User talk:Kotra

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I prefer to keep conversations all in one place.

  • If I commented on your talk page, I prefer if you reply there instead of here. I'll be watching your talk page.
  • Conversely, if you comment here, I'll reply here also. If you aren't going to be watching my page, let me know, so I can leave you a note whenever I reply here.

Thanks!


The Wikipedia Signpost
Volume 4, Issue 23 — 2008-06-02

Archives·Newsroom·Tip line·Single-page·Subscribe

For old stuff, go that-a-way:


For WikiProject stuff, go that-a-way (no need to put your WikiProject notifications in there, I'll move them myself periodically):


Contents

[edit] Alternative coagulants - source needed for 35% claim

Hi - your request is not that easy to fulfill. OECD says: cheese production 2004 world wide 17.9 million tons of cheese - http://www.defra.gov.uk/foodrin/milk/supplychainforum/pdf/pvavra.pdf . One ton is aprox. 2 kg of rennet with 165 IMCU. Worldwide need: 35.8 million kg of rennet. 1 stomach is aprox. 1 kg of rennet. Available stomachs of young suckling calfs and milk-fed calfs worldwide aprox. max. 12 million pieces - this is a fact that I know from my job. At http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/004/X6121E/x6121e02.htm you can find the complete cattle population worldwide - reduce for India, Bangladesh, Brasil (meat production) and many other countries and estimate the percentage of calfs killed for meat than you will arrive at these figures. So how to source this? US cheese-production is about 95% microbial or GMO rennet - claims of Christian Hansen and other producers of artificial rennets - same for UK - this is already 36% of the worlds cheese production. Believe me these cheap products are fed to the people with min. 65% of the worlds cheeses. So if you tell me how - I will try to source this claim. But this article about rennet is supposed to inform about rennet and artificial coagulants and should not be blown up into a study about worlds agricultural production!? I can of course also tell the people - including the source - that the americans eat 95% of their cheese made with artificial coagulants because of price, religion or vegetarian reasions - but I wanted this article to be objective and informing and balanced (Wolfgang 17:22, 1 February 2007 (UTC))

Unfortunately then, the 35% figure seems to be original research, which is not admissable on Wikipedia. I applaud your efforts, but by your description, the figure also sounds inaccurate. Rennet comes from only one of the four stomachs of a calf, as I'm sure you're aware, so your maximum of 12 million available stomachs (which is also a disputabe figure, as it is not sourced) would actually be 3 million. Not to mention that "estimating" the percentage of calves killed for meat worldwide with any accuracy at all is impossible for non-experts like you and I. That's why original research isn't admissable on Wikipedia. -kotra 23:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

never trust statistics that you did not fake by yourself............. so I will try again: if you have a look at http://www.indexmundi.com/en/commodities/agricultural/animal-numbers-cattle/ you will find the figures about total calf slaughter worldwide - which was 2006 something around 18.5 mio. heads - according to your calculation 74 mio stomachs of whom again only 18.5 mio are rennet stomachs. Than you have to know that only a part of these calves is milk-fed, another part is grain-fed. For rennet you can only use the milk-fed ones - otherwise you only have pepsin in the rennet and no chymosin. Than you have to consider, that in many countries there are no big slaughter houses where the stomachs can be collected in sanitary conditions. Then: if you look at http://www.indexmundi.com/en/commodities/agricultural/dairy-cheese/2006.html you can see the cheese production world-wide (the figures differ from OECD - but no matter). 2 kg of rennet (165 IMCU) for 1 ton of cheese, 50% of the calves milk-fed - 1 fourth stomach is aprox 1 kg of rennet 165 IMCU. With this simple calculation you arrive 25.6 mio kg of rennet need and 9,2 mio kg of natural rennet which is 34%.

So again - here are the figures - you should show me now how to but them into the article about rennet without blowing this article up to something different - or you also could draw back your claim(Wolfgang 12:41, 9 February 2007 (UTC)).

discussion continued on Talk:Rennet#Alternative coagulants - source needed for 35.25 claim.

[edit] Stephen Colbert's Alleged Chickasaw Ancestry

Thank you for removing Stephen Colbert from the "Notable Chickasaws" section of the Chickasaw article. I suspected it was a joke, which is why I added the "fact" template so that it could be checked by another user. --TommyBoy 19:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I have reverted another anonymous user's re-addition of Stephen Colbert to the "Notable Chickasaws" list. We may need to keep a close eye on that list in order to ensure that he is not re-added to the list. --TommyBoy 01:47, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I have the page on my watchlist, though I only take a look at it every few days, so I may not catch things like that very quickly. -kotra 20:01, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] a Thankyou

Hi, my name is Ryan. I just wanted to take a minute to thank you properly. I had almost given up hope on finding the adjectives for the planets, and was about to remove the discussion from my watchlist. I never knew they were in the articles info bar! I wish more Wikipedians could have taken the time to tell me like you did. Cheers mate ;) Ryan4314 03:05, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome! Also note, I forgot Uranus: Uranian. -kotra 21:51, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Green Zebra (publication)

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Green Zebra (publication), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Fabrictramp 21:12, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I've removed the tag and given a rationale on the talk page. I would also like to express concern at the reason you gave for deletion. In particular, a Google search does indeed turn up several articles from independent sources, not least of which is a lengthy article from the San Francisco Chronicle. I will assume that you just were unaware of boolean search operators, and that you gave up after the first two pages of results for "Green Zebra". I did a search for "Green Zebra" -tomato "San Francisco" and it helped enormously. It returns only results that contain "Green Zebra" and "San Francisco", but not "tomato". I recommend using this technique in the future when using Google hits as a reason for notability, because otherwise Google can be misleading. Also, calling it a borderline candidate for speedy deletion as advertisement I feel was a bit irresponsible. Blatant advertising is one thing, but mostly neutral wording that isn't backed up by sources is different (though it's still not ideal). I can see why you might think it was advertising because there were no sources, and you didn't find any after a quick Google search, but speedy deletion should only be used for obvious cases, where consensus is assured. So I urge you to not advocate speedy deletion in the future unless you're sure. Thanks for reading my ramblings, and, again, for notifying me! -kotra 22:44, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
I did "Green Zebra" -tomato -wikipedia, and didn't come up with the sources you did. I suggested on the article's talk page that you add them to the article itself, rather than the talk page, if you think they establish notability. It would help the AfD debate come to a just outcome, and if they do establish notability they belong in the article anyway.
Also, I prodded instead of speedied exactly because it was not an obvious case, just highly suspicious with nothing but primary sources and a lack of ghits. (And it's still possible that the previous editor of the tomato article added this as advertising). Please assume good faith on my part and don't call the prod "a bit irresponsible". Thanks!--Fabrictramp 23:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
I don't know how you didn't come up with the sources I found, so I'll refrain from making judgements about that. It's beside the point anyway. I've reworded the whole article and added at least one of the references now, so hopefully the article is better now. If there are still reasons for deletion, I suggest we talk about it at the AfD discussion, so we don't have to be having the same conversation in three places.
Sorry about the "bit irresponsible" thing. I was trying to assume good faith, but I couldn't understand why you would suggest possible speedy deletion when it wasn't suspicious at all to me, or how you didn't find any google hits. I don't know the full picture, so it was stupid of me to jump to conclusions like that. -kotra 00:15, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Green Zebra (publication)

Green Zebra (publication), an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Green Zebra (publication) satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has 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/Green Zebra (publication) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Green Zebra (publication) 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. Fabrictramp 23:16, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again for notifying me. -kotra 23:55, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect of The Green Zebra

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on The Green Zebra, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because The Green Zebra is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting The Green Zebra, 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. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 14:35, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Safia Aoude

In order to defeat the "deletionists" would you be prepared to keep Safia Aoude's article?Phase4 11:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for my late response; I was away from computers for several days. Though the AfD has ended, my answer to your question is a sympathetic no. I do not consider all article deletions to be unjustified, nor do I think it's a good idea to label those with opposing views as "deletionists", because it factionalizes the discussion and discourages consensus. I never saw the article itself before it was deleted, so I can't make an informed opinion, but based on the AfD discussion, it seems that the deletion was justified (barely), because there weren't enough reliable sources asserting the subject's notability. But I sympathize, because an article I supported was recently deleted for the same reason. I hope you will not be discouraged, and if you can find more independent, reliable sources that will prove the subject's notability, I encourage you to recreate the article in time (it's best to wait a bit, though). -kotra 00:03, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
That's encouraging. I'm inclined to follow your advice.Phase4 22:43, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ingo Swann

Ingo Swann is an artist and author, best known for his work as a founder of the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)'s remote viewing program. Where is your citation for this? This is not true as far as I know. It is a bit of an exaggeration. Where is your documented source? To me it looks like when the CIA entered the picture Swann skated out. In fact he retired.Kazuba (talk) 05:10, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know that this is disputed. I thought it was commonly held that the remote viewing program was funded by the CIA from the beginning, but perhaps it isn't commonly held. I originally learned of this subject from [1], which admittedly makes wild claims, but seems reliable nonetheless. Also note Remote_viewing#Early_SRI_experiments, which makes the same claims about the CIA's sponsorship, and appears to be well-sourced. But regardless, I'll trim the "United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)'s" part from it, since that can be found out by going to Remote viewing or Stargate (or not, depending on whatever is the current state of those articles), which I will add into the sentence. To be clear though, it isn't disputed that Swann is best known for his work in remote viewing, correct?
Also, if you don't mind, I would like to copy this discussion to Talk:Ingo Swann, so that others may contribute to the discussion if they wish. -kotra (talk) 07:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Ingo is best known as the Father of remote viewing. Sure. Go a head.Kazuba (talk) 14:37, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

(this discussion is continued at Talk:Ingo_Swann#CIA_involvement_in_remote_viewing_program)

[edit] added reference in Kabir

please check and suggest.KabirAjjay (talk) 09:52, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reference. Note that it that usually is considered a copyright violation to copy text from outside websites unless it's a quote. I've changed the wording so it's different. But thanks again for adding that reference, it's helpful. -kotra (talk) 18:34, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Quafe bottle.jpg‎

Greetings, I have changed the replaceability on Image:Quafe bottle.jpg‎ back to no as the product is not, and has not been available for purchase for a number of years. You can search in the Eve-Online store if you like to double check. Fosnez (talk) 04:32, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I see, thanks for correcting my edit. -kotra (talk) 21:46, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] About the Democratic candidate template

Sorry about the miss-edit, I did not do my math right, I had checked Mike Gravel's site (gravel2008.us) and it said that he is on the ballot in 20 states which means he is on the ballot in 30 states I said 15, that is my own fault, he is a write in candidate in the states where he is not on the ballot.

Sskchh (talk) 22:37, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I don't entirely trust Gravel's site to be up-to-date (he may actually be on more ballots than the 20), but if the Gravel campaign won't update their website, we have no way of knowing. I think your edit is good now. Thanks! -kotra (talk) 23:47, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, all of the candidates including third party candidates like Ralph Nader need to raise money in order to be on the ballot in that state, in New Mexico Nader needed to raise at least 10,000 dollars to get on the ballot, as well as 7,000 signatures, the third party candidates have more time to do this but for the 2 major parties have to do this before primary elections start, Mike Gravel failed to do this before the Iowa cacuses. Sskchh (talk) 20:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

That's interesting to know, but I was more referring to this quote from gravel2008.us: "The Gravel Campaign is right on schedule getting Mike in all the primaries and caucuses. We have confirmation from the 20 states where the deadline has passed..." Either one of both of these two statements appear to be incorrect now that the deadline has passed for more than 20 states. Though Iowa is listed there as one of the states Gravel is on the ballot, so I don't know what you mean about him failing to get on the ballot before the Iowa caucuses. In any case, I think it's fine how Template:2008 Democratic presidential candidates is now. -kotra (talk) 22:55, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] One thing leads to another

I saw your edit in Prison loaf today, looked at your userpage and saw the really neat userbox (AWW DMBJ et cetera). I didn't know they had a userbox until I saw your copy. So I transcluded it. Cool. Trilobitealive (talk) 22:05, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Hooray, a fellow AWWDMBJAWGCAWAIFDSPBATDMTDian! May you continue to dislike making broad judgments about the worthiness of a general category of article, and may you continue to be in favor of the deletion of some particularly bad articles, while not meaning you are a Deletionist! -kotra (talk) 22:24, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Sirimavo Bandaranaike1.jpg

Hi, thanks for uploading Image:Sirimavo Bandaranaike1.jpg, it's a great photo. Did you take the photo yourself? -kotra (talk) 23:16, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Kotra, I have full permission to use & publish the photo. Thank you

Fitz Mackins

Ok, in that case, since your permission is from someone else, what the name of the person who took the picture? This is necessary because the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license requires attribution. -kotra (talk) 19:06, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Credits in photo captions

Because you have voiced your opinion on such matters in the past, I thought you would like to know that consensus is trying to be reached on this issue at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Photograph_attribution_in_image_captions. (Mind meal (talk) 22:21, 21 April 2008 (UTC))

Thanks. To avoid WP:Canvassing concerns, I've also put a notice on Wikipedia talk:Captions. -kotra (talk) 00:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
With the amount of opposition, I wonder if there is canvassing going on from the other side. I tell you, I've often found myself scratching my head in discussions but this one takes the cake. It seems so common sense. (Mind meal (talk) 00:56, 24 April 2008 (UTC))
Yeah, it does seem like some editors are being a bit egocentric here. But I think it partially has to do with people not realizing there is a problem. Wikipedia editors generally tend to think that current policies are perfect policies, and there is no need for change (most of the time I myself feel this way, but here I feel we could have improvement). Probably there would be less opposition if the complaints Wikipedia frequently receives about attribution were presented more. I myself only became aware of those complaints in the past few days by researching the issue.
Anyway, if there continues to be a lack of consensus, I'd like to formally propose my icon-changing suggestion at the Village Pump, with visual examples and a survey of outsiders. I'd like to wait until Mike Godwin responds, though. If you could notify me when he does, I'd be very appreciative. -kotra (talk) 02:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
I'd vote for it when it comes up. As for Mike Godwin, he is very slow to respond on issues. My suspicion is he wouldn't object at all, however, as it in no way weakens our legal standing. To the contrary it strengthens it. Sigh. I'm really disappointed with my fellow editors here, who seem to live inside of a policy bubble without a clue as to the real complaints we receive. The last opposition really irks me. They assert Flickr images are useless, and we shouldn't be using them. I'm at wit's end. (Mind meal (talk) 03:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC))
Yeah. I think the best thing to do is civilly and rationally respond to each comment, though I don't have time to do that... I'm happy about all the attention this issue is getting, but I can't keep up with all of it! -kotra (talk) 18:23, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Furry fandom

Thanks for the revert and explanation. The original editor didn't leave an edit summary, so I couldn't tell if it was vandalism or not. -- Kesh (talk) 22:40, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem! In the future, if you want to check changes to interwiki links yourself, they're located at the bottom of the left column. -kotra (talk) 00:05, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cinco de COTW

Greetings once again from the Collaboration of the Week at WikiProject Oregon. Thank you to those who helped out with the last set of articles. This week we have the lone Stub class article left in the Top importance classification, Flag of Oregon, and by request, Detroit Lake. Help where you can, if you can. To opt out of these messages, leave your name here. Adios. Aboutmovies (talk) 22:10, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deleting Natural Remedies

Could you weigh in on the Onion Juice Therapy debate? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Onion_Juice_Therapy#Onion_Juice_Therapy Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by JamesMMc (talk • contribs) 01:42, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I've done so. In the future though, you may not want to notify people of AfDs like this, as it may be considered canvassing. Also, it's considered standard practice to add new comments at the bottom of talk pages, not in the middle. -kotra (talk) 03:39, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wilgefortis Reference in Anorexia Mirabilis entry

I notice you moved a portion of my entry on Anorexia Mirabilis to the discussion page due to an unreliable/ possibly unreliable source, so I have a new, much better one, and am hoping you will find this acceptable and re-enter the passage and new reference (I'm not sure of wiki ettequite, is this the right thing to do?) Anyhow, here is the new reference link: http://www.philipresheph.com/a424/study/lacey.doc —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esmeralda.rupp (talk • contribs) 21:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment. I'll review the references and respond on Talk:Anorexia mirabilis. Also, usually it's considered standard to add comments to the bottom of a talk page, instead of the top (like with the "new section" tab next to "edit this page"). -kotra (talk) 22:45, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Zzzz Oregon COTW

Howdy ya’ll, time for another Collaboration of the Week from WikiProject Oregon. Last week we improved Flag of Oregon & Detroit Lake, enough I think to move them to Start class, so great job everyone! This week, we have another request in Oregon Ballot Measure 47 and a randomly selected two sentence stub that should be easy to expand enough for a DYK in Wallowa-Whitman National Forest. To opt out of these messages, leave your name here, or click here to make a suggestion. Aboutmovies (talk) 18:46, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] re: User:Nationalism

Thanks for the note. I agree, being an SPA isn't a problem; his ongoing attempts to /b/-ify the Furry Fandom article are certainly disruptive, though, and that's more what the warning is for. (Plus the occasional attacks on other editors, and so on.) If there's a blocking needed, I'll probably ask another admin to look into it, I'm sure they'll see the issue as well. Cheers! Tony Fox (arf!) 20:14, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. -kotra (talk) 20:28, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] QWERTY: Oregon COTW

Hello WikiProject Oregon participants, time for another edition of Collaboration of the Week. Last week we made some great improvements to Wallowa-Whitman National Forest and Oregon Ballot Measure 47 (1996), with a DYK for the forest. Great job everyone! This week we have another stub, George Lemuel Woods, one of only two governor stubs left, and should be an easy job getting it to Start class. Then, in honor of the long weekend, we have our second State Park Article Creation Drive. Lots of red links to turn blue, lots of opportunities for DYKs. Help if you can, even if it is only adding pictures of state parks. To opt out of these messages, leave your name here, or click here to make a suggestion. May the The Schwartz be with you. Aboutmovies (talk) 10:31, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiquettes

Sorry for the delay. My internet connection went down. --Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 16:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem! Thanks for the note. -kotra (talk) 19:22, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] X marks the WPOR COTW spot

Guten Tag WikiProject Oregon team members! Great job last week with the Collaboration of the Week, we improved George Lemuel Woods and added eleven new state park articles. This past week we also surpassed the 6000 article mark as a project. The weather may suck, but WPORE is not. For this week we have by request Music of Oregon and Phil Knight. Both need some help, and with Knight we might be able to improve it to GA standards. Once again, to opt out of these messages, leave your name here, or click here to make a suggestion. Aboutmovies (talk) 19:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A is for Apple at COTW

Hello again to those of the WikiProject we call Oregon. Time for another edition of Collaboration of the Week. Last week there was some good improvements to Music of Oregon and Phil Knight, great job everyone. This week, by request is the Applegate Trail, which is short enough to easily conjure up a DYK. Then, I’m trying something a little different, with the Portland State stuff. We included the two high profile schools during Civil War week last year, so now its time for the younger sibling that gets no respect to get some attention. After all, it is the largest college in the state. Feel free to help with whatever aspects you like, though to help with some ideas I added some to the article talk page. Click here to opt out of these messages, or click here to make a suggestion for a future COTW. Nana na na, hey hey hey, goouud byeeee. Aboutmovies (talk) 08:06, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] B12

"The article you reference is good for a basic description of B12 as it relates to vegans, but it doesn't address the question of how often Vitamin B12 deficiency is actually observed in vegetarians/vegans, or how long B12 stays in the body."

True. It seems vegan/vegetarians aren't a very high priority in the medical research field. I did see a reference that talked about the rate at which B12 was metabolized, but I didn't bookmark it and so...

I'll have to admit to having some personal experience with this subject. About three years ago, when I was 50 and getting my first old man physical, they discovered that I had what they called vitamin B12 anemia. They gave me a shot and a bunch of tests, told me there was nothing wrong with me, and then suggested that I start eating meat. Well, rather than eating meat, I started taking supplements, and now I'm wondering if older people aren't more prone to B12 deficiency.

Anyhow, just stopping by to say hello and thanks for working with me on the vegetarian article. -Tom Mmyotis ^^o^^ 03:07, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Actually, I have seen in a couple places that say older people are at a higher risk for B12 deficiency. I just found this 2005 Harvard press release, which talks about how B12 deficiency is more common among both vegetarians and elderly people. I think this would probably be a good reference for the changes you make to the B12 section. What do you think? -kotra (talk) 07:38, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Nice find. I'm hoping to put together a rewrite for the B12 section (at this point I've only talked in generalities) that we can discuss on the talk pages. I've been sick all weekend and trying to get my school work done (yes, this old man is going to school and, in an effort to finish his coursework by next spring, decided to take a summer course) so it'll be a bit before I can put something together. If you have any more thoughts or suggestions, let me know. Thanks! Mmyotis ^^o^^ 14:20, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Alright, I will. Don't worry about Wikipedia, school (and your health, of course) is more important. -kotra (talk) 19:35, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Username

I will have a read through the username policies again myself, unfortunately "I refuse to change my username" isn't a get out clause in the username policy. I suspect it will probably be okay, however the best thing might be to use WP:RFCN to gain concensus. I'll set that up for you, so hold fast on the category removal for a little bit. I'll link you when I've done it. SGGH speak! 07:22, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

There we go, I have listed it at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names. SGGH speak! 07:28, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your response. I've commented there. -kotra (talk) 07:56, 8 June 2008 (UTC)