Severity: Notice
Message: Undefined offset: 1
Filename: infosekolah/leftmenudasboard.php
Line Number: 33
Line Number: 34
Jonathunder-- Thank you for your comments concerning my RfA. I will take them into consideration as I continue to grow as an editor. Thank you for your time. --Lord Voldemort (Dark Mark) 17:35, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, the images were added so they could be used. I'm glad you found them useful. —Mulad (talk) 12:53, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for supporting my masters RfA. He appreciates your support and comments and looks forward to better serving Wikipedia the best he can. Of course I will be doing all of the real work. He would have responded to you directly, but he is currently out of town, and wanted to thank you asap. Thanks again. --Who's mop?¿? 21:09, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for supporting me on my RfA! Robert 16:12, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Can I get your opinion of Tony's latest recreation and relisting of a valid VfD deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Systemwars.com (second version). Thanks. - Tεxτurε 15:48, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your support on my nomination for adminship. Now that I have been made an admin, I will do my best to live up to the truest you and the community have placed in me. If you ever see my doing something you think is incorrect or questionable, or does not live up to the standards that should be expected of an admin, please let me know. DES (talk) 16:01, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads up. Hopefully we can get a few others from the Balder vote to go to this one. DreamGuy 04:08, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You have supported a move of the article Skånska over at Talk:Skånska#Requested move that is not compatible with the concept of NPOV and general guidelines over at Wikipedia:WikiProject Languages. I would appreciate if you'd read the objection I've posted and reconsider your vote.
Peter Isotalo 11:08, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Talk:Skånska#Requested moved I have altered single "first past the post" vote to approval voting so that we can try to reach a consensus. Please check that your vote still reflects your position as I may have misunderstood your voting intentions or you may wish to vote for more than one proposal. Philip Baird Shearer 21:52, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
regards Philip Baird Shearer 01:21, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the support. freestylefrappe 14:44, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
If you are still interested in the subject please see WP:RM#Proposed changes. Philip Baird Shearer 21:27, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Jonathunder, I recently found your name on the list at User:Rick Block/WP600 not admins and noticed that you had indicated your potential interest in being an administrator. I've been reviewing your contributions to Wikipedia against my rather strict nomination standards and I'm pleased to tell you that you passed. I did observe that you were one of the disputants in a request for Arbitrattion back in January, but that you were never central to the dispute and the dispute went the way of your opinion. I've reviewed every single one of your User talk page contributions and found no incidents of incivility. I've reviewed your overall edits as well. You've been heavily involved in vandal fighting, AfD, RfA, CfD, and the ever contentious requested moves. I also particularly liked your contributions to things related to WP:3RR, and WP:MOS. I've also reviewed your contributions in images and especially appreciated your observance of copyright and the proper application of license tags. Everything I have found has been exemplary in conduct, with the best of intentions and inline with Wikipedia policy. With all of this in mind, I'd like to nominate you for adminstrator. If you would be interested in accepting, I have just a couple of questions:
All the best, --Durin 19:34, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
PS: You're not bald. Your hair just migrated south to your chin :)
Thanks for the welcome. Well done on the State Park articles and the other stuff you've started. I'll contribute what I can and appreciate the welcoming guidance and hope you'll offer any other advice on wiki-ing (is "wiki" a verb yet?) as you see fit. Cheers. the dharma bum 18:53, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for supporting my rather contentious request for adminship, but now that I've been promoted, I'd like to do a little dance here *DANCES*. If you have any specific issues/problems with me, please feel free to state them on my talk page so that I can work to prevent them in the future, and thanks once again! ALKIVAR™ 07:32, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
please dont change the names and the regions of greece.
A new proposal on representation of Norse mythology names is now up for a vote. I'm letting you know because you commented on that page :) - Haukur Þorgeirsson 00:51, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree - guidance should have consensus, and when it loses consensus, it should be removed. This piece of guidance, which is often ignored (by the way), has long since lost that. After all, if it were consensus to remove, it would mean that once there it would only need 25% support to stay - and it just doesn't seem right that 25% can overrule 75%, jguk 19:53, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry you're upset and I, too, am sorry about personal attacks on both sides. I will reply further later. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 07:40, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I was quite shocked tonight when I stumbled onto the recent RFA for Rl and saw your vote and its justification. Quite frankly I can see no excuse for the harm caused to our community by your ridiculous imposition of a bureaucratic and arbitrary numerical standard which is neither supported by policy or by community behavior. I find it further unacceptable that you choose to use a helpful user as a pawn in your wiki political battle and as a result alienated him from our project. I have never before been so ashamed to be a Wikipedia editor. After careful consideration I believe that all users who have caused this travesty are a greater harm to our project than an asset. Please confine your activities to the main namespace or discontinue your involvement altogether. Thank you. --Gmaxwell 05:50, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! As you can see, an old RFA is causing quite some waves. Next time you're on irc, I'd love to ask you some questions, if you can still recall what happened a bit. :-)
Kim Bruning 06:43, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Jonathunder. Thanks for the vote of confidence in my RFA. I have now officially received the badge, so I shall try my best to be a good administrator. Thanks again. --TheParanoidOne 21:40, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a ton for your thunderous support on my rfa, the final tally was 50-0-0; I'll try and live up to the expectations of others and do my best in maintaining the integrity of Wikipedia. --Gurubrahma 14:48, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't expect to be nominating anyone again any time soon. But, Gurubrahma approached me to nominate him despite my concerns. The success of his RfA has restored some of my faith in the process. I'd be willing to move forward with a nomination for you if you'd like. If not, no worries. I just didn't want to leave this thread dangling. --Durin 14:19, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Jonathunder, thank you for supporting my RfA - I'll do my best as an admin to help make the dream of Wikipedia into a reality! BD2412 T 07:36, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've marked your changes as POV, what will we do next, delete everything Macedonia related that has nothing to do with RoM? If we want to help the readers then we should remember that WP is an encyclopedia, isn't it? Please leave your comments at the relavant talk page. Thanks. +MATIA ☎ 17:27, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Wanting to assure you that I don't think you had anything to do with this and hoping that we can bury the hatchet I'd like to offer you something I've seen User:Unfocused do when he's been in conflict with someone and wants to put things right. I quote:
Examples of such edits: [1] [2]
So, pick an article - any article - and I'll do my best to help it :) - Haukur Þorgeirsson 12:29, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Just wanted to say thanks for keeping an eye on the ever-controversial Macedonia article. It takes a braver man than me to get involved with that page! Soo 18:01, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Ian ≡ talk 07:53, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm rather pleased with the article, but it needs much more detail on parts of his life not covered by his book - in particular his family life and third stay on the island. The new edition of "An Island To Oneself" will have a preface by his daughter, Stella, which I believe covers these matters, but I don't believe it's out yet. Stella said she'd send me a copy of the preface, but I've lost touch with her.
We also need an appropriately licenced photo for the article. The book cover is technically only fair use on an article about the book, although I think that autobiography covers should be fair use on articles about their authors.
If I can get the additional material I want, I'll put the article up for peer review and depending on the feedback there, go for featured article status.
Thanks for your comments.-gadfium 21:14, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I know it looks like edit-warring but that's not the case at all. If you care to see the discussions you'll find out that all of my edits concern the removal of blatant POVs and unsourced information, particularly offensive to certain ethnic groups. The only reason it looks like edit-warring is because I'm outnumbered and I have to deal with this POV-pushing entirely on my own. If I don't, then no-one will, and wikepedia neutrality will remain violated. I always try to stick to wp:rules, and revert what is considered as "official policy vandalism". Today I've been in certain cases over the limit, but it's a risk I'm willing to take in order to de-POV a certain number of articles which is under constant borderline-vandalism, performed mainly by nationalist users. According to wp:rules, when the unsourced content is put into question, nobody has a right to add it back in until it's sourced. Miskin 06:09, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I checked the official UN roster of nations, and you are absolutely right. My apologies. Sysin 00:19, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your support. -- Samuel Wantman 21:02, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I must admitt I was quite surprised you defended Macedonia's edit, I mean the piece which adds to "It is presumed by some historians (Kunchov; Weigand) that these Slavic tribes probably absorbed some indigenous populations that they came upon in the area" this piece: like the ancient Macedonians as claimed by the Macedonian government. The first point (It is presumed by some historians (Kunchov; Weigand) that these Slavic tribes probably absorbed some indigenous populations that they came upon in the area) is correct; these two ethnographers, the German Gustav Weigand in his Ethnography of Macedonia (1919) and the Bulgarian Vasil Kanchov's (and not Kunchov) in Makedoniya (I think) in the late 19th century, presupposed that the Slavic tribes in Macedonia mixed with indigenous elements, intending Latin speakers (today Vlachs), Thracians and Illyrians; but they did not not go further than the level of assumptions. What is important, neither Weigand nor Kanchov spoke of a fusion between Ancient Macedonians and Slavs, because their is full consensus among scholars that by the 5th century Macedonia was Greek, and this at least from the 4th century BC. In my opinion this is a case of manipulation of sources: respected references are used to make them say something they don't. The ex. link added is another example, for it is unclear why a passing remark in a tourism-promotion page can be considered an official position of the government of the Republic of Macedonia. For these reasons I believe we should remove the addition like the ancient Macedonians as claimed by the Macedonian government. But first I would like to hear your opinion. Bye, and sorry if this message came so long ;-) Aldux 21:56, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
