan Smuts's youth

Best wishes, Xdamrtalk 00:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Poll on CC vs RCC[edit]

Hi, Batmanand. I’m here hoping you can reconsider your view in Talk:Roman Catholic Church. Bellow, I’ll explain my position on the matter.

First I'd like to say that, according to WP naming conventions, the choice of the name for the articles should not be a matter of "one POV" over "another POV". The question is not if the entity has any "right" to call herself CC, but if CC is the best name for the article according to WP guidelines. According to the guidelines, any POV issues should be resolved inside the articles – and not by the choice of its name.

You said that "when most people in the West say "Catholic Church" they mean the Church of Rome; but that is not necessarily indicative of what the rest of the world thinks." That's true. However, the official WP policy says that: article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize... (emphasis mine). AFAIK, English speakers typically live in the west, or at least have strong contact with Western culture.

(As a side-note, Eastern English speakers might even be more aware of the inadequacy of the modifier "Roman" when applyed to the CC as a whole, because of the closer contact with the non-roman Eastern Rite part of the Catholic Church).

When more objective procedures are applied, the results so far seem always to favor CC over RCC. For example: no one has come up with a good rebuttal of Vaquero's analysis in CC vs. RCC.

That’s it, thanks for your time considering my arguments. Best wishes. --Leinad ¬ Flag of Brazil.svg »saudações! 00:07, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

"in" or "during"?[edit]

Copied from User talk:Bastin8

What is your opinion on this grammatical puzzler: should the two "German Occupation of Luxembourg" articles say "... of Luxembourg in World War I/II" or "... of Luxembourg during World War I/II"? I have been thinking over it for a good few minutes, but cannot come to an answer. It seems natural to ask either "what did you do in the war?" or "what did you do during the war?"; although I suppose the former suggests that you were in the war itself, whilst the second is perhaps concerned with the time period the war was in. I suppose in that case maybe we should come to a decision on whether the military occupations were part of the wars, or happened contemporaneously? Batmanand | Talk 00:16, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

There is certainly a difference between the two adjectives (in this sense, specifically), and, originally, I believed that the articles should be moved to 'during', to reflect just that distinction. However, I have since changed my mind on the grounds that the German occupation was an intrinsic part of the war. This was certainly the case in the Second World War, and to quite a degree in the first (German high command was in Luxembourg City, Clausen was bombed by the RAF, Luxembourg's evacuation was a term of the Armistice, thousands of Luxembourgers did fight, etc).
Another question is that of the general case. The reason that they were titled as such in the first place was that they were being standardised with other occupations in the Second World War. Although (IMO) Luxembourg was a part of the World Wars, other countries might not be classified as having been, yet would still be burdened by the incorrect adjective ('in') for the purposes of standardisation. 'During' is applicable whether one is part of the war or apart, so would probably be preferable for the entire article series, such that it might then embrace those countries that weren't actively engaged. Bastin 00:28, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Some support from an opposer[edit]

Hi David. I waded briefly into the discussion about the main page article count a couple of weeks back, and opposed your decision to remove it from the top of the page. I have not been involved more recently, but have followed the discussions as they have unfolded, and still am of the opinion that you are wrong. However, or perhaps furthermore, I am disgusted by the personal attacks, the lack of good faith, the incivility, the plain, old-fashioned rudeness that has been displayed by those who seem to share my opinion on the matter. You have been subjected to vitriolic hatred, and I am sorry for that. I am ashamed that there are those who cannot argue cogently and politely who are "on my side".

I am glad to note that you yourself have behaved impeccably. I feel it is important that someone who disagrees with you can come forward and say that the behaviour of others who disagree with you is wrong, and should not be tolerated. I hope you understand that - leaving the dispute itself aside - you most certainly have my whole-hearted support in the way you have conducted yourself. Batmanand | Talk 14:08, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your kind words. I always make it a point to view people on an individual basis (not based upon their positions on particular issues or the conduct of those who happen to agree with them). In other words, rest assured that I would never lump you together with the likes of Juicifer or condemn your viewpoint because it happens to overlap with his.
I truly am attempting to gauge consensus (or lack thereof) and help to apply it appropriately, and I'm especially glad to know that not all of my opponents believe that I'm acting in bad faith. Thanks again for reassuring me of this. It's also nice to be reminded that some people are still capable of disagreeing without being disagreeable.  :-) —David Levy 15:18, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Please, no personal attacks[edit]

The whole exchange, as copied from User talk:Juicifer

Juicifer, I agree with you with regards to the matter of whether or not the article count should be at the top of the Main Page. However, edits such as this are totally unacceptable, and not only do huge damage to the credibility of the point of view we are both parties to, but are also in themselves explicitly against all sorts of policies. Because of the sheer vitriol of the above diff, I have decided to formally warn you. I am sorry to have to do this, but I cannot see another way:

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Batmanand | Talk 15:29, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I am not prone to personal attacks, but sometimes mockery is the only way. Specifically, in dealing with people that wont debate constructivly anyway. I wanted to put the fullest possible stop to the matter and make him realise that I was not movable on the subject of needing a vote in any way. Sometimes I just feel like breaking the rules to save time, but yes you are correct. juicifer 17:59, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
I understand what you are saying, but 1. there are rules that can be broken (perhaps in the spirit of WP:IAR), and then there are things so basic as courtesy and WP:NPA which should never, ever be broken and 2. the scale of you personal attack I felt was above and beyond mere "annoyance". I appreciate the fact that you admit that you have done wrong, and I hope you now stop, but that does not mean that the original act was right. I hope this is the end of the matter, and that the real issue, of what to do to article count, can now be resolved harmoniously. Batmanand | Talk 18:11, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Look a number of people had been trying to pin him down on the matter for 2 weeks and rather that making or responding to substantive points, discussing both sided of the issue etc, he simply kept responding with with word-games pedantry and obfuscation. I get the feeling that he would happily go on forever. Indeed he wore out zoggy and a number of other contributors with his trolling, and they dropped out of the debate begging others to take up the reigns. His behaviour has been utterly insufferable, as an admin he should be straightforward and productive, my response was not writ en not in anger but as a calculated way to put an end to the matter. I don't believe he would now be brazen enough to change it back without a strong consensus. That is all want, I think that has been achieved, and if I have underestimated his zealotry, he must know that he will only end up looking very very silly indeed. juicifer 18:43, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
I find your attitude - that if a first you cannot win an argument by reason, resort to personal attacks - utterly wrong. However, given that David Levy himself seems less concerned with you attacks than me, I am going to say no more on the matter. Batmanand | Talk 18:50, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Reason needs to be a two way street. I tried reason and recieved patronizing pedantry again and again (which again, comprises the bulk of his fisking). Life is too short for endless polite conversation with timewaster IMHO. Thank you again for your advice. juicifer 19:00, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Hiss, What is the accepted story?[edit]

Is it generally accepted that he was a spy but unproven, or merely a wannabee and a Soviet sympatghizer? Chivista 19:57, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Re:Great Question[edit]

Hi Batmanand!
Thanks! It certainly is a fascinating concept. And I must say I've really enjoyed the resulting conversation - I'll use the Reference Desk more often now. My teachers frequently complain about the questions I ask! --Fir0002 10:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the image[edit]

Hi Batmanand,

Thanks for adding the image to the Telecommunication article. It fits the lead well.

Cedars 23:33, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Bosnian Pyramid Rubbish[edit]

I've restored the cosmic energy rubbish. Yes, it's rubbish. The problem is, everything from Osmanagic and his Foundation is rubbish. See the talk page for the continued discussion on this. --Ronz 03:00, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, your changes will make it easier to pull the claims out of the intro and put in the proper sections of the article. The claim is actually made by Osmanagic, so it's a bit misleading with the "some commentators" inclusion, but easily fixed when the intro is cleaned up. Archaeological Park: Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun Foundation is the group controlling the promotion and management of the "pyramids". I don't think we've had any problems with them directly with editing Wikipedia, but they're responsible for almost all of the English-language news about the "pyramids" via their press releases that most news agencies print without the slightest fact checking. So far, Archeology magazine is the only source we have (that I can recall top-of-my-head) that has actually investigated the claims of the Foundation in any depth. The Foundation's tactics besides controlling as much of the information as possible is to directly attack anyone that holds an opinion contrary to theirs. To date, the Foundation's claims beyond the "pyramids" existance and locations are extremely vague: information on the age, structure, size, builders, etc all vary from report to report, one report often contradicting another, with no attempt to clarify the claims and providing little or no verifiable information on what the claims are based upon. --Ronz 14:45, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Belated thanks[edit]

Thank you for participating in my RfA. Consensus to promote was reached, and I am now an administrator. I'll be using the tools cautiously at first, and everyone should feel welcome to peer over my shoulder and make sure I'm not doing anything foolish. --RobthTalk 04:03, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Protecting children's privacy[edit]

Hi. You contributed to the discussion at Wikipedia:Protecting children's privacy. If you have time and interest, I'm asking for contributors to make a brief statement summarizing your thoughts about it here, thanks. Herostratus 19:56, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

fish tank clan post[edit]

Note: the post below has been censored to remove direct personal attacks. The gist of the post is still the same as the original, however. My response is at User talk:Saatana Batmanand | Talk 10:48, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

wow. I didnt think I would see the day when wikipedia was censored just like the web in China. Also, maybe just maybe you could give people some TIME to continue working on the page and finish it, at least to the best of their ability, before deleting it. Saatana 10:36, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

um....quite honestly I see no place in my post that could be taken as a personal attack but whatever man. I have found that a great many of the people on here are delusional, egotistical bastards who do not care about the others on here and what their opinions are. You say stuff like "happy editing" and "I will be glad to help" but that's just a bunch of bullshit. (Again this is not a personal attack, just a broad statement of what my dealings with people here have showed me so far.) And as to my experiences here, not only have they not been "not entirely positive", but have downright sucked. Saatana 11:02, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

ok I am sorry but I saw you're comment on how [FT] isn't significant inside or outside the counterstrike community and on this you are just wrong. [FT] IS significant inside the counterstrike community because we have been around for longer than something like 97% of all gaming clans. Also, it is our original server FTC2 that the <DAWG> clan was a major part of. Also [FT] servers are not only places to play counterstrike but also are places to chill with friends and have a good time—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.225.66.38 (talkcontribs)

Sorry, but that was not me who added that comment. I completely agree with it but I did not add it. Perhaps wiki got confused because I have had this page opened the entire time. Saatana 11:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Batmanand, just want to fill you in on this issue...before you had PRODded the article, it had been speedied twice and almost instantly recreated. The AfD was closed as a speedy. Just thought you'd like to know. Akradecki 13:51, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

American vs British spelling[edit]

Re your edit to Socrates: 'dialog' is the American spelling. m.e. 01:22, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I live in America, and I say it's spelled "dialogue". Meh. ~ Flameviper 16:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Spelling on my user page[edit]

Gee, thanks :) ~ Flameviper 16:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Martin Luther edit[edit]

I noticed your addition to the Martin Luther intro. I might be inclined to change it a little because having a graduate masters in Luther's theology I know that Luther was not a radical reformer. Your are right though to say that his view are "radical" in a sense. Luther, though, is considered by Reformation scholars as a "conservative" reformer. I think that the bit about being a controversial figure is a good point that you have made here.--Drboisclair 16:42, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I think that it is a good addition about him or his legacy being controversial. Perhaps better would be "As a result of this, his revolutionary theological views, and the Reformation his legacy remains a controversial one." This might be revised by some of the other editors; however, I believe that you add an important point to the lead-in intro.--Drboisclair 17:21, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I think that I am not capturing what you are trying to do here. You are saying: "As a result [of all of what Luther said and did] ... his legacy remains a controversial one", so scratch my suggestion above. Everything about the man was controversial. I think that it is a good way to end the intro. Let's see what the other editors do with it.--Drboisclair 17:25, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

0.999...[edit]

Thanks for supporting the 0.999... FAC, which passed! Melchoir 23:39, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

WP:ADOPT[edit]

Hi there,

Looking through our Archives I saw that you took an interest in the Adopt-a-user program during its formation and development. Well this is just a quick message to tell you the program is well and truly lifted off, with over 200 users involved in the program, 50+ active Adopters and approx. 150 Adoptees, and always expanding. If your still interested please pop by WP:ADOPT, have a look around and ask any questions you want on our talk page. Look forward to seeing you there. Cheers Lethaniol 15:36, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

FAC Ebionites[edit]

Hello Batmanand, since I've removed the primary sources section from the Ebionites article, could you drop your opposition on the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ebionites page? --Loremaster 17:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Clement Atlee[edit]

Dear Batmanand,

Some sorries: firstly, sorry for bothering you; secondly, sorry that this is a bit of a form letter (although, actually, it has been exquisitely personalized for you in at least two places); and thirdly, that I come over as a mad or maddish person suffering from some form of OCD ... which, unfortunately, is about right.

  • I'm writing to ask if you would please consider correcting the spelling of Clement Attlee on your page here:
  • where it is currently misspelt Clement Atlee. Please?

Since I do have a bit of a bee in my bonnet about this, I see it often - probably more often than is healthy - in searches and so on. Your correcting it would not only very slightly improve the sum of correct human knowledge, but would also lessen the chances of my suddenly attacking someone on the Tube for snoring, pushing, spitting, sniffing, reading the wrong novel, or whatever - so really it is a double benefit to personkind. I could also attempt to bribe you with Linzertorte, though it would have to be virtual unless you can easily make it to London, EC1 in order to be bribed in person.

I can't tell me how happy it would make me if you would please correct this small but (I think) important matter.

Thanks and best wishes, DBaK (talk) 13:05, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

In fact, I see that you have not edited for some time. I am unsure about the rightness of editing a userpage but this is rather a small spelling correction, rather than a change of meaning. So, if you don't mind, I will leave it a few days for a response, just in case, and then change it for you, in the hope that this is generally a helpful and positive move. If you do mind, I will no doubt be hearing from you. :) Thanks and best wishesDBaK (talk) 13:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Well, a week has elapsed; in addition, I have now read your nice notice about good-faith editing of your user page, so I will change it per that and all above here. Thanks and best wishes to you, DBaK (talk) 09:08, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 14:50, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 September 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 22:25, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 September 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 19:00, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 September 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 21:35, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 September 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 20:36, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 October 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:35, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 October 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 06:25, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 October 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:10, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 October 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:29, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 November 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 03:15, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 8 November 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 16:00, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 November 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:49, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 November 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:55, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 20:30, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 December 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:40, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 December 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:16, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 December 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:22, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 December 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 12:13, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 January 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:08, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 January 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 04:44, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 January 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 18:20, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 January 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:29, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:19, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 February 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:54, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 February 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:51, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 February 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 17:19, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 February 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:39, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 March 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 14:09, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 March 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:39, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 March 2011[edit]


Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 March 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:29, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 April 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:24, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 April 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 09:13, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 April 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 05:34, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 April 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:30, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 May 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 22:15, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of films with unexposed contents[edit]

Having participated (on 29 January 2006) in the above-linked AfD, you may wish to express an opinion on this entry's ultimate fate at its revived AfD vote: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of films with unexposed contents (2nd nomination), which began on 1 May.—Roman Spinner (talk) 00:30, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 May 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:44, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 May 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:46, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 May 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:06, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 May 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 19:01, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 June 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:15, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 June 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:24, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 June 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 14:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 June 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:30, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 July 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 10:21, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 July 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:20, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 July 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:15, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 July 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 22:22, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 August 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:20, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 August 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 22:55, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 August 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 08:20, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 August 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:12, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 August 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 07:41, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 September 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:25, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 September 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:03, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 September 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 09:16, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 September 2011[edit]


Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:52, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 October 2011[edit]


Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 04:45, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 October 2011[edit]


Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:01, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 October 2011[edit]


Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 09:55, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 October 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 10:10, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 16:50, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 November2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 11:54, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 November 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 22:04, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 November 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:25, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 November 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 05 December 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 12 December 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 19 December 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 26 December 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 02 January 2012[edit]


The Signpost: 09 January 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 16 January 2012[edit]


The Signpost: 23 January 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 30 January 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 06 February 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 13 February 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 20 February 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 27 February 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 05 March 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 12 March 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 19 March 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 26 March 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 02 April 2012[edit]

Replaceable fair use File:SLL map of schools dec 2011.jpg[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

Thanks for uploading File:SLL map of schools dec 2011.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 12:25, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Saving Londoners' Lives at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 10:56, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 9[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Saving Londoners' Lives, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NHS (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) 10:58, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

File:SLL map of schools dec 2011.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:SLL map of schools dec 2011.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 18:53, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 April 2012[edit]

Template:Did you know nominations/Saving Londoners' Lives[edit]

Hi Batmanand: I reviewed this and a reference is needed for the hook fact. I also noted some other concerns and a query about the origins of the programme - though that doesn't affect its DYK eligibility. I'll check back at the nomination page; hoping that this can be passed soon. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:31, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 April 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 23 April 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 30 April 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 07 May 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 14 May 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 21 May 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 28 May 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 04 June 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 11 June 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 18 June 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 25 June 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 02 July 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 09 July 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 16 July 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 23 July 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 30 July 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 06 August 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 13 August 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 20 August 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 27 August 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 03 September 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 10 September 2012[edit]

Replaceable fair use File:SLL map of schools dec 2011.jpg[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

Thanks for uploading File:SLL map of schools dec 2011.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:46, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 September 2012[edit]

File:SLL map of schools dec 2011.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:SLL map of schools dec 2011.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:36, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 September 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 01 October 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 08 October 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 15 October 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 22 October 2012[edit]

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Batmanand. You have new messages at SchuminWeb's talk page.
Message added 06:22, 28 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SchuminWeb (Talk) 06:22, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 October 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 05 November 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 12 November 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 19 November 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 26 November 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 03 December 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 10 December 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 17 December 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 24 December 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 31 December 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 07 January 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 14 January 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 21 January 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 28 January 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 04 February 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 11 February 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 18 February 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 25 February 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 04 March 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 11 March 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 18 March 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 25 March 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 01 April 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 08 April 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 15 April 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 22 April 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 29 April 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 06 May 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 13 May 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 20 May 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 27 May 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 05 June 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 12 June 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 19 June 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 26 June 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 03 July 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 10 July 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 17 July 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 24 July 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 31 July 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 07 August 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 14 August 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 21 August 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 28 August 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 04 September 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 11 September 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 18 September 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 25 September 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 02 October 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 09 October 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 16 October 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 23 October 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 30 October 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 30 October 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 06 November 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 13 November 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 20 November 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 04 December 2013[edit]

  • Featured content: F*&!

The Signpost: 11 December 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 18 December 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 25 December 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 01 January 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 08 January 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 15 January 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 22 January 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 29 January 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 29 January 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 12 February 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 19 February 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 26 February 2014[edit]

(test) The Signpost: 05 March 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 12 March 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 19 March 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 26 March 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 02 April 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 09 April 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 23 April 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 30 April 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 07 May 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 14 May 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 21 May 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 28 May 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 04 June 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 11 June 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 18 June 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 25 June 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 02 July 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 09 July 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 16 July 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 23 July 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 30 July 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 06 August 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 13 August 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 20 August 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 27 August 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 03 September 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 10 September 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 17 September 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 24 September 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 01 October 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 08 October 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 15 October 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 22 October 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 29 October 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 05 November 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 12 November 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 26 November 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 03 December 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 10 December 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 17 December 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 24 December 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 31 December 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 07 January 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 14 January 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 21 January 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 28 January 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 04 February 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 11 February 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 18 February 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 25 February 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 25 February 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 04 March 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 11 March 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 18 March 2015[edit]

.

The Signpost – Volume 11, Issue 12 – 25 March 2015[edit]

The Signpost, 1 April 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 01 April 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 08 April 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 15 April 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 22 April 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 29 April 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 06 May 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 13 May 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 20 May 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 03 June 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 10 June 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 17 June 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 24 June 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 01 July 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 08 July 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 15 July 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 22 July 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 29 July 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 05 August 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 12 August 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 19 August 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 26 August 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 02 September 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 09 September 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 16 September 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 23 September 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 30 September 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 07 October 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 14 October 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 21 October 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 28 October 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 04 November 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 11 November 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 18 November 2015[edit]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 12:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 November 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 02 December 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 09 December 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 16 December 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 30 December 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 06 January 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 13 January 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 20 January 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 27 January 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 03 February 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 10 February 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 17 February 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 24 February 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 02 March 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 09 March 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 16 March 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 23 March 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 1 April 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 14 April 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 24 April 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 2 May 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 17 May 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 28 May 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 05 June 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 15 June 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 04 July 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 21 July 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 04 August 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 18 August 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 06 September 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 29 September 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 14 October 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 4 November 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 4 November 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 22 December 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 17 January 2017[edit]

The Signpost: 6 February 2017[edit]

The Signpost: 27 February 2017[edit]

Nomination for deletion of Template:FPR[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:FPR has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 14:14, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 June 2017[edit]

The Signpost: 23 June 2017[edit]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Batmanand
en.wikipedia.org
crawl=CC-MAIN-2017-26
1014141
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:2GYPYD3LOF2XQCFNSICOZMDM2YVEOOEI
<urn:uuid:13100a4e-e705-4aaf-bbe1-677691ea84f1>
2017-06-27T06:10:24Z
208.80.154.224
text/html
sha1:TSDSFNNNNI3ASNA7K7KBBFHLOXO7NWES
<urn:uuid:22767130-605b-45e4-b7d4-66d82578f7b7>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Batmanand
length
response
<urn:uuid:57ad71c5-ea15-4a4f-b147-0fa8b16f189f>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-145-237-37.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2017-26
operator: Common Crawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for June 2017
publisher: Common Crawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf