User talk:Toh

Hi. Nice job on the cork taint page. I wrote the first version, mostly using the Oxford Companion to Wine as a source, but you did a much better job. Keep up the good work! Wnissen 03:46, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks on Vegetable oil ... Nice piece of syntax. -- Dbroadwell 21:15, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Redfaced

And a small suggestion. If you write at least something on your User page, your signature will become a pleasant blue. Oleg Alexandrov 01:29, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

On the other hand, keeping it red makes it much easier to find my own comments on a talk page thick with them - such as this one is becoming. ;) But if you find it truly obnoxious, perhaps I can dream up some filler. - toh

You made me have some good laughs! Oleg Alexandrov 02:07, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Acoustic cleaning and wiki links

Hello Toh, Thank you for the input and apologies for having created work for you. Although i thought that some of the links were more constructive than others, for instance the link from cement and the cleaning of cement silos is i believe constructive, i am happy to follow your suggestions.

This is what i have done to try and rectify some of the questions you raised

a. Silo cleaning...i have raised the issue on the discussion page.I think i can move some way towards a NPOV but ideally i will get input from other contributors who will know more.

b. Acoustic cleaning....not sure this article can ever be truly neutral, almost by definition. If you look on the discussion page you will see that i have cross referenced another wiki page where a similar issue has arisen ( not one i was involved with!)

c. Finally where i think that internal links will be valuable probably better to suggest on discussion page 1st and see what response is...for example Fletcher Christian. Suspect this is now too long a note so will sign off

Collieman 19:08, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Higgs boson consensus vote

There is currently a vote on the Higgs boson talk page over whether or not to merge the pop culture references article with the main article. I noticed you've previously contributed to the debate, so your vote would be helpful in establishing a consensus (or, perhaps, a vote of "no consensus", in which case the problem will be referred to AfD). Thanks! -DMurphy 21:36, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recreation, addiction, and self-destruction

Recreational use of drugs is not self-destruction. Many people lead very fulfilling lives as addicts. Please change your opinion in the oxycontin discussion page, as you are stating a rather ill informed opinion. Granted, it is a discussion page, but you're a very eloquent and concise writer, and I'd hate for you to let your emotions cloud otherwise very useful input. - Never — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.88.179.74 (talk)

Hi Never - You may be surprised to find that I essentially agree with you. In fact I had thought my comment to be an argument for neutrality, but I now see that the parenthetical juxtaposition "used for recreation (or self-destruction)," is a bit too concise. I had intended the "or" to imply that not all recreational, or even addictive behaviour was necessarily self-destructive, which I think is also the gist of your argument. I don't like to edit or delete discussions and I do think that the subsequent sentences serve to clarify, but given your concern I've added a small subcomment. Whether I can mitigate my general abuse of parentheses is a question I'll take forward.

My own view of the broader topic is that addiction potential is a facet of most behaviour, and that most people in a leisured culture will manage multiple addictions of various modalities at various times in their lives.

As a side note, you appear to have a good deal to offer on a difficult and taboo subject, not to mention a restrained and open-minded stance that typically works very well on this site. I'd encourage to you create an account, or remain signed in if you already have one. The personal rewards of doing so aren't obvious at first, but they become tangible over time. - toh 20:07, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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) 12:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Toh. Voting in the 2016 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.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Toh. Voting in the 2017 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.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Toh. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

As per Wikipedia:Signatures "Your signature must include a link to your user page, talk page, or contributions." Currently you have to look in the history of the talk page to see who you are. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 02:04, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]