User talk:Theleftorium/Archive 5

11828:

had planned on trying to get in some token offense and making the second round before withdrawing. If you're looking for articles to work on, why not the season pages? Seasons 10-14 have books, so they should be easy enough. You could also work on season 10-12 episodes, though that may be harder because the commentaries suck and the complete guide doesn't cover them. If you're looking for FAs, why not some bios? The one on Harry Shearer is particularily close and I've always meant to whip it to FA shape but never gotten around to it. I'd like to try and get our topic drives done soon, we've been close for a while now and interest in them has waned. I'll most likely retire from working on episode pages (well, aside from maintainance, updating the new ones, etc.) once we finish seasons 2 & 3, my goal was to get all the classic season episodes to GA (or higher) and amazingly, we are very close. --

214:. This was tagged by CorenSearchBot, but you removed the tag as a "Knowledge mirror." True enough; it is. But strange as it seems, this does not eliminate copyvio concerns; it just means we have to figure out how this content got placed as "new" on Knowledge by this contributor and if he had the right to place it here. For example, did he copy or split it from an existing article? Did he salvage an article that had been deleted? Either way, unless he was the sole contributor of the earlier version, he can't place the text here without acknowledging his source as required under re-use at the copyright policy. In this particle case, the article is a 6374:. The article did indeed have paraphrasing problems when first created, but I have been working with its creator for the past couple of days to fix those issues, and I believe the article is substantially improved compared to its original state. In my opinion, it no longer is a potential copyright violation, though we have still continued to improve it and bring in a much greater variety of sources. I am unsure what information you were using when you decided to blank the article, so if you could provide a specific rationale for your blanking of the article, I would be grateful. 5281: 4557: 3515: 2781: 1659: 950: 4604: 2838: 1007: 6161: 11733: 11707: 3921: 31: 5203: 5058: 4882: 3437: 3292: 3116: 1605: 1460: 1284: 4614: 2848: 1017: 5329: 4866: 4811: 4669: 4567: 3539: 3100: 3045: 2903: 2801: 1683: 1268: 1213: 1072: 960: 11638: 10002: 9560: 9036: 8849: 8733: 8099: 7764: 7212: 5746: 5674: 3698: 5121: 4976: 4700: 3355: 3210: 2934: 1523: 1378: 1103: 4894: 4594: 3128: 2828: 1296: 997: 9389: 5180: 5035: 4827: 3414: 3269: 3061: 1582: 1437: 1229: 5257: 4726: 4547: 3491: 2960: 2791: 1707: 1129: 980: 5169: 5024: 4785: 4753: 4631: 3403: 3258: 3019: 2987: 2865: 1571: 1426: 1187: 1156: 1034: 6954: 5305: 4838: 4796: 4577: 3563: 3072: 3030: 2811: 1731: 1240: 1198: 970: 4514: 2748: 917: 318: 6909: 5191: 5046: 4854: 3425: 3280: 3088: 1593: 1448: 1256: 4502: 2736: 905: 306: 11611:

how a person could determine if an article meets that criteria. Featured articles have the star, but outside of perusing the list of good articles, how can I tell if an article meets that definition? I apologize for taking your time in this; most of my contribs qualify as minor edits. Admittedly I find the policies for adding material so complex that I often feel daunted (despite the 'be bold' policy). TIA!

5158: 5143: 5132: 5110: 5099: 5013: 4998: 4987: 4965: 4954: 4770: 4742: 4715: 4685: 4658: 3392: 3377: 3366: 3344: 3333: 3247: 3232: 3221: 3199: 3188: 3004: 2976: 2949: 2919: 2892: 1560: 1545: 1534: 1512: 1501: 1415: 1400: 1389: 1367: 1356: 1172: 1145: 1118: 1088: 1061: 8383:

quality of the references. I'm not saying the article should not be promoted once these are adressed, but these matters might need another look. Some more input from other medicine men might also be warranted, perhaps one might ask at some medical collaborations noticeboard. Sorry that I can't be more specific but I am so disengaged from Knowledge these days that I can't give better advice.

6477:

that I did was revert to your original tagged version of the article and then move the revised prose onto the subpage, which, again, I thought was required in order to follow the process of clearing up the Possible Copyright Infringement. Please let me know what I misunderstood and did incorrectly here, because I do not want to mishandle similar situations in the future. —

289: 8575: 4480: 2714: 883: 5818: 2190: 6282: 5969: 5886: 2363: 8344:, and the case itself and the original article are mentioned there. A more detailed review is for example: Giesbrecht GG: Cold stress, near drowning and accidental hypothermia: a review. Aviat Space Environ Med. 2000 Jul;71(7):733-52, though that may be not freely available online. Thanks and good luck. 6698:

Hey, Lefty. Just wondering, about two months ago, you intoned that you would try to get around to reviewing one of my GANs when you had the time - have you gotten some time to be able to do this? Sorry if it's imposing, just want to check in, as a lot of them are getting swept up in the whole backlog

6476:

template, which specifically instructed us not to edit the main page but rather to put any revisions on the subpage. I thought Racepacket had misread the instructions and was making edits improperly to the original page instead of on the special-purpose subpage sandbox prescribed by the template. All

4008:

I was doing in manually with the help of the tool. I hope you don't mind. I didn't change any of the actual content, all I did was fix a few disambiguations and links. The actual content is the same and every link goes to the same target page (i.e. the link to Superintendent Chalmers goes to the page

2645:

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work.

1774:

Hi everyone! We're very sorry we didn't get this one out anytime sooner. We've all been pretty busy IRL. But down to business: Since the last newsletter, the first half of the round has ended. We said goodbye to Candlewicke, Juliancolton, and Mitchazenia. We'd like to thank them for all of their hard

836:

Thank you for your consideration. You are probably wondering why should English Knowledge see new articles on these subjects only after so many years. Although these Illinois institutions were historic pioneers in the fields of mental health and developmental disability, and did much to improve the

11827:

I haven't been too bad. I've been busy, but I have missed working on articles (though I have had time, it's been tough getting back into my old editing patterns). As for Flaming Moes, I had been planning on working on it next week. I am also in the WikiCup and though I won't make it as far as you, I

9531:

If you have any final concerns about the WikiCup's rules and regulations, please ask them now, before the Cup begins to avoid last minute problems. You may come to the WikiCup's talk page, or any of the judge's user talk pages. We're looking forwards to a great 2010 WikiCup! On behalf of the WikiCup

8382:

Thanks for your work! I'm going offline now but will look at this again, tomorrow perhaps. I do think that the factual questions can all be adressed, but that leaves stylistic matters, such as the over-referencing, the linguistic style, which for my taste is a little bit too reality TV-like, and the

7056:

Thank you for the advice, for future reference. Before doing the split, I read the relevant procedure . This talks about (a) putting a tag on it to ask an administrator to do it or (b) be bold and just do it. I didn't see the 'copied from' tag that you mention, but I know about it now. No need to

6936: 6922:

for placing fourth overall in the 2009 WikiCup! You worked hard each round, churning out good articles and collaborating with your competitors. Your positive attitude was always pleasant, and your sportsmanlike conduct was admirable. Congratulations on coming in fourth, beating 56 other contestants!

6509:

You're right that the text should have been rewritten on the temp page. However, Racepacket should have moved the text there instead of you, because otherwise it will look like as if you wrote that content and not him when the temp page is moved to the actual article by an administrator. Knowledge's

11610:

I have no complaints. What I had thought was a very minor affront was instead clearly aligned with Good Article policy. However, I was both unaware of such a policy, and was subsequently unaware that this article qualified. After reading the entry defining a Good Article, though, I am left confused

5851:

for their kind nomination and support. I am truly honored by the trust and confidence that the community has placed in me. I thank you for your kind inputs and I will be sincerely looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas ( including my english ;) ). If you ever

1885:

were the split articles for which you fixed the attribution. I'm curious - how did you learn that those articles needed attribution links? Did you randomly happen across them or is there a search that helped you locate them? If there is a search procedure to find improperly split articles then I

1786:

Good luck again to the remaining four contestants! 20 days left in the Round, so make sure you get all your content nominated soon! You've all worked hard for this, since the beginning of January. I'm sure you're all tired by now, but you've come too far to just give up now. Congratulations Top 4!

8394:

Hiya. Didn't find the time earlier. It seems that the FAC has been closed, citing mostly my points - stylistic problems and quality of references. I do think that this can be helped. If you wish to give the article another attempt at FAC, why not take some time out and consider these matters more

11571:

I respect your position on citing for my contribution to 'Crepes of Wrath.' Ideally, every entry should be cited. Nevertheless, I feel your removal was hasty and possibly even impertinent. My reasoning is thus: not every item in Knowledge is cited, and generally items of what might be considered

221:

Back to it, but I wanted to stop and explain. These don't show up that often, but they do pop up now and again and they require a bit of sleuthing. :) If you find one and need to view the history, please feel free to pop by my talk page, and I can help figure out if there are attribution issues.

9259:

Actually I haven't seen horn salt mentioned as an ingredient. I think the "horn" part of the name refers to the shape, which seems to be the key difference with smultring, and can perhaps be seen as being horn shaped (two horns overlapping?). Or maybe I'm just engaging in wishful thinking. Some

821:

I have addressed your two sentences. You see that I added two more sources which I have found, and that you have checked those as well. I think this is sufficiently different to withstand any copyright infringement suit from the Manteno website, which appears to have derived from the Illinois

8912:

Hi. I am contacting you on behalf of the WikiCup judges because you were involved in our previous points polling. Though most of the polls are now closed, we have restarted polls relating to the points value for both valued pictures and in the news entries. You are welcome to submit your votes

5376:

The end of the round, and the end of the 2009 WikiCup is this coming Saturday, October 31! To our top four: don't give up yet. Make sure that anything you have left to nominate is nominated today or tomorrow, for the slighted chance of it passing in time. The last day items will be accepted is

1911:

so it would no longer be a copyright infringement. Unfortunately, adding synonyms and minor alterations in the sentences won't relieve the plagiarism issue. As it is currently written, the text will need to be deleted as a copyright violation. You are welcome to rewrite the text using original

218:. Since I can see the contributor list, I know that it is also a copyvio, as this was not the creator of the text originally. If the previous article had been deleted by PROD, I'd be restoring the history for attribution and, if the deletion rationale seemed valid, nominating for AfD. 637:

Hi, Ser Amantio di Nicolao. I hope TL doesn't mind my jumping in here. Thanks for providing the attributions to the source. I just wanted to mention that it is also suggested that you make a note about the source in your edit summary when it is copied text. For example, when creating

11572:

common knowledge are often never cited. I will (if I remember) return my contribution with a citation, but I do proffer a small objection to your removal without discussion or substantial cause. Regardless, I appreciate (honestly) your reminder that added information is best cited.

3944:

I saw your discussion with Theleftorium concerning text copied from from the Illinois State Archives website on those mental hospital pages. That text is a description taken directly from the Illinois Secretary of State's website (which hosts the archival info). According to

9492:

removing yourself from the WikiCup. This is simply a way for the judges to take note of who has not yet reconfirmed their participation. If you have not removed your name from that list by December 30th, 2009 (by 23:59 (UTC)) then your name will be removed from the WikiCup.

9429:

You Swedish Meats article may not be about bacon specifically, but it mentions pigs so it is approved. It doesn't quite score you enough to earn the "substantial contributions" points but you have created it which means you are now on the board with your first

6186:

brought you to us was most definitely to our benefit. :) Thanks. (It will not hurt my feelings if you want to get rid of the shiny Halloween image, though I love it. :D I hope it renders well on your page, because I don't usually make these things for myself.)

246:, thanks for the correction. I have rewritten the sentences that were too close from the main source, and added other references, which helped having more accurate information. Please, can you see wether this is now acceptable ? With many thanks in advance, -- 9136:? Is it legitimate? Can we redirect. And the hjorte ones sound tasty. Can we add a bit about them (or even a section) to the main fattingman article and redirect? I know this seems trivial, but compared to the "Johnny bit my finger gag" this is Nobel worthy. 1886:

would appreciate it if you could explain how to perform that search. That's something I would be interested in helping with. If you just happened to stumble across those articles, then kudos to you for your diligence and your attention to detail.

11471:

I was in error regarding the Rigpa Shedra Wiki license. Thank you very much for repairing my understanding and oversight. I have rewritten the article, restructured and cited as appropriate. I apologize for unintentionally misleading you through my

9400:

before the New Year even starts! This is a fun and collegial event and all are welcome. There are many non-pork articles for editors who enjoy some sizzle, but object to or don't like messing with pig products. This year's event also includes a

1782:

is joining our judging team effective immediately. J was assigned after Garden and Thehelpfulone announced they would be highly inactive throughout the remainder of the WikiCup. It is likely you will see J return as a judge next year as well.

785:

At that time, the board of trustees was reduced to three members and the newly created Board of State Commissioners of Public Charities was given authority to investigate and report to the Governor on conditions at the hospital. (This will be

3789:

I'm gonna wait a while until I create it. There's a huge backlog at GAN and I don't want to add more to the section. When it slows down, I guess, I'll create the article. Also, thank you for the barnstar, I appreciate a whole lot. :)

618:

Sure, it's my pleasure. Apparently there are a lot of mirrors of NWR websites out there - tourist websites, mainly - which clouds the issue considerably. I left Coren a note on his talkpage explaining what my sources are for these.

837:

care of hundreds of thousands of patients, there is a certain stigma attached to mental illness and people don't want to spend their time reading and writing about it. It is still an important part of society and cultural heritage.

10528:, you're being notified because we are currently planning another one in January! We hope to have an even greater level of participation this time around, and we need your help. If you're still interested please sign up now at 6296:

For outstanding contributions during the 2009 WikiCup: to count only the final round that included a featured article, a 23 part good topic, 24 good articles, and 12 DYK articles. Great work, and all the best to you for 2010!

11461: 2100:), could you please explain the copyright policies to them? This is important, obviously, to keep them from doing it again, when Corensearchbot might not notice. :) I'll let this one know. This is jut a request for future. -- 1775:

work getting this far. Shoemaker's Holiday has also withdrawn, so we'd like to thank him for his hard work too. Congratulations to Durova, Ottava Rima, Sasata, and Theleftorium for making the top 4! Good luck to you all.

9405:

for those who may want to keep score and enjoy engaging in friendly competition. Given the critical importance of this subject matter, I know you will want to participate, so remember to sign up today and get started

2095:

You may not know that Corensearchbot is not at this point able to warn individuals if they do not already have article talk pages. If you clean an article where the contributor was not warned (I see this happened at

5372:

It just came to me that multiple users have worked together on a bunch of content items, which means the newsletter counts are likely off. I'll try to put that all together and figure it out by the end of the round.

653:. It may help in keeping some of the unwanted CV tags off the article. But, more importantly, it is very helpful later on, after other editors have changed or altered the original text. Good luck with your editing. 2330:

I think that section should be shortened down (like a small summary) since it's already on the main Family Guy article. This article doesn't seem ready for GAN, though. The reception section needs to be expanded.

937:

In this round of the WikiCup, the bottom three contestants of the top eight were eliminated on September 30th, while the top five are continuing for an additional month. On October 31, a winner will be announced.

4534:

In this round of the WikiCup, the bottom three contestants of the top eight were eliminated on September 30th, while the top five are continued for an additional month. On October 31, a winner will be announced.

2768:

756:

I have double checked the new version and I assure you that every sentence is different. I think the history is far more comprehensive and draws from more sources than the article which you cite. Thanks.

9362:

Thanks for that. I didn't realise that I had The Leftorium. anyway, if you have created anything for the challenge, you can report it right now on that page and if you are quick enough, you will be the

6493:

In addition, I would propose modifying that template to give more explicit directions to clear up any such misunderstandings in the future (though I'm still unclear on what the misunderstanding was!). —

5876: 11483: 1916:

can provide you with some explanations and help. In the long run, it is always better to simply write the text from scratch using your own words. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Regards.

2166:

I'm about to test MLauba's template on you. :D Don't worry. It'll be swiftly removed. If it works, you can save some time and just use {{subst:User:MLauba/tcclean|ARTICLE}} and get a handy notice. --

822:

archives website. A court would look at the order in which ideas are presented (the organization of the work) as well as the individual sentences. Every sentence and their sequence are different.

7279: 369: 10187:

I always have a problem understanding IN-U, even after reading it a few times. Are we not suppose to write pages in a historical context? Like everything kinda happens at the same time? For

408: 9157:) so that is probably not worth redirecting. I have no idea what Hjorte Bakkels is though, and there are no results for it on Google (except for Knowledge mirrors). Perhaps you could ask 2299:

he put in cast and production information from the series as a whole, not specifically related to the episode. I said to ask you if that is how he should do it or not. I didn't think so.

6891: 5987:

is amazingly outstanding!!! Left, you do great work, and are an amazing editor, and a great person to work with! Keep up the great work, and I look forward to your next 100 GAs!! :-D

1972: 11445:

I know, but someday you may not be there. :) Not that I'm wishing you ill or anything. But if automated behaviors like this can be, well, automated, then it's all to the best. :D --

10477:. I've created it for article talk pages. It works for contributor talk pages, too, but said recent fiasco convinces me that the article talk page is better. :) See it in action at 8445: 8023: 3989:

is listed. You said in April 2009 that, "the article needs a copyedit before I nominate it for FA." It's now a FA (congratulations!), so do you still need the article on that list?

2739: 908: 9921:

Hi there Henrik, quick question if you don't mind: Which are the best forums to get answers to everyday questions related to Sweden (kind of like our Reference Desks)? I know of

8333: 2206:

is completely clear when you log on, it's because of all you do regularly when the backlog mounts in the 100s. Keeping it down when there's 10 items on it every morning is easy.

782:

All patients were to be maintained at state expense. However, patients or their counties were expected to pay for clothing, travel, and incidental expenses. (This will be fixed.)

427: 5929: 11198: 9239:

I'm sorry that I couldn't be of more help. I don't think hjortebakkels are quite the same thing as a smultring. I only say this because I do not associate the foul stench of

5912: 2114:. Feel free to use it. If you copy the material from ==, the only thing you need to include is the article title. :) (Again, if you see any mistakes, please let me know!) -- 422: 632: 7447: 7431: 6449:. I therefore restored your edits on the main article. And since your rewrite looks good, I have removed the template. An admin will need the delete the subpage, though. 11788: 11532: 10581: 9789: 8976: 8673: 7889: 7506: 6831: 5618: 3868: 2014: 152: 2074: 203:

Hi. First, let me say how glad I am that you're still plugging away at copyvios. :D We really need you. I hope you will be well and thoroughly addicted by the time you

10589: 9797: 8984: 8681: 7897: 7514: 7439: 6839: 6823: 6791: 5624: 3874: 2020: 2008: 413: 158: 146: 122: 9471: 6182:

Those of us who seem to live and breathe copyright are very fortunate that you have decided to pitch in on this cleanup. I appreciate your diligence and persistence.

11780: 11524: 10597: 10573: 9805: 9781: 8992: 8968: 8689: 8665: 7905: 7881: 7498: 6847: 6815: 6775: 5630: 5612: 3880: 3862: 2026: 2002: 164: 140: 9733: 4402: 2430: 2111: 547: 529: 9340:

Apology accepted gracefully ... I just got Rollback this week, and have been afraid about what would happen if I did that by accident. No worries, and thanks. --

667: 11500: 10557: 9749: 9521:

Featured topics (which were worth 10 points per article last year) will now be worth 15 points per any article in the topic that you were a major contributor to.

8944: 8633: 8221: 7873: 7849: 7841: 7490: 7455: 6783: 6767: 5490:

sets out, when material is split, we have to provide a direct link to the source article. Instructions on how to do this are located in the Hyperlink section at

2677: 1966: 10381: 8466: 5467:. I read somewhere that copy paste moves/splits are bad because they do not bring over the history of the text and attribute the work properly. I reported it 11764: 11508: 10565: 10227: 9765: 8952: 8649: 8625: 7857: 7474: 6807: 6398:

then you'll see what I mean. Adding synonyms and minor alterations in the sentences won't relieve the plagiarism issue. If you haven't already, take a look at

5596: 4009:

that Superintendent Chalmers redirects to (List of recurring characters in The Simpsons#Superintendent Chalmers). I would never change what others are saying.

3850: 3606:

We have announced the intention to hire another new judge to cover for future judge absences. If you are interested please see the talk page for the WikiCup.

1984: 128: 116: 5357: 3591: 270: 9133: 313: 309: 10404: 10362: 10339: 10328: 10305: 10294: 9710: 9699: 9688: 9665: 9654: 9614: 9524:

Good topics (which were worth 5 points per article last year) will now be worth 10 points per any article in the topic that you were a major contributor to.

8489: 8195: 8010: 7974: 6675: 6652: 6641: 6618: 6607: 6584: 6573: 3998: 2118: 11373: 9234: 9207: 9179: 8604: 8569: 8543: 7630: 7383: 7360: 7344: 7330: 6048: 11449: 11440: 11417: 11404: 10509: 7196: 6260: 6251: 6226: 6217: 4083: 4068: 2170: 2161: 745: 11817: 11772: 11561: 11516: 10626: 9773: 9021: 8960: 8718: 8657: 8022:

19:09, 16 November 2009 (UTC) Could you help me out as i am trying to get lisa simpson to FA i need some help at cultural influences, my work is in here

7944:

hey left your kind of an expert on ga on episode articals(in tiger woods level of golf and beckams football) so how can i find production for episodes.--

7934: 7865: 7482: 7463: 6748: 6733: 6062: 5602: 3856: 1990: 1978: 543: 525: 134: 11359: 11338: 9834: 7732: 7543: 6876: 6528: 6504: 6488: 6420: 5659: 4180:

darn, well lisa is a bit more cmplicated than bart, so we well see what happens tell me when you can conect to disscus unless you wish to discuss now.--

3909: 2055: 9550: 9269: 9254: 8641: 7833: 7423: 6799: 4898: 3132: 1996: 1300: 514: 193: 11620: 11605: 9349: 9335: 8928: 6467: 5567: 5553: 5526: 5512: 2325: 2277: 713:. We can link to music lyrics if they are hosted legally, but not when they are a violation of copyright. In any event, I am redirecting this one per 559: 11746: 11724: 10474: 9757: 9741: 8427: 8404: 8377: 8219:

Since it's a short video, shouldn't the title be in quotes ("Charlie Bit My Finger") rather than italics, throughout the article? I noticed that the

5590: 3934: 538: 496: 9984: 9968: 8902: 8268: 8083: 7681: 7658: 7045: 4442: 2424: 2137: 11753: 11489: 11165: 10546: 9545: 8933: 8614: 8515: 7822: 7365:

Munk is the Swedish term for "doughnut". Those images are definitely Fattigmann (I renamed the article "Fattigmann" by the way. It's more common).

5463:

Hey. You seem to know a little bit about the copyright policy on Knowledge so can you help me? The editor who created this page copy-pasted from

3982: 11281: 11250: 11227: 11188: 10978: 10947: 10920: 10889: 10828: 10797: 10740: 10709: 10248: 10180: 10149: 10126: 8831: 7594: 7268: 7157: 7126: 6332: 6127: 6102: 6088: 6042: 5953: 4384: 4357: 4330: 4303: 3967: 3811: 2349: 1949: 9722: 9378: 7412: 6756: 5579: 3839: 1955: 10462: 9908: 9889: 8321: 4406: 4130: 8907: 8152: 8055: 5868: 2399: 505: 211: 105: 9145: 7699:

I have revised the opening sentences to meet the objection raised at FAC. Of course, if you don't like what I've done feel free to change it.

3834: 709:

Hi. :) Thanks for the clean up on that one (and all the other ones you clean up :D), but wanted to point out that the link is a problem under

9484: 9482:

To ensure that everyone who signed up is still committed to participating in the 2010 WikiCup, it is required that you remove your name from

9302:

source to indicate that this movie is in active production, please be sure to add it instead of this improperly used citation. Thank you. --

9184:

The mystery of the Hjortebakkels has only grown. On the one hand I have established that they are a real thing, that they can look like this

7349:

I found some very nice Fattingman photos, but I don't know if they're "bakkels" and they aren't licensed for Knowledge use, but I could ask.

4219: 4208: 4197: 4186: 4175: 4164: 4153: 4142: 3972: 510: 11695: 11136: 11095: 11058: 11027: 10863: 10771: 10221: 7565: 775:

On March 1, 1847, the legislature established a nine-member board of trustees that was empowered to appoint a superintendent, purchase land

727:

Ah, I didn't know that. Thanks for letting me know! :) Yeah, redirecting the article seems like a good idea (why didn't I think of that?!).

10055: 9477: 9447: 8808: 7290:. Feel free to merge, redirect, or create this article as you see fit, and to add other Swedish varietals as necessary. I know we can work 6427: 5824: 5480: 5468: 3927: 3920: 2069:, but I consider you a pretty important part of the copyright cleanup team given your current activities. :) There is some conversation at 626: 606: 583: 534: 492: 11475:

If you celebrate Christmas, Blessings of the Season to you and yours, otherwise, be well and thank you for your contribution to Knowledge!

9127: 5491: 4275: 4048: 1853: 10273: 8790: 3675: 10541: 9132:

Speaking of weight gain, did you tell me what Hjorte Bakkels and Futimonbuckles are? The second is just an alternate transliteration of

7303: 5443: 1934: 10529: 10523: 7287: 4418: 11836: 8353: 7817: 6472:

I apologize if I violated any policies, but I was under the impression that Racepacket had not been following the instructions on the

3752: 2104: 612: 226: 9397: 7708: 4233:

season two episode articles, but I'm having difficulties finding sources for reception. Could you help me out, as you have access to

2368: 2085: 1759: 501: 10485: 9311: 8244: 6388: 6191: 5558:

Understood, makes sense. I never thought to look at the talk page of the redirect, assumed it was always that way. Good to know.--

681: 255: 11232:

I don't think a copyedit is necessary there. The opposer wants you to add more general information about the history of Davenport.

10431: 9419: 8915: 8037: 2357: 2289: 2245: 2234: 721: 9286:

Greetings. I've had to revert this addition a number of times, and I admit I'm puzzled as to why it keeps getting added back. The

8454: 8297: 6709: 6439: 5803: 5471:. Is there anything else I should do or have I dont the right thing? Is it actually a problem or am I misremembering? Thanks.-- 697: 11001:

Hey, can you edit my talk, and see if it has your name at top, and if the talkback template works correctly on my talk. Thanks.

9190:, and yet I'm still not entirely clear on how best to include them. They seem to be sometimes treated as a synonym or variant of 8471:

The stuff you've found looks pretty good. You may want to ask Scorpion, he was the one who wrote the article from the beginning.

8207: 8168: 7407: 7398:

What source? Sources 63-66 all link back to the page. If souring is a problem, I can provide the episode transcript if you want.

6430:, but Notyourbroom has moved the fix to the talk subpage. Could you please review it, so that we can get this resolved? Thanks. 5731: 4102: 3914: 2215: 9188: 7180: 4308:

Hi, don't mean to push you or anything, but I haven't received anything yet, and those Revenge reviews are a little bit urgent--

11805: 11661:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 11549: 10639:

Hey, for an FAC, do I strike out the comments when I fix someone's suggestion, or do they do it, after they see I've fixed it?

10614: 10516: 10025:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 9822: 9583:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 9059:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 9009: 8872:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 8756:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 8706: 8122:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 7922: 7787:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 7749: 7531: 7235:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 6864: 5769:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 5697:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 5647: 5464: 3897: 3721:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 2043: 794:

participated in a departmental affiliation program for psychiatric nursing which provided instruction in psychiatric nursing to

462: 181: 7350: 6343:

Thanks very much mate - although you as a competitor made the contest really something special. Best of luck for the future.

11677: