User talk:Mighty Antar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Mighty Antar, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!

1 Basingstoke
2 Warning Users
3 Spectre (Monster in My Pocket)
4 AfD nomination of Spectre (Monster in My Pocket)
5 Glenrothes
6 Slot Car/Tether Car edits
7 Slipknot GAC
8 Slot Car comments
9 Anglewinder, Sidewinder, Pancake motors - and Slot Car Mfgs. List
10 SLOT CAR - Need Help with New Illustration
11 Jim Clark
12 Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Jim Morrison photo.jpg
13 Bobbi-Kar/Airway conflicts
14 Taxi Driver
15 Humorous
16 Look before accusing
17 Ghost
18 Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Actionbiker game cover.jpg
19 Automobile conversion templates
20 Fair use rationale for Image:Anauroch.jpg
21 CompScientist socks
22 Andrea Bocelli
23 Image:Asilkaan2004.jpg listed for deletion
24 Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Riga 1941 Nazi Welcome.jpg
25 Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
26 cfd category:supercars
27 Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Andy Griffith1.jpg
28 Informing you
29 Deletion of selected recordings box on Madame Butterfly article
30 Deletion of supercar article
31 MigrationWatch UK

[edit] Basingstoke

Regarding this edit to Basingstoke — thank you for your contributions, but please note internal links (where appropriate) are far better than external ones. Thus, I've reverted your change, and kept Festival Place and Basingstoke Town F.C. as internal, rather than external links. _└ ^UkPaolo/_talk^┐ 19:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Warning Users

Hi you recently added a few warning to User:Viddin's userpage, these warning are intened to be put on user's talk pages not their user page. If you could keep that in mind when warning users, that would be great! --Lwarf ^Talk! 01:13, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spectre (Monster in My Pocket)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Spectre (Monster in My Pocket), by Feeeshboy (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Spectre (Monster in My Pocket) fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason:

non-notable thing

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Spectre (Monster in My Pocket), 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. Please note that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it did not nominate Spectre (Monster in My Pocket) itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 03:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Spectre (Monster in My Pocket)

I've nominated Spectre (Monster in My Pocket), an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Spectre (Monster in My Pocket) satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spectre (Monster in My Pocket) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Spectre (Monster in My Pocket) during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Kwsn^(Ni!) 01:04, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Glenrothes

Hi, thanks for reviewing the Glenrothes article, and i'm glad you liked it. Everyone who has contributed to it has done a great job.

I was just wondering how I can go about getting its grading up from a B? I was expecting it to go up once it had been reviewed?

Mcwesty 17:36, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Slot Car/Tether Car edits

Hi, Antar. Thanks for the welcome to Wikipedia, but it's really just me, David (D.Helber) who made the tether-car edits to Slot Car. I forgot to log in, so it looked like a new user.

Prior to making that edit, I had been reading a bit about early model car racing history, and also found the Tether Car entry. I noticed that the author had dated the I.C. car racing on tethers to the late '20s. Not knowing much about the gas engine side of the hobby, I figured he was more likely to be right than I was when I said "From the 1930s..." in Slot Cars, so I changed the date. As you say, though, his assertion is unsourced. Hertz says "gasoline [sic] powered cars ... originated in the late 1930's," so I'm happy to go with that. Thanks for the wiser analysis.

I can't quite agree that tether cars are not an antecedent to slot-racing merely because the Lionel cars preceded them. If that's valid, we might as well leave out the IC rail cars and the '50s electric rail-cars also. As a part of the gas-car/rail-car hobby, the tether car is part of the mainstream progression from uncontrolled to driver-controlled hobby racing. The Lionel cars, on the other hand were something of a dead-end anomaly, a mere foreshadowing. I think it is worth leaving the Tether Car link in both the body text and (at very least) the links. It is one of the few hobby-car-racing entries in Wikipedia, and will likely improve in quality in the same way Slot Car has. Perhaps our link will help speed that evolution by bringing it to the attention of more people.

One of the problems in discussing the IC cars is knowing what they burned and when. Some people describe them as diesels. Did any of the early ones actually burn diesel fuel, or is that just a verbal approximation for "methanol-fueled glow plug engines"? Those might be considered an exotic sort of diesel since they use self-sustained heat (in the glowplugs) instead of spark, though not the heat of compression like a true diesel. Hertz refers to the entire class as "gasoline-powered." Apparently some common earlier versions actually burned gasoline and used spark-ignition, though I can't at the moment come up with a source for that recently-read and multiply-encountered assertion.

Another problem for me is the tether-car/rail-car relationship. I originally presumed tether car IC racing, because it is simpler, had preceded rail-car IC racing and had largely been supplanted by it. Now thanks to [this 1940 article] I'm not sure at all. I have an old book coming in the mail that may shed some light on that. Or perhaps you already know the answers. This book would have the answers, but I'm not up for a $300 expenditure at the moment. However, do check their History page for a great pic of tether racing in 1939, so maybe my presumed chronology was correct after all, if not my assumption of the supplanting of tether by rail.

[edit] Slipknot GAC

Recently you failed the article Slipknot (band) as a good article, I was wondering if you could post a review or explain how this article failed so I or somebody else can improve on the article. (Rezter 18:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Slot Car comments

Antar, I got my book, Dempewolff's "Table Top Racing", 1963. A beautiful copy for $11 plus postage. It had lots of info on the electric rail-racing era, but less than I had hoped on the gas-cars. Using it and some web sources, I added some detail concerning the infancy of tabletop racing to SLOT CAR. Then I went back and added a bit of detail to the gas-car part to balance.

The problem is that, with the rewrite, I'm not entirely sure that some of your sources remain correctly attached to the specific information that you intended them to illustrate (since I don't have those publications to look at). Please check the new wording for me, to be sure that they still match up, and fix any problems. We may now be a bit over-sourced in that section, considering the relative scarcity of footnotes in later sections.

I have sent the original author of TETHER CAR a note asking for sourced verification of the 1920s-30s claim, but the more I read, the more I am convinced that it was just a fudged guess, and there was no significant gas-car activity prior to about 1936. If I don't get anything solid soon, I think I'll amend both articles to read "late 1930s".

As a side note, I was amused to find this ironic verification cementing the link between gas-car rail-racing and slot cars. "In 1954 the Southport Model Engineering Society (SMES) used a portable diesel rail car track as part of their annual exhibition to raise funds for the society. Alban Adams felt quite rightly that this breached his patent on the guides on their cars as he had made it clear that any club using this system for commercial use had to pay a portion of their profits to him as a royalty, and threatened legal action against the society if they continued to use a diesel rail track for the 1955 exhibition. This forced the society to look for a replacement model racing car attraction. The solution to their problem was an electric rail racing system inspired by the discussions in the recent edition of Model Maker. And so, electric rail racing came to be in this country. This eventually led to slot racing, so Alban Adams was right after all - albeit indirectly." It's from http://www.ddavid.com/slot-car-gallery/passion.htm , quoting J.R. Davies.

It was just too good not to use in our SLOT CAR entry, even though it takes a lot of words and clunkifies the flow a bit.

-- David D.Helber 16:31, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anglewinder, Sidewinder, Pancake motors - and Slot Car Mfgs. List

Antar, Since it looked like SLOT CAR was stuck linked to that sad and inaccurate Anglewinder entry, I redid ANGLEWINDER, and added SIDEWINDER (SLOT CAR) and PANCAKE (SLOT CAR) entries. Haven't done INLINE yet, but soon. Also did two illustrations to use in all the motor-style entries. One has a glitch in the pancake part - the crown gear jumped up above the pinion drive gear. I'll correct it.

Please check the PANCAKE (SLOT CAR) entry for me and see if you can figure out why my source numbers are goobered up, and why the source list doesn't show up at the bottom of the article.

Thanks for your help.

Now, what can we do with that pointless GOOP entry?

SLOT CAR - I added a few manufacturers' names. Manufacturers' lists are a bit of a problem. HO SCALE had one that was very incomplete, even for the significant manufacturers, but long nonetheless. I broke it up into Current Mfgs. and Mfgs. No Longer Active in HO. I'm getting to be quite a Wiki busybody. Breaking up a long list makes it more readable but it's still a bit irritating to the reader who has to scan down several screens worth of company names to make it to the external links. I haven't come up with a good solution - maybe double columns (can you do tables in Wikipedia? I'll have to check.) Cheers--

-- David - D.Helber 05:41, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SLOT CAR - Need Help with New Illustration

Hi, Antar - Upgrading SLOT CAR's neglected aft-section. I did an illustration for 'Electrical', but it got a bit out of hand. Could you please take a look and give me some feedback. It's at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:SlotControllers.gif

It'll appear about 67% of full size in the article. Caption to read something like: Types of Slot Car Controllers Telegraph Key, c. 1955- used by the earliest rail-car clubs. On/Off only. Thumb button, c. 1959 - In early sets. On/Off, or Fast/Slow/Off. Wheel/Knob Rheostat, c. 1960 - Full speed range. Can be set for constant speed. Carbon Disc Plunger c. 1963 - Aurora. Full range, but uncomfortable.. Rheostat Plunger - c.1964 onward. With or without brakes. Full Grip Style - c.1962 . Marx set controller. A precursor of pistolgrip styles. Pistolgrip or Russkit type Rheostat - c. 1965 onward. With or without brakes Electronic Controller, 1975 onward - multiple features, adjustable ohm rating.

Long caption. I'll add a bit on controller design in the body text so the image doesn't overpower the text. Thanks for any comments on the image/caption. Several of the dates are guesses. When did that Cox/Strombecker ventilated style plunger rheo come on the market? I know the simple cylinder plunger predated it, and probably the Scalextric flat ventilated plunger, but when? Also, no idea when practical electronic controllers arrived, 1975 is a guess. The thumb-clicker is a Revell, who marketed Scalextric in the US. Was it also the early Scalextric controller? Maybe ought to axe the stoopid Marx gripper and add a Ninco or Scallextric digital. Any help appreciated. Thanks. -- David (D.Helber 03:43, 29 August 2007 (UTC))

Thanks so much, Mighty A -- I must say, I envy your reference library. And your knowledge of the bigger slots - I'm pretty much an HO guy.

I was so tickled when I saw the telegraph key mentioned and illustrated in the "Built with Passion" book ad, http://www.vsrnonline.com/RailRacing/BuiltWithPassion.html and http://www.ddavid.com/slot-car-gallery/passion.htm . I just had to get it into SLOT CAR, somehow. The Electrical section needed an illustration - et voila! Now I'm wondering how serious the reference is. I wish I had Laidlaw-Dickson's Rail Car book, but the best price I've found is thirty dollars, which seems to me like a lot just to clarify points on fifty-year-old toy technology.

Your first reply sent me through my collection of sources. Somewhere I remember reading that this Revell controller had a Full/Half/Off configuration, but two of my books show that it is clearly the mysterioso "vibrator" variable controller abused by the Old Weird Herald (still can only guess at how it worked). I've searched through my American books and all over the web for a picture of the early Scalextric on/off thumb clicker - nada. If you know where there is an image of one, could you send me the URL? I'd like to replace the Revell buzzer with a drawing of it. There used to be a site which had extensive images of early Scalextric catalogue pages, but it seems to be gone now. Hertz is inexplicably silent on the subject of Scalextric in all areas.

Aurora absorbed Russkit (or at least hired Jim Russell) and used a dark blue version of the Russkit-style controller to replace the carbon-disk thumbbusters in T-jet sets in 1969, and a golden-yellow or orange version with AFX. That's the one I illustrated - its cheerful color and horizontal slots make a visual change from the purple Parma-style electronic controller. Really ought to have a K&B style horizontal thumb-plunger, too, but the picture is already threatening to overpower the text in that section. Besides, they look so 'Rube Goldberg' and uncomfortable (at least for a short-thumbed person like myself). Thanks again for all your wise counsel. -- David (D.Helber 05:55, 31 August 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Jim Clark

<sigh> Don't bother trying to talk to him - it's Pflanzgarten -- Ian Dalziel 18:57, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Jim Morrison photo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jim Morrison photo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:36, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bobbi-Kar/Airway conflicts

Hello, thank you for pointing out the disturbing similarities between these two articles. I will look into whether they are, indeed, the same article next time I have my hands on the book I got the info from. Thank you again, and happy editing. -Belvyzep Belvyzep 07:00, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Taxi Driver

Hello, regarding this edit of mine, where I undid your edit, it was a mistake - due to the way the diff was formatted I thought you had removed a large portion of the text while in reality it was just moved down. Sorry for the inconvenience. Michał Kosmulski (talk) 16:08, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Humorous

PLEASE look it up! I really am spelling it correctly! Even in British English. Stephenb (Talk) 10:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

The page you cite is wrong, or lists an unusual spelling. Please, look it up! Try [1] or [2] Stephenb (Talk) 10:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Incidentally, I have corrected the page you cited - it is most definitely wrong. Looking at the history, a user added it because there was an entry here, though mistakenly added it as a UK spelling despite the dictionary link it gives is Princeton's, with no indication of usage. I have changed it to read "unusual" instead of "UK". I have also rechecked with a dictionary (the New Oxford) we have here in the office. Stephenb (Talk) 10:50, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I shall revert no changes. The Oxford dictionary may list it, but I bet it doesn't say that it is the correct or, indeed, usual spelling. Check American and British English spelling differences as well as User:Roger Davies/Sandbox1 and the discussion at User talk:Spellmaster. I also don't appreciate your use of "Yawn" - please keep the discussion civil rather than suggesting you are bored. Once again, I implore you to check for the proper English spelling. I corrected the spelling on the page because it was poorly spelt - whether or not it was a red link is immaterial (if you check the, link for humourous and humorous both redirect correctly to humour and so should not be taken as an indication of correct sspelling) Stephenb (Talk) 11:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

If you really take the trouble to read those articles, you will realise you are, in fact, wrong. I don't think you've actually read them have you? In all cases, where people have tried to claim your spelling is an alternative, their arguments have been rebutted and the correct spelling was pointed out. Or, if you have read them, you are attempting to wind me up! If so, please stop. As it is, I will leave it there. Stephenb (Talk) 19:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Look before accusing

I have posted my rationale for my edit to the Apocalypto article in the "talk" section. You accused me of not doing so in your "edit comments", and furthered this accusation in sending me a message. Although I am new to wikipedia and do not know how to perform certain functions (such as posting my reasons for the edit directly in my edit itself) I would think that any responsible person would've looked to the article discussion before thoughtlessly reverting back to the prior version. If, however, being familiar with the intricacies of wikipedia (as you seem to be) you simply decided to ignore my concerns with the article, then you need to be reported.

I have two suggestions for you:

A) Present your VALID contention in the talk page, and we can sort it out in an educated fashion (deciding the matter on the basis of popular consensus if need be), rather than you just rashly deleting my edits.

B) If you lack any material objections, then revert back to my edit until you can come up with some, seeing as (for the time being at least) I am the only one justified in my editing actions.

and also, please, in the future, refrain from deleting my posts in an attempt, I must assume, at saying that I did not adequately justify my edit.

Here is a definition of plot from wikipedia for you, so it should be useful and applicable:

Story arc Plot is often schematically represented as an arc reflecting the rising action described in the following phases: Initial situation – the beginning. It is the first incident that makes the story start. Conflict or Problem – goal which the main character, or other characters, of the story has to achieve. Complication or Rising action – obstacles which the main character has to cope. Climax – highest point of interest of the story. Dénouement or Resolution – what happens to the character after overcoming all obstacles and reaching his goal, or failing to achieve the desired result and not reaching his goal. Conclusion – the end result

Using the interpretation of plot provided for us by a sanctioned wikipedia article, it is easy to see that plot is not inclusive of a quote which has no actual relevance to the action or substance of a film. If you would like to add another section, that would be wonderful, but as of now, this is irrelevant and must be deleted.

P.S. please actually read my post before ignoring it, and afterwards, don't delete half of it.

Thanks, Jarrodca —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jarrodca (talk • contribs) 18:54, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ghost

I'm not sure why you put those words back in. None of the applicable definitions of ghost give reason for them[3][4]. Do you think the article needs re-naming or something? ——Martin^phi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 01:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

I would call that good reason to rename, or redo the summary to be more inclusive, not to put in those words in particular. Yes, it's said to be that, but other things as well. So we need to take those words out and expand the definition. ——Martin^phi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 02:15, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Actionbiker game cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Actionbiker game cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

[edit] Automobile conversion templates

It seemed like a good idea at the time. The auto mph template has been deprecated, there is no real need to change them but such as task is quite easy. As for the Auto conversion templates being recommended by the auto project, it should note that auto mph shouldn't be used. It is a bit odd that auto mph is the only one to be deprecated. Jbattersby (talk) 11:03, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Anauroch.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Anauroch.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Gavin Collins (talk) 08:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CompScientist socks

I'd put those on the SSP page. Meantime, I'll block them. Daniel Case (talk) 03:48, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Andrea Bocelli

Hi just wanted to say thanks for your message on the talk page as I have found it very helpful in my "quest" to improve the article this weekend!I am trying to balance it all out so that the criticism section is expanded upon, not just for the purpose of criticism, but to simply show that there is criticism from some quarters of the opera world, explain something about why that is and who these critics are. So as to give more of a background to it to those who know little. It does seem that recently on the article a number of users have added "critical material" (for want of a far better experession") some of which has been unsourced and others which whilst sourced, have not really fully explained the criticism. If that makes any sense at all. When I have finished as much as I can, I wonder if you would do me the favour of checking it for me please to see if I get it as balanced as possible? Thanks.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 23:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi thanks for your message. No worries to be honest whilst I made a point of mentioning the criticism section, I am actually working on the article as a whole, with that particular section being one part of it and as you say it does need to be "countered" with the praise of millions of people - especially when the critics probably number a tiny percentage in comparison which is one of the reasons why I wanted to do all this! Such fun. I've made a start already with trying to add more bio stuff to the article.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 01:22, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Asilkaan2004.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Asilkaan2004.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media 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. —Bkell (talk) 09:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Riga 1941 Nazi Welcome.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Riga 1941 Nazi Welcome.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: J. R. Shaw; Hitman City; WCWM; Microcar; Piaggio; Patricia Alice Shaw; Terrance Shaw; Herbert Kenneth Airy Shaw; Captain Brassbound's Conversion; Lindsey Shaw; Baughurst; Richard Noble; Silchester; Everynight ... Everynight; Woody Shaw; Jimmy Shaw; Volkswagen Lupo; Battle of Reading (871); Byam Shaw

Cleanup: Daihatsu Terios; Bugatti Veyron; Vanity plate
Merge: Hot hatch; Biometric word list; Lymphocytopenia
Add Sources: History of the automobile; Lloyd Shaw (socialist); Mechanical pencil
Wikify: Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution; Ferrari 360; Bernie Shaw
Expand: Eugene R. Black; Porsche Carrera GT; Scuderia Ferrari

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. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] cfd category:supercars

hello, I've noticed that you've initiated the discussion about car classifications on WP:CAR. Maybe you would like to participate in this discussion as well: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_February_4#Category:Supercars. regards--79.212.225.247 (talk) 16:46, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Andy Griffith1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Andy Griffith1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

[edit] Informing you

Hello, Mighty Antar. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.

[edit] Deletion of selected recordings box on Madame Butterfly article

Please look at the TALK PAGE and lay out your reasoning rather than just reverting. - Jay (talk) 04:10, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of supercar article

Please look at the TALK PAGE and lay out your reasoning rather than just reverting. - 206.125.176.3 (talk) 19:34, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MigrationWatch UK

Hello Mighty Antar. I hope there will be a chance to restore balance to this article. I have suggested to the editors at WP:COIN that semi-protection ought to be considered. As we try to make that article neutral, I hope the term 'right wing' will be carefully scrutinized. It's not up to Wikipedia editors to determine that something is right wing, though we could report the opinions of journalists who use that term. Notice that even this article in the Independent talks about a 'right-wing agenda' in their headine but they don't use that adjective on MigrationWatch itself. One of your versions of the article has this in the lead: MigrationWatch UK is an independent right wing[1][2][3] pressure group and think tank which recognises the value of limited migration in both directions as a natural part of an open economy. I think that would have to be tweaked, since I'd rather not qualify them as 'right wing' in Wikipedia's own words, though it might take some thought how best to do it. EdJohnston (talk) 04:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

See also ebooksgratis.com: no banners, no cookies, totally FREE.