Revision as of 01:47, 3 August 2011 editMediationBot (talk | contribs)5,654 edits A request for formal mediation has been filed for a case in which you are involved← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:24, 3 August 2011 edit undoSteven Crossin (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors39,854 edits →Abortion RFAR: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 75: | Line 75: | ||
<small>Message delivered by ] (]) on ] of the Mediation Committee. 01:47, 3 August 2011 (UTC)</small> | <small>Message delivered by ] (]) on ] of the Mediation Committee. 01:47, 3 August 2011 (UTC)</small> | ||
}} | }} | ||
== Abortion RFAR == | |||
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at ] and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use— | |||
* ]; | |||
* ]. | |||
Thanks,<!-- Template:Arbcom notice --> |
Revision as of 03:24, 3 August 2011
|
This is Eraserhead1's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 20 days |
Archives |
This page has archives. Sections older than 20 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Your comment on ITN
Hi Eraserhead, just to follow up on your comment at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Main Page features, and entirely in good faith, could I ask you to expand on your statement that "We have actually managed to improve it so far this year, maybe not enough, but it is working significantly better."? I'm on the fence about this one. Tony (talk) 16:31, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
- I've done so in the discussion section. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:51, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
Talk:Death of Caylee Anthony#Article not yet ready for Good article (GA) status
Hello, Eraserhead1. Will you weigh in on the above linked discussion. I do not feel that this article is ready for GA review and believe that it would have been better that you asked the editors of the article whether or not it is ready before nominating it. Flyer22 (talk) 15:31, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of AppleInsider
The article AppleInsider has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. HereToHelp 01:01, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
File:1-over-x.png listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:1-over-x.png, has been listed at Misplaced Pages: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. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:44, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Eraserhead1. You have new messages at HereToHelp's talk page.You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
List of oldest universities in continuous operation
Agreed on my tp is not agreed by me but you know that full well yourself. I glossed over your revert a bit. Since you did not respond to my qualms from 21:50, 9 July 2011 I presume given the lack of your further comments that I can revert your version anytime. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 17:50, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
If it's reverted I will escalate the matter and continue doing so until it is resolved or until you actually continue discussing the matter. I addressed you qualms and gave you plenty of opportunity to make further suggestions that are practical within the lead section. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:05, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
- I should add that I think your changes so far are reasonable enough. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:28, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
- I told you that your changes won't improve people's understanding of the topic and keep them from adding madrasahs, but let's see what happens. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 09:56, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- Well they've been added so frequently that statistically I don't think that particular time means too much. If after 6 months the rate hasn't declined from the previous 6 months then it would be reasonable to remove the content from the lead. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 14:38, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- I told you that your changes won't improve people's understanding of the topic and keep them from adding madrasahs, but let's see what happens. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 09:56, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:China-header
Template:China-header has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 00:58, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Eraserhead1. You have new messages at HereToHelp's talk page.You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Misplaced Pages:In the news/Candidates#Largest ever fungal fruit body
I really don't understand why you want more sources, or what more sources could possibly add. The nature of this type of news is that articles from news providers are just going to be rephrasings of the published article- the BBC did have some other little bits, but not much. It's useful as a citation for two reasons- showing "mainstream" attention, and because it's more accessible than an academic journal. For a species like this, the only other real source at this time will be the original description, which I am making efforts to obtain, but will, obviously, not have anything about the news anyway. J Milburn (talk) 23:41, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Formal mediation has been requested
The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Opposition to the legalisation of abortion". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by January 24, 2011.
Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 01:47, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Abortion RFAR
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests#Abortion and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks,