User talk:Moe Epsilon/Archive 20

Please stay

God Moe, you can't leave again, sure the place is full to the rafters with wankers, but you can't let them drag you down. I don't want you to go, because frankly if I didn't try to stop you, I would being essentially let one of the brightest bulbs of the tree that is Wikipedia burn out. Alone. Okay that makes no sense. But please hear me out.

And gawd, if you say don't, your friends will. Pleeeease, HighwayCello 22:53, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I think it's so that spam bots don't pick it up when searching. Someone did it to an address on my page. Anyway, I can relate to your problems, admins can go mad, posting pictures of dicks on people's user pages (I really don't get it) and other stuff, and normal users get screamed at for trying to use correct grammar. And I have a stalker, if Minun appears here, I rest my case ;), which doesn't help. Generally, the whole place isn't a backstabbing hypocritical shitfest, and good users are in the firing line. What was my point here? Stay, please! HighwayCello 23:11, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I have a fan club! And mine is eerie, one day I had "Batman" to my sig, then suddenly "Spiderman" appears in his. He's pretended to be his dad, accusing of making death threats against his family. He's badmouthed across dozens of pages, and asked me to expand an article, did extremely dodgy work, causing me to rewrite the whole thing, and then take all the credit! He also claims credit for nominating an article by me to GA status, when it already was one. *imitates Twilight Zone music* HighwayCello 23:27, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

• I remember the quote a friend once told me : "You can never please everyone, but it'd be best to know that you have tried your best." There will always be selfish people out there, but that shouldn't deter you and me from giving knowledge to more netizens out there, which is our aim here. Please stay, and if you really need to, try and take a WikiBreak yeah? - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 12:35, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Signature

I just wanted to say that I don't think your signature is good at all. It is offensive to Christians and makes you look pompous and arrogant. It violates various policies of wikipedia and your attitude towards it is shameful. To tell people a vulgar catchphrase is just horrible. You should just change a signature back to your user name, it would cause less trauma and make it easier for others to communicate. --Burgwerworldz 03:07, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I think the word your looking for is "drama", not trauma. I don't think having the name reference to a song is causing trauma, an injury, to anyone. And how does changing a signature make it easier to communicate? I'm already leaving Wikipedia, mind WP:DICK. And FYI, I am a Christian, and I don't think a Motorhead reference is wrong. — Moe 03:31 July 20 '06

I've got four words for ya: Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy -- Sceptre 12:54, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Your comments on WP:AN

I see you're leaving Wikipedia again. You already know I disapprove of this style of participation where you repeatedly get involved in conflicts, get angry at other users, make angry statements, leave, cool off, and return. Don't get me wrong—I'm glad you come back, and when things bother me I take Wikibreaks too. But perhaps you could take your breaks without burning all your bridges. And why do you pick fights over such minor matters? If your signature is causing you so much stress, why not change it—especially when it's not even your username? And what do you mean by people not getting it through their head? I think everyone understands that you do not intend the religious reference once you explain it to them, but that doesn't stop the phrase from being a religious reference, among other meanings. I also find it bizzarre that you accuse others of being selfish while inexplicably insisting on using a non-standard signature that causes widespread offense.

Look, I get angry, too. But I try to avoid situations that cause me stress, or I try taking steps to defuse the stress. And if I'm really bothered, I just stop editing for a few days, and if I must use Wikipedia for something, I avoid visiting the policy pages and discussion pages and such. You seem to say things to increase the stress. If you've gotten yourself especially worked up, just step away for a bit. No need to post angry rants, no need to go out in a blaze, just step back, and when you've calmed down, resume editing. And consider trying to modify the behavior that caused you to get so worked up in the first place. I know you long ago gave up the idea of pursuing a position as administrator, and you obvoiusly realize that you don't yet possess the stability for such a position, but perhaps you could make your time on Wikipedia a little easier for you (and others). You may feel free not to respond to this message. — Knowledge Seeker 08:31, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Beyond now, Redemption

No one's going to catch you when you fall...

Bye Moe. HighwayCello 11:54, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Bye

Hope you come back, superstar (I'll try to spot who you are). -- Samir (The Scope) 08:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Why?

Ding Xiang from Esperanza hopes that your stress will become a part of the past soon.

Right. Please return. It's so sad if you leave. We love you as a contributor.--Tdxiang 10:58, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Nice template

But it needs an over the hill style icon. BTW Please vote for YTMND wiki's featured article plzty --LBMixPro^{<Speak|on|it!>} 03:38, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Messy

Thank you, 216.78.95.213 for telling me what I already knew. How thoughtful of you. I noticed you removed the personal attack. Regardless, eveything I said was true, and if you were in any way involved (and knew the facts) you would probably have kept the message up there on Sergeant Snopake's talk page. But never mind. It's wrong to mock the afflicted, so I'll sign off. DiLuna25 17:24, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what sort of "intervention" you had in mind, but I seriously wouldn't bother. As far as patching up goes, what sort of patching up could you possibly do? Nathanrdotcom was so weird and creepy that he eventually weirded- and creeped-out even his friends. It's going to take more than a patch to fix that sort of damage, wouldn't you agree? TTFN DiLuna25 00:10, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

So who are you really, then? Because I'm pretty sure Snopake doesn't have a friend by the name of 216.78.95.213

I could be wrong, but, you know, I'm not. DiLuna25 00:16, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, Moe Epsilon, I've heard of you. I heard Snopake mention you as a cool guy. Well, let me just say this: Imagine you're friends with two people half your age, who live not an hours car ride from each other when you live on the other side of the planet. Now imagine your two friends start dating.

Would you a) say "Oh, that's nice, good for you." because they were your friends and you wanted them to be happy. Or would you b) fly completely off the handle when they told you, and the next day send a nasty little email and a nasty little blog entry saying how they had hurt and betrayed you. There's a great deal more to it than that even, and the police (in this country and in Canada) were most interested and seemed to think it even stranger and more sinister than Snopake's family did. Best regards, DiLuna25 00:28, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I suppose it's hard for me to stay neutral, but I won't make any more personal attacks like that, and I understand why you thought to remove it. It just makes me very angry that he has tried to paint himself as the innocent, hard-done-by victim, when both Sceptre and Snopake purposefully kept it off the wiki, when they were the ones hurt the most. I know he has a mood disorder, but he's compos mentis enough to know when he's being deliberately spiteful. I'm not getting on at you, just explaining my point of view. But I'm off to bed now, so no more editing for me! DiLuna25 00:59, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Nathan

Re. Nathan: I know you're personally involved, but you need to understand that the block was not one made lightly. There are serious foundation issues here, and legal ramifications. Please don't make this hard; a few trusted admins have made clear to me their intention to block you. If you continue, I will. Ral315 (talk) 04:14, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

That is outrageously out of line. Under what premises do you plan on blocking him, mind I ask? ~ PseudoSudo 04:37, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

In response to Moe Epsilon, I suggest you let the foundation handle it, then. They've been notified and I'm sure they, or Arbcom, will provide input in a timely manner. Until then, it won't hurt for Nathan to be blocked. Ral315 (talk) 04:46, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Sceptre's block was removed (then replaced by Cyde). I agree that he shouldn't have placed the original block. But judging by the discussion, there is significant support for the block right now. Remember that indefinite is NOT infinite- it just means we don't know when the block should end. The ball is in the Foundation/Arbcom's court, really, but for now, the block should remain until a ruling is made. Ral315 (talk) 04:55, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I was wrong in my comment above. Sceptre's block is apparently the one in effect. I guess what I'm trying to say is were the issue not so tense right now that I'd look foolish doing so, I would remove the block and replace it with one of my own. I understand your point as well, but trust me, Sceptre will not be the final person in the chain. Ral315 (talk) 05:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

IYO why was he blocked?

What's your reasoning for why he was blocked? Everyone else is treating the matter as if it were diseased. I have great respect for most of the blocking parties, however their stonewalling does leave me a bit cold even if the block was justifed. JohnnyBGood t c VIVA! 23:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

User:Moe Epsilon/Users

Hello. I removed the "Users who I lost my respect for..." since I feel it should be better approached through dispute resolution. Thanks. El_C 08:08, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Phew, glad to see I wasn't on that list ^_^ I've been a bit snappy lately, due to all the FAC pushes and so on. — Deckiller 08:13, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'm enforcing WP:NOT in my capacity as an administrator, so please do not revert. Feel free to appeal my decision, however. Thanks again. El_C 16:48, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

W00t!

David, you're back! I'm glad! Just remember what we're here for (to build a free encyclopedia), okay? :D--Tdxiang Jimbo's 40th Birthday! 12:07, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry you're getting run roughshod around here. Some people just don't understand the fundamentals of meta:Don't be a dick. Good luck. --Kbdank71 17:36, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion

Next time El_C blocks you, might I suggest you use the Association of Members Advocates? --scareslamfist 18:11, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Unblock

{{unblock|What did I say? Kbdank71 just commented here and now I'm blocked? What comment exactly was incivil?}}

"13:26, 16 August 2006 Moe Epsilon (Talk | contribs | block) (screw all of you)" struck me as incivil. El_C 18:07, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Sure, it's uncivil, but blockworthy? What's wrong with simply asking folks to be nicer? Friday (talk) 18:09, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

RE:Friday - didn't "simply block," Moe Epsilon keeps removing my comments from the talk page. El_C 18:24, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

*Sigh* I archived it. *see edit after removing both your comments, Deckiller's and Tdxiangs* — Moe Epsilon 18:25 August 16 '06

See also: User talk:Moe Epsilon/Archive August 2006 where comment is still visible. — Moe Epsilon 18:29 August 16 '06 18:29, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I know it was archived; you removed it from the active conversation thread, which is ongoing. El_C 18:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I thought the conversation was done. I didn't think anything more was going to be discussed. I usually (now) archive comments once theres nothing left to discuss. Which there wasn't. You didn't want the section, so I didn't want the page, and I thought that was going to be all; thus I archived. — Moe Epsilon 18:38 August 16 '06

That makes sense, actually. El_C 18:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I have no reason to lie. :) — Moe Epsilon 18:42 August 16 '06

I was not suggesting that you had/did. Anyway, you're unblocked. Best wishes for constructive edits. El_C 18:46, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Prodego

1) You're not supposed to block people you're in a dispute with 2) The comment wasn't made towards you, in general, it was made towards everyone. 3) True, it might not have been the best response, but I didn't revert back you're action, I reverted to my revision back in July, which is a revert of the entire page. Blockworthy, no. — Moe Epsilon 18:11 August 16 '06

Hey, I was on that list, what did I do? Prodego ^talk 18:13, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

You were on the list of users I did respect :) — Moe Epsilon 18:14 August 16 '06

Which you blanked with the summary "screw all of you" correct? Prodego ^talk 18:15, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

True, but wasn't intended towards anyone on the list though, not towards anyone in particualar, just got mad. — Moe Epsilon 18:17 August 16 '06

All right :-). Perhaps 24hr cooldown might not be so bad then? Prodego ^talk 18:18, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not mad anymore. I saw no justification behind the block. — Moe Epsilon 18:20 August 16 '06

You admit it was uncivil, which does mean you probably are fine now, and it isn't something I would block for, but El_C did. Naturally I can't undo his block without his approval, but I will talk to him for you. Prodego ^talk 18:25, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Fine — Moe Epsilon 18:27 August 16 '06

I have no objection to unblocking and am comfortable with leaving the matter to Prodego's discretion and supervision. Regards, El_C 18:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

What happened to nathan?

--Slipknot222 03:00, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Reversion to Phyrexia

Hi, you reverted an anon edit to Phyrexia - I have undone this reversion as the sentences which were altered by the edits made no sense as they were written and were grammatically incorrect. I can't see why you reverted them, except possibly the use of the word "loser", which is appropriate for the context. Thanks. QmunkE 06:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

WWE Roster Reverts

Do you really know what you're doing when talking about WWE?

It is quite clear that Vince McMahon does not like his talent to be called "Wrestlers" but Superstars (a point Joey Syles Made earlier in the Year). If your going to have one big on air talent section, don't forget the bell ringer, the guy who tells who's in ring that they're out of a commercial break, and the EMT's that appear every single week! And the make up lady who is often seen, and the guys that neel over the far side of he announce tables, and the cameramen (they'er talented) and most importantly, what about the Stone Cold Look-a-like security guard you see every episode? They're on air talent yet nobody remembers them.

It's less confusing having announcers and Part-Timers seperate and saying what they announce. Sure we know who's who, but what about a brand new WWE Fan or a non-WWE Fan intrested in the workings of a show? Everything is confusing on this page and needs to be sorted out. If it envolves adding a few more sections, then go ahead! But as it is, everything is squashed and confusing.

And most importantly, it appears on WWE Roster, that DSW and OVW are brands of the WWE! And no where on the page does it say that they are not. OVW and DSW are independently owned and are "Developmental Territories" not Brands.Vince McMahon has no political power in the Developmental Territories. Once the Superstars are booked for an OVW or DSW show, they work with OVW/DSW Management. WWE may pay alot of tose guys but they don't own OVW/DSW.

From The Holy Trinity of Sports Entertainment

Hi, your sig

I can't help but notice that it still links directly to User:Moe Epsilon, which doesn't exist anymore (: --205.188.116.197 00:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

COME BACK

Moe Epsilon come back! Batman2005 20:37, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

He's baaaaaack

Hey babe, good you're back. ;) Highway ^Daytrippers 21:42, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

monobook restored

per your request. NawlinWiki 21:54, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

thanks

Thanks for reverting the edit to my user page. Sharp eyes! Girolamo Savonarola 22:55, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

yay

Glad to see you back Moe! ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 01:09, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

You're back

It's always good to see. Good luck out there. RyanGerbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 14:00, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

WP:NAM

Hi. There's some debate about the shortcut WP:NAM to the essay Wikipedia:No angry mastodons. Some people vote for keeping it, but the major essay authors themselves suggest removing it (see reasoning at here - shortly, it sounds too like a policy). What's your opinion? CP/M ^comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 18:09, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I never got the time to thank you

For opening up this. My connection got cut just right after my incedent with him, so I didn't have any time to try and contanct someone about it. Dunno what would have happened had you not taken the case. 69.145.123.171 ^Hello! Tuesday, September 12, 2006, 20:05 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Methinks he's a prime candidate for an indefblock. 69.145.123.171 ^Hello! Tuesday, September 12, 2006, 20:14 (UTC)

Ah, so we think alike. I'm sure that they'll want to squash any chance of his return, though, by making sure he can't edit through that account. ;) 69.145.123.171 ^Hello! Tuesday, September 12, 2006, 20:20 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for unsubst'ing my indefblock templates. I appreciate it. --Yamla 22:21, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

User:Mgdriven

Why the change ([1]?--BSI 14:39, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Doug Basham

In reference to Basham's name... I have his senior yearbook in which it shows his name to be, in fact, Lyle Douglas Basham. I added the link I did to reinforce the fact of his full birthname. I'd stated all this on the discussion page, with no one commenting at the time. As per discussion at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions the yearbook should stand as reliable primary source. I don't want an edit war, but I do think that a biography should be accurate :-) -- Supersquid 20:56, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Good point, I posted the question to WP:BLP/N (more applicable than Admin noticeboard) in regards to sourcing from non-web based items. My point is that paper predates the WWW by several centuries, and still the majority of the written word has yet to make it to cyberspace, yet there are thousands of articles on Wikipedia that reference analog pages (lol) which are considered reputable sources. I can always scan the yearbook and post it to the talk page (if it is permissable under fair use) on the issue of verifiability, but to be honest that would be overkill IMHO (besides it'd take more time that I'm willing to expend lol). I just want to do right in regards to a home-town hero.

Supersquid 22:30, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Good to see you back!

Ok, a week late, but I just discovered you're back. Welcome back! Great to see you! --Durin 14:41, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Warning

A warning to avoid personal attacks in regard to Sceptre; your comment was highly incivil. Ral315 (talk) 02:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Welcome back

Long time no see. Good to have you back. -- bd (talk to me) (watch me) 06:56, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Whoa, you're back! That's great! —this is messedrocker (talk) 10:47, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Succession boxes

Who decided that they should just be gone? If it was just a decision by yourself, all of it should be reverted. You can't just decide on something big like that, without discussing it on the project page first. RobJ1981 20:05, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Konnan

lol well this format should still be uused as far as im concerned.... or all will have is list and succession boxes and we dont want that... plus it was part of the peer reviews of the konnan article and it is the only article listed in the good article standard --- Paulley 21:24, 22 September 2006

SummerSlam

I use Windows XP and Internet Explorer 6.0, and your edits just create a HUGE white space for me. I took a screen-cap to show you what I see [2] TJ Spyke 22:49, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Great, it now looks the same way it did when I edited it. [3] TJ Spyke 23:09, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

The Halo's RfA

Moe Epsilon... Thank you very much for the constructive criticism in your oppose comment in my request for adminship. Ultimately, no consensus was reached, and I failed to be promoted, but I am very grateful for your coments. I will strive to better myself in all areas, especially Mainspace. Thε Halo Θ

Because

You're helping us build something amazing. 69.145.123.171 _{Yes, I'm really an IP} Saturday, September 23, 2006, 00:42 (UTC)

Your restoration requests

All done. Your user page still looks blank, but the edit history is intact - so you can revert to any old version (be sure to refresh the history page if it still shows the old one though).--Konstable 01:34, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

All done =)--Konstable 01:44, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Whoa! You came back!

G'day Moe! When did you get back? I was in another debate over another User:OzWrestlemaniac sockpuppet and the internal link to your user page turned blue. I thought "somebody's been stuffin' around with Moe's page" but it was actually you. Good to see you back buddy. Normy132 03:16, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm glad you've returned, Moe. Keep up the good work. And don't disappear again. That's really starting to get annoying. --TantalumTelluride 03:25, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Can you do me a favour?

Hey Moe. I need you to do me a massive favour. As you may (or may not) hae noticed, I go on Wikibreak tomorrow. I just had another user (User:Curse of Fenric) leave a message on my talk page concerning a possible sockpuppet (yes, another one) of User:OzWrestlemaniac. Nothing is concrete at the moment but I said I'd keep an eye on the situation. Seeing as you were involved in this issue at the beginning, do you think you could help him out with any issues he's having? I probably won't respond to this, I've got a truckload of revision to do. Thanks! Normy132 10:03, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Moe - if you check back to my talk page you'll see that the user concerned has (somewhat tersely I think but anyway) apologised. I think my message on her talk page hit a nerve and I put her in a spot that she couldn't get out of. It should be the end of that matter, but I do have the relevant page on my watch list if it happens again. Curse of Fenric 12:38, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

reply

Thanks that answered alot of my concerns.. and i agree the champonships and accomplishment heading does seem long for what it is. Also i dont know if you have noticed or not but recently i have been putting company subsections in wrestler bios in italics... see James Curtin, Andrew Simmons, Dudley Boyz... i dont know it may just be me but i did it by accident once and it seemed to fit nicely in the articles. esspecially in comparison with articles that dont do it like Christopher Daniels. anyway it was just an idea i toying with and i wanted your oppinion --- Paulley 10:18, 3 October 2006

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Crzrussian 2

Could I get some more information about your removing the section headers at the rfa? Your summary said:

"removed section headers; they are making the RFA TOC unnessecarily long. We've had bigger RFA's that never had them, and this should't be an exception"

The TOC was exactly 5 lines long and was never going to get any longer, how was that "unnessecarily long"? As for what's happened before, perhaps no one ever thought to add them for easier navigation.

I'm not trying to make a big deal out of this, I just don't understand your reasoning—and I was quite frustrated trying to find the end of the section I wanted to add a comment to; that's going to get worse as the process procedes. Thanks.—Chidom ^talk  04:27, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

SITCIOT

I changed it to redirect to Click It or Ticket, I'll admit I'm not totally confident if this redirect is needed/related or not. So feel free to revert.--Andeh 15:59, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, #2 will be fine. Good thinking.--Andeh 16:11, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Doc's "please refrain from editting Tony's page" comment

M.E. -
Doc knows he can tell it to me straight. While I would like to be able to communicate with Tony, if Mr. Glasgow reckons I'm just making it worse, I believe him. Thanks for the thought though!
brenneman ^{L} 02:47, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Objectivity

Search for this term still redirects to "Accuracy and precision". Why is that? Search for "Objectivity" should go to its disambiguation page, and "Accuracy and precision" should perhaps be placed on that page. Amerindianarts 00:25, 9 October 2006 (UTC) Sorry to bother. It appears the search function needs awhile to refresh. Amerindianarts 00:29, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

WP:RM

Your listing at WP:RM was improperly formatted. I'm assuming that it was a noncontroversial proposal, but it was listed in the controversial section with the wrong template and no discussion set up on the article's talk page. —Mets501 (talk) 01:53, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing it! See you around! —Mets501 (talk) 02:02, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

No, WP:RM has only had a noncontroversial section since yesterday or the day before :-) —Mets501 (talk) 02:03, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: Edit Count

Here you go:

Statistics for: Moe_Epsilon
(Permissions: N/A)
- Total: 23863 -
Main: 12014
Talk: 629
User: 2644
User talk: 5548
Wikipedia: 2322
Wikipedia talk: 477
Image: 102
MediaWiki talk: 1
Template: 98
Template talk: 2
Help: 3
Category: 17
Category talk: 1
Portal: 5

Total edits: 23863
w/ edit summary: 21158 (88.66%*)
w/ manual edit summary: 18039 (75.59%*)
Minor edits: 780 (3.26%*)
First known edit: Jul 10, 2005

• - percentages are rounded down to the nearest hundredth.
  

Let me know if you need anything else, or if you need help downloading the tool (it should work on most computers.) Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 21:48, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. --Rettetast 23:30, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my page! I barely saw it before it was gone!  :-) Confiteordeo 20:23, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

RuthieK and page redirection

Sounds like exactly what needed to be done. My only concern would be whether or not that redirect should exist at all, or whether it would be considered 'pov' itself. --InShaneee 20:25, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Apparently, "arab" refers to speakers of Arabic, meaning this user is trying to make this about ethnicity. I'd nuke it, to be safe. --InShaneee 20:39, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Consider it nuke'd. :) --InShaneee 21:07, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Reverting at WWE roster page

I added a post on the talk page about it, see that before reverting it back. This problem needs a compromise. Snitsky is known as Gene Snitsky AND Snitsky, same goes for Mr. Kennedy/Ken Kennedy. RobJ1981 22:52, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, how can we compromise though? We've tried compromising on Kennedy and TJ Spyke insists on changing it back despite WWE.com's references to him as Ken. For the same reason, I felt it should be Gene Snitsky, but it's just an edit war. And I really don't like it, but I'm trying to help make this page accurate. DaHumorist 18:53, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

WP:LA

The TOC is great. Any updating between active and semi-active is a waste of time, people go back and forth often and the Steve Block update will wipe out any changes anyway. Inactive is different, changes for people who have completely stopped editing or have returned is worth doing. But I think you just want to make my life difficult updating User:NoSeptember/List of Administrators ;). NoSeptember 06:53, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

re: Album covers

There's really no discussion to be had, or rather the discussion has already been had. Wikipedia has established policy regarding decorative use of fair use images, which is what I removed in the articles being discussed. Revert their removal again, and you will be the one contravening policy. By the way, thanks ever so much for the personal attack in calling me a "nuisance"; I really appreciate it. --keepsleeping slack off! 19:42, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

User:MarkS/Extra edit buttons/dev2.js

Thanks for letting me know about this. This came about because I wanted the page deleted. However, you can't add the deletion request template to a javascript page so I actually moved the page to a 'dev2' (without the .js at the end). As far as I know the dev2 page has been deleted. However, I forgot that the system would automatically create a redirect page so I'm still stuck with the original page which I don't know how to delete. Any ideas? --MarkS (talk) 20:13, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

agreement!

Yep...frogs raining from the sky, cats sleeping with dogs...I hope there's no bad feelings. Rx StrangeLove 20:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Request for arbitration

You is officially informed about this [4] Berton 00:31, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm back

Hi moe epsilon. China just lifted its ban on Wikipedia. I saw your post on my talk page. I'm happy that people actually noticed ;-)

You may not remember me anymore, but,

Regards, Exir Kamalabadi^{Join Esperanza!} 08:17, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I saw your reply. Wikipedia has changed a lot. Radiant is back, Essjay and Redwolf24 is gone and the WikiProjects has changed a lot. PS. I don't think China will ban Wikipedia for long moments now, not after their ban-certain-articles policy. --Exir Kamalabadi^{Join Esperanza!} 23:02, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Can you tell me the full story of how Redwolf24 and Essjay left? Why did Redwolf24 go? What "other thing" in real life did Essjay pursue? --Exir Kamalabadi^{Join Esperanza!} 00:07, 19 October 2006 (UTC)