User talk:Chacor/Archive 07

Redirect

Hi. What is your reason for this edit? You reverted it back shortly after. Did you think I was removing the redirect? I was not. Thanks. A stroHur ricane 00 1^{(Talk+Contribs+Ubx)} 13:33, 16 February 2007 (UTC) [reply]

RE: J Di

Sorry to cause anymore unnecessary heat. I've restored it with a couple revisions for the time being.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 02:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your offer

Well thanks for the offer, I feel like since it's no big deal anyway, the best would be for us all to let the issue drop. No harm done, right? :) See you around, delldot | talk 02:12, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: The young lady who left me a nice note of introduction on my Talk Page

You removed a message from my Talk Page that appeared to be from a nice young lady who wanted to date me.

Did it occur to you that I might actually want to date her? -)

Seriously, thanks for cleaning up my Talk Page.

--Richard 10:16, 18 February 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Trebor Rowntree

I'm mistaken; please remove your oppose vote. My apologies. Ral315 » 04:19, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cliff

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		This is for your words of support on his talk page regarding what happened to him - the definition of what this barnstar means, "being nice without being asked". Thanks. Will ^{(Speak to Me/Breathe)}_{(Grab that cash with both hands and make a stash)} 10:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

STOP!

no one has complained about it untill you came along i have had them there for over 2 months please leave them alone! continuing to do so will be seen as vandelism on my page. also i see many users with stuff like mine on their pages. it took me a while also to figure out how to edit the page to look like that so you comming in and removing it is like a direct violation on my persona. Only the user can edit his or her own pages. Maverick423 14:11, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you are the one that should stop. Fair use images are not allowed on user pages. If you continue to add them back in, you can and probably will be blocked. Hurricanehink (talk) 14:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good bye

i hope your all happy im quitting this place obviously you all dont belive in fairness. i have seen so many people with stuff like mine (and i still see some even right now) and you all just decide to bother me about it. well forget it if this is how wiki treats people that contributed to articles, created new ones, and helped countless people learn on the science refreance desk then just forget it. i dont need crap like this from anyone. i got my own dam website to play with in which none of you can ever touch! Maverick423 14:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

Have you thought about another go at RfA in the near future? I've been thinking about it and I'm pretty sure I'd be willing to nominate you. Grand master ka 23:07, 21 February 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks

It's been a week since my recent request for adminship passed, and since I haven't managed to delete the Main Page - yet - I figure it's safe to send these out. Thanks a lot for participating in my RfA; I hope to do a good job. If you see me doing something wrong, need help, or just want to have a chat, please don't hesitate to drop by :) – riana_dzasta 07:13, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jennifer Government

I'm not sure it is possible to have present a neutral article on Jennifer Government:Nationstates as per the requirements of wikipedia. Everyone who has worked on the article so far and who has either supported or opposed it is either a player of and hence a biased fan of or a disenchanted Nationstates opponent with a bias against the game or some aspect of it. The attempt by the Cybernation's people looked like an attempt to the effect of "If I can't have mine then you can't have yours either." But at the same time, I don't see any criticisms of the game included in the article. If I am correct, other gaming articles on wikipedia do include some criticisms. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.103.22.288 (talk • contribs) 18:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Daniel Brandt

Can we close the AFD? It would be better to let the DRV run, and list at AFD only if the DRV fails to endorse the deletion. And we should try to keep discussion in only one place whenever possible. GRBerry 17:01, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Transcribed

I transcribed the DB DRV - I think that's more transparent. I have no objection to you reverting me if you disagree. Hipocrite - «Talk» 17:49, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Back

Well, I've archived my talk page after people started complaining. Thanks. :) Jude (talk) 00:01, 24 February 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Unblock approval

No, you shouldn't, but I had you on both lists (sysop and non-sysop) for some reason. You want me to remove you? :) You will be discussed, just like all non-sysops, but I think you're good. Prodego ^talk 14:11, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tools?

Hi Chacor, I didn't understand what you meant by 'no need for tools' in my RfA. Please expand. Thanks. WilliamKF 02:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, was I not supposed to touch the RfA once started? Thanks. WilliamKF 02:57, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarifications! WilliamKF 03:06, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Given misleading information to journalists"

Do you think that this claim should be backed with a factual reference of some sort? --72.94.152.27 13:51, 1 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks

Thanks for not feeding the troll on ANI. I cannot speak Japanese let along be an admin on that wiki. Currently I have accounts on en.wiki and meta and Im only a sysop on the en wiki. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 16:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfA for WilliamKF

Hello Chacor, I was wondering if you had noticed my response to your feeling that I do not know what administrator tools are? I think it was just poor communication on my part that led you to believe that. Please do take a look, if you haven't already, to see if you might feel differently based upon my comments at Requests for adminship/WilliamKF also, there was an added question by Eli Falk to which I responded which you may find helpful. Thanks for your consideration. WilliamKF 19:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Brain Peppers

Thank you, I was on my way over to RFC/NAME with him as well. He claims satire as his defense if you read his user talk, but satirical trolling is still trolling and it's anything but productive. --tjstrf talk 09:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Essjay edit

I suggest we take the matter elsewhere. Agathoclea 12:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, apart from trying to add blogs, which is really a content matter, I can see no disruption. Agathoclea 08:25, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFA?

It's March already, you said you may accept a RFA nom in March, I'm ready to nominate you, just let me know. Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 18:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote something up at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Chacor 2. Jaranda needs to jump in and add his two cents, but you can answer the questions and add it when you're ready on March 9. Grand master ka 05:09, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused... Should I redact the "background" part? Or leave it as is? Grand master ka 05:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha. Grand master ka 05:39, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll just give a detailed support vote, I'm not going to edit much the next week because of a sprained shoulder I got while wrestling with some friends. I missed class today because of it. Thanks Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 18:12, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #10

The March issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.--Nilf anion (talk) 22:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Spread-the-funny and-slighty-random-love day!

:) pschemp (talk) 01:11, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sharon

I don't know the situation (I can guess), but I think we would be doing her a favour if we deleted her user page and restored just the latest revision (or blanked it). Do you agree? --kingboyk 14:29, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Q5

That's a non-answer! "Will you sign up" calls for "yes" or "no". - NYC JD (make a motion) 15:20, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hereby ask you. - NYC JD (make a motion) 15:26, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About Said Troll...

That's a rather unorthodox way of trolling; spewing out random awards for no reason. I thought it was kind of weird that he gave me two more stars that meant basically the same thing as the first. I'll probably end up keeping the first one, though, mainly on the grounds that I don't have sure proof that it was of ill repute. -- §Hurricane E RIC § archive 22:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Question

I added a new question earlier this evening. My question is not meant to attack, just to ask a very direct question that needs to be asked. It's nothing personal. Your edits and contributions seem remarkable and I actually believe you should be an admin. I dont think you'll mess up like that again. The honesty issue is a bit troubling, however. Keep your chin up, own up to what needs to be owned up, and let's do this thing right. - grubber 01:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I replied to the ArbCom approval issue. If there hasn't been a formal declaration by the commitee, you should seek that now. I think your application (and the previous) are genuine and good-faith, so I expect they will approve. If this procedural issue is resolved (even now in medias res), I personally support your RfA. - grubber 04:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFCU and clerks

Greetings! A recent change has been made in the clerking system at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser. There are no longer any obstacles to editors who wish to help out in this areas, as the standby list has now been deprecated. You were listed as a volunteer on the standby list before it was deprecated. If you are still interested in helping out in this area, please:

Consider adding yourself to the list of active clerks at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Clerks.
In helping, please make sure you follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Procedures as it is very important to the process there to follow these instructions for smooth operation.
Please remember "Trust between the clerks and the checkusers is essential. Clerks who persistently make problematic comments on requests or otherwise violate decorum may be asked by the checkusers to cease contributing here."
Add Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Clerks/Noticeboard to your watchlist to stay up to do date on the latest communications happening regarding this role.
"Be aware that this position is rather dull and carries no particular prestige; status-seeking will not be looked upon kindly."

I am not involved with the checkuser system. I am acting only to inform you of this change. Thank you. --Durin 14:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfA question

My apologies if you answered this elsewhere. I noticed that your NSLE and Chacor accounts overlap quite a bit. Why did you use 2 accounts for so long? Thanks, Fang Aili ^talk 20:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. --Fang Aili ^talk 00:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfA nomination

Sorry that went to shit so severely. When the sharks smell blood, all you can do is get out of the water. I know you won't let this ruin things for you, and I'll be happy to support you again next time around. Kafziel ^Talk 07:07, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- And dagnabbit, you should've told me about the nomination. :) I would've voted for you. Oh well. Next time. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 12:36, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Don't fret. You will get it eventually. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 14:36, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of James F. Byrnes High School

I have discovered that the page entitled James F. Byrnes High School is needed to be deleted because the notice for deletion has been on the page for five days due to unreliable sources.--72.159.134.195 16:32, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing I can do. – Chacor 02:03, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3rr warning

Please don't comment out the section again. futurebird 05:30, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't a revert. --Core desat 05:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's commenting out the table... over and over. futurebird 05:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the third link you provided is the original edit, which can't be a revert, and doesn't count as one. Both of you have two reverts on the article. --Core desat 05:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The table was commented out three times. futurebird 05:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And the first time was the initial edit which you dispute. That can not possibly be a revert as there was no reversion to a prior version which had the table commented out. – Chacor 05:44, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Yes; the original comment was the edit, and the ensuing four edits were reversions and re-reversions of that same edit, per the Three-revert rule. Now, since you're all discussing whether the table should be there or not, how about this is moved to the article's talk page? Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 05:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK. That makes sense. Still, I don't understand why you're doing this at all. futurebird 05:49, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rfa thanks

Hey, just popping by to say thanks alot for supporting Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ryanpostlethwaite which passed on saturday, I'm honoured to serve the community. I'm sorry about how yours went, but I've no doubts that such an accomplished editor like you should be forgiven again and you've got so much to give to the project, you can certainly count on my support again next time Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 12:20, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Main page image

Don't forget to protect the image of Khalid Mohammed. – Chacor 15:10, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't need to; the image is protected through cascading protection. -- tariqabjotu 15:12, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Couple of questions

Firstly, an article for Cyclone George, would it be possible?

Secondly: if it is possible - the information in the article, can it be simply copied from the 2006/2007 Southern Hemisphere Cyclone Season? Not all of it, but just the general information; or is that plagiarism?

Reason I'm asking you is you know the rules inside out, and I'm thinking of making an article, and I don't see much of a point without asking first if it's worth it (I think it is, as Cyclone Vance and Thelma both have articles, and neither were as deadly as George).

Thanks. Gavirulax 12:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick reply. Stupid me hit "save page" instead of show preview on Cyclone George 2006. I'll follow your advice, and if you have the power to delete articles, please delete that one (that was very unintended, sorry).Gavirulax 12:14, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Johnston

Hi, just been reading your page on Alan Johnston, the BBC's man in Gaza. The diploma in journalism that he obtained was from the University of Wales, Cardiff (now simply known as Cardiff University), and not the University of Wales Institute in Cardiff (formerly Cardiff Institute). I'm not too good at editing pages, so could you please correct?! Thanks

Feroze0 15:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. vs. US

This is regarding the move of The Amazing Race (US TV series) to The Amazing Race (U.S. TV series). WP:NC-TV says that United States article titles should be named (US TV series), and that statement is derived from WP:NCA. Should those conventions be changed? If a change is needed, it should be posted on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (abbreviations), as it would be a major change that will affect quite a handful of articles. I personally don't like U.S. as the periods for abbreviations/acronyms in article titles appears to be extraneous. (I don't mind U.S. in main text, however.) But if it has to be, it has to be.Tinlinkin 05:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Derex and SpLoT

Thank you for your intervention on User talk:Ivygohnair in the argument between Derex and SpLoT.

In my opinion, SpLoT was taking issue with six statements that Darek made. However, I believe there was an "interpretation gap" for at least four of the statements: The meaning inferred by SpLoT was different than the meaning intended by Darek.

--Kevinkor2 11:00, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Hi Chacor - Thanks for the clarification, I'll tag all of my images for deletion immediately. --Michael Laca 08:34, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! I'm looking forward to contributing to the Tropical Cyclone WikiProject. I believe I tagged the images correctly for deletion, though I'm new to this environment so I may have missed something. If there is anything else I need to do, please let me know. Thanks again. --Michael Laca 09:07, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFA Thanks

I would like to thank you for your support in my recent RFA. As you may or may not be aware, it passed with approximately 99% support. I ensure you that I will use the tools well, and if I ever disappoint you, I am open to recall. If you ever need anything, don't hesitate to leave me a note on my talkpage. Thanks again, ^demon^{[omg plz]} 20:29, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Remember..........

...........this?! I always thought I got into this conflict with Picaroon!! Ha! It was a long time ago now, so I'm sorry about the misunderstanding - quite funny though when you look back on it! Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 14:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Core

Thanks for the explanation. He has an {{unblock}} tag up, but I didn't want to unblock without checking with the blocking admin, even though it did look funny. Much appreciated! -- Avi 05:18, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Betacommand

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Betacommand. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Betacommand/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Betacommand/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Newyorkbrad 00:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ZERO and Meteroid

Thanks for letting me know that, it is not obvious from the user accounts. I have reverted my edit. My understanding is that following a change user its usual to stop using the old account. I'm pretty sure the edit summary on [1] isn't a good idea. Gwernol 03:44, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Welcome back ;)

I'm not coming back. I just thought it was time to be honest. And no, this is not a prank – Qxz 09:51, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing comments from WP:AN/I

I'm afraid that if you don't stop removing another editor's comments from WP:AN/I I shall have to block you from editing for twenty-four hours. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 10:35, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that I may have misunderstood your action, in which case I apologise. The page is a mess, though, and it does seem that Guinnog and Ryulong (the latter unsurprisingly, in my view) have been acting badly. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 10:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #11

The April issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.--Nilf anion (talk) 16:21, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tohru Honda admin nom

I answered your question and provided the diffs as proof, please go take a look at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tohru Honda13. Wooyi 13:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the userpage ARGH

Hi. Was this a joke? You reverted it afterwards, and seeing it was on April fools' day...wait! I have to revert or remove the message on my page. Why? It's April 2nd! Ahh! Did you see the newsletter? It seems a joke, but I'm not sure whether or not there will be another one this month. Ok, I will go edit. Thanks. A stroHur ricane 00 1^{(Talk+Contribs+Ubx)} 21:29, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Thank you for your note alerting me to the centralised discussion of my interaction with another user. I appreciate it. --Guinnog 07:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. --Guinnog 15:04, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Southeast Indian Ocean/SW Pacific

Right, so what about the operational plans for the other basins?

And, would the Atlantic and Northeast Pacific qualify as one basin, because that's what it says in Table 1.1 here. RaNdOm26 08:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OP

I have never done anything with WP:OP. I am just going to be on here for a few more minutes until it is time to head to the airport, so I will probably not get around to figuring it out. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 14:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, User talk:74.53.88.50 is now requesting an uinblock to create an account. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 14:03, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whoo! That was fast work. I'd hate to be a vandal around here...--Guinnog 14:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. What gets me is the semi weekly complaints at WT:AIV about how innefficient we are at getting vandals and how the entire system needs revamped. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 14:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The present system is labour intensive but very efficient, fast and fair, over 99% of the time, in my opinion. --Guinnog 14:42, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pink carnations and pickup trucks.

Hey, I thought you might like to see my work in progress, seeing as you're mentioned :D Will ^{(I hope they cannot see, I AM THE GREAT DESTROYER!)} 17:18, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really surprised there isn't an American Pie parody already. Really surprised. Will ^{(I hope they cannot see, I AM THE GREAT DESTROYER!)} 01:20, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Badan Meteorologi dan Geofisika

Hi, I've started an {{indonesia-stub}} on Badan Meteorologi dan Geofisika. I'll try to develop the article later. --ivanlanin ♫ •• 06:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: A Very Belated Congrats

Thanks very much. Always good to hear from a fan :-P ^demon^{[omg plz]} 06:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Singapore

Hi, I see that you reverted my entire edit about Singapore. The University of Texas source which I cited didn't distinguish between becoming self-governing and independence, so I assumed that Singapore was fully independent from the date of self-government in 1959. I've now inserted this as a separate date. - Fayenatic london (talk) 13:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Kuan Yew very clearly states in his book Singapore Story that he declared Singapore independent from the UK on August 31, 1963. I think it's chapter 32 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.117.143.29 (talk • contribs)

That would be correct, yes, UDI August 31, 1963. – Chacor 04:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Words

So you are implying that User Kafziel has the right to say "There's no reason for us to take crap from you" as well as harassing user Retionno Virginian. Pliz this is an encyclopedia and everything should be done in a polite way and regarding the way I write("anywayz")>>as I had mentioned to you a long time ago, thats how I write on talk pages and discussion pages but when it comes to writing an article, I have alwayz used proper English..--Cometstyles 14:14, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So you mean Kafziel being an Admin has all the rights to criticise an Editor but the Editors cant do anything and you are implying that Iam the one "out of line"..is that so??..--Cometstyles 14:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apologise for what Exactly..???..--Cometstyles 14:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFA

No, there are actually 4 opposes as Tellyaddict withdrew his support and in the support section; he accidently added oppose. I also see the cometstyles has done hiself out of this RFA. Retiono Virginian 14:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didnt add an oppose though, yes I withdrew my support but I didnt change to oppose, I'm going to contact Kafziel now.Telly addict 14:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, it was just the headers colliding I know. Sorry. However what do you mean by that comment you just left on my talk page? Retiono Virginian 14:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage

Thanks for catching the vandalism! Appreciate it. Philippe 06:05, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

I may be applying for adminship in the near future. I know that we had quite the dispute a while back and I wanted to get your thoughts before I move forward. Alan.ca 08:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of notable Atlantic hurricanes

Hiya! I noticed your edit to the article "List of notable Atlantic hurricanes".... how would the tropical systems that struck Angola and Costa Rica not be considered unusual landfalls? I know they were not hurricanes in their own right, but i thought it could countt since they were tropical in nature (Tropical depressions or even tropical storms), and made landfall in highly unusual areas.... I'd like to hear back from ya. :) RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 16:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure the World Meteorological Association had agreed it was tropical, instead of subtropical or extratropical in nature. Regarding Costa Rica: i agree. Can't have unsourced material... Regarding Hurricane Hazel: well, it *is* iffy on whether feeding off the Great Lakes counts as a landfall, but i think it should, since it was tropical in characteristics and used the warm lake waters as fuel... RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 16:46, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[2], [3]/[4], and [5] regarding the tropical storm that struck Costa Rica. Also, Hurricane Joan (1988) made landfall in Bluefields, Nicaragua (around 120 km north of Costa Rica), but CR felt its effects. Would that be notable for either nation? RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 16:54, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. However, is the information i gave you (the links above) sufficient for Tropical Storm 19 (the one that struck Costa Rica in 1887)?
Regarding the Tropical Depression/Storm that struck Angola...if i find some sources that can verify it was tropical in nature, would that count (even if it's not a Category 1 Hurricane)?
It's your call on whether we keep Hazel or not. I understand if it stays or goes, as it's logical either way. :) - User:RingtailedFox/talk 17:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Parsuram Jayanti

I see you changed it to prod. Fair enough. But the external link on that page is linkspam imo. Please see WP:ANI#User:Anil Kr Gupta linkspam. Cheers. – Chacor 12:28, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I've removed that useless external link already. Thanks, Chacor. --PFHLai 12:30, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: infoboxes

Thanks, though obviously that was just to increase my edit count ;) Hurricanehink (talk) 02:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, not sure. Feel free to revert. Hurricanehink (talk) 02:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Break

Hey Chacor, I just wanted to say good luck in future endeavours. I'm sorry you feel the need to leave, but how about considering it as an extended break? Your contributions will be sorely missed... The Rambling Man 09:35, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoy your break (hell, we could all use one, I think). I hope you come back feeling better! Take care, – Riana ^ऋ 15:04, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto, hope to see you back soon. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 18:33, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Nolan

Whoops! I'm usually pretty good about checking to see if I have the right version, but that one slipped through. Thanks for pointing it out, I'll be more vigilant, especially with BLPs. --Storkk 09:01, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting

Yes, you beat me to it. I reverted the last one, then immediately checked the edit history and spotted the others. Your connection must be faster than mine - by the time I had typed in "revert to last by Mentality" you had already made the changes. Euryalus 11:39, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I should also say, thank you for the reminder. I should have checked how many there were before reverting the first one. Unpicking multiple vandalisms after subsequent edits is a great deal harder. So, thanks again. Euryalus 12:01, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your RFA criteria

Greetings. I just noticed your "RFA Criteria" while browsing through some old RFAs and just wanted to say that I think your personal guidelines are spot on! All the best, Duke of Whitstable 23:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1994 Pacific typhoon season

I'll try to do some work on it in the near future...the seasonal articles do have a good structure/format which would make them easier to upgrade and finish. It may nearly be time for me to take a break from wikipedia myself. I'm beginning to burn out after converting some of our core TC articles into GA over the past few months. What's really done it lately is the long road for surface weather analysis and tropical cyclone to get to FA, a process that seems to get longer every week/month. I've run into walls concerning certain articles within the meteorology projects (like weather forecasting and lapse rate), where people are consciously chosing not to include inline references, which makes them a bear to upgrade past B class. Oy gevalt. Thegreatdr 03:47, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Storm name sections

Sorry about that. I only changed them to follow the format of some of the other articles. — Super-Magician (talk • contribs • count) ★ 22:33, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Yutu

Thanks, but I got that out of my system. Though it would be nice having an article for every named storm, it's not worth the effort. Good call from the beginning. Hurricanehink (talk) 00:12, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: 2007 EPac season

Thank you for the tips. I will keep them in mind. ---CWY2190^T^C 02:35, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I saw that about the graphic after I uploaded it. If I do upload it again, it will be the highres. ---CWY2190^T^C 02:35, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didnt get a message that you already edited the page. So sorry if I deleted any of your info. ---CWY2190^T^C 02:41, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should we add a note like this to each of the basin talk pages linking them to Hurricanes wikis forums? ---CWY2190^T^C 23:49, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TS Barry

The information I removed stated the announcement came at 5 PM EST. It is not 5 PM EST yet. --Ted-m 20:47, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When I checked weather.com they said TS Barry had not formed yet so I removed the info. I just rechecked it and they have updated to say it is now active. I apologize for not double checking.--Ted-m 20:55, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heres the Barry forecast track. Image:02L_2007_Five-day_cone.gif ---CWY2190^T^C 20:51, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WHYS

learn to use templates and spaces after punctuation

Speaking of being nice, you could have put that more gently. I'm fully aware of how to use templates, I wasn't aware of what was contained within the radio infobox. I'm only trying to help, let's work with each other, not against each other. BT14 01:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Dear Chacor, thanks for your support in my recent RfA, it was, however, unsuccessful. I am not the type of editor to be disheartened by such a result, and have gained much experience. If you have anything to contribute by way of improvements or comments, please don’t hesitate to tell me.

I will run again. Until then, Cheers, Dfrg.msc 07:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Loureid (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Time for a block methinks. Cheers. – Chacor 12:42, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, well ahead of me. :) – Chacor 12:43, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per this I would suggest you extend the block to indefinite and bring it up at WP:ANI. I think it's fair to say that he'll resume vandalising when the block expires. I've reverted that ridiculous unblock request. – Chacor 12:50, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Give me about half an hour to an hour. I've got a few things to do in real life first. The account was created by a student in a few of my classes at high school and the reasons behind it are more complicated than someone vandalising Wikipedia for the fun of it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Harryboyles (talk • contribs) 12:56, 9 June 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I've put the issue up to ANI. Feel free to comment. Harryboyles 13:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Johnston (disambiguation)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Alan Johnston (disambiguation), by Potatoswatter, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Alan Johnston (disambiguation) fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason:

disambig with only one actual target

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Alan Johnston (disambiguation), 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, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Alan Johnston (disambiguation) 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 16:43, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

STS Andrea

Hi. I've noticed you've clearly stated that andrea was 0.000 ace and 5 indirect fatalities. However, IMO Andrea has an ACE value and a source, and a reliable one at that. The same website which provided the ACE for andrea, lwf.noaa, is strangely the same one that says STS's have no ACE. So, the same source conflicts with itself. What do we do then? Also, I believe andrea had six fatalities (see my comment on the 2007 AHS page). The reason is because, the article clearly states that 5 people died from flooding while the storm was extratropical. It also states, that there is one other fatality which is a surfer off the coast of Florida, while subtropical. So, if you add up the fatalities while extratropical (5), and also the one while subtropical (1), what do you get? You get 5 + 1 = 6. So, this is why I added the '6' figure to the article. You said NOAA mentioned that there were 5 fatalities while extratropical. The 1 other probably came from another source. If that source, the one with the one fatality while subtropical, is reliable, the total should be six. However, I'm not certain whether this would be "6 direct", "6 indirect", or "1 direct, 5 indirect", or something else. So, should it be changed? Thanks. -- AstroHurricane001 22:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at user's talk page. Also, reformatted sig. – Chacor 02:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Cheers for the barnstar Chacor, it was much appreciated. Flameviper has got a lot to give to the project, and I really wish it could have worked out for him this time, but I guess even I can't assume good faith with this latest sock to get him unblocked, oh well... Ryan Postlethwaite 02:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Split discussion from WP:AN

Splitting some rather off-topic discussion to here:

I just checked some articles on US hurricanes. Why don't they have a comparison against the other international standards? --bainer (talk) 12:38, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because only the United States issues warnings on them, and no other agency provides readings on them. The Joint Typhoon Warning Center (which is U.S. run) monitors all tropical cyclones, so there's a way to make a comparison against the U.S. scale using their info. – Chacor 12:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but it still seems unusual that people would war to include a sentence like that; I mean, on Hurricane Katrina, for example, it isn't stated that classifications under all the other systems are not available. By the way, why does the infobox on Cyclone Larry give the SSHS classification if it isn't available? --bainer (talk) 14:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Katrina

I am new to wikipedia and learning as I go...I am responding to your statement that I am injecting personal opinion into Hurricane Katrina by saying:

"The design and construction of New Orleans' flood protection is, by congressional mandate, the sole responsibility of the US Army Corps of Engineers in the Flood Protection Act of 1965."

How is this sentence, complete with sources, representative of a personal opinion?

I totally want to resolve this peacefully. HoppinHill 17:57, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chacor,

I am new to wikipedia and didn't realize I had inadvertantly made a revision without saying it was me. I have no reason nor intention to make a change anonymously. I know ignorance of the rules is not an excuse, but I wasn't trying to hide my identity and from now on I will be sure to make sure I am logged in before I make a revision.

I also didn't know I cannot use another wikipedia article as a source. I won't do that again, either.

HoppinHill

You say: "That the levees are federally built is your POV that it is important. No-one else has harped on that. You were blocked prior for a similar offence (3 revert rule violationw hile doing the same thing - adding POV). There is no consensus for your addition."

1. This is not a point of view, it's a fact and there is tons of sources. I have them. 2. I didn't know about the 3-rule invert rule, as I said I am new to wikipedia. I won't again. 3. You reverted my change three times in 24 hours. How is it you are immune? 4. How do I get "consensus" for a fact, other than sources? 5. Just to be sure, I honestly want all of this resolved peacefully, within the rules.

HoppinHill

Edit intro

But when I click "edit" or "+" on your talk page, I don't see the edit intro stuff. I think it is meant to appear there if it has been implemented properly. Carcharoth 13:00, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. Since it says that there has to be the additional &editintro in the URL... – Chacor 13:04, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weird. Click there twice, and things (eventually) stop moving around. Clicking on the link works eventually, for me. Carcharoth 13:16, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox hurricane

Will do, but probably next week. I have a couple of final exams this week, so I don't really have the time to hack the templates right now. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 18:25, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/CharlotteWebb

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/CharlotteWebb. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/CharlotteWebb/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/CharlotteWebb/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Newyorkbrad 23:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strawberry Shortcake

I need Help, I placed the WP:OR and other maitenice tags because the majority of the article is unsourced, contains original reserch and have references that are unreliable (links to blogs, fan sites) etc.[6], [7], [8]. But User:RAMChYLD keeps reverting them [9] despite my explainations.Storm05 12:13, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SEW

Please respond at my User talk page at Simple English Wikipedia. I need someone to transliterate (in Pinyin) the Chinese on the article that I started on Simple, The Internationale. I found that you speak Chinese, and I wanted you to help. On my browser, Chinese characters appear as little boxes. Please help.

ιονας Δ. ρανδ 23:33, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you anyway! :)

Ionas —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.224.239.145 (talk • contribs) 04:18, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Alan johnston button.png

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Alan johnston button.png. 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. Edward Morgan Blake 04:50, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shalit is in Gaza, he isn't Palestinian, he was kidnapped

Yeah, he's relevant. I've been a journalist for 50 years. I know journalistic ethics. My specialty is forensic journalism. I catch bad journalists for a living. Some were quite famous. What do YOU do? And yeah, Shalit is quite relevant. Unless, of course, you are one of those who thinks that Palestinians have an existential right to kidnap and murder Israelis, but not Britons.Scott Adler 06:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's your opinion. This is an ongoing news story, it's part of the real world. Leaving out Shalit in this story is like leaving out the dog that didn't bark in the night. They're interrelated. Scott Adler 19:07, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BOB 05 Depression

Could you please explain as to whether there is a depression in BOB or not -- BOB 05. I thought that IMD is doing the work as RSMC for North Indian Ocean region. Also since you are an expert on these matters, what do you think is the reason for JTWC not upgrading it at all. Normally, JTWC has one minute wind speeds as compared to RSMC 10 minute average wind speeds.--Ugaap 13:17, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Chacor for your reply. I read about it on IMD website, which I thought is for public. Anyways when and where can we get public domain confirmation?--Ugaap 14:29, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Humus with hania.jpg

I have been told that the above image (that you tagged) is from here (see my talk page). So you can proceed as you wish, I'm not too hot on copyright I just got the info for you :) SGGH ^speak! 16:44, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry! Need help!

Dear Charcor,

Sorry! I am VERY NEW to adding images. Please tell me what to click on to get to an image info editing page to update who created it and so forth. That message is on all of my images. And how do I change the copyright info on the hurricane images? Please tell me where to clicka nd what to do.

Thanks Chrisg21090

Thanks for getting back.

Dear Charcor,

Wow! That was fast! One last question. How do I change the license and info? I clicked on my contributions and the images. Then it went to the page with the picture and the warnings. What do I click on from there. As I said, I am very new to this. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Chrisg21090

Pic Info

I took all on the list EXCEPT botom two on the list. For the last two: Got from weather.msfc.nasa.gov. Clicked on satellites, clicked on respective satellite site, right clicked and saved to computer. Note: the image updates every 20 or so minutes.

Camera and Resolution differences.

The reason is that some pics are from my digital camera. Others I took with an old-school standard film camera. I took those and scanned them into my computer using my printer/scanner. I swear that is THE truth.

OK

Thanks! I swear that you wont find these images elsewhere. If you do, it is because someone stole them (haha)! And I will give them better names in the future.

Once again, thanks! Chrisg21090

Thanks.

Just let me know when Im "outta the woods" Charcor. Thank you for all of your help.

Chrisg21090

(Apologies for using this garish template, but it is what is suggested...)

How is my edit "pov"?

Care to explain? What is my "pov"? The only "pov" I see is when someone reverts me and says "rm. anti-israel inspired edit. israels nuclear program is not an ongoing current issue, iran's is. live with it." Care to explain how listing Israel's ongoing nuclear program as a current event is "anti-israeli"? So wouldn't listing Iran's nuclear program be "anti-Iranian"? Since when is being anti something grounds for removal on Wikipedia? Notice these are my very first edits so I have no idea how you are getting the idea that my edit is "anti-israeli". Makes no sense. --Fâtimâh bint Fulâni 15:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Stuff

I left a post on Dianmu, which I can't believe was even necessary. I'll hold off on Cosme until it regains TS status, or if it causes some impact. Hurricanehink (talk) 15:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Few things

All done. I fixed my sig and opening message also cancelled the work. Also, I have a request, you have any refs for two articles I need done soon:

User:Mitchazenia/List of notable Pacific typhoons and User:Mitchazenia/Tropical Storm Emilia (2006). If you do, Thanks.Mitch^contribs 15:51, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: EPac

Yes, I realized that after I saved it and I was fixing it but you beat me to it. ---CWY2190^T^C 02:42, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, no problem. Go ahead and take care of the sidebar. I noticed the NRL put up 07E.NONAME about an hour ago and I was preparing it.

If Cosme's remnants were to redevelop in the West Pacific, where would the active system template go? The EPac article or WPac article? ---CWY2190^T^C 00:27, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lord Chan - Chinese names

I noticed the change you'd made to the name in this article. I couldn't find a guideline for this on Wikipedia, but I think the standard rule should be applied, which is that we use the form the subject would use himself. There are plenty of references to Michael Chew Koon Chan in Google [10], including a profile in the Lancet. He was referred to as Michael Chew Koon Chan in the House of Lords minutes when he was "introduced" as a member of the house [11]. There is only one reference to Michael Chan Chew Koon in Google [12] which is in someone's blog.

While I realise that the form EnglishName Surname ChineseName is common in places such as Singapore, Malaysia and Hong Kong, the problem is that in the west we consider names to be made of two distinct parts: the surname and the given names. Each of these may comprise one or more names; but the two parts are kept separate. Whether the surname or given name is first will depend on the context. Having the surname in the middle, though, is not an option. This is probably why Lord Chan (and professionals I've known who came to the UK from Malaysia) switched to using their surnames at the end.

I would also like to note that people from China or Taiwan who use an English name most commonly write their names as either EnglishName ChineseName Surname or ChineseName EnglishName Surname, so while your edit makes this article conform to the convention used in Singapore, I wouldn't say that it's standard for a Chinese name in general.

I'm going to revert your change, unless you have any particular objections... JRawle (Talk) 22:15, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Track maps

Sure. I just got the program working again and I should have time to make the maps tomorrow. --Ajm⁸¹ 23:33, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re:second warning

Oops, sorry! I was trying to see if the info the anon added was true or not, and I doubted it, so I reverted it. Then, I looked at the source, not knowing it was an error, thinking it was real, so then I tried to fix it. I was going to adjust the page to suit that edit that the anon made, not knowing it was in error. Sorry about all those spelling errors I made in the edit summary, I was in a rush. Soon after, I checked the edit history again, and I saw that you made the edit explaining it was an error. So, I tried to fix it back, and saw that you reverted it already. I'm not sure why that saved as two edits, and I am also confused. Maybe I should have just reverted the anon edits, and left it there like that until further decision or discussion? I didn't really have time to bring it up on the talkpage becasue you reverted it so quickly. I appoligize for any inconvienience. ~A H 1^(TCU) 17:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re 1st Warning

Chacor When i looked on the JMAs Website they were nto tracking the Tropical depression i dont know why but they were not tracking it Jason Rees 20:08, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re:WP:BIO

Hi. The reason I think they should be notable enough is because they are TWN articles. Before creating all those, I saw that some other ones already had articles. They have a reference. I added as much info as I could from the TWN's bio pages. Do you say these articles specifically because they are too short? There aren't a lot of other places where I could find info, but perhaps someone could through a google search. Since they are presenters on TWN, they are frequenntly seen by millions of people across Canada. If they are well-known and frequently on TV, seen by millions, with a source, why are those specifically not notable enough? Also, I created Nneka Elliott because she only recently had an entry on TWN's website, and was then the only one without an article, and Kim MacDonald is actually one of the older articles, and it only seemed recent because I moved it to its correct title after someone corrected it. Also, many people are editting these articles, even those very new to Wikipedia, which suggests that they are very well-known. Since you especially stated the ones that seem more recent, suggests that you've been thourougly scanning through my contribs ever since I got here, which I have no objection to but it can be a little exhausting when you have to go and fix your errors every time someone else notices one. Well, the articles that were originally there were already there. Most of those were short as well, but nobody seemed to complain about their notability. Should it have many sources? Sometimes, what's notable and what's not is very thin line, and sometimes a gray area. I'll try to take a closer look at WP:BIO, too. Sorry I'm late, Wikimedia error. Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 15:12, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

115 knot conversion

That is correct, but 130 mph falls into Cat 3 intensity, so the NHC usually makes it 135 on advisories. CrazyC83 15:55, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flossie's ACE

I always thought that the wind speed was estimated for the same time as the position, ie 1500Z when it was firmly in CPAC. The real truth will only be apparent when we get the Best Track, anyway.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 16:03, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Flossie

I want to thank you for all your help on Hurricane Flossie (2007). It is my first substantial project and I have found your advice to be most helpful. There are still a lot of WPTC conventions for me to learn but so far this has been an incredibly rewarding experience. Plasticup ^T/C 16:23, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I really welcome being corrected when i do something wrong so thank you. Perhaps i will create an article on Rio San Fernando, Mexico... lol ... HurricaneChase 13:51, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: TD 5

Well, I am at work right now, so there is a small possibility I might not be able to work on it :) I'll try and get some time to get it updated, but do you really think it should be published as Tropical Depression Five (2007), or should I wait until TS status (which would give me more time and would probably be tonight, IMO)? Hurricanehink (talk) 15:04, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on it. Hurricanehink (talk) 15:31, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taiwan CWB and WMO

Taiwan is not a member of the WMO, so it is not official recognized here. The typhoon is approaching Taiwan waters and thus, at this point, the top level agency would be Taiwan's CWB. If the data is different as it approaches Taiwan waters, the Taiwan numbers should be used. ludahai 魯大海 14:03, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The numbers for our CWB are officially recognized here in Taiwan, so YES, they ARE official. Taiwan is not a member of the WMO, so what you regard as official is NOT regarded as official here. What makes the Japanese numbers right and the Taiwanese numbers wrong, especially for a storm that is approaching Taiwanese waters. ludahai 魯大海 14:14, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The storm is currently approaching Taiwan. Also, those other countries are WMO members, Taiwan is not. They accept WMO supremacy in these matters, Taiwan does not. It is not Taiwan's fault is it not a WMO member either, it is Japan, and China, and any other country that opposes Taiwan's participation. As it is, I will include location and movement information ONLY from Taiwan's CWB for this storm (and future storms) set to affect Taiwan in the Current Information section, but not override other information. That information comes every 90 minutes at this point, but as I am about to go to bed (it is 10:20 pm here), don't expect another update from me until the morning. However, I request the curtesy of you NOT deleting the information because it IS the latest available - even more recent than your JMA data. ludahai 魯大海 14:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not deleting information, I am only adding MORE CURRENT information from an OFFICIAL agency that is reporting on the storm. I am not deleting ANYTHING from your precious United Nations WMO agency. However, this IS international and the last I checked, Taiwan is a part of the world and the interantional community. The WMO is NOT recognized by Taiwan and as this IS affecting Taiwan, it is NOT inappropriate to include relevant data from Taiwan. The info I am including IS relevant and not harmful. This is NOT your page, please leave the data intact. ludahai 魯大海 14:27, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is exactly what I included, though once it is within Taiwan's territorial waters and land space, I think more specific information from Taiwan would be warrented until it leaves Taiwan waters. However, I am going to bed now, we can take that up tomorrow as it won't get here until early Saturday morning. Good night. ludahai 魯大海 14:29, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, generally information and articles are RETAINED if there is no consensus and only deleted if there is a consensus to do that. However, for the moment we are on the same page and I REALLY AM going to bed now. It is 10:30 pm and I have to teach tomorrow. ludahai 魯大海 14:32, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't have to be specific to Taiwan to be within the scope of the Taiwan Wikiproject. You are not a member of that project, I am. It DOES fall within the declared scope of the project on both a geographic and science basis, both of which are covered in this article. Hence, it DOES belong as a part of WikiProject Taiwan. I will restore the template. I ask you NOT to remove it. ludahai 魯大海 02:22, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is NOT POV. It falls within the scope of our project. It is NOT POV to include it. If members of other projects wish to include it within their projects, they are free to do so. You have no right to determine what belongs or doesn't belong in another WIkiProject. ludahai 魯大海 02:32, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not making any determination as to what pages should he in the Tropical SYstems project. This falls within the Taiwan Wikiproject. That is clear from the scope of the project and the content of the article. ludahai 魯大海 02:36, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reneging on an agreement you made earlier today? You have absolutely NO CREDIBILITY! ludahai 魯大海 07:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize if you took this too personally, but your attitude about including basic CURRENT information, your worship of the WMO and your referenece toward Taiwan and China are ALL highly offensive. Wikipedia is about presenting information and working together. You are SUPRESSING information. THat is a shame. ludahai 魯大海 07:56, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]