User talk:Kurtis

Archives

June 2008 - June 2009 June 2009 - June 2010 June 2010 - August 2012 August 2012 - October 2012 November 2012 - January 2013 February 2013 - July 2013

This week's article for improvement is
Currency of Spain
Eight gold Spanish escudo (1687), issued during the reign of Carlos II of Spain
Please be bold and help improve it!

posted by Northamerica1000^(talk) 13:57, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've added an opt-in section for those interested in receiving TAFI notifications on the project's main page, located here. Those that don't opt-in won't receive this message again. Also, a revised notification template has been created, located at Template:TAFI weekly selections notice. Northamerica1000^(talk) 05:11, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Kurtis. You had said that you were working on a rewrite of the MkuCr article a little while back, but that it was a bigger job than you expected. Don't feel that you are under any obligation to slog through the entire thing. If you have even a partial improvement, you are welcome to add it to the workpage we have set up for possible future edits (pending talk page consensus, per the sanctions), which you can find here. Thanks for the effort. AmateurEditor (talk) 22:37, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was just thinking about that page, and I was going to get back to you guys. I'd be glad to post some things there, once I can finally put the links I've gathered to text. :-) Kurtis ^(talk) 05:10, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

sharing
Thank you for sharing (to quote you): "interpersonal interaction", "through our dealings with one another, we can grow as individuals", "confidence in the Wikipedia community", and for sharing baklava, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (10 February 2009)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:30, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A year ago, you were the 209th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:02, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I should have said thanks for your support sooner. ```Buster Seven Talk 03:47, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. :-) Kurtis ^(talk) 04:35, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please correct your summary of the decision in the Manning case. We did not decide that there was a consensus for "Bradley". We decided that there was no consensus at all as to what the name should be, and that since "Bradley" was the long term stable location for the article, that's where it should be in the absence of a consensus.—Kww(talk) 17:33, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I've fixed it now. I read through the decision, but forgot to change the wording before saving the page. I thought it was clear from the way I'd represented the evidence that no consensus existed. Kurtis ^(talk) 23:36, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote "Manning herself has asked that people refer to her using female pronouns".

As the dispute concerns the article title/name, you may want to clarify that Manning mentioned both pronouns and name ("I also request that, starting today, you refer to me by my new name and use the feminine pronoun"). Josh Gorand (talk) 19:57, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's basically implied, but I'll probably make that addition shortly. Kurtis ^(talk) 23:37, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill ^[talk] 18:30, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kurtis. Thank you for your recent submission of evidence for the Manning naming dispute Arbitration case. As you may be aware, the Arbitration Committee asks that users submitting evidence in cases adhere to limits regarding the length of their submissions. These limits, currently at 1000 words and 100 diffs for parties and 500 words and 50 diffs for all others, are in place to ensure that the Arbitration Committee receives only the most important information relevant to the case, and is able to determine an appropriate course of action in a reasonable amount of time. The evidence you have submitted currently exceeds at least one of these limits, and is presently at 720 words and 9 diffs. Please try to reduce the length of your submission to fit within these limits; this guide may be able to provide some help in doing so. If the length of your evidence is not reduced soon, it may be refactored or removed by a human clerk within a few days. Thank you! If you have any questions or concerns regarding the case, please contact the drafting Arbitrator or case clerk (who are listed on the case pages); if you have any questions or concerns about this bot, please contact the operator. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, HersfoldArbClerkBOT^(talk) 04:21, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry about the multiple warnings earlier. One of the arbitrators alerted me to the problem, and I believe it's been fixed now. You should not receive any further warnings for this case. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 15:44, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]