User talk:Beyazid

Welcome to Wikipedia. And thanks for your work on Edgar Allan Poe National Historic Site: I wrote it as a stub to deal with a red link (meaning that an article didn't exist), and it's good to see someone who knows the subject improve the slapped-together version I did. --Calton | Talk 01:27, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

A mediation has started on the Missouri talk page, thanks for your work this far. Grey Wanderer | Talk 22:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For going above and beyond the call of duty in ensuring accuracy and completeness on the September 11, 2001 attacks pageHaemo 04:04, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Cougar

Thank you for the heads up. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 06:07, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Lost edits

If you blindly revert, could you please fix all the other changes that have been added to the article during this edit war. -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 03:42, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I didn't blindly revert, changes were included. Beyazid 03:54, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

You did, my edits for example have been lost. Check the diff. -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 04:28, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

You seem to be refering to edits from mid Sept, these were lost unfortunately because of another editor. Beyazid 05:47, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Could be, but you are reverting to a very old version that is kept in place by several editors, and it is your action that does the damage! -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 13:45, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

The version I went to with my first edit on the 23rd was to a previous version also as of the 23rd. It wasn't a very old version from my perspective as just arriving at the article and it wasn't apparent that there was an edit war spanning days and weeks. Edits fom the 18th - 23rd were missing it seems, like you point out, but the edit I just made yesterday wasn't a simple carry over from an ancient version like you're saying. I incorporated newer edits starting from the 23rd when I got here. With my latest edit I made sure your older edits from the 18th were incorporated. All the best. Beyazid 18:44, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Consensus on lowercase common names

I engaged the same lowercase vs. capitals on species common names with Uther on the bobcat and cougar pages over the course of several months. There was a consensus reached for lowercase. WP:BIRDS does not apply here and there are plently of ornithologists who feel it doesnt apply to birds either. He is engaging in unwarranted reverts again for some reason. I stand behind your edits. Bugguyak (talk) 19:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, many many editors have engaged in this topic also. You can go to almost any well-known megafauna article and if the article is capitalized there is almost certain to be a comment thread or multiple comment threads in the Talk pages pointing out how that doesn't make sense. You can go through the edit histories and see where many editors have changed it to be right, only to be reverted, almost entirely by just UtherSRG -- with never more substantive justification than the bizarre WP:BIRD. It certainly is a mystery to me why this argumentation still strangely is offered as if it's in any way meaningful. Beyazid (talk) 20:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Add me to that. These shouldn't be capitalized. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 18:28, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA

Please see Talk:Iriomote Cat#Edit warring. I'm considering taking this to an admin to be done with this once and for all. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 07:04, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I totally agree. Beyazid (talk) 20:48, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#misapplication of WP:BIRD

Please see the above link because I have filed a request for arbitration against User:UtherSRG. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 22:10, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration 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 impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)