User talk:Sdr

Welcome!

Hello, Sdr, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

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:Where to ask a question, 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! -- Longhair | Talk 12:19, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dagger-axe

Good job editing dagger-axe. I am the original author of that page, and overall approve of your changes. One thing though: although you kept my comment that the jade and bronze dagger-axes were constructed similarly, you obfuscated the point I was trying to make, which was that the jade version, although it is obviously not intended for combat, is designed to LOOK like the battle-worthy bronze version. Your wording seems overall less clunky than mine, so I'd rather not try to put this point back in without requesting that you do it first. ANy chance? --Iustinus 06:23, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well "lithic" weapons, yes, of course, but wouldn't jade be too fragile? It's very soft. --Iustinus 02:59, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

!! OK then, I can't argue with that. Where did you learn so much about jade weapons? I'll need to consider how to make my point while taking your arguments into consideration. --Iustinus 20:49, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well yes, but you argued very well beyond that obvious point. Thanks for the suggestion, I'll do something like that later today. --Iustinus 21:23, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Creation WP:CSD G4

Hello. Before creating re-directs, could you please check the deletion log of the page in question and avoid re-creating redirects that have been previously deleted for good reason. For example, if you look at the logs for Wikipedia is not, it went to rfd, and the consensus was delete. It was subsequently re-created, and re-deleted as a CSD-G4. You re-created the redirect, and I tagged it as a G4 again. Many of the other redirect you've created had similar problems, some having been deleted four or more times. Regards, MartinRe 00:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments got hosed

The edit you made here was reverted as it removed some newer stuff from the talk page. Looks like the thread you were trying to reply to was already archived. Not sure why people like to archive so agressively, but people do it. If you have a comment to make, you may wish to consider posting it again under a new heading. Friday (talk) 20:11, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Michael E. Davis

Hello, I got Michael E. Davis unprotected for you. Enjoy! Vectro 22:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated. I'm going to take a little time to make sure I start it off proper using the biographical standards and everything, assuming no one else does anything in the mean time. Sdr 03:42, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure No problem. Happy to help. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 15:47, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HEY, FOLKS...

Sort of nice to see, from this thread, that folks are kind and encouraging in this corner of WikiWorld. I only wish someone had been as encouraging and kind to some substantial work I did on Kris_Potts. I certainly woldn't have had any idea who Michael E. Davis was without your profile, but this person seemed to support your effort. I'm having a hard time believing my article, a first time effort here, is being blasted and flamed so badly with simple opinion, not challenges to content, copyright, etc.

Anyway, I'll keep an eye out for your stuff and chances to support you, if only because your attitude seems to be right.

June 2013

Hello, I'm Toddst1. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Robin Sachs, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 12:05, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:00, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Sdr. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Sdr. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]