User talk:Agent 86 - Knowledge (XXG)

412: 2630: 2751: 1915: 1290: 442: 225: 2538: 2450: 2375: 2302: 2192: 2119: 1191: 1830: 870:"promotional". Could you clarify why? The NCBL is not a profit-seeking institution; it's simply a centre for excellence housed at UBC, which offers specialization in business law topics, and opportunities for integration with the business school at UBC, not to mention the business community. It's a really cool emerging initiative, and it ought to be on the Knowledge (XXG) entry. 2804: 2768:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge (XXG). If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (XXG) (see 1757: 1526: 1121:), whose specialty is to troll talk pages. He's used dozens of IP addresses, but always proudly signs his name. He has no business commenting on anything here. While he is not technically banned (yet), it is standard practice to remove his comments, and a great many editors have done so over the years. Cheers :: --> 886:

significant, it might suit being elaborated upon, with reliable sources, under its own heading in the article. The oter bits of info that I've removed have no sources whatsoever (and I'm not talking about including the Chief Justices as notable alumni). One of those items is more mythical than anything.

1458:

As the original version has been deleted, it's hard to comment. If you think you've adequately addressed the comments in the AfD, go ahead and create a new article on the topic. On the new talk page, set out your reasons why you believe the new version of the article dispels the criticism in the AfD.

901:

Yes, sorry, I went back and compared some of the edits that were made - the Oakes test thing is definitely a myth and can't be confirmed anyway due to clerkship confidentiality. As for the source for the NCBL - that link was inserted as a source to confirm that UBC Law does, in fact, offer a business

368:

UPDATE: DONE, DONE, DONE! I left a message on the show's talk page, but the whole article is now in table form. I've currently commented out Season 8 and the last episode of Season 7 until they can be sourced. It won't take me long. It sure looks better in table form. Over to you to review it!!

192:

I know there's some suggested guideline on this point, but out of sheer laziness, until I look it up again (per my procrastination policy), this will be my practice for now: I will respond to any questions, queries, comments, etc. on this page, so as to maintain the flow and not have to flip between

619:

Certainly; however, I don't think reverting all my changes were appropriate, because I did more than edit the lead. Moreover, not all the info in the lead paragraph is repeated below. I also note that there were edits by an intervening editor, but your edit summary ignores that you reverted another

584:

Other than that, I'm glad that you are actually citing information, as usually these kinds of articles are written from someone's "memories". I usually end-up trying to find citations for articles that interest me to get them to GA or FA status. B.T.W., the sources cited do not indicate that Muir

869:

You've removed a few additions to UBC Law - could you clarify your reasoning? The article is currently a stub, and I'm trying to flesh out the business law concentration and the National Centre for Business Law information. The NCBL is a major institute housed at UBC Law. You have said the link is

300:

I just cleaned out the trivia, and was pretty savage. I've also started a discussion on the article's talk page. I saw your response to the last message I left once it disappeared into your archive, so I didn't have a chance to reply. You made a good point about the tableized (is that word? It

1443:

It seems that Wizardman is no longer active in this respect (according to his home page - as of January 2013). Before this I did ask him to take a look, and he had a few comments/questions which I answered, but since then he appears not to be active. So in truth I'm a bit stuck. I would very much

1881:

and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the

848:

before dropping loaded statements such as "edit-warring", particularly when it was another editor who started the reversion process without first taking it to the talk page. While you may hold a contrary opinion about how it did or did not improve the article, I took the trouble to set out the

1158:

It is serious, and it is hardly unsupported. He signs his name not because he is an imposter, but because he is ignoring his indefinite block. You are correct about the fact that I should have left a better edit summary; sorry for the confusion there. I can assure you that the majority of his

532:

decided they are same. Then some other bot linked them all. So if you think that's not correct, you should remove those links from sv.wikipedia and all other connected wikis (not only en.wiki), otherwise, bots will continue to link those two articles, all bots, not only mine :). Thank you for

885:

Whether or not it's not for profit doesn't make it any less promotional. The link seems to serve no other purpose than to promote the organization - it's not being used as a source, and it's not clear that it's a reliable source per policy. If National Centre for Business Law really is that

658:

article does not call it "self-selected". Please stop putting that in the article, as that is not what his Parliamentary file, nor the media call it. As well, as I pointed out earlier, please refrain from double citing, it is only required if you have made a statement that combines distinct

2204:

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

2387:

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.

2314:

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 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.

585:"self-designated" his senatorial seat. The Globe and Mail article that you cite, does not mention that, other than he was an MP from Cape Breton —The Sydneys. Do you have a source that explicitly states that he did indeed get to create his own seat? I have access to both 1862:, because the article appears to be about an organized event (tour, function, meeting, party, etc.), but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the 2131:

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.

568:

This ain't agent 99, more like Hymie the Robot here. Anyway, I just wanted to remind you about two important elements when dealing with a lead section, or opening paragraph, of a biography. One, there is no need for inline citations as explained in

573:, because the information in the lead section is also in the body section of the article, and cited. Two, putting place of birth in the first sentence, where the dates are listed, is not standard, and only should be included in the paragraph proper 2276:

I am asking you to participate in this study because you are a frequent editor of pages on Knowledge (XXG) that are of political interest. We would like to learn about your experiences in dealing with editors of different political orientations.

1941:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

1316:

1142:

That's a pretty serious unsupported allegation. In any event, "standard practice" doesn't supplant policy. At the very least, you should have provided an explanation in the edit summary for removing a rather innocuous talk page statement.

2262:

I'm working on a study of political motivations and how they affect editing. I'd like to ask you to take a survey. The survey should take no more than 1-2 minutes. Your survey responses will be kept private. Our project is documented at

1396:

I've finally got around to re-editing the article and addressing the issues that were raised, specifically: I've added more references, and I've added a complete new section about another work relating to the same problem.

1504:

Late in February you were significantly involved in a discussion on this article's talkpage about following MOS by removing the flag icons. Someone waited a month and went back and put them in again today. Just a heads-up.

1159:

comments are removable per WP:NOTFORUM, plus the fact that his comments are disruptive and that he is not allowed to make them as an indefinitely blocked user who has been trolling the site for years. Have a great day!

1320:

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

2581: 2493: 2415: 2342: 2232: 2159: 1945:

2074:. 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 681:

Read the Constitution. There is no such thing as a senate designation outside of Quebec. All non-Quebec senate seats are, by definition, self-designated. Muir's choice is set out in his parliamentary biography.

334:

Gad. I feel like Maxwell Smart should join the discussion. We're totally cool. I just wanted you to know why I hadn't responded. Do you ever use a Talkback when you reply to a comment on your talk page?

1425:. Click on it and you'll find instructions on how to proceed. As you're more or less recreating the same article, you'll see that he instructions suggest that you should first contact the administrator ( 2565:. 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 2477:. 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 2399:. 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 2326:. 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 2216:. 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 2143:. 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 301:

should be!) articles, but something needs to be done to at least simplify and make more concise the presentation of the ingredients, judges and outcomes. And then there's the issue of overlinking!

1485:

in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks,

1867: 823:

Hi Agent, I'm unsure why you want a one-para lead; to me, it's much more comfortable as it is now. Please avoid edit-warring about it: people will listen to any reasonable argument there. Thanks.

1444:

like to upload the article again and let it be judged in its revised version. I think most of the original comments and objections have been answered. Do you have any suggestions how to proceed?

902:

law concentration. The NCBL is *part* of UBC Law. Why is it promotional to link to specific centres within UBC Law on the UBC Law wiki page? It's not promotional, it's just saying it exists.

2551: 2463: 1938: 1353: 1349: 2831: 2021:

article. I was the person who added the table of house leaders and award winners. I'm currently a member of BCYP, and I hope to work with you in the future to improve the article.

349:

No, I haven't. I should get used to doing that (subject, of course, to my personal procrastination policy, whatever that is or was, I haven't gotten around to re-reading it).

316:

Sorry about that, Chief. I noticed that I had four years' worth of material on the last iteration of my talk page, so I figured I was wayyyyy overdue for archivisation of it.

2271: 711: 2826:

for further information on when maintenance templates should or should not be removed. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been

1393:

Hi, about a year and a half ago I edited an article by this name, which was . At the time you recommended to keep the article, though in the end it was deleted .

604:

If I sound too critical, I don't mean to be, as I think it is great that you are citing sources, even when its not needed: most people do the opposite. Take care.--

2818:. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the 1984: 1927: 1363: 1302: 1313: 2780: 2693: 1863: 1859: 1819: 1254: 156:

Place comments that start a new topic at the bottom of the page and give them ==A descriptive header==. Please sign your comments using four tildes (

629:

button rather than saving every edit all the time. It makes for a rather long change history of the article with the number of edits listed in the

2721:

I have largely abandoned editing Knowledge (XXG) and haven't logged in in almost three years. However, I stumbled across this recent blog post by

1081:

If anything was blindly reverted, it was my original GF edits. You should also be more careful in implying the lack of GF based on a single edit.

229: 1980: 1359: 1403:

I would like the article to be reconsidered. Could you tell me how do I go about this? Is there any Knowledge (XXG) procedure I can follow?

2604: 2515: 2429: 2356: 2246: 2173: 2099: 1341: 425: 1506: 2697: 2272:

https://uchicago.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9S3JByWf57fXEkR?Q_DL=56np5HpEZWkMlr7_9S3JByWf57fXEkR_MLRP_4McJJtxSyGZMIGV&Q_CHL=gl

1886:. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request 1258: 2823: 2018: 1118: 2815: 2600: 2511: 2425: 2352: 2242: 2169: 2095: 2574: 2486: 2408: 2335: 2225: 2152: 1839: 1356:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 1977:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 495:

if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the

2764:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge (XXG) under a 2685: 2641: 2619: 1246: 1202: 1180: 2760: 2769: 2765: 2689: 1883: 1250: 1040:) if you disagree then feel free to report me. Also there is nothing in any of the sources that demonstrates notability. 448: 1066:

Your blind reverts and restoration make it hard to assume AGF per the distorted edit summary. Kindly discuss them first.

1051: 990: 2086:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to

1931: 1306: 2586: 2498: 2420: 2347: 2237: 2164: 2091: 401: 269: 263: 257: 251: 245: 2811: 2726: 1846: 1002:, consistent with wiki-policy regarding reliable sources, and guidelines on notability. If anyone should be reading 1965:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge (XXG) appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

1340:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge (XXG) appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

496: 482: 1878: 1855: 1823: 275: 166: 1538: 1326: 1270: 2562: 2474: 2396: 2323: 2213: 2140: 1966: 1922: 1906: 1780:

again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on

1549:

again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on

1422: 136: 2044: 2028: 1951: 1510: 1490: 441: 389: 2701: 2087: 1262: 1007: 972: 957: 388:

Please stop inserting hyphens where they are not needed. See the fourth bullet point under WP:HYPHEN #3.

2835: 740: 707: 630: 514: 453: 2834:

to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use

2040: 2024: 844:

I don't mind people disagreeing about subjective matters like this one, but I'd appreciate it if you'd

786: 620:

editor as well. That all said, my interest in the topic is completed, so I'll leave the article to you.

570: 492: 2672: 2807: 2285: 1895: 1809: 1741: 1449: 1411: 1112: 2545: 2457: 2383: 2310: 2200: 2127: 2109: 2063: 2054: 1322: 1266: 703: 668: 609: 535: 2558: 2470: 2392: 2319: 2209: 2136: 2083: 2067: 1160: 1122: 903: 871: 529: 224: 2859: 1459:

The worst that can happen is that it's renominated at AfD and you can make your case once again.

1882:

speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with

2819: 2668: 2000: 1947: 1486: 1379: 1229: 1167: 1129: 943: 907: 875: 767: 744: 720: 626: 418: 411: 374: 340: 306: 2570: 2482: 2404: 2331: 2221: 2148: 2079: 2071: 1887: 1482: 574: 2593: 2505: 1071: 1046: 985: 924: 506: 2655: 2573:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 2566: 2485:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 2478: 2407:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 2400: 2334:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 2327: 2224:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 2217: 2151:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 2144: 2082:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 2075: 1216: 1003: 968: 961: 845: 172: 2788: 2281: 1891: 1805: 1761: 1737: 1530: 1445: 1407: 1108: 832: 785:

Among other things, you don't need the same term linked several times in an article. Read

196: 1210:

Non-remarkable television series. Google and Yahoo search yield no real result for this.

2827: 2722: 2037:

I was just curious if I may ask what your connection to BCYP is. Thank you in advance.

1426: 1345: 1215:

While all contributions to Knowledge (XXG) are appreciated, content or articles may be

1010:, I suggest it should be you, especially since you violated 3RR with your last revert. 976: 808: 775: 752: 664: 605: 2654:

While all constructive contributions to Knowledge (XXG) are appreciated, pages may be

1858:

requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge (XXG). This has been done under

999: 2844: 2732: 1991:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

1974: 1460: 1430: 1370:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

1233: 1144: 1082: 1011: 887: 850: 790: 683: 634: 350: 317: 131: 1996: 1992: 1500:

Flag icons have been put back, against MOS, in "List of Iron Chef America Episodes"

1375: 1371: 736: 715: 469: 460: 370: 336: 302: 2537: 2449: 2374: 2301: 2191: 2118: 555: 2637: 2623: 1769: 1067: 1041: 980: 917: 479:

You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page

2784: 2264: 1970: 825: 486: 2731:. Just posting this here to show that I saw it and appreciated it very much. 1239:

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing

804: 771: 748: 706:

was that helpful, but it's certainly more constructive than the nonsense at

474: 2678:

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing

1838:

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read

1297: 1281: 1198: 1184: 2803: 2577:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

2489:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

2411:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

2338:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

2228:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

2155:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

659:

information from more than one source. If you want to see The 1979-03-29

208: 2555:

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

2467:

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

2070:

is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Knowledge (XXG)

578: 2865: 2792: 2740: 2711: 2608: 2519: 2433: 2360: 2289: 2250: 2177: 2103: 2048: 2032: 2004: 1955: 1899: 1873:

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may

1813: 1745: 1514: 1494: 1468: 1453: 1438: 1415: 1383: 1330: 1274: 1174: 1152: 1136: 1090: 1075: 1053: 1019: 992: 951: 911: 895: 879: 858: 838: 812: 798: 779: 756: 725: 691: 672: 642: 613: 519: 405: 378: 358: 344: 325: 310: 65: 1773: 1542: 601:

from that period, and they don't seem to mention that he did that.

1866:, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about 2810:. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed 2590:. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add 2502:. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add 2580:

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review

2492:

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review

2414:

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review

2341:

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review

2231:

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review

2158:

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review

2017:

I wanted to thank you for your edits and hard-work editing the

2549:

is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All

1939:

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/List of w00tstock shows

436: 1481:

Hey Agent 86; I'm dropping you this note because you've used

2749: 2746:

Orphaned non-free image File:Love and Other Catastrophes.jpg

2628: 1828: 1189: 465:, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was 428:

at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

410: 2265:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics

1926:

is suitable for inclusion in Knowledge (XXG) according to

1301:

is suitable for inclusion in Knowledge (XXG) according to

1429:) who closed the AfD discussion and deleted the article. 2461:

is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All

1028:

Well no actually, if you count you will see only three (

195:

Okay, I've since looked it up, but see my user page re:

2696:

process can result in deletion without discussion, and

2561: