"== A cup of tea for you! == 

 {| style=""background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"" 
 |style=""vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;"" |  
 |style=""vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;"" | After all that work on Raymond Raikes, you deserve a good cup of tea! Keep up the excellent work! '''   
 |} 

 == Please accept this article == 

 Please accept this article. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Tambov_State_University&oldid;=555222380    
 :Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tambov State University was deleted for blatant copyright violation soon after you posted this message. I'm not sure why you contacted me. I didn't review this article. If I had, I would have marked it for deletion myself.    

 ::*Did 'em myself in the end: Tambov State University and Tambov State Technical University.    

  
 == End of civilization, etc. == 

 As you are probably aware, Gerda has now unilaterally started changing navboxes for Monteverdi and Verdi operas, without consulting on the relevant talk pages. I don't think this was what you had in mind, but maybe it was? Is it in your opinon OK to revert these with a request for discussion on each talk page? Can we advise Gerda to take this no further at present with out requesting disucssions? I don't want to launch a huge mess on ANI, etc.   
 :(watching) I replied on the project talk,    
 :: Gerda, that was not a reply, it was a declaration that you will continue regardless.   

 Hi both. I've left a comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera#Template:Infobox opera, momentarily breaking my resolution not to get involved ever again with that idiotic (both pro and con) subject.    

 :Thank you, voice of reason,    

 (ec) Gerda is also putting duplicate navboxes on all the Massenet operas. If this isn't a WP:POINT attack then I don't know what is. To VDT, nobody else thinks the infobox issue is idiotic. There is a general recognition on both sides that it will affect the future direction of the encyclopedia. Putting your head in the sand is not constructive. '  

 :I explained where you asked, it doesn't belong here. I created the navbox in response to a concern on the project talk, not what you think, and certainly no attack. If you can't see that a more detailed footer navbox is (by all standards I can think of) superior to a side navbox, I reached the limit of my teaching ability,    

 : Kleinzach, the endless arguments about it and refusal to compromise and/or simply get off one's hobby horse (either pro or con) are what are truly unconstructive and time wasting. I choose not to take part in it any further. If you wish to label that as unconstructive, so be it, but I seriously doubt that my decision to no longer participate in this saga is going to ""affect the future direction of the encyclopedia"" one iota.    

  
 == Nice tone, should I uncorrect the 150+ other mispelt articles while I'm at it? == 

 Nice tone, should I uncorrect the 150+ other mispelt articles while I'm at it?    
 :Not if you have corrected actual article text, only if you have tried to correct the file names. I reverted the two on my watch list. If you have done this to other file names, yes, you should revert yourself as such edits are unconstructive and damage th