User talk:Disavian

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives For discussion relating to Userboxes, go here. Archives Archive 1 (Feb 06 - Oct 06) Archive 2 (Oct 06 - Dec 06) Archive 3 (Dec 06 - Jan 07) Archive 4 (Feb 07 - ?)

[edit] NCAATeamBasketball

Ok, I have a first draft up at User:Nmajdan/Test. Take a look at tell me what changes should still be made. Specifically, I'd like input on if I handled the NCAA (or NIT) tourneys appropriately. Also, I have two Asst Coach fields. They are both optional, and they could both handle multiple names. So if there are 2 asst coachs, put one name in each as I did. If there are three, put two in the first one and one in the second one, and so on. Also, if these changes are sufficient, I might be able to combine the basketball and football templates into one. We'll see.↔NMajdan•talk•EditorReview 14:19, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

It's looking great so far! I don't know too much about basketball, so I asked a friend that does. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 16:19, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, I never really received any feedback on it. If you think its ready, I'll try to get it moved early next week.↔NMajdan•talk 15:36, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I opened up a discussion concerning the new template at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#Need opinion on a couple templates. Please feel free to share your opinion.↔NMajdan•talk 14:24, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your GA nomination of YouTube

The article YouTube you nominated as a good article has passed , see Talk:YouTube for eventual comments about the article. Good luck in future nominations. Veesicle (Talk) (Contribs) 20:53, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your GA nomination of Calvin Johnson (football)

The article Calvin Johnson (football) you nominated as a good article has passed , see Talk:Calvin Johnson (football) for eventual comments about the article. Good luck in future nominations. Good Work! ShadowJester07  ►Talk  21:12, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Source for Calvin Johnson

Don't know how else to respond to your question about my source, I haven't done a lot w/ Wikipedia... I found the source here it is: http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news?slug=ap-confidentjohnson&prov=ap&type=lgns 24.40.144.24 20:49, 8 March 2007 (UTC)15:49 8/2/07 I'm the one who put the thing about Johnson and Pinkney

Thanks! I added the source to the article. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 23:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] William G. Thrash

I apologize for the "Vandal Rollback" - I am a still a neophyte with these script options - I merely meant to edit, not vandal revert. The reason I was editing was because you mispelled his last name as "Trash" is all of his category details. --Ozgod 23:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, okay. Sorry about that. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 19:43, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shelly Jamison in WP:P*

She's not really a porn star, just an adult model, so not suitable for the project per se. Maybe if the project scope expands as suggested, but not yet. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 20:49, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah. My bad. Would you prefer WP:P*/D only cover porn stars, and not adult models, or should that page be broader in its coverage? —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 20:58, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, that is how I found the AFD, and I suspect that swayed the opiions to make the difference, so I won't object. :-) It's not overloaded. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 15:19, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:Russ_Chandler_Stadium.jpg

[edit] User American English

This page is not an encyclopedia article and has been marked for deletion, please move it. -23_PatPeter*∞ 21:19, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

No, I was not yelling at you in the least, I am not one of those Wikipedians. I saw that you were the founder of this template and would have moved it back into your userspace but where? The only thing that matters is that it is in the right place. -23_PatPeter*∞ 21:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Yay! -23_PatPeter*∞ 21:30, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:PORNBIO reversion

Could you comment on the line you reverted on WP:PORNBIO in the discussion on Wikipedia talk:Notability (pornographic actors)#"do not on their own establish notability"? --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 15:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Smile!

LaMenta3 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. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I think we all need it :) LaMenta3 03:34, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mary Anne.

I responded on my talk page with: Thanks; but I saw it. Why are you telling me this? (No disrespect intended, just curious) Acalamari 18:48, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

My talk page response. No, no; you didn't make any mistakes. I was only curious. You were being helpful; there is no need to apologize for that. :) Acalamari 18:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clough's pic

Just curious about why you removed it from the Modern History section of the Georgia Tech site, since it does mention a few words about Dr. Clough. —Gintar77 23:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Someone added a picture of the campus there, and his picture no longer within the section. I'm thinking of going back and moving the new picture somewhere else in the article; perhaps a panorama at the beginning of the campus section would look nice. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 23:18, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, how's that? We now have a nice panorama on the "campus" section and Funk Masta G. Wayne is back where he belongs. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 23:39, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Looks good to me! :-) I'll look into being part of the GT wiki project. It's been so long since I graduated though, and I spend enough time on the wiki, so we'll see. Thanks! —Gintar77 11:17, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] COM

I'll see what I can do about some stubs for notable COM alumni. I'm going to busy until the end of April so it might be awhile. Thanks for the great work on the COM article. By the way, in this viewbook is a list of notable COM alumni. I'll be adding some of the more prominently titled alumni to the page. http://mgt.gatech.edu/downloads/2005/2005_mba_viewbook.pdf Informed297 19:58, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

I had no idea how to do it. I just know it needed to be done. (You see, that page was created and deleted multiple times.) So now I know the process. Thanks again. I'm guessing the author is going to change it back though. --Donignacio 06:11, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello again. I mean that the article itself (that is the Tanner Agle page) had already been created and deleted. I looked at the author's talk page and looked at the previous discussions. If I read policy right, that even qualifies it for "speedy deletion." (P.S. Thank you for excusing my newbieness.) --Donignacio 06:19, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] William Bradford (professor)

Hi, you removed my prod nomination here (fair enough), but your reason isn't sensible. "article asserts notability. take it to AfD.)". An assertion of notability is a reason not to speedy delete something (that's why I didn't speedy it), however it is NOT a reason not to delete it. I don't believe the assertion of notability makes the article encyclopedic - if you do, and you think the article should be kept, fair enough. But you should only remove prod tags if you personally believe the article should be kept, not simply to force an AfD delete, as that defeats the purpose of prod. The purpose of prod is to prevent us having an afd if no-one actually wants to argue to keep it. Do you believe the article should be kept? If you do, we can discuss this over an afd, if you don't, then can you replace the prod tag and we'll see if anyone does think it should be kept.--Doc^g 08:25, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 14:05, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.--Doc^g 23:15, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to be de-prodding the article again. Technically, it's not even eligible for PROD, since it's already been through two AfDs. Checking back through the history, I realized you already know that, since you're the one who initiated the second AfD just last month! In the past few days, the article has been gutted as Bradford's sockpuppets/SPAs have knocked out the reliable sources for the unflattering facts, recharacterized them as the false accusations of "liberal bloggers," and after failing to get the article speedied, manipulated well-meaning editors to use BLP to remove them wholesale as "unsourced" and PROD the article to bury it entirely. Although the obvious way to repair the article would be to revert it to a version from a few days back, some of Bradford's points/edits do in fact have some validity, so I'll have to study the different versions to figure out which changes to integrate into the article. --Groggy Dice T | C 00:28, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to look into that. Yeah, I'd actually forgotten that I'd AfD'd it. I was wondering about those changes. They seemed kind of questionable to me, but I've been dealing with some other things and didn't think about them too much. The article should probably stay, because there seems to have been some controversy over him. However, it's hard to tell what's true/false/relevant. I'll go on a limb and say that any change that deleted a reference was probably a bad change. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 01:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

It's looking good. I went and fixed a couple things with one of the refs. Did you see that massive talk page message, apparently from the subject of the article? I think that most of his concerns have been met, as far as I can tell. I'm also kind of upset at myself for not realizing that Past AfD --> no prod. Duh. I know better. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 05:04, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

There seems to be some sockpuppetry going on in that article, all of the work I did to verify it was reverted by someone while I was asleep. Perhaps this should be investigated. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 14:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

If you would, please take a look at the post I left on the discussion page concerning the article about me that appears on Wikipedia. As I noted in that forum, the wild rumormongering and speculation is terribly harmful to me in my professional life, and it is grossly unfair to me, my wife, and my children. I have NEVER made any claims about my military record to anyone, and inaccurate reports in the press have been taken up as cudgels by those who opposed my tenure to blame me for them and to seek to damage my reputation. I never gave anyone any information about my military record, nor has anyone, save for on blogs or on Wikipedia and always anonymously, ever claimed that I did so.

Wholly apart from that, although I achieved some success as a law professor, I certainly did not achieve the notability that should be required to be included in an encyclopedia of any kind. The only reason anyone outside my former field knows my name is because I sought tenure, and the only reason my tenure case became news is because I was denied tenure on the ground that I refused to sign a petition in support of Ward Churchill. My military record was never at issue, and in retrospect I believe my tenure opponents may well have been the source of the misinformation to the press.

At any rate, I would like to ask you to please desist from posting information about me that is untrue and harmful to me. I hope you would wish that I would treat you fairly if the roles were reversed, and I encourage you to act upon your nobler instincts.

Thank you.

Bill Bradford

First of all, inclusion in Wikipedia is not up to you, or me, or any one person. Given that there are at least ten published secondary sources about you, it is highly unlikely that your article will be deleted, so you have to live with it. If you think the statements made in the press were defamatory, you should take it up with them. Wikipedia is a tertiary source that can only rely on published primary and secondary sources, preferably ones that can be reconciled and corroborated. I am sure that if you asked Frontpage Magazine.com to print a retraction of the facts about your military records, they'd go along with it. That's the source for that, you know.

I'd like to point out what I've done to the article so far:

1. Nominate it for deletion; it was then cleaned up, satisfying my initial concerns.
2. Remove some of the personal attacks
3. Add several more sources, the basis for verifiability.

So, last night I endeavored to support the article with published sources, and more than doubled the number of references. You should be happy with me. I suggest that you review WP:AUTO and the policies there. Given that your article is unlikely to go away any time soon, it would be more productive if you contributed to it in a constructive manner. If you believe that a specific fact is wrong, ten state which specific fact is wrong, and back it up with a secondary source. In the meantime, I will try to clean up some of the remaining bias in the article. I suggest you get an account and contribute by adding positive things to the article. For example, the positions listed in your profile at William & Mary seemed impressive to me. Why don't you elaborate more on that? Most biographies of living people have their birth dates. (Or at least birth year). Why don't you add that? I'm sure you can think of something positive you have to say about yourself. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 14:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

In my post, I've stated which specific facts are wrong. No reliable source has ever claimed that I was the source of misinformation about my government service record, and as I'm sure you know, it's not possible to provide a secondary source to prove a negative. E.g., "prove that you've stopped beating your wife." Not possible. I can't prove that I did not make claims about my government service record; I can only make the claim that I served honorably in intelligence and that beyond that the details are classified. For editors to say that I made any statements or claims solely because they drew that inference from something they may have read elsewhere it logically fallacious, false, and libelous.

My sense is that there are persons who take delight in the sport of trying to destroy people from the anonymity of cyberspace, and such persons will never let the truth get in the way of their fun. I hope I'm wrong.

I maintain and will continue to do so that I never discussed my military record with anyone who did not have clearance and the need to know, and that I've always stood behind whatever information is publicly available through government agencies. To claim that "Bradford claimed" anything else is simply not true.

I'll have a look at the wording. That section does look like it needs to be rewritten. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 14:38, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

The discussion has been moved to WP:AN/I#William Bradford (professor). —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 16:27, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

The AIV discussion has been archived at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive220. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 00:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:Cryptic C62#Zoobkar

Thanks for your message, but the circumstances that precipitated my use of that template were special. First of all, I know Cryptic personally and was conversing with him over AIM when he created the article Zoobkar and told me about it, as a joke. I marked the article for deletion and merely used that template as a way of saying, "Don't act like a common vandal"; I was almost making fun of him, in a good natured, albeit public, way, of course. We discussed on AIM this very out-of-character action and the matter was resolved quite pleasantly. Please understand, this was not a matter of disagreement, but a joke which he took too far, and for which I told him off in a light-hearted manner. -- Rmrfstar 22:27, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay! Good enough explanation for me. Sorry to bother you, have a good day :) —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 22:30, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Funk Masta G. Wayne

Hi Disavian, It's amazing what just a few words can do. I have no objections to the article as it now stands and reverted my tag. Thanks for being receptive to feedback. Party on, G. Wayne. -- Shunpiker 02:53, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Protection

My apologies, thank you for letting me know. The article has now been protected, I have also responded on AN/I.--Jersey Devil 14:46, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pensapedia

Greetings! This is the Pensapedia admin. Thanks for stopping by. I'm a bit new to wikis and didn't realize the animus towards Creative Commons licensing, but it's GFDL now. You're a fellow IBer, I see, and a GT student to boot — permanently cementing your life-connection to a certain red-bearded teacher, if I'm not mistaken. Anyhow, I hope you will be able to contribute to our little corner of the wikiverse sometime. Cheers! --Pensapedia 15:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I did happen to particularly like a certain red-bearded teacher, and he probably affected me ending up here. :) Are you currently in high school or college, and what is your name? I'll add you on Facebook :) As for my contributions so far, I've worked a lot on the Pensacola, Florida and Jeff Miller articles. One day, I'll get it to GA status. Just not today. I recommend that you change Pensapedia's reference style to match Wikipedia's. There are instructions on how to do that here. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 15:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm a bit wary of posting my proper name on Google-indexed pages, but I was IB class of '99. Nearly went to Tech, but bailed out and got a useless English degree at FSU instead. In a sense, Mr B influenced my decision as well, by making it obvious that I didn't have the 'hard work' gene to survive in a real science program. (You probably heard my name mentioned as a prime example of slackmanship.) One of my best friends, however, went on to Tech and is now a doctoral student at U of I Champaign. If you want, you can email me for further correspondence. Cheers! --Pensapedia 16:37, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Ronald Colle

I honestly don't remember exactly why I removed the notability template, but I think it was the discussion on the talk page and the discussion on the AfD. Apparently he is notable due to his position and works published. (WP:PROF is pretty open to these kind of bios). But you bring up a good point: there might just not be enough published information available to make an accurate article, especially where WP:BLP is concerned. Someone did mention some sources "who's who" on the talk page, but they do not look accessible. Hopefully someone will find something. Oh, and feel free to re-add the notability template if you want. It might encourage other editors to try to improve it. I won't remove it. Danski14^(talk) 00:58, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I put it back. If nothing has changed in a month, I think it'll be time to run it through AfD again. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 01:18, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Userpages etc.

Hi, Disavian. Wikid77 here. Yes, I checked several userpages and liked your content-layout best. Other users linking to your userboxes led me to your userpage: we use your USA-userbox ("This user comes from the United...") due to some guff about kicking your userboxes out of an official area. It's all okay, because most everything on WP is fleeting and changing. Is there a budding "alternative WP" where we can plant some copies of our articles? The future is all about "offspring" (as I recall from Johnny Appleseed), although it is great that Google, so far, gives WP articles high page-rank.

As for the late Gov. Ann Richards ("a woman's place is in the dome"), as guys in Texas, we were scrambling to keep photos undeleted: I tried fair-use rationale and public-domain phrases as a "shotgun approach" to deter deletion. Weeks earlier, someone had deleted my NOAA photos of Hurricane-Katrina landfall maps because their "source" was questioned, honestly (no joke, people couldn't figure out what NOAA was: try to thank God everyday you're intelligent). Now I use the license template "{{PD-NOAA}}" or use "NASA" because people don't seem to question whether NASA is PD (months later, I found those NOAA photos again & stored them in Commons). Wiki photo experts even experience several "random" deletions from Commons. However, a shotgun approach is best for everything: multiple photos per article; multiple articles per subject; and repeat key details in the talk-page for an article, lest censorship or Wiki-rot trash major points from an article. We also need multiple WPs, so I try to store key facts in German or Swedish or whatever foreign-WP articles. Plant seeds everywhere, just as Andrew Carnegie funded multiple libraries. Later.... -Wikid77 (^talk/_contribs) 04:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I recommend that you consider using {{fairusein}} on that particular photo. Your story about the NOAA photos is fairly amusing. If you're unsatisfied with Wikipedia's inclusion criteria, as many users are, you could try copying content to and from one of the other Wikis. For example, porn star articles get copied to Boobpedia (especially when they're about to be deleted); Pensacola-related articles could be copied to Pensapedia; star trek articles to Memory Alpha; Star Wars articles to Wookiepedia etc. Once those wikis are sufficiently developed, they cover their subject better than Wikipedia does. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 04:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GT Navbox Template

Didn't know who to ask about this, but I know you're really involved in WP:TECH, so I'll give it a shot. I noticed that the Georgia Tech pages do not have a generic navigation box for the university, and I decided to try my hand at developing one. I just don't know where I'd go about asking permission to place them on all the appropriate GT pages. Right now, I'm testing it out in my sandbox. Would love to hear any suggestions/comments and what I should do next. Thanks!—Gintar77 10:34, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd be the one to ask :) It looks good, but you can't use the institute seal on it, because it's considered "fair use." Beyond that, I'd also like to include History of Georgia Tech, List of Georgia Institute of Technology alumni, List of Georgia Institute of Technology faculty, and maybe even Georgia Tech in popular culture. I'm not sure what category they'd fit into, though. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 14:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I think you meant it violates "fair use". But why? Wouldn't it qualify as fair use for the same reasons you state on the image page, especially since the nav box would (and should) only be used on a GT-related page? I removed the logo for the time being, though.

Also, I included a new category, "People and History" where I put the links you suggested. I moved Funk Masta G. Wayne down to this section and added Georgia Tech traditions to this section as well (had it on before, but got lost in one of my edits). —Gintar77 17:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, maybe "violates" isn't the word I was looking for. Fair use images are generally discouraged on en-wiki, and I'd prefer to avoid using one in a template on a lot of articles if I can avoid it. It would make/will make featured article promotion harder on the articles where it is transcluded, because you have to provide a very detailed fair use justification for each page. If you really wanted to use an image, there are several cc images that would work just as well to illustrate the institute. You could even draw a rendition of the "shaft" logo and use that (see {{Dukeschools}}). Aside from the image, I really like it so far :) —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 17:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. Now what? How about a name for the template, say {{Georgia Tech Navbox}}? I'll let you place the template on whatever pages you feel is appropriate. Also, could you review the categories at the bottom of the code to ensure they are correct? Thanks! —Gintar77 17:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and edited the categories and then copied the template to the name you suggested. I'm not sure I'll use it just yet, (aside from the core pages) because I'm writing something for the 'Nique, and have a test tomorrow. But I'll be thinking about where I want to include it. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 17:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I see that you're poking the schedule present in 2007 Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets football team. Anything I can help with? —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 00:06, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Er... was I not supposed to fiddle with it? I didn't really change anything substantive. I only converted from the wikitable format to the template used for the 2006 schedule. This will make it much easier to update when the season rolls around. I also added the fact that the Army game is HC. I'm going back to the roster on the GT home page so I can update all the new signons from February. Hope you don't mind. How's that studying coming? :-) —Gintar77 00:33, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Eh, I finished the article for the 'Nique, my paper's deadline got pushed back, and I decided to not study for my Internet Law test until I got home from Technique deadline. Which... will be sometime tomorrow morning :/ Oh, look at the 2006 football page, I ghetto-hacked some references (Nique articles) onto it. I haven't finished going through the season, but it looks pretty good already. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 00:49, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

LOL, yeah, it is ghetto-hacked! But it looks good on screen. :-) BTW, I noticed going through the roster that at least one person (Eric Oetter) no longer shows up. Do you know anything about this. I'm pretty sure he was on the team last season, but I don't think he played. Did he quit/get kicked off? He still technically has a page, although so does Calvin Johnson who's going off to the NFL. —Gintar77 01:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I love the look :) They (the GTAA) have profiles for players that have been gone a long time, so I assume they're kept for historical reasons. If he's not on the current roster, then there could be a ton of reasons for why he's not coming back, and I'd prefer to not speculate. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 01:37, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jeremy Farris

Well, I'm his wife, so close enough. I found Jeremy's page and got all excited. He was less excited than me and wanted me to delete it, but then decided it was really having a picture up that bothered him, so I took it away. Hope you don't mind.

Thanks! lisa —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lhofler (talk • contribs) 16:38, 28 March 2007.

Ah. I'm the one that created the article, by the way. I've been working very hard on List of Georgia Institute of Technology alumni as part of a project for WikiProject Georgia Tech, and I figured that Rhodes Scholars would be a nice addition as Tech only has three so far. I'm sorry that he doesn't want his image on his Wikipedia article, but I suppose I can abide by that :) As he knows more about himself than I do, I'd appreciate it if he (or you, for that matter) helped out on his article. Just so you know, the image is still technically on Wikipedia (Image:Jeremy Farris.jpg and List of Georgia Institute of Technology alumni#Rhodes Scholars), but it's not on his article. I'd *really* appreciate it if he didn't mind those, as the list is going through a Featured List Nomination, and it's a 100px thumbnail. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 20:53, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] UGA Chapel Bell

Hey, I saw your comment on the UGA Talk Page. The Chapel Bell has not been stolen by Georgia Tech, but another bell on campus has been; I will find out for sure which one within the next few days.Pruddle 06:43, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into that. The sentence in Clean, Old-Fashioned Hate I'm investigating is the following:

The UGA Chapel Bell and the Georgia Tech [[Rambling Wreck|Ramblin' Wreck]] have been rumored to have been stolen numerous times by their respective rival before, after, or even during major sporting events between the two schools.<ref name="wreck">{{cite web|url=http://cyberbuzz.gatech.edu/reck/wreck.html|title=The Ramblin' Reck Club: History of the Ramblin' Wreck|accessdate=2007-03-04}}</ref>{{Fact|date=March 2007}}

—Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 06:49, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Evolution

Am I allowed to use your "this user understands biological evolution" temlate?Meson man 01:00, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes. The userboxes are for anyone to use. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 01:19, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

thanks!:-)Meson man 03:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re : Hint

Thanks for the reminder, my bad on this one. =P - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 14:02, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

• Oppps! =P - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 20:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rv

Thanks for the heads up as I was kind of curious about why the vandal was so determined to vandalize userpages, after returning from a block. Well, have a good day. - Gilliam 18:52, 30 March 2007 (UTC)