This user may have left Wikipedia. Themfromspace has not edited Wikipediasince July 2017. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Archives

July 2008 – February 2009 March 2009 – June 2009 July 2009 – December 2009 January 2010 – June 2010 July 2010 – December 2010 December 2011 – June 2011

You had marked my page as spam in June 2009. I have since rewritten it. Can you please re-review and remove the flag? Please let me know if anything else needs to be changed. Thanks!Eglobe55 (talk)23:27, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's much better than it was in 2009; I went ahead and removed the spam tag. A word of advice: try to avoid using press releases to cite the article. It's best to use independent, third-party sources for your citations, as they are more neutral than press releases, which are publications directly from the company.ThemFromSpace03:21, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: theCthulhu Mythos in popular culture, I was called away from the cyberworld during the process by real world issues and have only just returned. Thanks for the assist.Thebladesofchaos (talk)05:23, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	Thank you for your support
	Thank you for your support at my RfA. I shall endeavor to meet your and the community's expectations as an admin.Qwyrxian (talk)07:13, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey TFS, appreciate greatly your revert to remove the icon, which I also tried to do yesterday. I opened a discussion atWikipedia talk:Template namespace#Facebook icon.UnitedStatesian (talk)02:10, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I just wrote up a statement on the icon's talkpage explaining my reversion.ThemFromSpace02:11, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Themfromspace. You have new messages atCerejota's talk page.
Message added04:19, 8 August 2011 (UTC). You canremove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Cerejota (talk)04:19, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Themfromspace. You have new messages atCerejota's talk page.
Message added04:45, 8 August 2011 (UTC). You canremove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Cerejota (talk)04:45, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Themfromspace. You have new messages atCerejota's talk page.
Message added05:03, 8 August 2011 (UTC). You canremove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Cerejota (talk)05:03, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Themfromspace. You have new messages atCerejota's talk page.
Message added17:41, 8 August 2011 (UTC). You canremove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Cerejota (talk)17:41, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir,I am sorry to disturb You, just very briefly, I am Sylvie Bodorova, I noticed, there is some problem with my page on Wikipedia, could ypou, please, be so kind and explain me, where is the problem? I would be vera grateful, Sylvie Bodorova - composer <email redacted>— Precedingunsigned comment added by83.208.127.251 (talk)18:32, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to theSylvie Bodorova page? There is currently a deletion debate about the article going on atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sylvie Bodorová. The charge is that you don't meet our notability guidelines (this page andthis page). In other words, an editor feels that you haven't received enough coverage by the press/media to have an article. The discussion will last about a week and afterwards an administrator will either keep or delete the page, by judging the consensus of the debate. Fortunately for you the discussion is trending towards keeping your page.

You probably know better than anyone whatreliable sources have covered you. If you want, you can list these (and if possible, link to them if they are online) at the deletion discussion page.ThemFromSpace21:32, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note of encouragement about my recent edits on this subject. Sometimes the misinformation is so thick and the presentation so scrambled that there is no realistic option but to largely bulldoze through what's there and replace it, and sooner or later I imagine someone will be offended and assault me with a poisoned pen. So, nice to have your kind words on hand as an antidote.

I signed on to WP mainly to do what I could to stem the web-wide tide of fallacies surrounding the even more arcane topic of very early color photography, about which I might more comfortably call myself an expert, but the history of sound recording is also a subject of longstanding interest and study. Ancient discs have been a source of delight since early childhood. There are hundreds and perhaps thousands of people who are true experts on this subject and could leave me in the dust, but unfortunately it seems that none of them are doing any noticeable editing here at present. Looking around at the related articles anew, I am reminded why I once vowed to steer clear of editing on this subject: it involves an almost unbelievable nasty hairball of intertwining, overlapping and often duplicative articles dripping with errors, some of them very properly sourced from clueless general-readership magazine articles or short treatments in books which are reliable sources only about their main subject. Practically speaking, it is a blessing that so much isnot sourced, as it can be dealt with so much more easily.

Available time and energy are strictly limited, and it would take years for any one person to clean up the mess at this rate, but I will try to pitch in and do my share from time to time. Thanks again.AVarchaeologist (talk)14:22, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Schmidt's Primer (shortcutWP:MQSP) Whatcha think before I go live?Schmidt,^{MICHAEL Q.}07:04, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think you need a barnstar :PThemFromSpace00:38, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! And thanks.Schmidt,^{MICHAEL Q.}01:17, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is just the sort of page I was having in mind a few days ago when I wrotethis suggestion. I had no idea that such a page was already in the works.ThemFromSpace02:34, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as it had been growing and shrinking and being tweaked for almost, it was finally time to taste the vintage, as it were. While some feel the various multi-page step-by-steps that exist are enough, i reembered my own early days as an editor, and I wanted a one-stop-shop that gave a decent heads-up on expectations. I am pleased that it is being seen as filling a need. :)Schmidt,^{MICHAEL Q.}02:54, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I had mulled it over in discussions,[1][2] and decided that the hubris of naming the thingWP:Schmidt's Primer would have come of as self-aggrandizement (discuraged by my essayWP:NAU. So after a lot of thought in naming it for what it was,WP:A Primer for newcomers (orWP:NewbieGuide) was the right choice and acted a title better reflective of content.Schmidt,^{MICHAEL Q.}03:05, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good Day,

I understand your hesitation to have irrelevent or immaterial links posted to your page. In early August, I reviewed the page on computer forensics and believe that the addition of spoliation of evidence is directly related to the subject in question. Due to limited space, I believe that the appropriate venue is to create a link to the page.

I would ask you to cosider that there is no advertising on this page, with this article, nor is it associated with SPAM, I ask that the link be re-instated.

• What is Digital Spoliation?

Thank You.— Precedingunsigned comment added by65.222.202.26 (talk)15:53, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links should help give readers an encyclopedic understanding of an articles subject in a way that we cannot present within the text of the article. Your link deals with digital spoliation, which is asubtopic of computer forensics, so it isn't very relevant to the Computer forensics article. Our external links should bedirectly on topic with the articles they are placed in. Your link would be more relevant in an article aboutDigital spoliation (which we don't currently have -- you are welcome to create an account to create a stub if you want).

One last thing, you should probably look over Wikipedia'sconflict of interest guidelines, because you really shouldn't be linking to sites that you are affiliated with, especially when the link's value is called into question. It is hard to maintain a neutral editing standpoint when it isyour website that is under discussion.ThemFromSpace04:08, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain your comment regarding Barn Dinner Theatres only deserving a passing mention in the realm of dinner theatres as a whole?24.199.237.214 (talk)19:55, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having trouble finding where I made this comment. Can you link me to the article in question? The latest edit that I made to theDinner theater article was a removal of juvenile commentary over 2 years ago.ThemFromSpace00:27, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[

Hello, Themfromspace. You have new messages atMichaelQSchmidt's talk page.
You canremove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I noticed you removed a number ofUser:Saxbrack's video links for being spam. 99% of the time video movie segments are copyright infringements. However, it seems from looking at some of those, that they would be allowable under copyright law as being "compilations," which have their own independent copyright as a creative work. The compilation copyright does not affect the copyright of any underlying material used, but simply gives the compiler of the clips, similar to a collage artist, their own copyright for the arrangement. They arenot considered "derivative" works, and don't require permission. Thedefinition of "compilation" is part of thecopyright law.

As stated inFundamentals of Business Law, by Roger LeRoy Miller, 2010, p. 177,

A compilation is "a work formed by the collection and assembling of preexisting materials or of data that are selected, coordinated, or arranged in such a way that the resulting work as a whole constitutes an original work of authorship."

IMO, as "there is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube," per guidelines, and these are clearly creative compilations, they should be allowed. I've worked on similar compilations for a singer years ago, still online, and they're a lot of work. I always appreciate seeing one made available free and see them as a great benefit for articles about directors. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk)05:27, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I never questioned the copyright of the videos (I'm not a copyright expert on these compilation works). The videos do not add much encyclopedic material to the articles (they don'texplain anything), and it is obvious that this is just their creator spamming them in an attempt to create views.WP:NOT,WP:LINKSPAM, etc.ThemFromSpace17:59, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your first point, that they don't add or explain anything, is debatable since it depends on the subject. I notice that formany of the compilations, the subject was a film, where for others it was a director. For a film director, such compilations are supportive of their filmography sections, if not the entire career section. Film, being a visual medium, will benefit most from any visual additions that show clips, and a compilation is a great way to do that.

The "attempt to get viewers" aspect, I think, should be ignored here. Anyone who puts in countless hours and pays the cost needed to assemble film clips in a well-made, non haphazard way, is naturally wanting them to be seen. I'd question their sanity otherwise. As a "no-follow" external link, for non-commercial users, I see no problem with at least his director compilations. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk)19:40, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you should post this at theexternal links noticeboard if you want further discussion, but my position remains the same. Links such as these are inappropriate and shouldn't be here. External links should provide readers with encyclopedic material that we cannot fit within the text of our articles, which these do not do.ThemFromSpace20:36, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On a related note, edits such asthis andthis are unhelpful for the same reasons I mentioned above. Links to youtube in this manner are almost always inappropriate and only create cleanup issues down the line.ThemFromSpace20:47, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Them From Space,

Will you ploease give me some guidance as to why 'Steve Farber' should be deleted? I am new to Wikipedia. Thanks!

Janaupta (talk)22:43, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My concern is stated atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Farber. I feel that he hasn't received a significant amount of coverage in reliable independent sources, which is a key component to our inclusion criteria. Feel free to participate in the linked discussion above and by all means provide any evidence that you can find that he has received significant attention in reliable sources.ThemFromSpace03:33, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please solve this mystery if you can...

On September 23rd, traffic toPortal:James Bond doubled, and has stayed at the new level since then. I can't figure out what happened.

Seehttp://stats.grok.se/en/201109/Portal%3AJames_Bond

Traffic toOutline of James Bond stayed the same (though it was at the higher-level already), which leads me to suspect changes made somewhere in Wikipedia.

Seehttp://stats.grok.se/en/201109/Outline%20of%20James_Bond

I'd like to find out what happened, in case it reveals helpful link placement tips that can double the traffic to outlines too!

I look forward to your reply on my talk page.The Transhumanist23:25, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I looked over a few things and I have no idea what may be responsible for this.ThemFromSpace03:35, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol –Survey Invitation Hello Themfromspace! TheWMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only.  If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please clickHERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please seeNPP Survey.Global message delivery 13:36, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Hey Themfromspace! I'm just dropping you a message because you've commented on (or expressed an interest in) theArticle Feedback Tool in the past. If you don't have any interest in it any more, ignore the rest of this message :).

If youdo still have an interest or an opinion, good or bad, we're holding anoffice hours session tomorrow at 19:00 GMT/UTC in #wikimedia-office to discuss completely changing the system. In attendance will be myself,Howie Fung andFabrice Florin. All perspectives, opinions and comments are welcome :).

I appreciate that not everyone can make it to that session - it's in work hours for most of North and South America, for example - so if you're interested in having another session at a more America-friendly time of day, leave me a message on my talkpage. I hope to see you there :). Regards,Okeyes (WMF) (talk)14:28, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry not to see you at the session; the logs arehere. In the meantime, the Foundation has started developing a new version of the tool which dispenses with the idea of "ratings", amongst other things. Take a look atWP:AFT5 and drop any comments, criticisms or suggestions you have on the talkpage - I'd be very grateful to hear your opinions.Okeyes (WMF) (talk)21:38, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I was afk, and will be for most of the weekend. I may offer comments/suggestions when available.ThemFromSpace02:51, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome :). I'mtrying to take the weekend off - as you can see, it's not really happening.Okeyes (WMF) (talk)00:58, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Per your commentshere, would you care to comment atWikipedia:Bot_requests#Help_removing_a_template. There is an editor who seems to believe we need this template at the bottom of every article about every Russian. Thank you.198.175.175.57 (talk)23:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SeeWikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 November 14#Template:Lists of Russians198.102.153.2 (talk)21:45, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

Hello, Themfromspace. A reply to your request at theMap workshop has been made.
If you are satisfied, please copy/paste the following code and add it to your request: {{resolved|1=~~~~}}

You canremove this notice at any time by removing the{{GL Map reply}} template.

Hello, you recently participated in a straw poll concerning a link at theCampaign for "santorum" neologism article. I am giving all the poll participants a heads-up that a RfC on the same issue is being conductedhere.B^e——C_ritical19:46, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I invite you to help upgrade death to good article status.here14:13, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I recall reading several very interesting articles related to the "Number Stations" page. Especially the list of Number stations. I don't doubt your evidence that proves some of the accounts to be fictional, or your reason for feeling the need to delete them, I nonetheless found those articles intriguing and was hoping you could help me in retrieving the excluded articles just for my own personal use. I'm not implying they be reposted, or that I think they are based on any factual accounts. I just like them for the mystique associated to them, and the effort someone made to write them. I'd really appreciate if you could help me obtain any of the info in those past articles. I'd even be happy with just a simple copy and paste through user talk lol! Thanks for your time, and I hope you may be able to help!166.147.104.160 (talk)05:13, 6 February 2012 (UTC)GreenMan/x/phile[reply]

Hi, I'm having trouble understanding what you want me to do. There's a lot of articles on here that I've edited and, looking over theNumbers station page I don't see what I've done that you're asking about. Is there another page that you're writing about? If I had the correct page and what you want recovered, it wouldn't be any trouble to recover old information from the page history.ThemFromSpace18:23, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The pageList of drowning victims was scheduled for deletion, and you gave a prod2 to the deletion. I have removed those, and have started addressing the issues on that page. More on the talk page for the article.Ross-c (talk)11:21, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Noted, thanks. I might look over the referencing when I get a spare minute, though I've been awfully busy lately.ThemFromSpace02:40, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, since you recently participated inan RfC at Campaign for "santorum" neologism, I thought you might be interestedin this proposal for renaming the article, or perhaps another of the rename proposals on the page. Best,B^e——C_ritical22:06, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleList of films considered the best is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according toWikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should bedeleted.

The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of films considered the best 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 good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

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. Thank you,Schmidt,^{MICHAEL Q.}01:34, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Themfromspace,

I appreciate the following message you left for me:

"Hi, your edits are being discussed at the reliable sources noticeboard. You may want to contribute to the discussion, as the merit of a source you oftentimes use (canonizer dot com) is under scrutiny."

But I guess that was a long time ago, back in 2009 and I didn't see it till now? Did I miss this discussion? Is this discussion still available anywhere? What was the determination?

Is canonizer dot com, or any online petition, a reliable source for pointing out what people currently believe that have signed such 'petitions' or 'camps'?

Thanks

Brent.Allsop (talk)23:33, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute Resolution –Survey Invite Hello Themfromspace. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please clickHERE to participate. Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associatedresearch page.23:48, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks (for the notification I mean, not the revert itself ;) ...) I hope you will engage in the discussion that I've (re)started on the talk page of that guideline.Victor Yus (talk)16:30, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located atWikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fæ. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, atWikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fæ/Evidence.Please add your evidence by June 12, 2012, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page,Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fæ/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, seeWikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee,Lord Roem (talk)01:24, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As you had participated in theprevious AfD, your views would be welcome hereTalk:Use_of_Twitter_by_celebrities_and_politicians#Proposal_to_merge. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk)16:28, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/F%C3%A6/Proposed_decision&diff=501434416&oldid=501432871 – Can you please not use phrases such as "this is true"? That sort of phrase makes it sound as if you're stating a fact instead of an opinion. You should be saying "I believe" or "I agree". --Michaeldsuarez (talk)18:58, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't mean to offend you. I'll go ahead and reword that statement.ThemFromSpace19:24, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The other listed items introduced some level of doubt (e.g. the "may be" in the first item listed), so I figured that I should ask for the same treatment. --Michaeldsuarez (talk)19:48, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/may-might.aspx – Actually, you might want to consider switching "may" with "might". "May" is too strong of a word, especially when compared to the "I agree" in the item listed directly below the first item. --Michaeldsuarez (talk)19:54, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. About three years ago, you have decided that this article abouthospitals in Romania is too broad. I agree, that article was very poor-worded and its content lacked a lot of information. However, I believe that page should be recreated and the redirect link should be removed, and the article should be rewritten. I know you could argue that its content could be as well written in the article it currently redirects to, but there are about 425 hospitals nationwide, hence it would be too big to be added in that particular article.

Finally, I'd like to know your opinion on this matter, since you're the one who added the redirection link (for a good reason). I am personally willing to write the article from scratch and add the data in, so it wouldn't be just a stub. Please let me know what you think about this. Thanks and have a nice week,Thevaluablediamond (talk)14:51, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Feel free to go ahead and undo the redirect, but the entries in the new article should be notable and/or cited.ThemFromSpace14:54, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

• The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code you were emailed. If you did not receive a code, email wikiocaasi@yahoo.com your Wikipedia username.
• To activate your account: 1) Go tohttp://www.highbeam.com/prof1
• If you need assistance, email or askUser:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are atWP:HighBeam/Citations.
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback atWP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, checkapplications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers,Ocaasi15:34, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the first edition ofThe Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active indispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you areactive in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name tothis page.

In this issue:

• Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
• Research: The most recent DR data
• Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
• Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
• DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
• Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
• Proposal: It's time to close theGeopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 19:34, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Because you were a participating member of theDeletion review forCategory:Gay Wikipedians, I've contacted you to let you (and all others involved) know about and participate in thecurrent category discussion. Thanks for your participation!Ncboy2010 (talk)17:00, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email!

1. Go tohttps://www.questia.com/specialoffer
2. Input your unique Offer ID and Promotional code. Click Continue. (Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive).
3. Create your account by entering the requested information. (This is private and no one from Wikipedia will see it).
4. You'll then see the welcome page with your Login ID. (The account is now active for 1 year).

If you need help, please first ask Ocaasi atwikiocaasi@yahoo.com and, second, emailQuestiaHelp@cengage.com along with your Offer ID and Promotional Code (subject: Wikipedia).

• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Questia article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Questia pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are atWP:Questia/Citations.
• Questia would love to hear feedback atWP:Questia/Experiences
• Show off your Questia access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/Questia_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check theapplications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers,OcaasiEdwardsBot (talk)05:15, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I discovered the problem while enroute back west from the East Coast. I think I've got it resolved. Let me know if you get anymore. Thanks again. --Mike Cline (talk)15:45, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the close. I'll see what I can do over the next few days to properly source the article.Schmidt,^{MICHAEL Q.}20:12, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, thanks for the help.ThemFromSpace23:00, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For all you do!! Have a wonderful HOLIDAY!!

Sue Rangell✍✉ is wishing you aMerryChristmas! This greeting (and season) promotesWikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user aMerry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas5}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

From your recent comment there, I presume you're unaware that members of the classical music project have restored all the "no infobox" comments that were removed by the bot?Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);Talk to Andy;Andy's edits20:00, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see that now, thanks for the note.ThemFromSpace19:49, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pls seeWikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Wikiproject notes in articles - The issues may be much bigger then just the note on the pages - However I believe the viability of the note its self is what we should talk about at this time.Moxy (talk)23:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll have a look at that. Do you know of any other projects that use hidden messages like this? This one might be alone here.ThemFromSpace19:49, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Themfromspace. You recently applied for a Wikimedia IRC cloak, but it looks like you forgot to register your nickname first. Could you please log on to IRC and do:

/msg NickServ REGISTER <password> <email>

where <password> is a password of your choice and <email> is your e-mail address? After you do that, please follow the instructions that are e-mailed to you to confirm your e-mail address. When you're done with that, I just need you to confirm your cloak request:

/msg MemoServ send wmfgc IRC cloak request

After you finish all of that, I'd be happy to get you a cloak.:-) If you have any questions, feel free to ask me onmy talk page. --Filip (§)23:37, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment regarding my old family postcard "Christmas, Isle of Pines, 1910" was spot on. Thanks for your assessment. I had given Mr. Norton permission to post it and when I discovered it was going to be deleted, I then donated it myself (I'm going to make an even better hi-rez scan today to replace the aforementioned file).This postcard is more than likely the only one that exists. My comment is here.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2013_February_5#File:Cristmas_eve.2C_Isle_of_Pines.2C_1910_copy.jpgMy apologies if this comment doesn't end up at the bottom. I don't know what I'm doing exactly.Thanks again. JTNJnarrin (talk)21:27, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Will comment back on your talkpage.ThemFromSpace07:27, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there,My apologies for not responding sooner to your kind note Re: one of my Wiki Commons images,http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cristmas_eve,_Isle_of_Pines,_1910,_Great_Grandpa_%26_Grandma_Schell.jpgI understand if the image has to go. After reading the notes on my talk page, I decided to steam the postcard from it's backing and have a look.the results were interesting for me at least. There were no indications of the photographer however. There is the postmark, date and my ancestors writing. It was my wish that it could be of use for some person writing about the migration of Americans to the island, in that era. There exist two photo albums, documenting life on the island from 1898- 1917. At any rate, I will defer to your and whoever else is expert in these matters. It sure is not me!Please rest assured that if I post it at very least it is not copyrighted and possessed by me or is my personal work (a couple of these images seem to be plagiarized the world over). If any other of my uploads are not acceptable could you let me know?All my submissions are from originals which are still in my collection and I can prove this fact if need be.Although I'm ignorant of the details governing submissions (and many other myriad of protocol here), my intent is and always will be good.

Thanks for telling me. I appreciate your time.Jnarrin (talk)03:47, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of months ago, you opposed a proposal to lift the restrictions on Gibraltar-related DYKs, which were imposed in September 2012. Could you possibly clarify (1) under what conditions you would support a lifting of the restrictions, and (2) when you think it would be appropriate to lift the restrictions?Prioryman (talk)20:13, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've popped something onthe noticeboard. --Rob Sinden (talk)15:35, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice.ThemFromSpace15:44, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm DGG. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed,Rubber chemistry and technology, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them onmy talk page. Thank you. DGG ( talk)03:12, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since you immediately re-marked the page as reviewed, I'm assuming this was sent in error. Please correct me if I'm wrong.ThemFromSpace17:26, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	Philadelphia'sGreat American Wiknic at Penn Park
	You are invited to the Philadelphia edition of theGreat American Wiknic taking place inPenn Park, on Saturday, June 22, 2013! We would love to see you there!--User:Ocaasi (talk)|}}

Undid your removal of this external link. The website's inclusion was approved by consensus on 2006 and 2009 and therefore overrides the WP:EL in this case. It was the first website on Andy Murray and is considered to have content that is unique and valuable to the reader. Please respect the process involved for this by leaving this as is.Mark7144 (talk09:17, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but that link violates ourexternal links guidelines and does not add anything encyclopedic to the article. Repeated addition of it will be treated as spam and reverted on sight.ThemFromSpace21:52, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You yourself were part of the vote which was in favour of it remaining included. It has been voted in favour twice and never against. Please take a look at this:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Andy_Murray/Archive_10.

I fully accept I'm from a position of bias but it's besides the point. Consensus is consensus and you should attempt to overturn legitimately rather than ignoring its authority.Mark7144

Those conversations were tainted bysock puppets and were heavily stonewalled, mostly by you. There was no clear consensus for keeping the link in any of them, so we default to theWP:EL guidelines which state that we do not link to fan sites unless they give readers an encyclopedic understanding of the article's subject matter. Wikipedia is not a venue to promote your website, and if that's your purpose here then you will be blocked from further editing.ThemFromSpace22:25, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You alone speculated about existence of sock puppets, that does not give you the right to ignore the result of a vote. That vote, on the matter of the fan site specifically, resulted in 7 in favour and 4 against.Mark7144—Precedingundated comment added22:39, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

quality over quantity
Thank you for dreaming of "an appropriate and legitimate source of knowledge", "tough standards" and a "unified community", for an "incredible idea ... which has the potential to be a compromise for all parties", foroffering help and providing awell-phrased summary, - you are anawesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk)07:36, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A year ago, you were the 584th recipient of myPumpkinSky Prize, - is your offer still on? --Gerda Arendt (talk)20:06, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Six years ago, you were recipient no.584 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk)05:39, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Themfromspace.

This is just a quick courtesy notice. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened atWikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, atWikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute/Evidence.Please add your evidence by September 19, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage,Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, seeWikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee,Seddon^talk23:19, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Themfromspace. My problem is that your recent edits include outing - by providing a direct link to the Elance advertisements, where the editor has revealed their real name, you are effectively outing them. Other editors don't need to see the advertisement in question, as it seems to me that we can provide the same information - letting everyone know that there is COI editing - by acknowledging that an advertisement was placed, without also providing a direct link. This is especially the case where the editor in question has already described the provision of these links as harassment.

I fully support any move to reduce the impact of paid editing, But per policy, we can't out editors as part of the process of showing their COI. -Bilby (talk)22:46, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with this practice and I have raised the issue atWP:COIN if you want to chime in there.ThemFromSpace18:58, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't really a problem for COIN - if you want to change this, you'll probably need to tackle the policy atWikipedia:Harassment. The problem is that the policy specifically refers to conflicts of interest, and doesn't make an exception to privacy requirements in order to tackle a COI. Similarly, theWikipedia:Conflict of interest guidelines are clear that avoiding outing takes precedence over combatting conflicts of interest.

I have no problem with making it clear that an editor has a conflict of interest - we need to do so, and I wish we had stronger policies against paid editing. But we simply can't out someone as part of combatting their COI, so we need to find other approaches. In the past I've gone with sending details to checkusers and ArbCom, where appropriate, but often we don't need to provide the personal info in order to tackle them. -Bilby (talk)05:44, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia_talk:Paid_editing_(policy)#Paid_editing_by_User:EagerToddler39 Greetings, --Paramecium (talk)14:36, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. Because you participated in theAugust 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in thecurrent discussion. This notice is provided pursuant toWikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification. Cheers!bd2412T21:31, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedians are invited to theGLAM Café at theChemical Heritage Foundation to meet, talk, and edit. We provide the space, the coffee, and the snacks: you provide ideas and enthusiasm! On the second Tuesday of each month, starting November 12, 2013.Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk)23:54, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As a subscriber to one ofThe Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in thisbrief survey. Thanks and cheers,Ocaasi^{t| c}15:46, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,Think I saw that you did an edit to "SpotJobs" article. I'm new here, but have permission to edit that article. Need help on linking the word "beta" in the HISTORY paragraph; should link tohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle#Beta. Any assistance greatly appreciated.Tee (talk)01:29, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like somebody beat me to it.ThemFromSpace23:10, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am fresh out of wiki kittens; please accept this cake as a thank you for your thoughtful comments during my (now withdrawn) RfA. Constructive criticism is always appreciated. What doesn't kill us... Cheers,Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here11:43, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello: I have been monitoring theLingQ page for a couple of years now, but was unaware that it is a commissioned article. You will see my reply to your post in the Talk section, so I will await the response to the notability template and will then proceed based on what administrators think. However, as mentioned in my reply, it is crucial to provide evidence when such a claim is made, so if you can present proof of the article's Elance origin, then any corresponding processes will be more straightforward. Thanks, --Soulparadox (talk)13:40, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Could you take another look at this BLP article where you once made some edits. The article, originally created by a user now indefinitely blocked, relies on a single self-published source. ThanksChris Fynn (talk)08:22, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A few months ago during the eventually unsuccessfulWikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Piotrus_3 you voted "oppose". I wonder if you'd like to discuss any concerns of yours, or if you would have any suggestions in the event I'd decide to run again (which I am not planning to do anytime soon, but might consider in the future). For a better sense of my work and activities around the project, I invite you to consider reviewingmy userpage,my talk page archives (which are not redacted), to watchlist my talk page, or use edit analysis tools likeWikichecker,content.paragr,dewkin,xtools-pages orxtools-ec (which in theory should work as of late 2014...). I would be more than happy to talk about your concerns over canvassing, I have given the policy much thought over the past year, and I would like to think I have a better understanding of it now. Thank you for your time, (PS. If you reply here, I'd appreciate aWP:ECHO or{{talkback}} ping). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here}09:26, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the currentArbitration Committee election. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipediaarbitration 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome toreview the candidates' statements and submit your choices onthe voting page. For the Election committee,MediaWiki message delivery (talk)13:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Themfromspace - You contributed to a discussion of whether my Maldivescomplete.com website should be included as a "Reference" in the "Tourism in Maldives" page. The site is completely non-commercial, and a huge amount is invested in keeping useful information up to date. It is much more comprehensive than when you looked at it. You were concerned in your comments (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Brucelynn2) that it wasn't "encyclopedic" enough. One of the reasons why I think it warrants a reference link is because its data is interactive. I would love to add the data to to Wikipedia, but Wiki is not designed for this relational database information. Nonetheless, countless people feedback that it is a valuable *reference* tool for the Maldives. A number have suggested that it should be included, but I always say that I would need an editor to confirm that such an addition would be advisable and beneficial to the article. Can you please give me you advice on how I should proceed rather than me just giving it another attempt at adding it and seeing if it is acceptable now?

Thanks.

Bruce— Precedingunsigned comment added byBrucelynn2 (talk •contribs)12:59, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Join us this Saturday (July 30) at thePhiladelphia Wiknic, the "picnic anyone can edit". This is an opportunity to meet other local Wikipedians, have fun, and discuss potential projects.

The event is this Saturday, between 1pm-5pm at the Picnic Grove inPenn Park.

(To unsubscribe from future messages, remove your name fromWikipedia:WikiProject Philadelphia/Philadelphia meet-up invite list.)

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk)23:21, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Themfromspace. Voting in the2016 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.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

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

Hello, Themfromspace. Voting in the2017 Arbitration Committee elections 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.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

HelloThemfromspace! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access toAutoWikiBrowser may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from theCheckPage. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it atWP:PERM/AWB. Thank you!—MusikBot II^talk22:33, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk)08:57, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery
• Wikipedians who opt out of template messages