User talk:Dr who1975

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Dr who1975, 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! --M e rovingian {T C @} 03:05, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Pug3.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Pug3.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:09, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:People known by pseudonyms

Hehe, yeah the list seemed pretty short to me (and still does). My opinion is shortened names such as Little Steven don't count, they're more like nicknames. Another example would be Cher, which is simply a shortened version of her full name Cherilyn LaPiere. So I didn't add her. However, I did add Ritchie Valens, which I felt was sufficiently different from Richard Valenzuela, not to mention his label specifically changed his name for marketing reasons. Even deeper in the gray area is my addition of Ace Frehley (born Paul Frehley) which could possibly qualify as a nickname, but since it was Ace instead of "Ace" I opted to add him.

One question I've been pondering is the name of GWAR members. To me, Oderus Urungus et al. are characters, in some cases played by different musicians over time. In fact, I think Dave Brockie may be just as well known by his birth name. I think I'll remove them.

Another curiosity is that both Puff Daddy and P Diddy appear on the list, but his current name, Diddy, doesn't. I was considering only categorizing his latest moniker, and for this reason would also remove The Artist Formerly Known As Prince, who has gone back to Prince and incidentally was born Prince Nelson.

So this is my long, boring answer to your question. Would you agree with my analysis? Hoof Hearted 20:05, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Regarding changing last names only - I was a little unsure when I added Mel Brooks, and Natalie Portman. I'll admit it was a judgement call and certainly wouldn't object to removing their names. I'll agree with you about Oderus Urungus. My main argument was The Dave Brockie Experience which states his real name, but GWAR is a much more popular band. (BTW, are you a fan like me?) I agree with you 100% on Steagal - that was a new one to me. My concern with Diddy was only a technical one: the catergoy is titled "People known by pseudonyms", not "Pseudonyms used by people". Thus, in a sense, Sean Combs appears on a list of people several times. But I agree that the ridiculous nature of all the name changes are in the "spirit" of the list, and ultimately wouldn't object to their inclusion. You're absolutely right about The Artist..., past pseudonyms are certainly valid.

As for nickname vs. pseudonym - I think this is a subjective debate with a lot of overlap between the two. I would agree with the nickname article that describes the term as a shortened or familiar form of someone's real name. (Matisyahu is the Hebrew name for his real name, Matthew). Whereas a pseudonym allows much more variation from someone's real name.

My thinking is that people on this category should have a real article (not a redirect) for the pseudonym. However, there will always be exceptions (Spice Girls, The Artist...). This ensures notability and a genuine pseudonym. I violated my own rule with Mr. Lordi, and will probably remove him (unless you think it would be a good idea to list the Lordi guys too). I haven't had much experience with categories. I was thinking of adding some text at the top with "guidelines for inclusion" - do you know if that's frowned upon? Would you like to work together to develop the "official" guidelines?

Hey, it's been great talking to you. Glad to know there are others out there who can be serious while having fun. Hoof Hearted 17:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Proposed Guidelines for Inclusion

It is best if the pseudonym is a wiki article (not a redirect).
Try to include true pseudonyms rather than nicknames.
- The first name or surname should differ significantly from the real name.
- Quotation marks around a name usually indicate a nickname.
- In general, stage names and pen names are valid, character names are not. I think Ali G and Pee Wee Herman are good examples of character name exceptions.
Former pseudonyms may be included.
People who have had their names legally changed should not be included.
The person should be relatively well known. I'm questioning the validity of Isambard Khroustalov, Melnyk, and Ray Zee among others.

--Hoof Hearted 18:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] coordinates on Template:Infobox Stadium

If I understand you correctly on your recent posts, the template you are looking for is Template:Coor title dms. PETCO Park has the template tag near the bottom of the page, next to the Template:MLB tag. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 02:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

A follow up: The coordinates on the Giants Stadium is currently appearing on the infobox, so I assume you did not refresh the cache on your web browser (by pressing F5 on most browsers). Secondly, some articles may use Template:Geolinks-US-cityscale, which also puts a similar listing of coordinates in the upper-right of the article, just below the horizontal rule running under the article's title. As for something being "disabled", I am not sure what you are exactly referring to. Best. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 02:53, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- Okay, after briefly looking at your edits on the stadium articles, and re-reading your posts again, I think it is just basically a misunderstanding which template does what, not the fault of any user adding or disabling something. Currently, Template:Coor dms, which you only used, does NOT put the coordinates at the top of the page. Templates like Template:Coor title dms and Template:Geolinks-US-cityscale do, which some of the stadium articles like PETCO Park use. Giants Stadium currently does not have a template that puts the coordinates at the top of the page. A good list of all the coordinate templates can be found at WP:GEO#Templates. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:14, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Coordinates

Huh? I made a change to it but I reverted it back to your version... If something's wrong then it's probably from your version. --3bulletproof16 02:33, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Coordinate precision...

You have changed some stadium coordinates to be very precise, such as Coors Field to 39°45′21.14″N, 104°59′39.02″W. Even though the whole number seconds are plenty to still stay within ballpark 39°45′21″N, 104°59′39″W. Is there any reason for this precision, is this a citable coordinate with some reference? Otherwise, it seems a little overboard. --MattWright (talk) 04:58, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not going to undo them, was just curious the reason for it. Thanks for the response. --MattWright (talk) 14:51, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

How do you get the 50 yard line or pitcher's mound for closed roof stadiums? --MattWright (talk) 14:57, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:User Pug

Hi Dr who1975,

As part of the German userbox solution, would you be willing to move "Template:User Pug" to your userspace? If you are but aren't sure about the details, I can do it for you and let you know when the changes are made. Or, I can move it to my userspace, where most of the other pet boxes are located. The biggest difference you'll notice is it won't be listed at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Pets, which is in the process of being userfied. However, it still will be listed at the larger directory, User:Rfrisbie/Userboxes/Pets. Let me know what you think. Regards, Rfrisbie^talk 18:33, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Go for it! No hurry.

Rfrisbie^talk 21:00, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay, so a bit of a hurry. The original page is gone so I moved Pug to {{User:UBX/Pug2}}. You still can move it to your area when you have the time. You can see it at User:Rfrisbie/Userboxes/Pets.

Rfrisbie^talk 16:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry. It's been a busy week.--Dr who1975 16:58, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay, it's still there.

Rfrisbie^talk 17:03, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Go for it!

Rfrisbie^talk 21:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Admins have to delete pages, and I think I have to ask, so I'll do that in a while. Congrats! :-) Rfrisbie^talk 23:56, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question

How did you know about Clifford Davis being involved in the 1954 U.S. Capitol Shooting incident? When my father asked a Capitol guard about this incident in 1980, he was shown the bullet hole in the ceiling (next to the great seal, it resulted from one of the shooters being wrestled to the floor while in the act of firing) and told that he was the first person to have asked about it in at least 10 years (presumably to that guide, at least). Rlquall 03:18, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Under the verifiability guidelines, we're really not supposed to use one Wikipedia article to verify another or as a source. In reality, nearly all active Wikipedians have done it at one time or another, so you certainly haven't offended me, but I was hoping that you maybe had an independent source with which I was unfamiliar. In any event, I thank you for getting back with me, especially so fast, and wish you happy editing! Rlquall 16:51, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New User Box

FSU Helmet box Image:FSU Helmet.png Noles1984 19:34, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] mr_uu

".... but have you been to the Bahamas!?" No but would like to spend some air-miles and go there one-day, thanks I added Dr.Who fan box from the 3rd doctor, mr_uu 19:00, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Supercentenarians.

Heh DrWho. I didn't even look at the date of birth and date of death of Thomas Peters. I just saw the 112 years 80 days part, no idea where that came from.

The thing is, Wikipedia had a Thomas Peters page and it got deleted, and it seems that the people who wrote the new Thomas Peters (supercentenarian) page were not the previous authors, so it seems that hid page became completely different and rewritten, and because it was deleted, there wasn't a way to revert to the previous article. But that's okay.

Me, Bart Versieck, and Robert Douglas Young (RYoung122) come from a group where they document all supercentenarians. The parent site is www.grg.org. Guinness World Records tend to validate the oldest person in the world cases only, so you won't really know who's the second oldest person in the world, since persay, the '70s. Anyways I don't know the specifics of Thomas Peters. Neal 12:53, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Supercentinarians I had to sift through your compaints to wikipedia management to figure out what was going on and I have a few comments.

First of all, if I make a mthematical error or a mistake on somebody's page. It's an error, that's what it is. Considering the less than thurough ways in which you've been updating pages (you didn't even try to fix the succession boxes) you don't have much room to complain to management. I looked back and realized I made a mistake with Thomas Peters death date. I guess you've never made a mistake in your life. Also, Thomas Peter's didn't have a page before I put it up so when it comes to him at least I made an attemp to bring more information to wikipedia. The mistake about Jeane Klement reaching 120 years 238 days on Oct 17 1995 (not Oct 4 1995) was a mistake I DISCOVERED AND CORRECTED MUSELF!!!! yet you felt the need to complain about it.

Secondly... nice teamwork. Thanks for taking me seriously. Here I am, willing to help organize the information you provided (because even I know that you are the expert in this and not me) and you spit in my face. I apreciate it. Maybe I'll send a letter to your superiors at Guinness since you feel so comfortable representing them in this fasion.

I tried looking for you when all this strated with Bart but I didn;t realize the R was capitalized

Mr Who, it looks to me like you're the one who's spitting in my face...and you make far more errors than I do. Let's start with your above message.

1. Misspelled 'supercentenarians' 2. Misspelled 'mathematical' 3. Misspelled 'thorough' 4. Misspelled 'Jeanne' 5. Misspelled 'Calment' 6. Misspelled 'Peters' 7. Misspelled 'attempt' 8. Misspelled 'appreciate' 9. Misspelled 'fashion' 10. Misspelled 'started' 11. Misspelled 'didn't' 12. Forgot the period

I don't think making threats to take this to higher-ups is appropriate or polite in any way or manner, considering you didn't even go to me first about any issue. And both Bart and Neal complained about your editing as well. So, why don't you talk to them first since they brought this to my attention.→ R Young {^yakł_talk} 05:31, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

For your information, Wikipedia is NOT a 'job.' It's an unpaid VOLUNTEER service. If I lay out a framework and you finish it, great. If not, well, it's still not my 'job.' Wikipedia doesn't pay me anything.→ R Young {^yakł_talk} 05:38, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Midget/Dwarf Actors

I added Tony Cox and Danny Woodburn to the category, but I'm leery of the "Midget" part. Aside from the controversy of the term, it seems somewhat redundant, akin to "Gay and Homosexual Actors". Would you mind if I changed the category to "Actors with Dwarfism"? And yes, Doctor Who is awesome. Jjacobsmeyer 15:34, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

It's not redundant because the slash means either/or.

→ R Young {^yakł_talk} 05:32, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I should have been more exact in the header; the category as it is now reads "Midget and Dwarf Actors". I guess I wanted to save space. Plus, the Dwarfism article mentions the fact that the term "midget" usually applied only to those with pituitary dwarfism, a condition that has been greatly reduced in developed nations. There also is precedent for changing the name, based on the "People with Dwarfism" category. Jjacobsmeyer 12:24, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Maybe we should change it but I'd like to discuss this more. Midget isn't always a pajorative term. The artical on Midget say's it's scientific. Plus it has always been my understanding that Midget and Dwarf are two different things. For insatnce, Gary Coleman does not appear to be considered a Dwarf but he is a little person and I would like the category to include him. I personally would not liek to call it "little people actors" so Midget and Dwarf actors sounds best. What say you?--Dr who1975 04:22, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Not identical

Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen are not identical and the article specifically points this out. --Yamla 21:26, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Damn... they look identical.--Dr who1975 21:28, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Approved for AWB!

Thank you for your recent application to use AutoWikiBrowser. I have approved your request and you should now be able to use the AWB application. Be sure to check every edit before you save it, and don't forget to check out the AWB Guide. You can get any help you need over on the AWB talk page. Feel free to contact me with any questions, Alphachimp 20:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Veteran politicians

Just wanted to let you know I saw your reply here but I reverted it because the discussion is closed and should not be changed. Since the categories have been deleted, I guess there's not much point in beating a dead horse anyway. I just wanted to let you know it didn't go unnoticed, and thank you for taking the time to write it. Kafziel ^Talk 21:38, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you!

I just wanted to say thanks again for the Barnstar of Diligence. Since a few of us were going back and forth with the order, and since it all was rather confusing, I just wanted to get a definitive say on the matter. Cheers! Bridger 02:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Hi, I'm the real Dr Who ! ;) --Dr. Who 03:44, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Haha, I'm not communist. I'm extreme right, I'd say almost nazi. I'm in the mood of The Wall. Why Pinko? Cos I'm the chief of Floydians here? Maybe.... Anyway, I'm a fan of John Zorn and Jason Kay/Jamiroquai, not only of Kraftwerk and similar German electro-stuff, in the case you are wondering. Doktor is german.--Dr. Who 04:44, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

yes, I read your userpage. I do not "hate Jews", I do not hate anybody, I love differences, and I respect everyone. cheers, I'm going to bed. Nice to meet you.Dr. Who 05:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "See Also" links on Goth subculture

If you think more "See Also" links are relevant to Goth subculture, please contribute to the discussion on the talk page. --Stormie 00:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: 74.69.147.123 Vandalism

Hi Dr, see WP:AIV. I reported this one already.--Pethr 18:53, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome, however ip wasn't blocked since the edits were old (I haven't noticed). Anyway see WP:UTM for custom warnings and remember WP:AIV for vandal reporting. Regards.--Pethr 20:10, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, blocking is usually used as a last resort to stop people who are vandalizing, since he has stoped yesterday there is not really reason to block him for 31 hours for example because he's not here anyway. He will be blocked once he vandalize article again.--Pethr 20:20, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Earliest?

You've created a bunch of "earliest" politicians pages. What is an Earliest serving US senator, for example? That page lists "2005 - present - George M. Leader - Pennsylvania". Are you saying Pennsylvania had no senator before 2005? eaolson 04:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, I now notice the redirect. Again, what do you mean by "earliest"? The word makes no sense in the context you are using it. It appears to be a ranking of senators by age and/or senority, but more than one senator can not be the "oldest," unless they are the same age. eaolson 04:27, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AIV Report

Thank you for making a report on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize even after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. Thank you! alphachimp 00:13, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:ArborealCrustacean

Why on Earth did you write that on this user's userpage? J Milburn 18:22, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Just a note and a reminder... he spoofed his IP into that name to hide the vandalism he;d done. I reported the vandalism, but nobody put a warning anywhere on his user page nor his IP address page.--Dr who1975 18:02, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Naming all of the "United States Senators by seniority" pages

Hi Dro who,

I noticed you've been creating these Senator by seniority pages, but I believe you are using an incorrect naming convention for all of the titles. There should be a space between the word "seniority" and the first opening parenthesis, and there should be a space after a comma dividing dates. For example:

"United States Senators by seniority(1969,1970)" should actually be "United States Senators by seniority (1969, 1970)"

Please use the correct naming scheme when creating new articles, as it's already going to be a pain for me to go move the existing articles.

Also, please add them to the cateogry Category:United States Senators by seniority instead of Category:United States Senate.

Thanks, --CapitalR 23:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with CapitalR...those pages need to be moved to have a space between the years. It is improper to have no space inbetween them as you have named them, Metros232 06:12, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I made those change last week. Please try to check things before commenting on them.--Dr who1975 06:26, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, just got your message on my talk page about this. I think Metros232 was referring to adding a space in each of the page titles between the years. For example "United States Senators by seniority (1969,1970)" should be "United States Senators by seniority (1969, 1970)". Notice the space between "1969," and "1970". --CapitalR 07:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that is precisely what I mean. Metros232 13:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I just relaized something.... I already made the changes CapitalR suggested a week ago! Did you actually look at the pages before you commented? I realize I may be a little hypocritical here but... please try to check things before commenting on them. Incidentally I admitted to Quadpus that I made a mistake.--Dr who1975 06:24, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

What? No you didn't. There's definitely no space here: United States Senators by seniority (1963,1964), United States Senators by seniority (1967,1968), United States Senators by seniority (1969,1970). Metros232 13:45, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes... but there was a space between "seniority" and "(" which I (incorecty) thought he was talking about... in any event. 've taken care of it now.--Dr who1975 02:55, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Just noticed you're working on these. My question is, why aren't you using the numbered Congress to which the seniority applies? United States Senators by seniority (101st Congress). --Dhartung | Talk 01:06, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

While the divisions are based on the congressional sessions. I think having the years in the title makes the articles more personable and accdessable to lay person. I probably need to mention the session in the opening text of the articles.--Dr who1975 01:10, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Um. But nobody refers to Congresses that way, nor do we -- see Category:110th_United_States_Congress. It really makes more sense to be consistent with not just Wikipedia but with Congress itself, which certainly doesn't use this sort of notation. -- Dhartung | Talk 07:35, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] thanks!

Thank you for the nice barnstar barnstar! Herostratus 04:53, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Census page ratings

Hi Dr. Who, There isn't any type of special process you need to go through before adding an article to the US project and rating it. If someone disagrees with your assessment, we can discuss that- though I doubt that will happen. Right now we are just trying to get all the articles labeled and rated, so go ahead and classify the census articles- I would appreciate your help. Regards, Signature^brendel 06:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mahalo nui

Whoops. Thanks for catching this. I guess I got a little ahead of myself. --Ali'i 21:48, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your Congressional proposal

I care ... I don't have any strong improvements to suggest to your proposal, which is why I didn't say anything, but I certainly care about the project in general and your idea in particular. Regards, Newyorkbrad 19:41, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] replied on the impeachment movement cfd,

Please let me know if I'm misunderstanding or not addressing your concerns. — coel acan — 03:35, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mel Gibson edit

Hey there! I thought your recent edit to Mel Gibson was a clear POV-push, but then I noticed you are an established and serious editor, so that caught me by surprise. If you disagree with my revert, please let me know so we can come to a consensus. Actually, I probably would have contacted you pre-revert if I'd looked at your prior contribs first, heh... Anyway, let me know if you think my revert was a mistake and we can talk about it. Thanks! --Jaysweet 19:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I sympathize with your point, but I think because of WP:BLP, it is important that the WP article not actually say Gibson is an anti-Semite. That is a very serious charge, and in my opinion it is best to leave it up to readers to decide for themselves.

I would be interested if you can find an example of another Wikipedia article that specifically says the person is anti-Semitic, to compare and contrast. I think the threshold for Wikipedia to make that accusation would have to be extremely high... --Jaysweet 20:09, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, okay, I see your point now... right, one can debate whether spouting anti-Semitic comments during a DUI arrest really makes one an anti-Semite, but it's awfully hard to argue that the statement "Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world" is not an anti-Semitic statement. heh.... so yeah, I think you do have a point.

I don't like "shows signs of anti-Semitism," because that starts to border on labeling the man, which we have to be careful not to do because of BLP. Maybe in the second paragraph, the one specifically regarding the DUI arrest, the text could be made a little stronger, e.g. "he was abusive to the arresting officers and made a series of anti-Semitic statements, including..."

Be careful though. I dunno if you've been following this article or not, but there's been a lot of discussion about this on the Talk page. :D I wouldn't make any changes regarding the anti-Semitism accusations without justifying yourself there first. --Jaysweet 20:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re:Why Can't AT40 have a succession Box?

Hi there. The reason I removed AT40 succession boxes is because right now I am questioning a few articles that are attributing number-ones to AT40. American Top 40 is just the name of a radio program... for many years the show's data was derived from Billboard magazine, and currently (I believe), the data comes from Mediabase. I'm in a discussion right now to have some articles renamed to properly credit the organization that actually compiles the charts and not the radio show that counts them down. If anything, the succession boxes should probably say "Mediabase number-one single", not "AT40 number-one single". I just wanted to get the naming cleared up first before a bunch of succession boxes got placed all over in song articles. Please feel free to contribute to the discussion, if you'd like: Talk:List of number-one songs on American Top 40 of 2007. - eo 23:12, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Earliest serving US governor

Can you clarify whant is meant by Earliest serving US governor? Does it mean at each point of time the living governor who served earlier than any of the other living people who served as governor? RJFJR 21:13, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your comment

Please do not insult my intelligence, maturity, and make derogatory other names for my ideas as you did in this diff. If you think that it is a bad idea, please just say so instead of getting personal.

Note: I was being completely serious about this as an award, albeit maybe it would be better suited as PUA than a barnstar. ~Step trip 21:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Executive Order 10999

A tag has been placed on Executive Order 10999, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Hatch68 22:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, we don't keep placeholder pages such as the above or Executive Order 11000. Now you have the order numbers here on your talk page. NawlinWiki 03:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

So Hatch 68 lied to me when he said he's leave it up for 5 days. How come you guys didn;t notice Senate Bill 1873?--Dr who1975 03:53, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../d/r/_/User_talk%7EDr_who1975_151d.html"