User talk:Art Unbound
Thank you for communicating with me and contributing to my talk list. I will either answer here or on the relevant subject talks.
Art Unbound 00:48, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Seguir el pulso[edit]
Dear Sir Dimtri Nikolaj & estimated mr. Art Unbound: I herewith like to really thank you for your helpfull support in the case of my recent astonishing blocking up from further editing again. In the mean time with best regards I remain faithfully yours: D.A. Borgdorff - e.i. MASc. by 86.83.155.44 (talk) 12:47, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
A request for the arbcom to examine the Guideo den Broeder situation[edit]
G'day - I'm dropping this note in to you because earlier today I responded to a request to file a request for arbitration. My examination of events led me to believe that there may be some use in the arbcom examining this matter, and perchance resolving an issue or two, and you have been named as an 'Involved Party'. As such, your thoughts would be most welcome at the Request page.
Yours rather nervously to be wearing a clerk-ish hat for the first time,
PM - Privatemusings (talk) 23:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for notifying. - Art Unbound (talk) 20:01, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
- Would you mind moving your statement to the correct place in the list at the request for arbitration? I think many people only check for new statements at the end of the list of statements, and it would be a pity if they missed your statement, as it is an important part of the whole issue. I've also been following the discussion at Guido's talk page, and I'd like to thank you for engaging there, even though the result is still not ideal, to say the least. It's just that having that discussion there in English makes things a lot clearer for those of us who can't read Dutch, and can at least see the two sides expressed in English. Ideally, though, it would never have spilled over onto en-Wikipedia. But thanks again. Carcharoth (talk) 08:01, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
- Hey hello Carcharoth! These arbitration pages are a labyrinth if you don't exactly know them. First comes the case, the list of involved parties, then statements, then comments (by uninvolved parties?) then clerk notes and arbitrator's opinions. I will put my reaction under Comments, that better? By the way, I must thank you for your support. You were the only one who responded to my small poll; but that page was not a community pub page and most participants had already given their opinion in words. I'm used to the Dutch community but the English community works differently. Your Arbitration Committee works differently from the Dutch Arbcom too; it's more transparent and I believe more efficient as well. BTW, I believe a case is rejected if there are 4 reject votes an no accept vote, so this case was rejected quite rapidly? Finally, except for Guido being a user on both sites, spill-over might be less desirable, but in this case the problem was really the same. I agree with you though, that a user should be able to have a new chance on another wiki without being chased by problems on his former wiki. We might have to talk this over once more. Thanks and greetings, Art Unbound (talk) 23:33, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
- Would you mind moving your statement to the correct place in the list at the request for arbitration? I think many people only check for new statements at the end of the list of statements, and it would be a pity if they missed your statement, as it is an important part of the whole issue. I've also been following the discussion at Guido's talk page, and I'd like to thank you for engaging there, even though the result is still not ideal, to say the least. It's just that having that discussion there in English makes things a lot clearer for those of us who can't read Dutch, and can at least see the two sides expressed in English. Ideally, though, it would never have spilled over onto en-Wikipedia. But thanks again. Carcharoth (talk) 08:01, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Confidentiality[edit]
It has been brought to my attention that you have once again disclosed to the general public private, confidential information that you had in your capacity as a nl:Arbcom member. Please stop doing that. Guido den Broeder (talk, visit) 17:08, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Re:Tamar of Georgia[edit]
Hello Art Unbound. Many thanks for your kind words and your work on the Georgia-related articles in nl. I'm really glad that you find my contributions useful and I appreciate your interest in the subject. Kind regards, --KoberTalk 18:43, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you, Kober. I'm just finishing an article on David the Builder, also adapted from en:. We don't seem to have widespread knowledge on that period here ;) Kind regards, - Art Unbound (talk) 19:01, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Hello Kober, it might please you to know that History of Georgia has been greatly expanded by a couple of friends of mine and is now a featured article on Dutch Wikipedia. Thanks again for your work on the subject, regards, - Art Unbound (talk) 20:37, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Strategy[edit]
Hi there. What happened over on Strategy was a simple misunderstanding of format... you'll find all your content is stored on a recommendations page of its own now, here: [1]. --bodnotbod (talk) 13:04, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
wrote on talk pg thank youDecora (talk) 21:41, 25 November 2010 (UTC)