User talk:Rockpocket/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Rockpocket. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Some need a lot

Some need a lot, and sometimes, it is wiser to ask someone else to mediate informally. Some people come from fight contexts (fora and news groups foe example) and they have to get used to how wikipeida works (pretty much the otherway round). I will keep working with him, while not editing myself to stay the more neutral outsider. Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 07:03, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I see what is happening, you got somewhat caught between the rock and the hard place. I might actually suggest in a later stage that I will mentor Cesar for a while, if things continue as they are at the moment. Generally from what I have seen, it will put any other measures put forth by the arbcom at hold for the time being. We will see where it goes, see my extensive reply to him at his page. My experience is that as soon as you take a stance at a topic, you are immediatly kicked in the corner with that group, especially when it get difficult. What I see in ArbCom cases is that the Arbitrators are not easily fooled, and I have seen this happening before that the bringers of the ArbCom case themselves get reprimanded as well. Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 16:03, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I do not think you get anything bad from the arbCom case. It was more refering to the others that were kind of seeking the hard line of their side. Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 18:16, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Attributing work in Wikipedia

Hi, I had a question regarding your edit on the Sonic hedgehog article. I am new to editing Wiki (although I have been using it since the very beginning) and Wiki policy. I was trying to follow the weasel words policy and avoid expressions such as "it has been suggested", especially since it is a very controversial opinion. I am asking for your advice on what the most appropriate statement would be... Peter Znamenskiy 9:53, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments at RfA

Rockpocket, thanks for defending my integrity in the Request for Arbitration of the Bio Psy article. It's sad to see a supposed arbitrator demonstrate so little in the way of reading siklls or logic. After seeing that I was being accused of advocating bias, I really had to restrain myself. Your comment was greatly comforting. Thanks again. Ande B 07:50, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your concern, Rockpocket. I am moving around unassisted now, which is more than I was capable of 2 weeks ago. I never thought any of your comments were motivated by favoritism or partisaan concerns; from what I've seen, you have treated everyone with courtesy and seem to go the extra mile to provide insights and diffuse conflict. We'll see what happens soon enough. Ande B 06:29, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

EWS23's RfA

Hi Rockpocket! Thanks for your support at my request for adminship. I was happy to hear that I had "ticked all the boxes and then some." There are often times when I feel I could be doing even more for Wikipedia, but it's always good to hear from others that I'm at least doing enough. :o) Thanks again, and feel free to leave me a message if you ever see something I could be doing better. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 23:40, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Evolutionary biology text recommendations

Hi Rockpocket. I've been looking on-and-off for a decent text on evolutionary bio for a while. Your suggestion re the Selfish Gene is a good one, and I have more than one copy of it. I haven't read the Extended Phenotype, though, so I'll keep an eye open for that one. To tell the truth, though, I don't know exactly what I'm looking for or what to expect in an academic text for the subject. I've had some graduate level molecular bio & genetics, so something that is too entry level would just be frustrating. But I haven't been in a science lab or classroom in some time so an upper division or graduate level text might give me a headache at this point, although it may well be worth it.

I'm reluctant to order textbooks online unless I've had a chance to flip through quite a few pages and a get a feel for them, because I can be rather picky about these things. I must go through twenty text books cover to cover when I choose a new book to teach from, so when I say picky I mean really really picky. As for evo bio, I'm interested in cladistics and patterns of speciation, but that's quite open ended, isn't it? I find, though, that texts that have good quality graphs or charts tend to work well for me, provided the writing style is lucid. Anything you suggest I would definitely put on my list to check out.

Right now, another Wikipedian is asking me for advice on a good genetics book. (I briefly answered a reference question on genetics a while back.) You might be a better source to make such a recommendation. The topic that triggered his interest was polygenic inheritance. I don't know what to tell him, I was never very happy with the genetics books I worked from and I believe the student is currently an undergrad. I suppose he could ask one of his professors but you know how uncomfortable some students find such things.

Thanks for any ideas, Ande B 05:10, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I did suppose that you may have already sampled Dawkins' work, but couldn't resist plugging it anyway. The Extended Phenotype is more textbook like. I'm afraid i'm not really the person to ask about textbooks, as it appears i am the polar opposite to you. I got very little milage from textbooks, even as a student. Being fortunate enough to focus almost entirely on research now - i have little appetite for looking beyond primary sources now. Nevertheless, the lab will no doubt have a selection, so i'll have a look at what we have tomorrow and ask their opinion on both evolution and genetics. In terms of non text-books covering genetics - i really enjoyed Armand Leroi's Mutants , a beautifully written journey through the genetic basis of human variation. It doesn't focus on polygenetics specifically, and is perhaps more developmentally focused, but it reinforces the principle of complex genetic interaction creating form and function, by studying what happens when things go wrong. I found it to be much more informative than any textbook could (but thats just me ;)). Rockpocket (talk) 06:45, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks in advance for the consideration, Rockpocket. I envy your ability to look exclusivly at primary sources, that's really the only place for the good stuff. But I think I actually would benefit from a basic evo text, partly to help organize my own thinking rather than to get a lot of details. I got a lot of questions from young students among my friends and family when the Dover case was proceeding. And although I'm capable of defending just about any of the goofy "challenges" that the ID crowd try to foist off on the under-educated, I think it's time I actually got a text that might present ideas from a different angle rather than sending everyone off to TalkOrigins. I actually doubt that I will find any surprises in such a text book but I'm kind of a bookaholic on top of everything else. Your experiences (negative) with textbooks are probably not so different from my own. That is why, as I said, I'm terribly picky. Still, I felt a bit frustrated when the undergrad asked me for a reference. Quite honestly, my natural inclination would be to hand out a list of search terms to look for in Cell or EMBO or Nature's genetics periodicals. Boy, sounds like you do interesting work. Cool. Ande B 08:29, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

CorbinSimpson's Request for Adminship

Thanks for voting in my request for administrator rights, even though it failed (13/30/4). Sadly, work has forced me to respond to you all using a substituted message rather than a personalized response. Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that administrators, to me, should be chosen and approved by the community, and I will continue working to become a better editor and Wikipedian. No matter what the alignment of your vote was, I will take your comments seriously and use them to improve myself. If you wish to discuss your comments personally with me, I would be more than glad to talk about things since the RfA is now over; just leave your concern on my talk page and we will sort things out. Thanks again for voting, and happy editing! - Corbin ^{Be excellent}

5HTT Allele: Genetic links to trauma response & aggression

Rockpocket, I just wondered whether you have any insights or comments about the 5HTT allele and it's apparent involvement with many "emotional" or "social" reactions to various stressors in the environment. The New York Times carried a long article on the topic recently as it related to the resilience of PTS victims and other trauma survivors. I posted my question here because I din't want to clutter the rather long conversations at the RfArb. Ande B 21:57, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ande. The 5HTT story is a nice one, i think, in terms of bridging the gap between theoretical genetics and real life psychiatric reactions to stress. I'm not an expert in this specifically, in any way, but it seems pretty convincing to me. 5HT signalling clearly plays a role in neural processes related to mood, emotion, appetite, sleep etc (all functions that can be affected in PTS and other psychiatric states) therefore it is no great surprise that modulating a transporter expression could have an effect on those. Narrowing down the mechanism further than that is a thankless talk, however, as humans are awful subjects to study experimental genetics in.

The 5HTT New Zealand study data is pretty remarkable, i think. Of those who had been victims of child abuse, those who had two short alleles had a 63% chance of suffering deep depression. For those who had two long versions, the risk was 30%. When combined with all the data illustrating how 5HT influences neural signalling at the molecular level, the staticially significant difference appears (to me at least) excellent evidence for the gene + environment model. Quite how one could explain this away with the "parsimony of trauma only" argument i do not know (but i'm sure they try). I guess the only surprise for me is that the data is so clean, suggesting the 5HTT is one of the major players in the neural network of this type of human behaviour.

Another really interesting line of research is the DISC1 gene in schizophrenia/bi-polar disorder. The data that it is a predisposer for these conditions is very impressive (i happen to know the people that work on it, so have some inside knowledge), but there has never been strong evidence for a mechanism. Then, late last year they found another gene, PDE4B, that is disrupted in a subject with, to quote them,:

"a history of repeated psychotic episodes with auditory hallucinations and delusions ... A cousin of the proband who also carried the translocation had a psychotic illness with prolonged hospital admission".

Not only is this a hugely significant find in itself, but the kicker is that PDE4B regulates a second messenger implicated in mood, emotion etc and they showed how it functionally interacts with DISC1. This, to me, is incredibly strong evidence of a role for genetic predisposition. I really don't know how this sort of evidence can be refuted, if one understands the nature of the experiments. I think also, this is the beginning of the sort of studies that are going to shed light on the genetic networks that predispose to psychiatric conditions and, it follows, that modulate normal emotional responses to environmental stress. Rockpocket (talk) 02:15, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

There's an important recent paper which discusses the effects of altered gene expression and intracellular messenger cascades on depression: Vaidya VA, Duman RS, 2001;57:61-79, "Depression--emerging insights from neurobiology", British Medical Bulletin, PMID: 11719924. Full text available on-line (pdf):

From this standpoint 5HT signaling may only be the 1st step of a messenger cascade that ultimately affects mood. Selective modulation of other neurotransmitters aside from 5HT clinically produces antidepressant affects, which may indicate a deeper (possibly common) therapeutic mechanism.

From this standpoint, environmental stress (e.g, trauma) causes downregulation of neurotrophic growth factors in predisposed individuals, which ultimately leads to depression. Stress is often implicated in physiological problems -- heart, immune system, etc, so it should be no surprise stress can also cause mood problems, since the brain is ultimately a physiological entity. Joema 13:36, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, both of you, for your great replies. You've given me a few cites to check out, should be interesting reading. Ande B 17:24, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

request

yes, it seems to go well. The requirement is not 100% votes, but consensus that someone should get it, and it seems to go that way. As of the remarks, well that is the price one has to pay for working at controversial topics. I will have a look at the page later this long weekend. -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 21:00, 27 May 2006

Thanks! Rockpocket 21:13, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Darn, I forgot to sign.... You are welcome with the ref's. Anyway, the reading will come tomorrow, although you might want to consider to rewrite the second sentence, as it is quite difficult to follow (to many nouns dumped together). Probably cutting in two will do. -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 05:45, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I am busy NOW! :-) Just to clarify that I had not forgotten it, nothing else... :-)-- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 03:53, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Sure, no problem! Thanks for your comments so far, they are all very helpful. Rockpocket 04:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I will comment somewhat longer now at the talk page, in a few minutes. -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 04:22, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

It's there, I hope it is helpfull. Please feel free to ask as much as you want. I have written this in the style I would write a professional review, and the tone could appear somewhat harsher than we are used to at wikipedia. In that context, I would judge it as "Accept, with revision"-- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 04:34, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I hope...

Hi Rockpocket. I’ve just noted that another editor has tagged the Biopsych article. I hope this doesn’t poison the well in our discussion in Talk:Ross Institute for Psychological Trauma. —Cesar Tort 23:41, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Chromatophores rock!

Rockpocket, I'd be happy to take a look at the chromatophore article and let you know my reaction(s). Do you have a deadline in mind? I've got about 120 pages I need to complete for a project by this Thursday. (Obviously I'm playing a good game of avoidance by spending time here instead of working! Actually, by putting my brain to unrelated prose, I can clean it out pretty well and have a fresher eye for my own work.) But I'd be happy to give this a whirl. I actually recall a bit about chromatophores from school days and was always intrigued by the topic. Ande B 06:26, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Since you don't have a tight deadline I'll try to take a good look at it next week. Darn, now I have only myself to blame for my delays. Ande B 07:31, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Did you get my E-Mail?

I sent you an E-Mail. Did you get it? I'd prefer to have this discussion non-publicly, for now. Fsk 03:14, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Pensive

Pensive is a sort of "buzz word" that has become synonymous with prestige. Prestigious people (and some pretenders, alas) use the name "pensive" (or pensive derived anagrams) in their Internet names. See User:Pensive and User:Peter S. Levine Huckiss. Or, alternatively, do a search on "Patrick E. S. Vine", possibly the original pensive but no one really knows.

Of course there are various qualifications one must meet in terms of ancestry, breeding, bearing and diction before one can truly be "pensive" or use the pensive name, and certainly there are a lot of false pensives out there. The point, however, is that my linking to "pensive" had nothing to do with the horse.

I'm reinstating my change. People need to be educated about this. Apple Picker 03:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Blnguyen's RfA

File:Atlanticpuffin4.jpg

Hello Rockpocket. Thank you for your full support and gracious comment at my request for adminship which ended at the overwhelming and flattering result of (160/1/0), and leaves me in a position of having to live up to a high standard of community expectation - especially when people like yourself make a rare visit to RfA in order to support. You can see me in action and observe what then happened as a result. If you need admin assistance, feel free to ask me. Naturally, if I make any procedural mistakes, feel free to point them out. I look forward to working with you in the future, hopefully as an admin. Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 02:27, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Chromatophore introductory section ideas

Hi Rockpocket,

I've left a brief message on the Chromatophore web page (good work, so far) but thought I'd post some editing ideas here.

I'm afraid that this is about all the real editing I'll be able to get to this week but, if you findthese suggestions helpful, even if you end up rejecting them, then we'll both know if I can be of assistance.

I just took a stab at the summary header and tried to direct it to a casual but inquisitive reader with no expertise in bio. And I don't know if the additional info I entered is accurate, so you need to verify that as well.

Currrent sumary:
Chromatophore is the collective term for pigment containing and light reflecting cells found in amphibians, fish, reptiles, crustaceans and cephalopods. Derived from the neural crest, chromatophores are largely responsible for generating skin and eye colour in poikilothermic animals. These cells are subclassed as xanthophores, erythrophores, iridophores, leucophores, melanophores and cyanophores according to their hue under white light. The translocation of pigment and reorientation of reflective plates within the cells are the mechanisms through which some species, notably chameleons and octopus, can rapidly change colour. Mammals and birds have just one class of chromatophore-like cell type, the melanocyte.

My suggestions:
Chromatophore is the collective term for pigment containing and light reflecting cells found in amphibians, fish, reptiles, crustaceans and cephalopods. Chromatophores are largely responsible for generating skin and eye colour in poikilothermic (cold-blooded) animals. These cells are grouped into subclasses based on their color (more properly "hue") when under white light: xanthophores (yellow), erythrophores (red), iridophores (reflective / iridescent), leucophores (white), melanophores(black-brown) and cyanophores (blue). Some species, notably chameleons and octopus, can rapidly change colour through mechanisms that translocate pigment and reorient reflective plates within the cells. During embryological development, chromatophores are derived from the neural crest. Mammals and birds have only one class of chromatophore-like cell type, the melanocyte.

I dunno if it works for you or not.

Ande B. 05:31, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Works well! I like it. The only addition i would make is to suggest that both 'poikilothermic' and 'cold-blooded' are probably not needed. For introductory purposes, cold-blooded would probably be sufficient, i would have thought. I'll edit the article accordingly when i get the chance. Thanks again, this is exactly what i was looking for. Rockpocket 06:27, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

my two cents

Rockpocket, I understand, writing for a general audience is sometimes really hard, especially when you normally write for pears. A trick that I have used is the following. I come from a working middle class family, and I am the only one ever to have finished a Ph.D. let alone who has become a scientist. Not that the rest is stupid, but they have a clear different background. What I do in my mind is, if I would explain my mother what a melanophores is, how would I explain it to her. I would start with, they are black, then explain what makes it black (melanine), than explain ...., etc. It has helped me a lot to think about it in that way. Hope it helps. -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 12:27, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Misunderstanding

Hi Rockpocket. Re your recent communication, this is a misunderstanding. I thought our agreement is about not making accusations on each other, i.e., not making statements about behavior. I didn’t expect I couldn’t make content pronouncements. However, I will modify that passage you called my attention to in Talk Evidence page and instead of mentioning your name I will simply write “another editor”. —Cesar Tort 19:25, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the smile :-)

Thank you for your friendly note and reminder to keep my cool. I can get rather litigious at times. (Hey, I'm a lawyer, I get paid to react immediately to any improper or invalid point raised by the "opposition"! And I'm liable for malpractice and sanctions if I fail to react with adequate strength and promptnesz.) I try to keep this part of my professional life out of the rest of my life but, you might understand that it's not always easy. Especially when dealing with a buzzing insect that keeps trying to land on my ear! And here I thought I could actually relax while being productive on WP, a place where I could apply my journalism skills to a worthy project. Anyhow, I truly appreciate your calming influence in these matters. I'll take your advice. I've already poured a cup of green tea. That may do the trick. Ande B. 19:02, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Ande B. has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Also, thanks for introducing me to the smile templates. Ande B. 19:33, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Chromatophore classification section

Rockpocket, below I have made a few suggested edits for readability in the first part of the section dealing with classification. As you can see, I am not attempting to change any of the information you have set forth, I'm accepting your expertise on these matters. Also, I am trying to stay as close to the original language as possible, largely because it is fairly well done. Similarly, I have not attempted to reorganized the article, but the current structure is not one that would require extensive re-writing if the article is ultimately reorganized. I expect you to use my suggestions only as a starting point. With that in mind, here they are:

Current intro to the classification section:

The Italian, chromoforo, was first used to describe invertebrate pigment bearing cells in 1819.[1] The term chromatophore (Greek: khrōma = "colour", phoros = "bearing") later adopted as a name for the neural crest derived pigment bearing cells of cold blooded vertebrates and cephalopods (in contrast to the chromato-cytes found in mammals and birds). By the 1960s, sufficient understanding of the structure and colour of chromatophores was available to sub-classify them according to appearance. Despite subsequent studies revealing the biochemical nature of the pigments within chromatophore types, this classification system persists today.[2]

The biochemicals responsible for generating colour are also subclassified. True pigments, such as pteridines and carotenoids, selectively absorb a part of the visible spectrum that makes up white incident light, but they let the other wavelengths pass and reach the eye of the observer. These compounds are collectively called biochromes. Not all colours are generated in this manner, however. Some, most notably iridescent silver and gold colours, are generated by the scattering, interference and diffusion of light by colourless crystalline structures called schemochromes.

While all chromatophores contain pigments or reflecting structures (except in mutant individuals like albinos), not all pigment containing cells are chromatophores. Haem, for example, is a biochrome responsible for the red appearance of blood. It is primarily found in erythrocytes, which are generated in bone marrow and therefore not considered chromatophores.

Proposed edits:

Invertebrate pigment bearing cells were first described as chromoforo in an Italian science journal in 1819. The term "chromatophore" was adopted later as the name for pigment bearing cells derived from the neural crest of cold-blooded vertebrates and cephalopods. The word itself comes from the Greek words khrōma (χρωμα) meaning "colour," and phoros (φορος) meaning "bearing". In contrast, the word chromatocyte (cyte or κυτε being Greek for "cell") was adopted for the cells responsible for colour found in birds and mammals. Only one such cell type, the melanocyte, has been identified in these animals.

It wasn't until the 1960s that the structure and colouration of chromatophores were understood well enough to allow the development of a system of sub-classification based on their appearance. This classification system persists to this day even though more recent studies have revealed that certain biochemical aspects of the pigments may be more useful to a scientific understanding of how the cells function.

The colour-related biochemicals fall into distinct classes: biochromes and schemochromes. The biochromes include true pigments, such as carotenoids and pteridines. These pigments selectively absorb parts of the visible light spectrum that makes up white light while permitting other wavelengths to be passed to the eye of the observer. Schemochromes have a significant effect on the perceived colours of cells although they are not actually pigments themselves. Instead, the schemochromes, though colorless, produce iridescent colors, notably silver and gold, by diffusion, interference, and scattering of light.

While all chromatophores contain pigments or reflecting structures (except when there has been a mutation such as albinism), not all pigment containing cells are chromatophores. Haem, for example, is a biochrome responsible for the red appearance of blood. It is primarily found in red blood cells (erythrocytes), which are generated in bone marrow througout the life of an organism rather than being formed during embryological development. Therefore, erythrocytes are not classified as chromatophores.

Ande B. 23:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Superb stuff, Ande. That really is what i was looking for. I'll take that (almost) verbatim if you don't mind, with just a small clarification about albinism. I'll address the other comments you and others made ove the weekend also (its been a busy week) and try to rephrase the rest of the article in a similar simple, but informative, style. Rockpocket 06:38, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Rockpocket, you already have pretty good writing skills. I was pretty sure if you just got a few simplified examples that you found acceptable, you could use them to work out an approach that would seem natural to you. Have a good weekend, this week has been quite wearing for me, as well. I think I'll call it a night. Ande B. 06:44, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I just took a look at all the editing you've been doing and all I can say is great work. You had very good substance to start with and I think you're a natural at this type of explication. Thanks for inviting me to work on such a cool article and especially thank you for all your generous comments. Ande B. 15:54, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

A haiku of thanks

Thanks for your support

In my RfA, which passed!

Wise I'll try to be.

I'm very honored and glad that you found my contributions worthy of your support. Additionally, I think you're the first person I've seen to incoporate the word "sexy" into an RfA, which made me laugh! Thanks again.

-- Natalya 04:03, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for the trust that you had in me when you supported my Request for Adminship. The nomination ended successfully and I am actually overwhelmed by the support that I received. Thanks again! -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 06:49, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Cell signaling project?

Firstly, thank you for welcoming me to Wikipedia a couple of weeks ago! I am currently on forced vacation because of illness and have found that editing Wikipedia is a great way to kill time while a recover. I thought that it would be a good idea to set up a cell signaling/signal transduction project to organise and improve the articles on the subject, perhaps as a daughter project to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Molecular_and_Cellular_Biology. What do you think? Would you perhaps be interested in contributing? Peter Znamenskiy 21:20, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks much for your encouragement on my very first article! Chris1435 07:16, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

re: Alkivar

Great, glad to hear it. I know it can be frustrating and confusing, but then remember that admins don't necessarily have the perfect answers either. The only thing that we sometimes have that helps in these situations is some more leverage, just from being known more, and some experience with how the wiki works. Hint: the way the wiki works is often a do-it-yourself process — no one likes cleaning up after other people. Hence, my frustration that because we're admins — a postion which isn't really powerful (we just have more buttons! Honestly, there's nothing more to it, I didn't get initiated into the cabal or anything, we all just want to help out the encyclopedia) — we're expected to do all the leg work for someone else's problems. Anyone saying "admin abuse" before even discussing it is going to get some flak for that very reason. Honestly, being an admin sucks a lot of the time. People are ruder to you, you do all the dirty work, and no-one ever compliments you and says, Nice job. Plus, anytime we disagree with someone we're in the cabal, ohnoes! Dunno why I bother, really, I guess I feel like someone has to. Anyway, thanks for the note, I appreciate it. Snoutwood (talk) 07:53, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and by the way, please do offer your opinions and get involved (if you wish, of course)! It's great when others chip in, and you certainly don't have to be an admin. Snoutwood (talk) 08:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for voting in my recently unsuccessful RfA. I plan on working harder in the coming months so that I have a better chance of becoming an admin in the future. I hope you will consider supporting my if I have another RfA. Thank you for your comments. --digital_me^(t/c) 15:59, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

My RFA

Thanks

Rockpocket/Archive 3, thank you for participating in my RfA. It passed with an amazingly unopposed 77/0/1. Thanks for the support everybody! If you see me doing anything wrong, want to ask me something, or just want to yell in my general direction, leave me a note on my talk page. I promise to try and knock out Wikipedia's problems wherever I may find them!

Staxringold _talk^contribs 20:52, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

compromise?

Hi there, I have apparently been successful at generating a potential compromise regarding biospsychology article. (at the rfc)Perhaps you will go look at it, thanks. Prometheuspan 03:20, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you for supporting my Request for Adminship! I appreciate it and will do my best to maintain the faith you have shown in me! – Ben W Bell talk 07:17, 8 June 2006 (UTC)