Content deleted Content added
RichardWeiss (talk | contribs) |
m Remaining missing end tag addressed |
||
Line 1:
Ctrl F to find something. You are welcome to add comments here but if you do please drop me a line letting me know on my talk page.
==[[Peace walk]]==
Line 49 ⟶ 43:
== Oversize article comments ==
Please stop putting these comments on the article pages. Comments go on Talk: pages. [[User:Jayjg|Jayjg ]][[User_talk:Jayjg|<sup
== [[Rastafarianism]] → [[Rastafari (Religion)]] ==
Line 84 ⟶ 78:
Anarion's contribution was signed with his real name, Jordi.
:''
Compare Mormonism: Mormons tend to prefer Latter Day Saint theology for their religion (and Latter Day Saints instead of Mormons), but since Mormon is the better known term the article is there. -- Jordi¿…? 07:45, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Since it is likely to be a disputed point, I asked him to clarify his vote at RM - I suspect that he will vote no, but I think it's best not to end up arguing about who meant what. Anyway, don't let this get to you too much.
Line 262 ⟶ 256:
==the ugly image==
thanks! It doesn't look like we'll get entirely rid of it anytime soon, but I do encourage you to continue to voice your opposition on the relevant talk pages, and to be on the outlook for deletion votes. I'm really sorry people have to put up with this. regards, [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|('''ᛏ''')]]</small>
:PS, it's on VfD again, [[Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion#March_22]]. The vote should be more widely advertised this time. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|('''ᛏ''')]]</small>
:it's gone now, I am glad to say. Thanks for your support. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|('''ᛏ''')]]</small>
==Trey Stone is back==
Line 275 ⟶ 269:
== I am sorry ==
Hello friend.
Line 346 ⟶ 338:
==Thank you==
Thank you for supporting my adminship — I vow to use my super powers for good not evil. [[User:Mel Etitis|Mel Etitis]] ([[User talk:Mel Etitis|<
== Jamaica ==
Line 379 ⟶ 371:
==List of notable cardinals==
There is absolutely no reason for the only list of cardinals on Wikipedia to be of living cardinals,or for there not to be a list of distinguished past cardinals.--Louis E./le@put.com/[[User:12.144.5.2|12.144.5.2]] 18:40, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
<p> OK,better have [[List of deceased cardinals]] than nothing.However,I don't think it should include ''every'' deceased cardinal,only ''particularly important'' ones...not sure how best to convey that.The place for a listing of every cardinal ever is in the Cardinals Category,assuming it's added to every cardinal's bio.--Louis E./[[User:12.144.5.2|12.144.5.2]] 01:59, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)</p>
==Abortion==
Sigh. Maybe it's time to get the admins involved. - [[User:Jersyko|Jersyko]] 01:19, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)
Line 424 ⟶ 416:
=== Agwiii ===
Why does none of this surprise me? It was also pretty obvious that few if any of the claims he made about himself on his User page were true. He seems to have disappeared now, at least in that guise. It shouldn't be too difficult to spot him again... [[User:Mel Etitis|Mel Etitis]] ([[User talk:Mel Etitis|<
:Yes, almost no doubt at all. Peculiar that he should use a pseudonym here, then use it on the Net in such a way as to give away his identity. But then he didn't seem any brighter than he was self-controlled. I'm astonished that his qualifications are what he claimed, though — and his employers should be even more worried... [[User:Mel Etitis|Mel Etitis]] ([[User talk:Mel Etitis|<
=== RfC page move ===
Line 454 ⟶ 446:
== Copyvio images ==
Done. [[User:Mel Etitis|Mel Etitis]] ([[User talk:Mel Etitis|<
== Solana/Cumbey et. al. ==
Line 568 ⟶ 560:
== 23-F ==
The dispute tag was there because there was a dispute, and remains a dispute over content. Someone moved part of the text and in the process either removed or moved elsewhere the reason for the dispute. But the article is littered with unsubstantiated POVs. [[User:Jtdirl|<
Hey Squeek,
never suggested that you acted in bad faith. Just that you did not know that there was a serious issue with that page. I had left a detailed note explaining the POV issues previously on the page. Basically the page tried to do two things: cover the attempted coup ''and'' do it in a page on one of the coup leaders. I pointed out that the page was POV and it was meant to be a biographical page but had two paragraphs on the person and the rest a POV account of the coup. Whomever responded moved the 23F still ''en bloc'' to a new page, with the dispute tag, but didn't bring along the talk page stuff outlining the problems. That was their error, not mine. I was rushing out the door when I saw your change and had not time to trace back the talk page stuff ''at that stage'' but there ''was'' a serious POV error with the page. It was far from the encyclopaedic standard one could expect in an encyclopaedia. [[User:Jtdirl|<
Good work, mate. [[User:Jtdirl|<
== Confusing signature ==
Hi. It seems the entire page is somehow fubar. I'm going to delete the duplicate violations section. - [[User:Texture|<
== delete ==
Line 673 ⟶ 665:
== Odd behaviour ==
By removing your name from [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Cumbey]] (with an explanation that's difficult to follow, to say the least) you've left all those who supported you in a difficult position. By adding your support to the wholly spurious [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Whig]], with no explanaion for your action, and despite all the comments made by others, you've divested yourself of yet another layer of credibility. What's going on? [[User:Mel Etitis|Mel Etitis]] ([[User talk:Mel Etitis|<
== Fidel Castro and NPOV ==
Line 740 ⟶ 732:
|-
|[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|30px|Warning sign]]
|
|}
Line 775 ⟶ 766:
You are not a deletionist, you are a Wikipedia obsessionist and vandal. You are writing lies about me and anything/one that I support. In your distorted view of the world, you think I have multiple identities. This is simply one of your lies. You are absolutely and completely not a notable person, although I am sure your sockpupets and sycophants will fly to your aid. Proudly and accurately written by [[User:RexJudicata|Rex Judicata]] 13:02, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
:It was CesarB and not me who pointed out your sockpuppetry. Being not notable is just how I want it. I don't write articles about myself or my activities at wikipedia. I have written no lies. Please don't remove my comments from now on or accuse me of vandalism or libel. It was you who impersonated me and threatened to see me deported to Florida, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:24, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
Practically everything Squeakbox has written anywhere is a blatant lie and I am happy to see that others here see it! I proudly sign my name as CONSTANCE E. CUMBEY.
== User pages ==
Line 893 ⟶ 885:
== re: Threats ==
I am just quoting what's been said. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User%3ARexJudicata] for the log entry. [[User:Inter|Inter]]\[[User_talk:Inter|<sup
==EDITING/DELETING==
Line 973 ⟶ 965:
== Thanks ==
ive been reverting vandalism to [[Bolton Wanderers F.C.|Bolton Wanderers]] all week. thanks for giving us a helping hand. if the person that i keep catching continues to vandalise this page, can i refer the problem to you? so you can take the appropriate action.
:Thanks for the link! [[user:Agent003|Agent003]]
Line 1,035 ⟶ 1,027:
== Holy S**t Batman! ==
Hi! I have the task of going through [[:Category:Geography stubs]] once a week, taking out the ten or so new stubs that haven't been correctly stubbed and putting them in their appropriate places. Ten a week, normally. Only in the last 24 hours 212 new ones have arrives, all of which should be stubbed with {{tl|CentralAm-geo-stub}}. Are you trying to give me a hernia? I mean, good work on the stub creation, but... [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...
:S'alright - it was just a bit of a shock... leave it for a day or two - I'm trying to push through a separate Honduras-geo-stub at WP:WSS. With about 250 stubs for that country now there should be no real problem with it, and it will save re-stubbing them if it does. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...
::Thanks. As I said above, a new Honduras-geo-stub is likely to be made as a result of the suddent population increase in that category. I'll let you know when it gets made, so you cannuse it on any new articles you make! :) [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...
== [[IP address]] ==
Line 1,062 ⟶ 1,054:
==Geo-stubs==
Hi - there are now separate stub templates for Honduras and Guatemala: {{tl|Honduras-geo-stub}} and {{tl|Guatemala-geo-stub}}. The speed with which you're making Central American stubs, we'll probably need some for other coutries in the region soon, too! [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...
== ach! ==
Line 1,203 ⟶ 1,195:
I hereby give you this '''Barnstar''' for extreme patience with other Wikipedians.
[[Image:Original Barnstar.png]]
Take care, [[User:Dbraceyrules|D. J. Bracey]] [[User_talk:Dbraceyrules|(talk)]] 23:14, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
Line 1,318 ⟶ 1,310:
Have this Working Man's Barnstar for hard work on Wikipedia.
[[Image:
Take care, [[User:V. Molotov|Molotov]] [[User_talk:V. Molotov| (talk)]] [[Image:California_state_flag.png|25px]] 20:14, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
Line 1,377 ⟶ 1,369:
==RFA==
[[Image:WikiThanks.png|left|frame|Thanks]] I want to thank you very much for your vote on my RFA. Greatly apperciated, I owe you one! [[User:Journalist| <
Well, Ive finally learned to cope with it, and Im looking forward to tackling it a few months from now. [[User:Journalist| <
==Technicality==
Line 1,414 ⟶ 1,406:
:--[[User:Sebastiankessel|Sebastian Kessel]] <sup>''[[User_talk:Sebastiankessel|Talk]]''</sup> 20:14, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
==[[User:Who|Who]]'s RfA==
Thank you for supporting my [[User:Who|masters]] RfA. He appreciates your support and comments and looks forward to better serving Wikipedia the best he can. Of course [[User:Whobot|I]] will be doing all of the real work. He would have responded to you directly, but he is currently out of town, and wanted to thank you asap. Thanks again. --[[User:Who|Who]]'s [[User:Whobot|mop]]?¿? 20:57, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
==Depts==
Line 1,430 ⟶ 1,423:
== My RfA ==
Squeaks-- Thank you for your support on my RfA. I don't have much time to write a long thank you note, but I hope you know of my gratitude. Thanks. --[[User:Lord Voldemort|<
== Re: Buju Banton ==
Line 1,442 ⟶ 1,435:
For the several wonderful things you have done for me on Wikipedia. I'll start back contributing, but I have a pretty crammed schedule, so it can't be much anyway. You are a true friend.
[[Image:
[[Image:
Truly take care (I left you a note on the Spanish site, by the way) See you around [[User:V. Molotov|Molotov]] [[User_talk:V. Molotov| (talk)]] [[Image:California_state_flag.png|25px]] 21:44, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Line 1,528 ⟶ 1,521:
<div style="align: center; padding: 1em; border: solid 2px darkpink; background-color: lightpink;">
[[Image:Tournesol.png|left|80px]]'''<
Thanks for your support on my [[Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Francs2000|request for bureaucratship]].
Line 1,570 ⟶ 1,563:
Hi. You put a deletion notice on [[:Image:Federal.gif]]. I believe I have now licenced it as <nowiki>{{logo}}</nowiki>, I certainly recognise the motif and it is genuine. Can you make sure everything is okay and either dispute my licence (and let me know) or remove the deletion notice. Cheers, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:02, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
:Thanks for tagging that, I thought it might be a sports logo but wasn't sure. It's fine too, we are allowed to use logos :D - [[User:Cohesion|cohesion]]<
== Peace treaty ==
Line 1,635 ⟶ 1,628:
SqueakBox, if you had remembered [[WP:AGF]] and you had taken a look at the "supposed" source this problem would habe been avoided. If you had simply exposed your doubts in a civilized manner the problem would have been solved very quickly and you would not feel now as you do. Thank you. [[User:Zapatancas|Zapatancas]] 16:56, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Hello again, SqueakBox, and thanks for [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MarkGallagher&diff=next&oldid=38012722 your latest epistle]. It's not as civil as I'd have liked it to be, but hey, you're the one writing it, not I. Mate, I never said — <
:Actually, I referred to it as "The article SqueakBox linked to", which is a pretty strong implication that you ''did'' add the notice. My apologies for that comment; it ''was'' wrong. 'Course, the bit about civility stands. [[User:MarkGallagher|fuddlemark]] ([[User talk:MarkGallagher|fuddle me!]]) 11:46, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
Line 1,648 ⟶ 1,641:
==Request for Mediation==
You recently filed a Request for Mediation; your case has been acccepted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, [[Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero]].
:''For the Mediation Committee,'' <
:<small>(This message delivered by [[User:Celestianpower|Celestianpower]] ([[User talk:Celestianpower|talk]]) on behalf of [[User:Essjay|Essjay]].)</small>
Line 1,656 ⟶ 1,649:
#If you are currently interested in being considered for adminship, please be sure your name is in '''bold'''; if you are opposed to being considered for adminship, please cross out your name (but do not delete it, as it will automatically be re-added in the next page update).
#Please check to see if you are in the right category for classification by number of edits.
Thank you, and have a wiki wiki day! [[User:
== Selassie I ==
Line 1,676 ⟶ 1,669:
== hashish article quality ==
Hiya, Squeak. I was wondering if you'd like to work together to tighten up the hashish articles. They have a very jocular tone that I'd like to tighten up some, add links where appropriate, and as somebody hinted at, "bring them up to sync with the rest of the cannabis articles." What say you? <b>... </b><span style="background-color: #11cbc4; width: 52px; height: 16px; font-size: 12px; p { text-align: center; font-
== [[War on Drugs]] article improvement ==
Line 1,929 ⟶ 1,922:
==Arbitration case==
After reading your arbitration case more closely, it states that if any user, either you or Zapatancas, edit José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero-related articles, either using their own account or a sockpuppet, users may be blocked. You have violated this agreement by using [[User:Skanking]] as a sockpuppet account. Repeat violations may result in another block, if not longer. Think more closely next time. [[User:Kilo-Lima|<
What, like [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jos%C3%A9_Luis_Rodr%C3%ADguez_Zapatero&diff=prev&oldid=62021589 this] you mean? If you believe Skanking shouldn't have made this edit perhaps you would care to revert it, though if you do I will go to the Spanish press as wikipedia has a bad reputation for insulting living people, this edit had been in place for an hour and twenty one minutes and this man is the President of Spain so if you insult him you insult Spain as a sovereign country. Maybe you would like to think of the implications of this before denigrating Skanking, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
:Sockpuppets are not allowed to edit Wikipedia, and all of the edits have been reverted. Why are you referring Skanking in the third person? The edit has not been in place for one hour and twenty minutes, but '''29''' days ago.
{{cquote|though if you do I will go to the Spanish press as wikipedia has a bad reputation for insulting living people, this edit had been in place for an hour and twenty one minutes and this man is the President of Spain so if you insult him you insult Spain as a sovereign country. Maybe you would like to think of the implications of this before denigrating Skanking.}} Is this a legal threat? Stop editorializing people. [[User:Kilo-Lima|<
How can going to the press with a piece of vandalism be a legal threat? I dont editorialise people and dont have a clue what you are on about. I note you didnt revert the Zapatero edit, perhaps because Skanking was revertrting some vandalism as calling the President Robber of the Dead is offensive to a living person and to Spain and after one hour and 21 minutes there were no wikipeida editors willing or bothered to remove such offensiveness. My simple question was what is more important, the integrity of wikipedia or the arbcom, and you have clearly answered. Why would I not refer to Skanking in the third person? he is some black guy from Belize from what he said (which I believe is the real reason why he was blocked given the general air of elitism and rascism prevalent in all aspects of wiki[pedia). I hope you enjoyed your little game, I was actually just minding my own business and you came along to ruin my day, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:06, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Line 1,939 ⟶ 1,932:
You should also remember that what the arbcom decides is not legally binding and indeed if the wikipedia system of justice were to be used in any country in the world it would be assumed that every case was a miscarriage of justice. Neither you or I have been shown any evidence that I am Skanking so please dont ask me why I would refer to him in the third person. Anyway, part of my job is to find out what young net savvy English speakers are thinking, and you are a fine example of the American spirit. It would have been nice to have been informed when and why I was blocked and for how long as is your responsibility as an admin. If you want to add blocks please inform me here, otherwise I would rather you didnt make any comments because I am no longer interested in any opinions you have and your duty is to be sensitive when blocking or dealing with a blocked person. All I want to do is make constructive edits to wikipedia in a peaceful manner. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:33, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
:I have had to unblock you prematurely, due to ''way'' too much collateral damage and too much autoblocks. I hope you can now contribute to Wikipedia in a normal, correct and calm manner. Do not create any more sock puppet accounts, as you will be blocked again, and it will be longer than five days. [[User:Kilo-Lima|<
::That was the now banned Google Accelerator, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:14, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Line 1,946 ⟶ 1,939:
==Requested move of United Provinces of Central America==
I noticed you have contributed to the discussion at '''[[United Provinces of Central America]]''' and thought you might be interested in an move request there. - <span style="border:1px solid blue;padding:1px;">[[User talk:AjaxSmack|<
== Reverting referenced content ==
Line 1,952 ⟶ 1,945:
==Edit warring on Pedro Carmona==
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly on the page [[Pedro Carmona]]. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule. Please stop the warring, the POV disputes and all of this hassle. Please just accept that Pedro Carmona was president for a day, even if you don't think this is so; this is the introduction of false information and should be removed immediately. Please just stop; if you continue to do this, you will be blocked—again. [[User:Kilo-Lima|<
You appear not to know the first thing about Venezuela. Pursuing your whatever with me and making that more important than the encyclopedia will only have one result, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:58, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
==President==
I am ten steps ahead of you, because and I am aware of the "conflict of interest", but I am not involved in the wars as such, so if I were to block you, it would fall under the blocking policy. [[User:Kilo-Lima|<
Ten steps ahead of me in what? In knowing who was President of Venezuela. Please dont leave nonsensical statements on my talk page as the fact that I cant understand your messages may cause me some distress, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Line 1,963 ⟶ 1,956:
:They are not going to cause you distress, unless you can't understand them. Pedro Carmona is listed as a president on [[List of Presidents of Venezuela]] and on a template, [[Template:VEpresidents|VEpresidents]]; why can you not just accept this? You are the one adding in POV and false facts when all of references, like the BBC, [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1927678.stm here], state otherwise. To quote:
{{Cquote|But his time in office was short-lived - only 48 hours - and Hugo Chavez was restored to power on 14 April.}}
It may have been a short time, but he certainly was president. [[User:Kilo-Lima|<
A number of people disagee with this, not just me. You have one dated ref proving it and you are using that to rewrite history, which probably makes you a Carmona supporter and your claim that you arent really involved in this dispute is self-evidently not true. If you think I haver added in false information please provide diffs or dont claim such a thing, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:27, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
:This isn't even a dispute; it's the difference between a fact and a lie. And you source is wrong: count how many "presidents" it thinks VE has. I counted 50, but {{tl|VEpresidents}} gets 61? Hmm... I wonder who's wrong? We have more sources to prove me and Sandy are correct than you have to prove us wrong. [[User:Kilo-Lima|<
Yes but you shoul;dn't be editing and being the admin. The fact that you claim the Chavez viewpoint is a lie shows you are a Carmona supporter. Why only allow the cCarmona viewpoint and suppress the viewpoint of the Venezuelan government and its supporters. of course there is a dispute and I am not alone either in thinking that or in believing that you are using wikipedia to rewrite history, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:24, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Line 2,059 ⟶ 2,052:
==Drug-free==
Hi there SqueakBox, Im
== I am missing... ==
Line 2,069 ⟶ 2,062:
Gracias...
[[Image:Flag of Ireland.svg|20px]][[User:Camillus McElhinney|<span style="color
==My thoughts==
Hi there SqueakBox, it's
More of my thoughts have been added to the [[Wikipedia talk:List of drug-free Wikipedians]] page. — [[User:
==Buju Banton vandalism==
Line 2,205 ⟶ 2,198:
==Arbitration case==
After reading your arbitration case more closely, it states that if any user, either you or Zapatancas, edit José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero-related articles, either using their own account or a sockpuppet, users may be blocked. You have violated this agreement by using [[User:Skanking]] as a sockpuppet account. Repeat violations may result in another block, if not longer. Think more closely next time. [[User:Kilo-Lima|<
What, like [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jos%C3%A9_Luis_Rodr%C3%ADguez_Zapatero&diff=prev&oldid=62021589 this] you mean? If you believe Skanking shouldn't have made this edit perhaps you would care to revert it, though if you do I will go to the Spanish press as wikipedia has a bad reputation for insulting living people, this edit had been in place for an hour and twenty one minutes and this man is the President of Spain so if you insult him you insult Spain as a sovereign country. Maybe you would like to think of the implications of this before denigrating Skanking, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)== Re: Range block ==
Line 2,212 ⟶ 2,205:
==NPA==
Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks|personal attacks]]. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing by admins or [[Wikipedia:Banning policy|banned]] by the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee|arbitration committee]]. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please [[Wikipedia:Resolving disputes|resolve disputes]] appropriately. Thank you. <!-- Template:Npa3 --> Please don't call me a rogue admin; some admins may take this as humorous, others do not. Consider what you are saying before you make such judgments. [[User:Kilo-Lima|<
Well I am sure people can judge for themselves whether locking a page and then editing it is exclusively is the sign of a rogue admin or not, as they can look at [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Promise_Key&diff=next&oldid=67318658 this] edit and draw their own conclusions. Please dont presume I dont think before I speak, you sound like somebody inauthority whereas the reality is you are just a kid and as I made clear before I have no interest in anything you have to say. It just goes to show what happens when you give someone without experience power, this is a net issue that clearly needs addressing. Please stop being patronising and grow up a bit if you wish to be effective but fair in the position of (relative) power in which you find yourself. BTW I use the am not an admin box to let people know, you would be surprised how many people ,assume I am one and it helps avoid misunderstandings, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:21, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Line 2,228 ⟶ 2,221:
==[[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/SqueakBox and Zapatancas]]==
Adopting a commonsense approach to identification, the administrators of Wikipedia have decided to enforce the provisions of this case against anyone who exhibits behavior similar to that of SqueakBox and Zapatancas, to wit: ''Hagiographer and Pura Paja, and anyone else who engages in warring, tendentious edits, personal attacks and harassment related to [[José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero]] and related articles.''
Pura Paja has been blocked indefinitely because of his username.
Line 2,302 ⟶ 2,295:
and probably others.
Nice to make your acquaintance --<span class="nounderlinelink">[[User:Jaxhere|<span class="buttonlink" title="Jaxhere--User" style="border: 2px #999999;white-space:nowrap;background-color:#ffffee;padding:1px 5px 1px 5px;color:black;font-size:90%"><
== for some "in" people ==
Line 2,333 ⟶ 2,326:
==Central America==
I find it hilarious that you would say "What English speakers think is irrelevant".
The last time I checked, my country, [[Belize]], is an '''English''' speaking country. We are part of the Central American '''subcontinent''' and so is Mexico, regardless of what the The EU or UN's definition is. This is a geographical fact, just look at the map people!!! 20 November 2006 07:07 (UTC)
== marijuana CO ==
Line 2,408 ⟶ 2,401:
== The Sock Vandalizing Your Page... ==
Hello SqueakBox, I reported that sock ([[User:SqueakBoxx]]) that was vandalizing your page to an administrator. Hope this helps.[[User:Persian Poet Gal|<
:*Update: Sock was blocked by an admin, hopefully that will ward off the troll :P.[[User:Persian Poet Gal|<
==Swello==
Line 2,489 ⟶ 2,482:
<div style="float:center;border-style:solid;border-color:blue;background-color:AliceBlue;border-width:1px;text-align:left;padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">[[Image:Smiley.svg|left|60px]]
[[User:E. Sn0 =31337=|<
</div><!-- Template:smile -->
Love what you're doing with the article, m8. :) [[User:E. Sn0 =31337=|<
== marijiana ==
I can appreciate your hard work, but a couple of points. I never said "cannabis is exclusively marijuana", I said "cannabis is a plant genus". I said that "cannabis (drug)" is quite awkward, and may not be ideal according to Wikipedia naming conventions. I called for a discussion, and am quite astounded by the arrogance and cavallier attitudes of you and others who a) removed the merge tag, b) were hostile to a DISCUSSION of the issue, etc. Much of what Wikipedia is has to do with discussion, persusaion, and consensus building. I was met with "I am opposed to debate", and "please don't get in the way". Thanks for pointing out that "marijuana" is a predominantly American term. If I might also point that Wikipedia does not belong to you, and you should be open to a discussion, and not meet other Wikipedia members with overt hostility. --[[User:Bhuston|Bill Huston]] [[User talk:Bhuston|<sup
Well I didnt remove the merge tag and I did engage in debate with you, making my reasons very clear, and hopefully persuaded you (a) that cannabis is considered a drug and (b) that marijuana is an exclusively US term for some but not all of what cannabis users consume when they take this plant as a drug. You seem to be the one who is narked not me, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:25, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Line 2,529 ⟶ 2,522:
== Sorry ==
Look, I am sorry for the false accusation, but I believe that you owe me an apology also for your heavy-handed response. If you take a look, I am here to make an effort to improve this place also, and this is probably the first mistake in my 2,000 edits since coming here. I hope that you wouldn't go after new users like this, because we should be inviting here, not self-serving. This is a collaboration, not a project of personal bests. Merry Christmas to you also. :: <em>[[User:Colin Keigher|Colin Keigher]]</em> <
:Because people like Brandt bother me, I have [http://afreak.ca/other-stuff/legal/ taken steps] to ensure that if for whatever reason he includes me in his listing of editors (I have the article watched) that he cannot use my photo in his god-awful page. :: <em>[[User:Colin Keigher|Colin Keigher]]</em> <
==[[Bong]]==
I don't appreciate you referring to me as a vandal; you may want to check out my userpage. Please read my reply to your comments and the comments on the [[Bong]] page before reverting it again. Also be aware of the [[WP:3RR]] rule. <b>[[User:Ohnoitsjamie|OhNo<
:It is vandalism to remove cites. Just give references, dont remove the cites as I assume it means you cant source and therefore if you remove them again I will follow policy and remove the unsourced material, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:33, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
Line 2,539 ⟶ 2,532:
I'd quit reverting the legitimate edits to [[bong]], you're far past 3RR, and if you continue, I WILL report you to the admins. Thank you. [[User:71.147.39.11|71.147.39.11]] 20:30, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
: SqueakBox is not in violation of 3RR. I only mentioned it earlier because I asked that he read my comments before reverting again. While I didn't think the cites were necessary, they meet [[WP:Reliable sources]] in the context, and it's better to err on the side of caution. <b>[[User:Ohnoitsjamie|OhNo<
==Pinochet==
Line 2,546 ⟶ 2,539:
== Hello 2 ==
Have you ever considered [[WP:ARCHIVE|archiving]] this talk page? It's kinda huge :) — [[User:AnemoneProjectors|AnemoneProj]]''
No, I keep it deliberately that way, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:38, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
:Why? It just took me 25 seconds to load it. You should consider those of us who don't have the benefit of broadband. 308 kilobytes is a bit much. — [[User:AnemoneProjectors|AnemoneProj]]''
25 seconds isn't a lot; if I archive then I cant find anything, my own connection isn't that fast and I have to download pages at least twice as large. I am persoanlly not in favour of archiving any talk pages and while I recognise I am in a minority I can at least control my user talk page. I have found at times that with a few items on the talk page a trollish editor can pick up on stuff and misuse it, that has stopped with my enoprmous page so its a protective mechanism too (EE isn't controversial but a lot of political articles I edit are), [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:11, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
:Fair enough, it's your talk page, you can do whatever you want with it. It took 31 seconds to load this time though. Also, you don't have to archive by date, you could archive by subject. Do you remove unimportant messages? Do you really need to find stuff from 2004? — [[User:AnemoneProjectors|AnemoneProj]]''
== Your NPOV accusation ==
Line 2,615 ⟶ 2,608:
:cannibal deities
dogs in love with their own vomit
<br/><br/>
We have dug up Rage
:The library is a nest of killer rats
Line 2,646 ⟶ 2,639:
== [[Saddam Hussein]] ==
As requested in your last edit summary, I've explained my removal of your POV edit in [[Talk:Saddam Hussein]]. Please think carefully before reinstating comments like this -- similar edits of yours have been reverted by multiple users over the past few days. -- [[User:Jim Douglas|Jim Douglas]] [[User talk:Jim Douglas|<sup
I know this won't count for anything, but I'm not American, and I'm not pro-George Bush. My interest is in writing a neutral article, and it seems apparent that your political opinions are driving your editing. I'm asking you to consider this. -- [[User:Jim Douglas|Jim Douglas]] [[User talk:Jim Douglas|<sup
:''"I added Discussion on to your section title as it looked like everyone was reverting edits I had made to the talk page."''
Sure, that's ok. -- [[User:Jim Douglas|Jim Douglas]] [[User talk:Jim Douglas|<sup
== On a completely different subject :-) ==
I just noticed [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jahowk&diff=prev&oldid=97751583 this] welcome message to a new user. Just a minor procedural suggestion; templates should usually be subst'd to (1) slightly reduce the load on the servers and (2) to make it appear more personalized to the user (so he doesn't see an obvious template on his page). I went ahead and subst'd it. -- [[User:Jim Douglas|Jim Douglas]] [[User talk:Jim Douglas|<sup
No problem, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:27, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Line 2,675 ⟶ 2,668:
== Your comment on [[User talk:68.114.28.101]] ==
You could have made your point without the taunt ("they already are and they are always going to be English"). -- [[User:Jim Douglas|Jim Douglas]] [[User talk:Jim Douglas|<sup
Whoops, I agree, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Please stop posting to that user's talk page. Throwing petrol on a fire is not productive. -- [[User:Jim Douglas|Jim Douglas]] [[User talk:Jim Douglas|<sup
I certainly agree I should have explained why I removed his comment from the talk page, though what I said on his talk page was clearly far less provocative than what he said at talk Falklands, and not making me deserving of this person's rascist abuse, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:34, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
:The problem is that you responded in kind to his initial off-topic post on the Falklands talk page. He said they're Argentinian; you said they're British. Which doesn't in any way justify his racist abuse, but it didn't help matters. You should consider using [[WP:UTM|standard templates]] whenever possible to let people know that they have violated Wikipedia policies. That keeps everything impersonal, and reduces the likelihood of this sort of escalation. -- [[User:Jim Douglas|Jim Douglas]] [[User talk:Jim Douglas|<sup
Yes I am aware of the templates and normally I do, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
:Ok, thanks. I think I've got him sorted out now. He's apologized for the racist comments, and I've explained to him that continuing to compare the Brits to Hitler isn't a useful approach. -- [[User:Jim Douglas|Jim Douglas]] [[User talk:Jim Douglas|<sup
== RE:Ani ==
Line 2,865 ⟶ 2,858:
== Blocked one week ==
I have blocked you for one week for violating the no-attack parole that was imposed in [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/SqueakBox_and_Zapatancas]]. Please note that the Arbitration Committee ruled that "after 5 blocks, the maximum block shall increase to one year". [[User:Bucketsofg|<
== Blocked ==
Line 2,879 ⟶ 2,872:
== [[Straw man]] ==
Hey Squeak, I know you said don't leave messages, so feel free to delete this. I noticed your comment [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=102545661&oldid=102545257 here], and it sounds like you might have misinterpreted the reference. A [[straw man]] isn't a person; it's a kind of logical argument. Anyway...I don't know what the disagreement is in the [[brown people]] article; I haven't looked at the article or the afd discussion. But, FWIW, there's a significant South Asian population here in the Vancouver area, and my niece tells me that Indian and Pakistani high school kids commonly refer to themselves as "[[brown people]]". -- [[User:Jim Douglas|Jim Douglas]] [[User talk:Jim Douglas|<sup
* Jim beat me to it. Straw man is a rhetorical device, not a personal characterisation. See [[logical fallacy]] (interesting reading, find out the real meaning of [[begging the question]], a phrase so routinely misused that incorrcet usage is probably more common than corrrect). <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> <small>([[User:JzG/help|Help!]])</small> 15:14, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Here where I live (and in Mexico etc) a straw man is a "wanker", different language I guess, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:11, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
:Interesting! Is it Spanish slang ([[es:Falacia del hombre de paja|hombre de paja]]?), or does "straw man" have the same idiomatic meaning in English in Latin America? -- [[User:Jim Douglas|Jim Douglas]] [[User talk:Jim Douglas|<sup
According to the article it is the same indeed. As far as I am aware paja just means straw in Spain but in Latin America it means what I said before. Hence un hombre de paja is also a man who wanks, which in macho culture would be saying they are a straw man and not a real man (not something I agree with), [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
:Interesting, thanks. I did notice that [[es:Falacia del hombre de paja]] doesn't mention an idiomatic meaning for hombre de paja, but that probably just means that the editors who worked on the article aren't aware of Latin American slang. If you have an account on the Spanish Wikipedia, it might be worth mentioning it on the [[es:Discusión:Falacia del hombre de paja|talk page]]. -- [[User:Jim Douglas|Jim Douglas]] [[User talk:Jim Douglas|<sup
I had thought about that then changed my mind and added something to [[http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paja paja]] instead, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:20, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Line 2,905 ⟶ 2,898:
=== [[Spanish language]] ===
Since I've ran out of 3RR, it's 0.01%, not 0.1%, and kindly make it "the [[Philippines]]", not "[[The Philippines]]". Thanks. --<b
Done. I do agree with you but avoid 3RRing too much myself. I think Ramirez is wrong in that there is no chance of the Philippines remaining, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:34, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Line 2,943 ⟶ 2,936:
He's a well known user and I can prove it, please read this [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hseldon10#Corticopia.27s_past], it is a message where I exposed all the evidence. Perhaps you remember the long edit wars in the article North America and Central America. Corticopia is "E Pluribus Anthony", "Ex Post Factoid" and other old accounts. Since he retired himself both articles were not involved in edit wars, I'm pretty sure you remember that. Now that he's back, everything is a mess again because of his biased edits.
I kindly ask for your support and experience to stop this. It would be nice if you can check all his edits (since he created that account) and the info he supports in those articles. I think you didn't know what was going on. Thanks in advance for reading this. Oh and by the way, I'm sure you will have soon a message from Corticopia here because he is watching my contributions list. [[User:AlexCovarrubias|<
:I believe this is referred to as an ''[[ad hominem]]'' [[appeal to authority]], a logical fallacy. In any event, I have all pages I edit on my watchlist but won't care to otherwise comment on this user's bias. For instance, take a look at the North America article and you'll note [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADurova&diff=103646631&oldid=103645350 he deleted information he falsely claimed he "checked" and tried to stir shit as a result, only to be called on it]. Anyhow, thanks for your edits. [[User:Corticopia|Corticopia]] 20:37, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Ooh err. I certainly agree CA is not Mexico, I go for a tight definition of the traditional 5 countries. My box of matches, made in Guatemala, says CA with a map of CA and definitely only includes the traditional 5 countries. I'll be keeping a careful eye on this one but will take great care before further editing the article. lets all keep civil and chilled out, eh? [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:43, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks, I knew you would understand. I will follow your advice. [[User:AlexCovarrubias|<
==Zapatero the man==
Line 2,982 ⟶ 2,975:
==Poll==
Thanks for participating in the poll in [[Talk:Mexico]]. We are trying to use this system to avoid an either-or voting system, that is, we want to know your opinion on all proposals, and you can support or object more than one or all. Could you please express your opinion in all possible proposals? Otherwise, your opinion could be interpreted as opposing all proposals but one. Thanks. --''[[User:Dúnadan|<
Okay, not immediately (I need to think on the other proposals) but definitely beforwe the poll shuts, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:00, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Line 3,045 ⟶ 3,038:
== afd ==
Yeah, I know how to do it. I have a tool that automates creation of AfDs for me, and at the exact moment I submitted the AfD, the database was locked, so I had to wait about 3 minutes before I could finish submitting the Afd. I'm well aware of the process involved in nominating an article for deletion, it's just the timing got a little screwed up for technical reasons.[[User:Swatjester|<
Okay. I read your bit in the other cannabis article and then couldnt find the afd notice or the log, chasing around looking at your contribs and then suddenly it weas sorted. An edit conflict, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:39, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Yeah and I got edit conflicted at the log page too to slow it down even further. Eh well. BTW your talk page is almost 400KB, you should consider archiving. [[User:Swatjester|<
I deliberately keep my archive page that way but I am thinking about giving an explanation at the top of the page. I wish everyone else did as archived pages are difficult to search through. IMO while humans like short pages computers like long pages, so say in a years time I want to find what you said I just type in the word Jester and I will find your comment, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:47, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Line 3,055 ⟶ 3,048:
== archiving ==
While you can easily use Ctrl F in this manner, the problem is that everytime someone loads this page, it takes almost 400kb of bandwidth to load it, and quite a bit of processor power (for instance, it takes a while to scroll through the page on a top end MacBook Pro). If you archive by year, you could cut each page into a much smaller size, and still have enough size to effectively use Ctrl+F. Trust me, archiving doesn't eliminate the ability to find things, not to mention that I generally don't get the need to look through my archives often anyway. However, your page is at the size where even the wikipedia software is complaining that it is too big. I'd very strongly consider archiving everything before June 2006 onto a seperate page....that would significantly cut down on the size of your talk page and make it much easier to navigate. [[User:Swatjester|<
== Buenos Aires ==
Line 3,101 ⟶ 3,094:
== Subst: ing ==
Thank you so much for helping fight vandalism! Hello and thank you for your participation in countervandalism. Please subst your warnings to vandals by simply adding ''subst:'' (Example <nowiki> {{subst:test1}} instead of just {{test1}}</nowiki>). Doing so will replace the contents of the template into the talk page instead of just transcluding the template. Thank you. <
Thanks for that cogent explanation. Of course I will, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:28, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Line 3,107 ⟶ 3,100:
== Mexico and Central America... yet again. ==
Hello. Would you please come and help (again) in mantaining the neutrality of the article Central America? User Corticopia is again trying to include or at least give the impression that Mexico is included in CA. He's wrongly including physical and geological information in the Human Geography section, falsely arguing that geopolitically part of Mexico is in CA. We both know that geopolitically a country is never divided. Thanks! [[User:AlexCovarrubias|<
AlexCovarrubias
:And, again, AlexCovarrubias seems to want to complain while removing [[WP:CITE|cited information]] from a number of [[WP:V|reputable sources]] to [[WP:POV|push your viewpoint]] -- in addition to your prior removals of Fowler's in [[North America]] about America, you have TWICE (at least) removed references in Central America from ''[[Encyclopaedia Britannica]]'' that [[Political divisions of Mexico|list the five states of Mexico]] that some geographers include in Central America. SqueakBox: please read the sources before jumping to any conclusions. Thanks. [[User:Corticopia|Corticopia]] 11:29, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
:False. I added the citation from Britannica when I finished the moving of the info to the proper section. The information from Britannica is clearly naming the 5 states as a reference, it is not saying those states are geopolitically considered CA. That would be highly wrong, because no country in the world divide its territory to geopolitically play in two regions. States are an internal geopolitical division. International geopolitics are different. Mexico, as a whole, is not geopolitically in CA. [[User:AlexCovarrubias|<
::False again. The only thing that is wrong is you -- details on talk pages. Your continuous removals of [[WP:CITE|cited]], [[WP:V|verifible]] information leave much to be desired. And read again -- not only is ''Middle America'' used in the CIA World Factbook (alongside the map of Mexico, also from the World Factbook in the [[Geography of Mexico]] article), but the term also appears in the ''[[Oxford English Dictionary]]'' and ''[http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/Middle%20America Merriam-Wester's Collegiate Dictionary]'' Next ... [[User:Corticopia|Corticopia]] 16:21, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Line 3,124 ⟶ 3,117:
== [[Daniel Brandt]] ==
I share your frustrations. :: <em>[[User:Colin Keigher|Colin Keigher]]</em> <
:By the way, if you are aware of an ArbCom or something on this, please do e-mail me. I am on a "wikibreak" because WP has sort of frustrated me as of late, but I will break out of my shell temporarily to make my comments. Thanks. :: <em>[[User:Colin Keigher|Colin Keigher]]</em> <
== WP:Civil ==
You talk about my civility? Please, if you want to talk down upon me, at least do it somewhat directly towards me, please. Thanks, [[User talk:Yanksox|<
== Moved ==
Line 3,167 ⟶ 3,160:
== Your comment ==
Squeak, I'd appreciated it if you wouldn't make [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Daniel_Brandt&diff=prev&oldid=110439702 comments like this] about me. He has been very irritating, yes, but he has never "got me scared," because I have no reason to be "scared" of him. Many thanks, [[User:SlimVirgin|SlimVirgin]] [[User_talk:SlimVirgin|<sup
I am glad he doesnt scare you. He chased one editor off wikipedia by threatening to lose them their job and the editor left! So it wasnt a personal attack as much as concern. h3e doesnt scare me either but then he cant get me sacked, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
:Okay, thank you. Another point worth making is that, even if he did scare me, I wouldn't vote to delete his article for that reason, or do anything else on WP because of it. But anyway, thanks for your concern. [[User:SlimVirgin|SlimVirgin]] [[User_talk:SlimVirgin|<sup
== Your name ==
Line 3,226 ⟶ 3,219:
== Americas Comment ==
Hi Squeak. I see that you striked your comment next to your vote in the North America (Americas) article. Would you please just edit it? Because another user striked his vote and comment and I'm affraid the administrator will not count yours as a valid "keep". I don't know, I just don't want the article to be deleted because of a lack of votes. ¡Gracias! [[User:AlexCovarrubias|AlexCovarrubias]][[Image:Black ribbon.png|12px]] <sup>[[User_talk:AlexCovarrubias|<
Sure thing, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:05, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
:Gracias, again. [[User:AlexCovarrubias|AlexCovarrubias]][[Image:Black ribbon.png|12px]] <sup>[[User_talk:AlexCovarrubias|<
First of all, thanks for your words about my loss, I really appreciate it. I didn't think it was so hard for a person to get a transplant in Honduras, I'm really sorry to hear the tragedy of your friend.
Yes, I was thinking that the result of the nomination should be no concensus, due to the fact that the opinions are really divided. I really hope that the article doesn't get deleted, after all and speaking the truth, it was not the result of a POV forking. Thanks for your advice about what can be done in case it gets deleted. [[User:AlexCovarrubias|AlexCovarrubias]][[Image:Black ribbon.png|12px]] <sup>[[User_talk:AlexCovarrubias|<
Hi Squeak. Finally (and sadly) the debate was closed and this admin considered the result was "delete". I think his reasons are very vague since he's obviously ignoring the fact that the article was improved a little and most importantly, several verifiable sources were included. Also he's ignoring the definition of POV fork. I just asked for a deletion review. I hope I did it ok, since this is my first time. Now what's next? [[User:AlexCovarrubias|AlexCovarrubias]][[Image:Black ribbon.png|12px]] <sup>[[User_talk:AlexCovarrubias|<
:Well done, looks like an out of process deletion to me with the adnmin deciding to ignore the people who want to keep the article. Lets see how the DRV goes and if that fails decide what to do then, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:37, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Line 3,245 ⟶ 3,238:
"much beter hashish ref that makes it clear is a resin and estimates 2 thirds of UK cannabis consumed is hash hence we need hash in opening"
Do you really think that is a good reference? It is chalked full of Google Ads and appears to be a for profit witness firm for court proceedings? A paid witness/expert company is a good, neutral, reliable reference? I really don't think it is. I do think Hashish must be mentioned in this article and be more accurately described, particularly it's relevance in Europe. I'm working on several revisions of this article and hopefully they will encompass much of what we all want to see. In the mean time, be well, and I too will try to remember that at the end of the day, it is only a wiki article. After all, I'm a dog lover too. be well- [[User:Testerer|<
Nothin wrong with Google ads or for profit IMO, the ref seemed much clearrer and refenced very clearly that it is perceived as resin within the UK, something very obvious to any Brit. I've been around the cannabis articles longer than anyone and have seen what changes and what doesnt. And I am very happy to see your input, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 05:27, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Line 3,253 ⟶ 3,246:
<div style="float:center;border-style:solid;border-color:blue;background-color:AliceBlue;border-width:1px;text-align:left;padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">[[Image:Fsmile.svg|left|62px]]
{{{1|[[User:Groupempty|Groupempty]] ([[User talk:Groupempty|talk]] <small>•</small> [[Special:Contributions/Groupempty|contribs]])}}} has smiled at you! Smiles promote [[Wikipedia:WikiLove|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!
</div><!-- Template:smile -->
Line 3,318 ⟶ 3,311:
What you wrote was purely POV, you had no references, and UnCut is by know means known privatly as AOLs rip of of YouTUBE. I am more then aware of AOL UKs existance as I actually do work for them, and have done for some time know. I used the revert system to its proper intention, to revert an unneeded, unreferenced, POV edit.
Just a good will note, you may want to consider archiving your page, feel free to ask if your not sure of the proper protocol for Achival. [[User:Ferdiaob|Ferdia O'Brien]] <small><span style="-moz-border-radius: 5px; border: solid 2px #ff0000; background-color: #96d4ff; color
:What? Your response, other than its poor grammar ("have done for some time know") makes no sense to me but anti-vandalism tools are not to be used to roll back good faith edits even when you happen to think they are POV. Its a way of saying to other users, look at this person's contribs, they are a vandal, and that is a personal attack. It was clearly an improper use of that technology and I am concerned at your failure to see that. What POV was I pushing? If you know AOL UK exists what are trying to achieve?
Line 3,324 ⟶ 3,317:
:I deliberately dont archive my page but do know how to, but thanks for the offer of help, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
::Check your own edit my friend, the edit I reverted had nothing what so ever to do with the existance of AOL UK, and I am more then aware of its existance, because if it doesn't exist then I really cannot fathom were my payslips come from. The edit I reverted claimed that UnCut is known privately as AOLs rip off of YouTUBE, and made allogations as to the dissatisfaction of users on the same service, this is unreferenced, and Purely POV based. I apologise for the grammer of my last message but I have more to be getting on with then responding to messages on my Talk, that don't even reference the revert I made, visa-vi the above. Oh, and likewise on the grammer, from your edit to my talk: "You treared me" "AOL UK still xists". [[User:Ferdiaob|Ferdia O'Brien]] <small><span style="-moz-border-radius: 5px; border: solid 2px #ff0000; background-color: #96d4ff; color
Huh? That is not so. My edit was [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=AOL&diff=114719933&oldid=114702571 this], that sounds like someone else's edit, ie [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=AOL&diff=115159436&oldid=115119235 this]. Your reversion of mine to which I refer is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=AOL&diff=114777570&oldid=114719933 this]. If you workl for ASOL we are on the same side, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:52, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Misunderstanding understood, your message came after the one I reverted so I hope you can see where I was coming from with the edit I thought we where discussing, because that one was purely POV based. You have my apologies. (Although they did buy the entirety of the company, AOL UK merely remained an independent operation, under CPW's ownership.) <br/>
[[User:Ferdiaob|Ferdia O'Brien]] <small><span style="-moz-border-radius: 5px; border: solid 2px #ff0000; background-color: #96d4ff; color
== Edit War at [[Spanish language]] ==
Line 3,336 ⟶ 3,329:
<div class="user-block"> [[Image:Octagon-warning.svg|30px| ]]
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the [[Wikipedia:Three revert rule|three revert rule]] in regard to the article [[:Spanish language]]. Other users in violation have also been blocked. The timing of this block is coincidental, and does not represent an endorsement of the current article revision. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future on the article's talk page ([[Talk:Spanish language]]).</div>
<!-- Template:3RR5-multi --
Well that is odd as I certainly did not revert more than 3 times nor have I been involved in the extended edit wars, precisely because I respect the 3RR rule. I can t see the point of a block that achieves nothing as I am not edit warring, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:06, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Line 3,349 ⟶ 3,342:
{{unblock reviewed|1=as I have been unblocked but am still unable to edit due to ip autoblock I think as can edit other office machines|decline=Please try now. I believe you were [[Template:Autoblock|autoblocked]]. — [[User:Yamla|Yamla]] 22:59, 19 March 2007 (UTC)}}
:Your IP address is probably [[WP:AUTOBLOCK|auto-blocked]], Squeak. -- [[User:Jim Douglas|Jim Douglas]] [[User talk:Jim Douglas|<sup
:Its fixed now, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Line 3,409 ⟶ 3,402:
== Please archive ==
Sign up for werdnabot or something. Holy cow! That is a lot. -- '''[[Special:Contributions/The Hybrid|<
:I'm resisting, deliberately nothing to do with not being bothered etc, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:25, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
::Dude, really, archive this. Out of courtesy to fellow editors. It's ridiculous to get through your Table of Contents. '''''
:::Dude(s), really, if editors didn't post here with signatures longer than their comments his frappin talk page wouldn't be so big. ;-))) [[User:Anchoress|Anchoress]] 09:09, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
:Well isnt that what the scroll bar is for. My issue is with the whole way archiving is done here at wikipedia. Its not transparent and it buries things. I have a slow third world connection but even so it only takes a few seconds tillt he page loads. As far as I ma aware there is no policy on archiving, and if my talk page could encourage such a discussion that would be great. I could argue I am showing respect to other editors precisely by allowing easyy search of my talk page, and certainly that is why I have left the message envelope at the top, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
::Have you seen [[User talk:Ed g2s]]? His archives aren't entirely buried. In fact, their headers are quite visible on the page. Anyone who wants to see a discussion and click on the header and go there. Or you can take the time to write a page summarizing discussions in archives. That is, having a table filled with information like the number of the archive, a link to it, and a summary of the discussion. There are alternatives, believe me. [[User:Gracenotes|<
::Wikipedia likes to keep things at around 30 kilobytes a page if at all possible. You talk pages is 418 kilobytes long. That is precisely 13.9333... times longer than recommended. Peace, -- '''[[Special:Contributions/The Hybrid|<
Peace indeed! I really feel uncomfortable with the whole wikipedia attitude to archiving. If my talk page can spark a debate about that, and a really solid, non-acrimonious debate, that is something I would welcome. My approach to internet/computing is entirely based on search (and I work for a search engine as well) and I would like to see archives that were search friendly, which is not the case right now. I am being transparent to the extent that whatever [[regular expression|irregular expression]]s you pump into [[searching]] on my page will give a good result. Its images and especially videos not text that create real digital space issues so one way and another you could say my talk page is a statement. And very happy to receive any kind of feedback re this issue and to engage in deabte. What do you think?, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
:Archives exist to prevent clutter for many technical reasons. First, generic subsection headings like ''Reply'' are commonly used, and when duplicates exist the links in the table of contents may become confused. This may happen even if there are only 2 of that name, so when people leave messages on their talk pages, to a level such as your page especially, if duplicates are used then there is almost no chance of hitting the correct area of the page. It is also difficult to navigate manually. The scroll bar in inefficient for navigating a page of this length. Simply pulling the bar is inaccurate, and using the arrows is slow. Second, people such as yourself with primitive internet connection may have trouble as the user in question acquires barnstars and other such items containing images, videos, ect. You must also remember that there are far more primitive connections being used. In some cases entire regions are served through one server and/or IP address through an unreliable internet provider. 418 kilobytes of memory may be more than they have on their computer itself, even. Third, the majority of Wikipedia understand how to navigate archives. There are many different ways to organize them, name them, ect. You can name them by date, topic, user(s) who sent the messages, ect. You can even do combinations. You are the one who decides how convenient your archives are to navigate. Also, you will learn how to navigate other people’s archives by setting yours up. That is how I learned to do it. Experience is the best teacher. Cheers, -- '''[[Special:Contributions/The Hybrid|<
IMHO most users neither know how to navigate archives or the internet properly. This opinion is based on an abundance of evidence. Most people still use their eyes in order to search. I did archive in the past until I concluded this was a better system. And if my "primitive" connection still downloads the page in under 10 seconds I cant see a problem, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
:You're the one who called it "Third World", so I paraphrased. Anyway, I haven't seen anyone who has had a problem, even brand new users. For the reasons previously stated archives is a better system. The problem is having all of it bunched together. The index can't function correctly in this situation, and having to use the scroll bar takes more time than flipping through archives. That is not an exaggeration. I'm dead serious. -- '''[[Special:Contributions/The Hybrid|<
::I can see you are serious. And yes I would describe where I live as Third World. For me it is the ability to search through the one document that makes it so easy. Essentially having 7 archives disables search ability, and that is a tendency I oppose believeing that we should encourgae people to use search buittons more not less, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
:::I believe that America should use the metric system and switch to Celsius. However, that will never happen. The English systems of measurement have been the standard for a long time, so I conform to it in order to fit in. On Wikipedia, archives have always been the standard way to organize past discussions. This is due to the technical limitations mentioned earlier. It will cause problems as this page gets longer. Peace, -- '''[[Special:Contributions/The Hybrid|<
::::Dont agree with your example. IMO people will learn to search documents much more as search is something that is growing considerably on the internet all the time. Whereas Centigrade/Fahrenheit is an either/or thing. I learnt fahrenheit as a child and then switched age 12 to centigrade and immediately forgot fahrenheit and continue not to understand it but actually both are just different ways of interpreting the skill of understanding temperature using a number system whereas learning to search using the computer is a new skill that more people are adopting day by day, hence my comment at the top about using Ctrl F, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:17, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::I know and understand both, but I believe that America should conform to the ways the world works, just as I have to conform to the way America works. I believe that you should conform to the way Wikipedia works, as I do with America, even though you think that it should conform to the way the internet works. When in Rome, do as the Romans do. Also, the technical limitations of Wikipedia prevent long pages like this from working successfully as the page grows over time. It may work for you now, though it doesn't work for me who hasn't seen this page grow from one message to its current size, but eventually it will just stop working entirely. Wikipedia has its limitations. -- '''[[Special:Contributions/The Hybrid|<
:I am aware of what you say. I was wondering last night if there is a list of big articles in wikipedia, and if there are number bigger than this talk page, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
::Articles are divided up into multiple pages long before they reach this size. I don't think that there is a list, as those who edit the articles regularly are trusted to maintain the articles in this matter. Peace, -- '''[[Special:Contributions/The Hybrid|<
::Hm. Maybe you could have one archive for all old posts, followed by <nowiki>{{User talk:SqueakBox}}</nowiki>? In my humble opinion, that would be amicable (and better than the current set-up). [[User:Gracenotes|<
=="Getting away with murder"==
Line 3,451 ⟶ 3,444:
== [[Tom Mabe]] ==
I'm curious about your removal of the speedy tag here. You may be convinced of this guy's notability, but the ''article'' still makes no claim of it. Even if it weren't a speedy candidate for no assertion of notability under [[WP:CSD#A7]] (and I still think it is), it's obviously still speedy-able under [[WP:CSD#A1]] (no context). I'm holding off on re-applying the tag for now, but I see no reason not to do so. --[[User:Finngall|<
:I just followed speedy tag instructions. I have tried to imporve the article and Mabe does appear notable, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
::Could you have at least bleepin' waited until I got the AfD formatted via the template before you stepped on it? Jeez... --[[User:Finngall|<
Not while my comments were being misrepresented no I cant. Format properly and re-add to the log, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Line 3,539 ⟶ 3,532:
== arbitration requested - you are named ==
[[User:Mangoe]] has filed for arbitration about [[Wikipedia:Attack sites]] at this [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Wikipedia_talk:Attack_sites address]. We are named parties. - [[User:DennyColt|<
==Thanks==
I did try to find somewhere simple to put the photo but there wasn't anywhere obvious, and if you check the talk page I was making a note of it so someone else could restore it. <
Line 3,549 ⟶ 3,542:
==Mediation2==
Wil you agree to mediation, given [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration&diff=prev&oldid=122270658 this] completely out of order accusation it is, IMO, entirely necessary, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
:The only mediation needed is that you stop challenging everything I write all over Wikipedia endlessly. Re: my harassment statement -- I posted a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3ABiographies_of_living_persons&diff=122014378&oldid=121996147 question] on the BLP page. You per the edit logs had ''never'' touched that page before you [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Biographies_of_living_persons&diff=next&oldid=122014378 replied] to me minutes later, your first edit ever there. I don't care if you're following my contributions to contest me at every step of everything I do--your right, I suppose. But be honest about. :) And don't be surprised if it goes on for weeks or months if you find yourself on the other end of arbitration/ANI for harassment. Your jousting against anything I do lately is amusing but if you keep this up much longer it will not be. - [[User:DennyColt|<
::Is that a yes or a no? You suddenly start attacking me with serious accusations and I have not been attacking you. Please calm down and answer the question. I've had BLP on my watchlist for longer than you have been editing here and you have no right to claim I cannot edit there. Your aggressive thrreat in your response and your failure to answer my question are not shoiwiung any good faith towards me, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
:::I am concerned that every single time I write a single sentence related to the Brandt or attack site issues, you swiftly come after what I wrote. For the BLP page. You've had it a long time watchlisted, ok. Why did you NEVER touch the BLP talk page until I posted THAT question? Please answer that question. And please, please, please start doing indents like everyone else on WP does. You don't need to outdent every four seconds. - [[User:DennyColt|<
I take it you are refusing mediation then? [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
:I will address any mediation questions after you answer my question about the BLP page, based on your answer. Why did you NEVER touch the BLP talk page until I posted THAT question? - [[User:DennyColt|<
You what? I can make no sense of your question. I watch BNP because of Brandt, and I only post when I have something to say, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
:I've added myself and [[User:Crum375]] to the case, based upon this [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3AAttack_sites&diff=122900235&oldid=122899219 diff]. [[User:Mangoe|Mangoe]] 03:35, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
::It [[Special:Contributions/DennyColt|appears]] that [[User:DennyColt|DennyColt]] has left Wikipedia for the time being. —'''[[User:MichaelLinnear| <
:::That's what i figured to. My feeling is if he doesnt edit wiklipedia within the 7 day mediation limit that I absolutely will not take thaty as a rejection of mediation. Though actually I wish him the best and dont believe he is coming from a bad space, ie for me asking for mediation was not a hostile act but a genuinne wanting to resolve differences, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Line 3,592 ⟶ 3,585:
== Illustrated Guide to dressing like a hippie ==
I dunno; I clicked the link and it pretty much matches my memories (and some of my current wardrobe). Is it really spam? --[[User:Orangemike|<
:okay put it back if you want. By the time I was a hippy the dress code was somewhat different (mostly just scruffy and hairy, both of which I was good at), [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Line 3,617 ⟶ 3,610:
:I live in a former Spanish colony in Central America, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:59, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I will add that I am a historian living in the Americas, well outside the "British spectrum" (indeed, I have been accused of Anglophobia once or twice), and the ''only'' time I ever hear the archipelago referred to as the Malvinas is when someone is explaining the former Argentine government's position on the occupation. --[[User:Orangemike|<
::One result of living here is that I watch a lot of US television, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Line 3,633 ⟶ 3,626:
== Your edit to [[Nappy (disambiguation)]] ==
You merged the two definitions but they are distinct. One refers to distinctly African American hair and the other is general and refers to any race. African Americans aren't the only ones who can have "Nappy" hair. The 3rd definition covers all bases by also pointing that out. Can you change it back?[[User:Wikidudeman|'''<
== Brandt paragraph ==
Line 3,653 ⟶ 3,646:
::::::::''For the Mediation Committee,'' <span style="color:red;font-weight:bold">^</span>[[User:^demon|<span style="color:black;font-weight:bold;">demon</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:^demon|<span style="color:red">[omg plz]</span>]]</sup>
<small><div style="text-align: center;">This message delivered by [[User:MediationBot|MediationBot]], an automated bot account operated by the [[WP:MC|Mediation Committee]] to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please [[WT:MC|contact the Mediation Committee directly]].</
|}
<div align="right">''This message delivered: 18:29, 23 April 2007 (UTC)''.</div>
Line 3,702 ⟶ 3,695:
:Back to the drawing board,
:—[[User:Academy Leader|''ACADEMY LEADER'' ]]<sup><small
== Annoying ==
Line 3,833 ⟶ 3,826:
:::Hey SqueakBox probably you didn't notice my original message on your userpage, since LessHeard posted a message just below mine. [[User:Wooyi|Wooyi]]<sup>[[User talk:Wooyi|Talk]], [[Wikipedia:Editor review/Wooyi|Editor review]]</sup> 22:19, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
==[Child sexual abuse] article and [User:Voice of Britain]==
This user continues to engage in aggressive editing, ignores others, and engages in multiple reverts. I see he has been blocked again for several hours. What other steps can be taken to stop him. He is a very disruptive influence on this article and disregards what others have to say. I do not see him showing an interest in building consensus. Your suggestions would be apprecited. Thanks. [[user:DPeterson|<
:I see that DPeterson filed a User Conduct (see article talk page for Child sexual abuse). I also see that Voice has a "hit list" on this talk page with several names (mine just added) along with yours and I find that intimidating. [[User:SamDavidson|SamDavidson]] 01:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
::Other than the RfC what other options are there to stop this behavior and the POV pushing? [[user:DPeterson|<
:::The next step is [[Wikipedia:Request for arbitration]]. IMO we have a strong case, and especially as JonesRD was accused of making an illegal statement in an edit summary today, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:17, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Line 3,874 ⟶ 3,867:
:I guess my point got lost somewhere along the way... [[User:Jillium|-Jillium]] 02:56, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
:What is so offensive about a 23 year old man who is friends with a 22 year old? AT is among the milder of the sites concerned, anyway. --[[User:Jim Burton|<b><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS"><span style="color: #3090C7">Jim</span><span style="color: #FAAFBA">♥</span><span style="color: #F88158">Burton</span></span></b>]] 01:45, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
== I reverted your article moves ==
Line 3,882 ⟶ 3,877:
Well you shouldnt have. All the cannabis related articles use the word cannabis in the title. That you failed to fix the redirects "because it was too much work" is bad as it creates [[Wikipedia:Double redirects]]. Also you reverted my linking to cannabis (drug) to relink to the article about cannabis the plant. yet cannabis a s a drug is absolutely the relevant article for legalization isues. Please dont do this again, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:24, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
:I shouldn't have reverted your edit, which changed [[cannabis]] to [[cannabis (drug)]], my mistake, but all your other edits were valid reverts. I know the policy regarding double redirects, but it would be too much work for me to change all the re-directs you changed, why don't you change them back? —[[User:Christopher Mann McKay]] 18:19, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
== Intense! ==
Very intense (but great) user page. Thanks for contributing to [[Tony Blair]]. <big>[[User:Gautam3|<b><
==Cannabis or marijuana==
Your comment, "All the cannabis related articles use the word cannabis in the title"
:Please read the [[WP:MOS#National_varieties_of_English|Wikipedia: Manual of Style]], which says, ''Articles that focus on a topic specific to a particular English-speaking country should generally conform to the usage and spelling of that country. For example: American Civil War: American English usage and spelling; Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings: British English usage and spelling.'' Cannabis is refered to most often as marijuana in the United States, so marijuana is what these articles should use. Other articles are named cannabis because they are not about the United States.
Thank you.
—[[User:Christopher Mann McKay]] 18:19, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
The articles all are called cannabis. Your slap happy attitude combined with false vandalsim accusations rubs me up the wrong way. Please desist, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:27, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
:It is not false vandalism, instead of following [[Wikipedia:Requested moves#Requesting a potentially controversial page move]], you decided that you should move three articles without any dicussion or [[Template:Move]] and when I reverted your edits and told you why, you continued to move the articles, instead of dealing with the controversial move in the proper way. This is considered vandalism, as you are ignoring the proper way to deal with controversial page move. I don't understand why you don't get this, why would there be a [[Template:Uw-move3]] if not for this exact reason? —[[User:Christopher Mann McKay]] 21:07, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
::It is absolutely not considered vandalism. Edit warring (both of us) and POV dispute, yes, but vandals wreck the encyclopedia and even your failure to address the double redirects is not vandalism. Making up bad faith rules or rules to suit you isnt how things work here, please accept that this isnt vandalsim or seek advice from someone else or just read the guide to vandalsim pages, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:17, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
:::SqueakBox, I think you are right. We are writing an international encyclopedia so we need to use internationally acceptable terminology. Cannabis is the correct international term. While the U.S. government use the term "marijuana" and give notoriously harsh penalty on its users, it does not mean the international community has to do the same. The term "marijuana" is racially derogatory (taken from Spanish to stigmatize Mexicans). Also off topic, "Hemp" is the traditional American term before its criminalization, so in this sense "marijuana" is [[un-American]] :-) [[User:Wooyi|Wooyi]]<sup>[[User talk:Wooyi|Talk to me?]]</sup> 21:23, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
::::Wooyi- are you saying the Wikipedia Manual of Style should be ignored, even when in the first sentence of the article is says "marijuana (also referred to as cannabis)" to prevent confusion? Since when were Wikipedia guidelines ignored? —[[User:Christopher Mann McKay]] 21:28, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
:::::Since when does MoS suport slang terms. We are absolutely not saying MoS should be ignored, it should be adhered to whichh you are not doing, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:28, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
::::::Marijuana IS NOT A SLANG TERM IN THE UNITED STATES. I addressed this in [[Talk:Legal history of cannabis in the United States]]. —[[User:Christopher Mann McKay]] 21:32, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
:::::::That is highly debatable. Cannabis is a term used in and outside the US and is clearly not slang, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
==Message from Sidaway==
: Looks to me like you're edit warring over this, SqueakBox. Since there's controversy over these moves, please advertise them on [[Wikipedia:Requested moves]] and discuss them on the talk page to reach a consensual decision on what to do about these pages, rather than warring over them. --[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway]] 19:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
::Sure, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:14, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
==Will==
Your recent edit to [[:User taIk:WiII Beback]] ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_taIk%3AWiII_Beback&diff=130186957&oldid=130184977 diff]) was reverted by an '''automated bot''' that attempts to recognize and repair [[Wikipedia:vandalism|vandalism]] to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. '''[[User:Tawkerbot2/FAQ|Click here]]''' for '''frequently asked questions''' about the bot and this warning. // [[User:MartinBot|MartinBot]] 21:25, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
:I was very confused by what an obvious vandal was doing but it has now been fixed, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
== Shared accounts ==
See [[WP:USERNAME#Sharing accounts]]. In theory shared accoutns may be blocked. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 23:51, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
== Margaret Thatcher ==
My curiosity was aroused by your complaints about an edit on the Margaret Thatcher page. The passage that you removed was unnecessary because the "human rights abuses" by Pinochet were already referred to earlier in the same sentence. It was not, however, POV, since the things mentioned indisputably happened. And since when has torture, murder, etc. been "utterly irrelevant" to someone's attitude toward the person responsible?<br/>
You were correct to edit out the passage, but your comments in the edit summary were ridiculously POV. Please do not in future ram your tendentious attitudinizing down other Wikipedia users' throats.<br/>
[[User:81.145.240.181|81.145.240.181]] 00:34, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
==Request for help with [[Attachment Therapy]]==
There is an extensive and ongoing dispute on the talk page for this article. One editor seems to feel very strongly about his POV and a number of others disagree. I think a cool head would be beneficial here (I know it would help me too). If you would look in here and comment or make a suggestion, that would be great. [[user:DPeterson|<span style="color:red;">DPeterson</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:DPeterson|talk]]</sup> 01:49, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
== Racism [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Arbitrary_break_9_-_precedent accusations] ==
Could you please stop accusing me of being racist. On one occasion, you actually removed the 'racist' material, which created the obvious problem of making it look like your accusations had any merit at all.
Although you seem to be of an absolutist mindset, you should at least be expected to understand and tolerate those of a relativist outlook. Hypothetically justifying racist abuse by bestowing honour upon the dirty object with which the individual is compared is obviously one pertinent way of demonstrating relativism, as opposed to racism --[[User:Jim Burton|<b><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS"><span style="color: #3090C7">Jim</span><span style="color: #FAAFBA">♥</span><span style="color: #F88158">Burton</span></span></b>]] 12:14, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
man this guy's a prick (with apologies to the wiki spirits for any karma upset) - you're way out of line burton mister, and squeakers here deserves much kudos man for calling it as it is. get gone jim burt. [[User:Why oh why not?|Why oh why not?]] 23:53, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
:If you wish to raise a point regarding my edits or complaints, without making insults or flames, you are free to write to my talk page. [[User:Jim Burton|<b><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS"><span style="color: #3090C7">Jim</span><span style="color: #FAAFBA">♥</span><span style="color: #F88158">Burton</span></span></b>]] 02:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
::Stop [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pedophile_activism&diff=130694823&oldid=130531662 attacking me] would be a start, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:06, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
:::And what is your point? [[User:Jim Burton|<b><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS"><span style="color: #3090C7">Jim</span><span style="color: #FAAFBA">♥</span><span style="color: #F88158">Burton</span></span></b>]] 00:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
::::Obvious, mate, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:11, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
:::::I'll pre - empt your objection as a complaint that I'm using 'anti vandalism' (auto revert/undo) technology to dispose of your edits. This is not an attack, since I would perform exactly the same edit without that option. On the other hand, accusing others of racism, agenda, activism and the systemic promotion of promotion pedophilia and 'child rape' is most certainly an unjustified attack. [[User:Jim Burton|<b><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS"><span style="color: #3090C7">Jim</span><span style="color: #FAAFBA">♥</span><span style="color: #F88158">Burton</span></span></b>]] 05:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I never said you promoted child rape. What are you on about? You did compare black people to a crock of shit which in my eyes absolutely makes you a rascist, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:36, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
:'another step on the road to allowing our children to be molested', 'trying to make pedophile activism look like the best thing...' or somesuch. You may want to read the archive before accusing me of making that comparison. I did not compare. I hypothesized about a situation in which one could compare without being a racist. [[User:Jim Burton|<b><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS"><span style="color: #3090C7">Jim</span><span style="color: #FAAFBA">♥</span><span style="color: #F88158">Burton</span></span></b>]] 07:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
==[[GNAA]]==
It's probably a bad idea to get involved in an edit war over this. I strongly advise you to steer clear of it because of the likelihood that your edits will be misinterpreted as trolling. --[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway]] 18:48, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
:There was a tremendous confusion at the beginning as my attention was drawn by a vandalism. Its been put through Rfc and I wont add this to the GNAA page again but will let due process unfold, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:51, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
::I agree the appearance of edit warring is false, due to someone reverting you to a vandalized version. <small>[[User:HighInBC|<sup>High</sup><sub>InBC</sub>]]<sup>(Need help? [[User_talk:HighInBC|Ask me]])</sup></small> 20:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
== Original Research on the [[Pedophile activism]] page ==
Please look at the [[Talk:Pedophile activism|Discussion Page]] for the article on [[Pedophile activism]]. In the history of that page you will see where I have offered an explanation of the deletion that I think should be made within the main article. [[User:Homologeo|Homologeo]] 05:04, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
==RfC and [[Attachment Therapy]]==
Well, now the group has filed an RfC on me and you might want to look at it and comment, if you feel so inclined...Supporting it is Voice of Britain and a related party! The RfC is at: [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/DPeterson]] regards. [[user:DPeterson|<span style="color:red;">DPeterson</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:DPeterson|talk]]</sup> 12:23, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
==Archive==
SqueakBox, may I suggest that you start archiving your talk page. It is currently 503 [[KB]] long (very big for a bunch of text on a page). Also it loads slowly and uses up a lot of memory while typing on it--[[User:Cadet hastings|Cadet hastings]] 13:37, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
==AT==
Well they've also called me a single issue acount which one glance at my contribs will show is untrue. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Attachment_Therapy]. [[User:Fainites|Fainites]] 16:48, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
== comment ==
Yes I just wanted him to know that Spaniards and Latin Americans at least most with the expections of Argentines and Uruguayans are very different. We hardly ever use Gringo. We use the term Yankee.([[User:XGustaX|XGustaX]] 20:03, 20 May 2007 (UTC))
:I am in Central America where again things are very different. We use yanks a lot to describe Americans in the UK though I was always told that yanks are specifically East Coast Americans. Never been to the south cone (hope to one day) but I know Spain and never heard the woprd Gringo there. Here in CA it is used, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Oh, Yeah I have heard of that. Yeah, we are like Spain in that we hardly ever use Gringo and much more use Yankee. In fact we get that because most Europeans as you know call Americans Yankees. Yeah I mean in the US Yankee means someone from the North it is used normally in the South of the US. Great chatting with you. Cheers. ([[User:XGustaX|XGustaX]] 20:11, 20 May 2007 (UTC))
== Trolling? ==
How d'ya figure? Plenty of folks who don't know better start at his talk page without it being trolling. - [[User:Chairboy|C<small>HAIRBOY</small>]] ([[User_talk:Chairboy|☎]]) 00:51, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
:I had a look at the user's talk page and took my call from there. Whatever, it didnt look like the kind of stuff Jimbo should spend his time investigating, just another angrey person, and it was his comments in his contribs that provoked my comment to be honest, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
== Banstarr ==
You have certainly earned this:<br clear=all>
I haven't really kept up with things lately as I should. I guess I'm kind of at a low energy state right now and when my watchlist is lit up with like 60 changes apiece to several articles it's like ohhh noo. I ''really'' appreciate you stepping up to the plate and taking on V of B. [[User:Herostratus|Herostratus]] 12:39, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
==Golbez==
Let's take a moment to examine the situation... I asked him "What the heck happened yesterday What did you do to accidentally block all of wikipedia?" (I don't understand how you could think I was implying he did it on purpose since the word "accidentally" is clearly in the sentence but in any event). He ignored me. I gave him 2 days and checked his activity to make sure he had been on wikipedia and seen my question so I tried being mildly sarcastic... I wrote "Thank you for (not) answering my question... how administrator-like of you.". I didn't call him a name... I didn't post a non sequetor remark (although if he had ignored it at that point I would've dropped it). He responds by calling me a TROLL. Like I'm just posting on his board to see me own text (i.e. hear my own voice)... Three questions...
*Why do you and he assume my initial question was not serious?
*Are administartors supposed to help explain thigns to people? (maybe the answer is no... you tell me)
*What exactly do I owe him an apology for?<br/>
--[[User:Dr who1975|Dr who1975]] 15:50, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
:For humiliating him after he made a simple mistake and suggesting he should be de sysopped for it. Leave the man be, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
::For one thing, I didn't make a mistake - the block was valid. The mistake was made by the developers. Second of all, I'm hardly humiliated by it, I found the whole thing hilarious; what annoyed me was, when I didn't respond within 3 days (my edit history shows I've not been very active lately), he said how "administrator-like" it was of me to ignore him, and THAT is what set me off. --[[User:Golbez|Golbez]] 18:14, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
:::I share your sense of hilarity, lol, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:18, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
::Humiliating him? How sensetive is this place. I just wanted some information. It certainly wasn't my intent to humiliate him but perhaps he needs to develope thicker skin. It also might've helped if he actually had tried to be helpful to me. Perhaps showing remorse for making a mistake might've also helped.--[[User:Dr who1975|Dr who1975]] 16:15, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
:::If he is so concerned with huiliating people how come I';m the guy with the word "Troll" on my discussion page. Damn that's hypocritical.--[[User:Dr who1975|Dr who1975]] 16:19, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
::::I didn't delete your comments... I moved them... you deleted my response to your comment with your revision.... perhaps I should've said something in my edit summary.--[[User:Dr who1975|Dr who1975]] 16:28, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
== beanfield ==
thanks for the (very fast) reaction! i have edited the page before and now im just whacking in a few references from the links section - shame that the person who left the "fact" tags couldnt have done that himself or herself ... [[User:Mujinga|Mujinga]] 18:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
== Merkey ==
I read your comments at the [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jeffrey Vernon Merkey2|Merkey RfC]] - I know what you're saying, but I think you missed the point rather. We'd all like Merkey to contribute (carefully, since by his own admission he is strongly biased) within his fields of expertise; the problem arises when anybody has even a slight difference of opinion. He then goes off the deep end quite spectacularly, and spreads his dissatisfaction far and wide in the search for a sympathetic audience. I am coming to the view that he does not engage in calm debate with his opponents because he ''can't'', not because he doesn't want to. He sees SCOX trolls under every bed, and discounts every disagreement as being a personal vendetta against him. I honestly have no idea how to fix this, but do feel free to make some suggestions on his Talk page if you can think of any. <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> <small>([[User:JzG/help|Help!]])</small> 13:40, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
== re [[User:Nandaba Naota]] ==
Is this VoiceOfBritain, do you think? [[User:Herostratus|Herostratus]] 04:07, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
:How difficult is it to file a CheckUser request? [[user:DPeterson|<span style="color:red;">DPeterson</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:DPeterson|talk]]</sup> 12:43, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
::Ask [[User:Fred Bauder]], [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
:::OK...but he appears now to be out. I will file the info for later use. Thanks. [[user:DPeterson|<span style="color:red;">DPeterson</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:DPeterson|talk]]</sup> 21:54, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
::::He's very aware of the whole situastion, including the latest, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:59, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
==Vandalism allegation==
Please don't vandalism the article [[Britain and Ireland]] again. It DOES NOT already exist. It is under construction. ([[User:Sarah777|Sarah777]] 00:13, 30 May 2007 (UTC))
Dont make vadalism allegations you cant back up. I have db'd it, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:14, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
You blanked an article I am creating. That is vandalism. ([[User:Sarah777|Sarah777]] 00:18, 30 May 2007 (UTC))
No I did not, I redirected it [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Britain_and_Ireland&diff=prev&oldid=134445363]. Blanking would have been vandalism but redirecting clearly involves a content dispute. This article will go to afd so i suggest you improve it for that if you can, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:20, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, that will give me some time; last time it was gone before I got started. You aren't helping btw - can you cite where the article so far lacks neutrality? If not you might PLEASE remove your tag. Thanks ([[User:Sarah777|Sarah777]] 00:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC))
I have tried a different redirect but wont revert you again on this tonight. The whole article is a POV fork as I shall say in the afd if you do revert me agin. Cheers, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:26, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
And I shall say your redirects (which blank the page) are manifest vandalism! Goodnight. ([[User:Sarah777|Sarah777]] 00:33, 30 May 2007 (UTC))
:Well you are clearly wrong there, see for example [[Sir William Arbuthnot, 2nd Baronet]], [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:36, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
::I did look at Sir William - can't make any connections. You tell me what he has to do with it! ([[User:Sarah777|Sarah777]] 01:33, 30 May 2007 (UTC))
:::His article was redirected, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:41, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
== [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ages_of_consent_in_North_America&curid=5071177&diff=134647197&oldid=134646939 Ages of consent] ==
Sorry I missed that you'd also wikilinked the continent in your edit. I reverted "nations" as there are states, nations and other entities in these discussions. The term "jurisdictions" is a nicer umbrella term.
We're trying to keep the lead paragraph consistent across all the ''Ages of consent in..." articles. I'm toying with the idea of making it a template. Passing the template the unique name ("North America" or "Africa").''
Good idea to wikilink the continent though, I'll add that to the others now. Cheers Squeeky. --[[User talk:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 05:32, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
:No problem, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:40, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Age_of_consent&diff=134881585&oldid=134881337 Are you sure?]
The geographic map is simply a arbitrary division for the ''Ages of consent in...'' pages. Otherwise people have endless conversations about whether Turkey is in Europe or Asia, and so on. Even that map was selected from one of 7 different geographical continent models just because it spit the World up into roughly an equal number of countries/states. Without it it's a potential free for all as to which page to list on. --[[User talk:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 01:21, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
==Hey There, Kids==
Thanks for responding to my call. I was thinking speedy deletion, but I'm not well-informed about policy. As there is already an entry on [[Whitest_Kids_U%27Know]], what about a merge? To me, the new [[Hey There, Kids]] page does not seem notable in and of itself. -[[User:Jmh123|Jmh123]] 19:35, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
:Sounds good to me. I have several mergers in mind myself, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:36, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
::Done, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:40, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
:::Thanks. -[[User:Jmh123|Jmh123]] 19:49, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
== [[WP:NPOV]] in [[Olivenza]] ==
Hello SqueakBox. I have reverted your last edits to [[Olivenza]]. Your edits removed information that is factual and makes this article comply with [[WP:NPOV]]. This town is ''de facto'' Spanish, but ''de jure'' Portuguese (in limbo, if you will). Although it is administered by Spain, Spanish sovereignty over it is not recognized by Portugal, and the international border in that area has been disputed by both countries for centuries. Thus this article should not refer to Olivenza as solely being in [[Spain]]. Furthermore, Portugal recognizes it as being a municipality of the district of [[Évora]], so it has a rightful place in [[:Category:Municipalities of Portugal]]. I hope this explains why I reverted you. Best regards, <strong>[[User:Husond|<span style="color:#082567;">Hús</span>]][[User:Husond/Esperanza|<span style="color:green;">ö</span>]][[User talk:Husond|<span style="color:#082567;">nd</span>]]</strong> 00:33, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
== [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ages_of_consent_in_North_America&curid=5071177&diff=134647197&oldid=134646939 Ages of consent] ==
Sorry I missed that you'd also wikilinked the continent in your edit. I reverted "nations" as there are states, nations and other entities in these discussions. The term "jurisdictions" is a nicer umbrella term.
We're trying to keep the lead paragraph consistent across all the "Ages of consent in..." articles. I'm toying with the idea of making it a template. Passing the template the unique name ("North America" or "Africa").
Good idea to wikilink the continent though, I'll add that to the others now. Cheers Squeeky. --[[User talk:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 05:32, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
:No problem, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:40, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Age_of_consent&diff=134881585&oldid=134881337 Are you sure?]
The geographic map is simply a arbitrary division for the ''Ages of consent in...'' pages. Otherwise people have endless conversations about whether Turkey is in Europe or Asia, and so on. Even that map was selected from one of 7 different geographical continent models just because it spit the World up into roughly an equal number of countries/states. Without it it's a potential free for all as to which page to list on. --[[User talk:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 01:21, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
==RfC==
Just wanted to let you know that I opened an [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct|RfC]] on myself in response to the concerns raised during my [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Cla68|RfA]] over my actions in the [[Gary Weiss]] dispute. The RfC is located [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Cla68|here]] and I welcome any comments or questions you may have. [[User:Cla68|CLA]] 12:41, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
== Questions ==
I can here to ask you to remove your [[WP:Afd|Afd]] of the [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monster Pig|Monster Pig]] article. I think your reason of "Fails notability and includes non rlevant info about other hunted pigs also not notable," doesn't work with this article. The subject has been reported on by CNN, Fox News, the AP, MSNBC, ect. All of which are major news outlets. See [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,275524,00.html][http://www.monsterpig.com/news.htm][http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2007-05/26/content_880764.htm]
[http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/05/25/monster.pig.ap/index.html][http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18989526/?GT1=10056][http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,277097,00.html]
[http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/2007/06/01/0601monsterpig.html] Also, could you archive your talk page? Thanks, <sup>[[User:Wikihermit|<span style="color: black"><b>Ideology</b></span>]]</sup><sub>[[user_talk:Wikihermit|Talk to me]]</sub> <small>[[User:Wikihermit/Articles/Issues|£]]</small> 17:09, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
I think the article will clearly survive and is in much better shape than before. I wont remove the afd as I would rather wait for an admin to do so but am happy to see it closed and the article retained, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:09, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
==Flores Costa Cuca==
A "{{[[Template:prod|prod]]}}" template has been added to the article [[Flores Costa Cuca]], suggesting that it be deleted according to the [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed deletion]] process. All contributions are appreciated, but yours may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "[[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not|What Wikipedia is not]]" and [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|Wikipedia's deletion policy]]). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the <code><nowiki>{{dated prod}}</nowiki></code> notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on [[Talk:Flores Costa Cuca|its talk page]]. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the [[WP:PROD|proposed deletion process]], the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|speedy deletion criteria]] or it can be sent to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|Articles for Deletion]], where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. [[User:Bobo The Ninja|Ninja!]] 16:51, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
== Thanks! ==
[[Image:WikiThanks.png]]Thanks for the star. [[User:Herostratus|Herostratus]] 12:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
==Commercial use of [[:Image:Final Solution-chan1.jpg]]==
[[Image:Information_icon.svg|left]]Hello, this is a message from [[User:Android Mouse Bot 2|an automated bot]]. A tag has been placed on [[:Image:Final Solution-chan1.jpg]], by {{#ifeq:{{{nom}}}|1|[[User:{{{nominator}}}|{{{nominator}}}]],}} another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be [[Wikipedia:Speedy deletions|speedily deleted]] from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because [[:Image:Final Solution-chan1.jpg]] is an image licensed as "[[:Category:Non-commercial use only images|for non-commercial use only]]" or "[[:Category:Images used with permission|used with permission for use on Wikipedia only]]" which was either uploaded on or after [[2005-05-19]] or is not used in any articles ([[WP:CSD#I3|CSD I3]]).
'''If you ''created'' this media file''' and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{tl|GFDL-self}} to license it under the [[GFDL]], or {{tl|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the [[Creative Commons]] Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{tl|PD-self}} to release it into the public ___domain.
'''If you ''did not create'' this media file''' but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from [[Wikipedia:Non-free content#Tagging fair use images|this list]] if you believe one of those [[fair use]] rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and [[Wikipedia:Example requests for permission|request that they make the media available under a '''free''' license]].
If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at [[WP:WMD]]. '''This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate [[:Image:Final Solution-chan1.jpg]] itself'''. Feel free to leave a message [[User talk:Android Mouse|on the bot operator's talk page]] if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions]]. Thanks. --[[User:Android Mouse Bot 2|Android Mouse Bot 2]] 21:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks for that. I couldnt find the licence details on wikipedia, it was on the commons and I have now put the same licence on the croppede image, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:45, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
==Chapmans==
Thanks for the note. [[User:Tyrenius|Tyrenius]] 23:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
== hey ==
why did u delete my pic? --[[User:Callopeaatsaaps|Callopeaatsaaps]] 23:54, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
:I havent but I have asked someone else to as it is entirely inappropriate on wikipedia and in the nappy/diaper article, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:56, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
== Your POV remarks ==
The word "stupid" was unnecessary. "Irrelevant" would have been better. Discussion Pages are clearly marked as being for discussing improvement to the article. They are not a forum for POV chit-chat. [[User:Conval|Conval]] 19:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
:Yes but what you missed is that our conversation is helping improve the article. I have already added the link Gustav gave me and our thread contains other good, useful info for the article, so I would dispute the irrelevant (though obviously my civil note was re the stupid comment)[[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:39, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
== Did I do this correctly? ==
Thanks for the correction. Did I properly submit Search Engine Marketing to articles for Deletion now?
Thanks!
Al
--[[User:Akc9000|Akc9000]] 20:28, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
== Thanks for all your hard work! ==
I'm not a wiki editor, just a wiki watcher, (still learning the ropes by lurking); but I just wanted you to know people who care about child abuse issues really, really, appreciate the efforts editors like yourself, Herostratus, DPeterson, and Jmh123 make to keep those articles NPOV. It's a valiant, thankless, job, I expect, and fraught with a lot of trolling and difficulties, but greatly appreciated. [[User:Eats, shoots & leaves|Eats, shoots & leaves]] 17:53, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
== Brandt AfD ==
I am not ignoring your comments, I have just promised SlimVirgin to leave the debate until tomorrow at the earliest. There aren't many people who would describe me as a newbie- I am an administrator, and have been a heavy contributor for well over a year. If you want to raise an issue with me, hit me on my talk page. [[User:J Milburn|J Milburn]] 18:32, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
:No, I did take them on board- I have not commented since recieving them. I am also not attacking you. [[User:J Milburn|J Milburn]] 18:35, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
:oops I think I misread the year onn your oldest contribs, I see you have been around a while, but you are still very young in life and your comments werent appreciated re accusing me of trying to tip the balance on the afd while trying to do so yourself. I am happy to debate the rights and wrongs of the DB article in an adult way, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:39, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
::My age isn't particuarly relevent, it doesn't stop me from being an experienced Wikipedia contributor or having valid opinions. I did not accuse you of that, I simply threw it into the equation- whether or not you were trying to do it, it may have had that effect, so I just wanted to make sure that it wasn't happening subliminally. Also, I was not trying to tip the balance myself- I did exactly what you did. I put myself in the role of the closing admin and reviewed the discussion. My point was that what you were saying was not clear-cut ''at all''. No hard feelings were meant. [[User:J Milburn|J Milburn]] 18:48, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
== Brandt AfD 2==
Squeak, could you please stop commenting? You've posted eight times already; it not only makes for an aggressive atmosphere, it's probably having the opposite effect to the one you intend because it annoys people. It's best not to fan the flames when feelings are running high. Cheers, [[User:SlimVirgin|SlimVirgin]] [[User_talk:SlimVirgin|<sup style="color:purple;">(talk)</sup>]] 18:36, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
:No 5 times, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:40, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
== Indentation ==
Simple request - Can you please learn to indent correctly, it helps editors follow the discussion and avoids others having to format your comments. regards--[[User:Vintagekits|Vintagekits]] 21:08, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
:Also can you archieve some of these discussion - if you need a hand doing it I can help.--[[User:Vintagekits|Vintagekits]] 21:14, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
::Its been left unarchived deliberately and in the name of transparency (me being a transparent kind of a guy). Someone tried a fix but it didnt work so i removed it. Thanks for the comment but I dont need any help thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:17, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
== Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR ==
Hi. I saw and closed the report that Vintagekits filed on you there. While technically in breach of [[WP:3RR]] I understand fully that you were acting to remove a comment on your supposed motive for contributing to the debate. I suggest that if anything like this ever happens again you should ask another user to remove the offending comment for you. Even though you were acting quite properly to remove something unhelpful, edit-warring is always bad. Nest time, please ask for help. Incidentally, do you have any plans to archive this talk page? It's getting rather long. Best wishes and happy editing. --[[User:John|John]] 21:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
:Hi, I see you changed your name. Yes, I hear what you are saying and willt ake that on board. No I dont have plans to archive this talk page, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:29, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
::Thank you. Please make a special effort to interact civilly (or not at all) with [[User:Vintagekits]]. --[[User:John|John]] 22:07, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
I think not at all isnt an option (given I dont want him permanently blocked) so the special civil effort 'll be how I go with this one, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:27, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
If you ever need a hand, let me know. [[user:DPeterson|<span style="color:red;">DPeterson</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:DPeterson|talk]]</sup> 23:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
== Archive? ==
I just stumbled on your talk page as a result of your recent ANI posting (via convoluted route). Have you considered archiving? This page was so long that it froze my browser for a good 15-20 seconds, and I dread the wait after I submit this comment. Please consider. [[User:PouponOnToast|PouponOnToast]] 18:39, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
==VK==
Do you think Vintagekits is using TamB as a sort of "call one's bluff" sockpuppet? As he voted against himself there. --[[User:Counter-revolutionary|Counter-revolutionary]] 00:55, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
:Hello Squeakbox. I wonder if you and OneNight could keep British/Irish dispute that seems to range across the whole project off [[Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Vintagekits]]. There is little point in arguing with suspected socks about their motivation, the point is to determine whether they are the same editor as another. Lets keep this focused, please, before it turns into another example of endless bickering. Thanks. [[User:Rockpocket|<span style="color: green">Rockpock</span>]]<span style="color: black">e</span>[[User_talk:Rockpocket|<span style="color: green">t</span>]] 04:28, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
== La Prensa link ==
Actually, both laprensahn.com and laprensa.hn are correct. Either will get you to the newspaper's web site. I think the laprensahn.com is the older of the two domains, and may be being phased out, but I've seen no notice of that. [[User:Rsheptak|Rsheptak]] 00:18, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
== definition of attack ==
Simply using profane or strong language is not a personal attack. I did not label any individual, call names, or directly accuse anyone of doing or being anything. I was speaking in generalities about my view on the nature of being a public figure and the responsibilities it entails. 01:46, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Well do it without insulting and PAs. Your comment is for the most part still intact, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:48, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
:Again, my comments do not attack anyone. They mention no specific individual and make no accusations. [[User:VanTucky|VanTucky]] 01:49, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
::That's your opinion, its not mine, I think you attacked Angela, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:50, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
I have come to think that while what I said wasn't an attack (I certainly don't want to attack Angela, I don't even know the woman) it ''was'' irrefutably personal. So of course it doesn't belong in any discussion. Thanks for giving me time to cool off. [[User:VanTucky|VanTucky]] 23:23, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
== About Boddhi ==
I was wondering if you knew what mix your dog Boddhi is. I have a dog who is IDENTICAL to yours. When I saw his pic in the mix breed section, I thought it was my dog!!! If you could email me and if you know, let me know. My email: piperk1980@aol.com
Here is a pic of my dog, Xena. http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h280/PiperK1980/Xena21207011.jpg
Thanks!!
:Boddhi was very much a mongrel. He was born on a farm in southern England and I think his recent ancestors had been working sheepdog, although his mother (who had the long furry features as well) was a pet of new age travellers rather than a working dog. People always asked what breed he was and he simply wasnt. One of his older brothers was completely different and unnotable whereas of his 2 known children one was short furred and the other looked very similar to him but was much smaller. Your dog looks nice, too, and as similar to Boddhi as his mother was, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]]
== for your reading pleasure ==
SqueakBox, I read on an external website about the pedophile's Wikipedia campaign. <nowiki>http://www.corporatesexoffenders.com/wiki/Wikipedia_Campaign</nowiki>. You may have already seen this, but I found it a fascinating and disturbing read, it really sheds light on what you're dealing with here. --[[User:MichaelLinnear|MichaelLinnear]] 00:52, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
==Welcome==
Hi SqueakBox and thank you for your welcoming message. I see from your profile that you are a very busy wikipedian, however, if you happen across any of my edits that you feel I could use some advice on or you have suggestions for me, please feel free to mention it to me. Thanks again. --[[User:Migglesworth|Migglesworth]] 22:51, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
== [[:Category:Rape victims]] ==
Hello. Please stop!!! explanations coming in two seconds. [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 23:56, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
:Hello. I'm reverting all of your removals of this category and I have removed the speedy deletion tag you placed on the category. The latter I have done because "BLP violation" is not a good rationale for speedy deleting a category. I understand (though I probably don't quite share) your concerns about how appropriate this category is but in any case, this is something that should be properly debated. For that very same reason, I am reverting your unilateral decision to remove this cat from all articles that it contained. This is quite simply not the way to go about resolving the issue you may have with its existence. Please start a [[WP:CFD|cfd nomination]] and if consensus is reached in deleting the category, a bot will take care of its removal. Cheers, [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 00:00, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
::So I see you have chosen to revert all my reverts. Look, I don't want to get into a revert war with you on this whole thing but please be reasonable. Start a proper discussion and, in the meantime, leave the category as it is and leave the categorization of these articles as they are. Otherwise, it's impossible to hold a proper discussion on the subject. [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 00:03, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
:::You seem to have left for the day. In the meantime, I will revert again the deletion of the categorization tags. Please let me know if you have a problem with that. Cheers, [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 00:41, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
::::Yes please take it to XFD dont indulge in mass moves like this. Thanks [[User:Taprobanus|Taprobanus]] 15:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
== help! under politically motivated attacks ==
Hi SqueakBox,
Can you see if this article is really OR or just being railroaded?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Influence_and_activism_of_J._K._Rowling
Thanks, [[User:Libertycookies|Libertycookies]] 17:49, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
== Tony Blairs address ==
Probably a good idea to remove the house nunber from the article, but did you know that it is in the linked article on [[Connaught Square]]? --[[User:BrownHairedGirl|BrownHairedGirl]] <small>[[User_talk:BrownHairedGirl|(talk)]] • ([[Special:Contributions/BrownHairedGirl|contribs]])</small> 19:19, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
:Yes I just discovered that, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:21, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
==Your edit==
I ws attempting to remove your move of the page, because I think contentious moves (like this will be) needs more time before going ahead with the move. I have brought it to ANI, but removing your comment was unintended and I apologize. [[User:SirFozzie|SirFozzie]] 21:01, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
:Moving articles (especially those moves likely to be contentious) is best done '''after''' a consensus-building exercise, as you know very well already. Please don't move it again until that takes place. And please archive your talk page, it's getting ridiculous. --[[User:John|John]] 21:13, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
::This should not be controversial as Ireland is an island not a state so I felt that having made this clear on the talk page there was no need to gain consensus. Its a very straightforward mistake that needed rectifying and because some people ghave passionate opinions about the subject should not be a reason to not fix a simple error, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:50, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
:::Some editors don't agree with you though, thus making it a controversial move. --[[User:John|John]] 21:55, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
::::Yes but disagreing isnt enough. of the two opposers one focussed entirely on attacking David and I for getting involved and the other said that ireland was the name of the state which is of course incorrect on wikipedia as the state is called RoI and the island Ireland. Wikipedia shoudl not succumb to opinions, we arent a democracy and we are trying to build an accurate encycloepdia and making glaring mistakes is not good, it just weakens our credibility as an acvcurate source of information and in this case that is obvious, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:02, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
==The three working languages of the European commision are...==
English, French and German
Yes. I found it surprising but it's true. I guess it's one of the working languages as it is the most spoken language in the EU when you just look at native speakers. English is only the most spoken language in the EU when you look at first and second language speakers. German is one of the three working languages of the European Commission, along with English and French. ...
http://www.answers.com/topic/german-language
== Honduras national team ==
Why did u delete my question on the discussion area of the article Honduras national team? That kind of information must be verified. Unless u proove brazilians made that jokes at Honduras, the citation must be deleted. [[User:Digodf|Digodf]] 21:23, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
:Whoopos! My apologies, I misunderstood what you had actually said, and have removed the offending item from the article, I thought you were saying honduras' football team is a joke, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:32, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok.See u [[User:Digodf|Digodf]] 22:02, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
== Response to question about sock puppet==
See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Laderov|Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Laderov]. Note, the latest sock puppet IP has been banned from Wikipedia for three months.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=142033645&oldid=142031778][[User:Spylab|Spylab]] 16:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
==Edit waring==
I'm only aggressive because you keep editing referenced material or making illogical edits. I don't want to be in conflict with you, I think that on the page of the Nartional Front Nordicism and white nationalism are rather conradictory. That is why I insist on it being Nordicism and ethnic nationalism or just Nordicism.
== Merger ==
Jmh123 is concerned that there was no consensus to merge [[Pro-pedophile activism]] and [[Anti-pedophile activism]] into [[Pedophilia]]. Are you sure you had a consensus for that action? [[Special:Contributions/Will_Beback| ·:· ]][[User:Will Beback|Will Beback]] [[User talk:Will Beback|·:·]] 20:35, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
:If we ignore the banned users and the SPA newbies I absolutely think there is a consensus and Jmh herself was one of those in favour of the merge so I am surprised she has doubts, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:45, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
::I would just assume her doubts had to do with ensuring that form and practice were followed so that there would not be a basis for challenging the merger. My count is that there is a clear consensus for merger (but not total agreement). I see enough support for the merger that going ahead is within bounds, so to speak. At least that is my opinion. [[user:DPeterson|<span style="color:red;">DPeterson</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:DPeterson|talk]]</sup> 21:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Your assumption is incorrect. My objection is that you asked for a formal proposal to merge, then ignored the results and did as you pleased. Four established users opposed and four supporting is hardly clear consensus. I am fully aware of the difficulties that pro-pedophile editors have presented and how frustrating it can be, but this is not the proper response. It damages the reputation of the project when members act against established guidelines, and the project is losing respect because of it. I can't be associated with this kind of behavior, and have left the project. -[[User:Jmh123|Jmh123]] 17:47, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
== Your note ==
Thanks. :-) [[User:SlimVirgin|<span style="color:purple;">SlimVirgin</span>]] <small>[[User_talk:SlimVirgin|<sup style="color:blue;">(talk)</sup>]]</small> 22:00, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
==Nordic theory==
Squeakbox, I realise that protected versions of pages are not endorsed, but I am concerned that the protected version preserves the preferred version of the sockpuppet of a banned neo-Nazi whose version is rejected by ''all'' other editors. He has no incentive to build consensus if his version is preserved by the protection. I am hoping you will contest this protected version. [[User:Paul Barlow|Paul B]] 22:06, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks. Sadly, it's too late to suggest I don't contact the admin. Already done! [[User:Paul Barlow|Paul B]] 22:28, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
::Well you could point out that the edits of banned users should be reverted regardless of content rather than because of the poor quality of the content, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:37, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
== Re: Pedophilia ==
[[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox]] Please don't redirect a mass of articles without consensus. I'm reverting them back to the agreed upon versions.--[[User:Flamgirlant|Flamgirlant]] 22:22, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
:Please. There is enought of a consensus to do the redirection...Let's work to make a good article. [[user:DPeterson|<span style="color:red;">DPeterson</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:DPeterson|talk]]</sup> 22:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
::The closing admin said no consensus, that is what I am going by.
[[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Mass_redirects_with_no_consensus]]. Thanks.--[[User:Flamgirlant|Flamgirlant]] 22:45, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
== A thought on our past discussion ==
In the past you and I discussed archiving your talk page, with a few other people joining in, of course. I was just reading through some articles, and I noticed something that would make a great compromise. The purpose of archives is to keep a page from growing very large, as I stated previously. You don't like archives because you feel that they make it hard to navigate through past discussions. Well, how would you feel about the addition of a scroll box? Here's an example:
As you can see, this keeps the page from growing too long while still allowing the past discussions to be navigated in the same way. You would use a much larger scroll box, of course, and you would probably have to remove the images, as these things don't work well with them, but it would be a nice compromise. After doing some research I decided that the memory/loading thing I brought up before was a non-issue, as you said all along. Well, what do you think of the scroll box idea? I would be willing to set it up for you, as this thing makes you fight it to get an accurate preview if you don't get it right on the first try. Cheers, [[User talk:The Hybrid|The Hybrid]] 06:46, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
::Feel free to impose your system on my talk page and I will try it. I tried Hipocrite's system but it didnt work (I was losing messages etc) and if after a few days I didnt like your system I would get rid of it. Okay? [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:22, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
The box just couldn't handle that much text. I've restored all of the images, and made sure that all of your conversations remained in tact. Sorry for clogging up you page history. Peace, [[User talk:The Hybrid|The Hybrid]] 05:41, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
== [[Alan Johnston]] Hatnote ==
I'm intrigued by what makes you think that [[Alan Johnston]] and [[Allan Johnston]] wouldn't be confused considering they are pronounced exactly the same and spelled so similarly. —[[User:Joeblakesley|'''Joe''' Llywelyn Griffith '''Blakesley''']] [[user_talk:joeblakesley|<sub>talk</sub>]] [[Special:Contributions/joeblakesley|<sub>contrib</sub>]] 21:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
:Simple, one would spell Alan with one l as the default and spell Johnson without the t as the default (as I did when looking for him here). Or is that just my English prejudice? [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:09, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
== Comment in [[Lolicon]] ==
Couple requests:
#Can you move your comment[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lolicon&diff=142548553&oldid=142548359] to your own statement? This is so the previous debate is not resumed in the RfC section.
#Can you link the ''2 to 1 consensus'' to which you refer? Asking uninvolved editors to find this on their own is making work.
[[User:Edgarde|edgarde]] 23:12, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
:I think my comment needs to stay with tjstrf's comment, feel free to move them both. This is the [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Wikipe-tan_lolicon_%282007-01-04%29 link], I'll put it in, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:16, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
::Thanks much. I'm noticing the discussion you're linking is about the Wikipe-tan lolicon, which is off-topic in the current RfC. Is it okay to just delete this entirely? Both the deletion request and [[:commons:User talk:Jimbo Wales]] show the same thing, that consensus wasn't achieved and Jimbo ultimately deleted Wikipe-tan, but Jimbo had no objection to the current image.
::Also (and I'm sorry to be a pain here), it would be helpful if you could [[WP:ARCHIVE|archive]] some of your talk page. I'm on dialup and this page takes several minutes to complete. I'm clicking Save now, but won't wait for the result to come in — it's just too much of a time-waster. / [[User:Edgarde|edgarde]] 23:33, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
:::I think best leave the comment be. You are on dial-up? sounds painful. I am getting a fix to the archive issue, see a couple of threads up, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
::::<blockquote>An admin unilaterally decided to keep the image even thought he consensus ...</blockquote>
::::This is very misleading to uninvolved editors because "the image" to which you refer is not the image being discussed in this RfC. It would be helpful if you removed this comment entirely — it is off-topic and confusing.
::::If I knew up front you were referring to lolicon Wikipe-tan, and not the current image, I'd have simply suggested you remove it from the RfC.
::::Not to make you responsible for my problems, but it's has taken me half an hour (including 1 edit conflict) to type this conversation with you. I'm kind of hoping I don't need to plead my case further. / [[User:Edgarde|edgarde]] 23:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
:::::Okay, cool, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:55, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
==Attack==
[[Image:Information_icon.svg|left]]Hello, this is a message from [[User:Android Mouse Bot 2|an automated bot]]. A tag has been placed on [[:Carlos José Solórzano|this page]], by {{#ifeq:1|1|[[User:Agamemnon2|Agamemnon2]] ([[User talk:Agamemnon2|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Agamemnon2|contribs]]),}} another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be [[Wikipedia:Speedy deletions|speedily deleted]] from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because the article is a page created primarily to disparage its subject or a biography of a living person that is controversial in tone and unsourced, where there is no neutral point of view version in the history to revert to. (CSD G10).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting the article, please affix the template <nowiki>{{hangon}}</nowiki> to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at [[WP:WMD]]. '''Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate the article itself.''' Feel free to leave a message on the [[User talk:Android Mouse|bot operator's talk page]] if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --[[User:Android Mouse Bot 2|Android Mouse Bot 2]] 10:39, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
== Categorization of [[Thomas Hamilton (spree killer)]] redirect ==
Please review recent modifications to the guideline at [[Wikipedia:Redirect#Categories_for_redirect_pages]] and the proposed guideline at [[Wikipedia:Categorizing redirects]] for a growing consensus you may not be aware of. There's nothing wrong with encyclopedic categories on redirects which are not typos, abbreviations, and the like; Thomas Hamilton doesn't need a biographical article, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't be categorized in certain ways, so his information can be found. ''[[User:nae'blis|nae]]'[[user_talk:nae'blis|blis]]'' 17:40, 6 July 2007 (UTC) <small>(not logged in at present)</small>
:No problem; by the way, you may want to take a look at my archival solution, which just involves one big archive for old stuff, making it easy to search. I got the idea from Durin. -- ''[[User:Nae'blis|nae]]'[[User_talk:Nae'blis|blis]]'' 05:39, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
== Article writing ==
Seeing as you're currently opposing me because of my lack of article writing, I would appreciate if you looked at [[Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/R#To all the "article writing" opposes|this]]. I hope you don't mind me posting this on your talk page, but I know some people probably don't watchlist everything they ever edit. Thanks, [[User:R|'''R''']] <sup>[[User_talk:R|Parlate]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/R|Contribs]]<sub>[[Special:Emailuser/R|@]]</sub> (Let's Go Yankees!)</small> 02:03, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
== Ages of consent (again) ==
You reverted the page move we [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Age_of_consent#Latin_America discussed earlier]. Since you hadn't replied in over 20 days I took your silence as agreement. So I moved the North America page to "North and Central America" as you quite rightly pointed out Central America, although included as part of North America in the 7 continent model, had become somewhat of an orphan.
Once again;
The "''Ages of consent in...''" articles are sub pages of the [[Age of consent]] article.
They were created solely because there was too much text for a single article.
We needed an arbitrary way to divide the World up into several articles with roughly the same number of jurisdictions in each.
That division needed to be well defined.
It was decided to use the [[continent|7 continent model]] as only one country (Russia) falls over a boundary and we can use a [[Age_of_consent#Ages_of_consent_in_various_countries|clear colour key]] so that people may find the page they need.
[[Image:Continents_vide_couleurs.png|thumb|400px]]
The term "Latin America" stands separate from any other division of the World. It does not form part of a holistic demarcation we can easily use.
From [[Latin America|the article]]; "''There are several definitions of Latin America, none of them perfect or necessarily logically consistent''". As well as not dealing with the rest of the World, this model does not provide a clear and understandable definition within itself.
What possible logical reasons can you have for this move? Disrupting this set of articles in this manner damages the project as a whole. --[[User talk:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 21:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
:I have already made my reasons abundantly clear. Chopping the real entity of Latin America in half is unacceptabl;e and reflects terribly on the articles (that is why Central Am,erica has been ignored. You know this already and my reason is abundantly logical. Your comments make me think you know little and care less about Latin America, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:15, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
:Again I ask you to consider the set of articles as a whole. Consider the reader trying to find an article. How likely is it that someone looking for a particular country would enter the terms "Latin America"?
:Do you intend to nominate other divisions for the rest of the World where there are significant cultural differences? You say that this is the reason why there are few articles regarding Central America. Why then are there few articles regarding South America? Or Africa? Or Asia? I suspect the inherent bias of en.wikipedia rather than what page name they appear on. You complain that Central America is being left out and yet you reverted my page move to North and Central America.
:How does it reflect terribly on the articles? Why is it unacceptable? All you've provided so far is emotive normative statements. Give me something I can identify with and I'll consider it, I may even agree with you.
:Attacking my imagined political position about Latin America is not helpful at all. I could ask you why are you so intent on this objective separatist kind of division? As opposed to a more inclusive World view where all jurisdictions are treated equally? --[[User talk:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 04:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
::The reader is exactly who I am considering and all are the other divisions are fine. I was responding to your earlier comments and your resistance to Latin Am,erica as a concept and yoyur sdesire to arbitrarily split Latin America in 2, something that doesnt occur anywhere else in this series of articles, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:36, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Seeing that you don't seem to be able to be swayed with logic on this I've made a new map and fixed all labels for the links that the move has disrupted. If anyone complains about this scheme I'll refer them to you to defend it. ;) --[[User talk:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 22:14, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
:The thing is, there are other continents which have similar situations where the cultural differences (across Asia for example) are even more vast than from Latin countries to the US. Canada and most of the US have a fairly wide gulf in AOC laws despite their similarities. When we first split the article up into 6 parts we decided to go along completely arbitrary lines to avoid such political/cultural arguments.
:Of course now that you've made yourself known, I expect you to contribute well referenced discussions of the laws of the countries that are missing from [[Ages of consent in Latin America]] - :) :) Cheeky grin :) :) --[[User talk:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 22:28, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
::Oh indeed and starting with Honduras (I got involved because of my paedophile watch involvement). Asia is actually very different, different areasd there are glued together whereas with LA the region was torn apart, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:46, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
I would also like to comment on this. SqueakBox, you are correct that having a North America and a South America article would break Latin America in half. However, if we have an article on [[Ages of consent in Latin America]], what countries are included? Are Belize and the Bahamas included? Mexico? Jamaica? Suriname? Guyana? If not, then where do they go? Suriname and Guyana certainly aren't in North America, and the others I mentioned (and more) are all disputed. No, using Latin America as a region when the subject is not about language is unnecessarily problematic. Also, Monotonehell rightly brings up the question of other regions. [[Ages of consent in North America]] currently suffers from an incorrect name, because it excludes Mexico and Central America. This is confusing at best, and it doesn't need to be that way. Using the standard North America and South America is the best option, because it eliminates all questions of POV, is used internationally, and has uncontroversially delineated borders. I advocate reverting [[Ages of consent in Latin America]] back to [[Ages of consent in South America]], and moving the content about Mexico and Central America (there still seems to be none, so much for the switch allowing Central America to not be ignored) into [[Ages of consent in North America]]. -[[User:Kotra|kotra]] 21:15, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
::We could call it Latin America and the Caribbean. I would strongly opose an arbitrary breaking though my preferred solution wopuld be to have one AoC for the Americas which has a relatively small population (less than either India or Africa), [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Calling it Latin America and the Caribbean still wouldn't solve the problem of countries in the same region that do not speak Spanish or Portuguese, nor would it solve the problem of the North America article still being incorrectly named, nor would it be consistent with the other regional AoC articles, which are all geographic/political continents, not perceived cultural or social regions. As for your suggestion of one Americas article, that would be a solution only if population was relevant to the AoC articles (and if [[Ages_of_consent_in_Australia_and_Oceania|Australia and Oceania]] was ignored). However, population isn't relevant to the laws regarding age of consent. What would be more relevant is the number of legal jurisdictions. North and South America each have a comparable number of jurisdictions to the other continents. -[[User:Kotra|kotra]] 00:53, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
::::So lets have an AoC in the Americas, though there is no question that Latin America is considered a political region while North America is not, encompassing as it does 2 different regions, one very rich and English s[peaking the other (a third of Latin America) a very poor, Spanish region. Actually Africa, Asia and Europe all have as amny or more states than the Americas, eg Africa has 61 and Asia has a similar number, and that is nearly double the number in the Americas as a whole so your asswertions are incorrect re the number of territories, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:59, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
:::::::Personally I think that the 7-continent model is the more political model, because it is used to describe political entities more often. For example, Mexico (a political entity, not a geographic entity) is almost always described as being primarily in North America, not Latin America.[http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/Mexico][http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Mexico]. Cultural is irrelevant because the article makes no claims about how the age of consent relates to the culture or cultures of the region. The laws are the only thing these articles should describe, and despite your claim to the contrary, some Latin American countries have similar age of consent laws to those in Canada and the US (Argentina and Brazil, for example). Therefore, the Latin America/Anglophone North America model groups the regions by their age of consent laws just as badly as the South America/North America model.
:::::::As for treating the United States as one entity, that doesn't make sense in this situation because each US state's description is as long as that of other countries, as it should be because of how the US's laws are set up. The whole purpose of splitting the age of consent articles by region is because having a single article for all the countries would be too long. The reason is length, not cultural division. Probably not even political division either, so the entire Political line of discussion is probably moot anyway.
:::::::Since you have said you live in Honduras, I wonder if you are pressing this point because you don't want your country to be in the same category as the United States and/or Canada. I hope that is not the case because that's not what this should be about. The AoC articles make no claims about how the countries are 'similar' culturally, politically, or otherwise. The only things being discussed are the laws. -[[User:Kotra|kotra]] 03:45, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
:::::::Sorry, I forgot to add something: if the previous model didn't work, then the current model doesn't work just as much. There still aren't any sections about Central American countries. -[[User:Kotra|kotra]] 03:48, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
::::::::BTW if we assume the uS contains 50 states we have something over 60 in North America and only 13 in Soyuth America so that doesnt work either. I'll see what I can get together for the Central American states. I dont want my (adopted) country to be in the same page as the US/Canada, not because I am against these countries (I certainly am not that) but because I recognise the culture here is a Latin culture very like South America and not at all like Canada and the US, so be assured it isnt prejudice against the US or Canada that motivates me here or in life (some editors would dsya I have a pro Brit POV but that isnt the same thing at all). But I am pro Latin America and if I have a prejudice here it is not wanting to see it split in two. I am of the opinion (developed during our discussion) that one article for all the Americas would be best, which of course would mean Honduras and the US ont he same page butt hat is okay by me). I dont agree that culture is irrelevant in AoC, quite the opposite I would sday and nor do i agree that Mexico is not considered a part of Latin America but instead a part of North America, that is simply not the case, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:24, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::I don't see why it wouldn't work with over 60 in North America and 13 in South America. There's nothing that says each section has to have the same number of jurisdictions. As I said earlier, the point of breaking the AoC list into regions was so that the articles wouldn't be too long and unwieldy. I don't think North America or South America is in danger of that anytime soon. However, a single article for all the Americas would probably be too long, and it wouldn't fit with the other AoC articles either. Consider North Africa, which is very similar in culture to most of the Middle East. Or Malaysian and Indonesian culture's similary to that of Papua and West Irian Jaya. The areas aren't divided culturally because culture isn't the focus of Age of Consent. It's just a legal topic, nothing more. I don't understand your view that culture is relevant enough to this subject to determine the way the regions are sectioned off, because there aren't any claims made about culture in any of the AoC articles (I might be wrong on this, because I haven't read all of them). But even if it were a cultural subject, drawing borders around cultural areas is extremely difficult and problematic, and needs a well-though-out discussion before changes are made, and anyone who says otherwise is completely ignoring the complexity and unavoidable subjectivity of culture. But if you want to go that route, at least keep it consistent. All the other AoC articles must be reexamined and revised to meet some sort of objective cultural map that reflects some sort of consensus. In my opinion, that's nearly impossible.
:::::::::As for Mexico not being part of Latin America, I think I was misunderstood. I said that Mexico is described as being ''primarily'' part of North America (as the dictionary definitions I linked support), not Latin America. Latin America is noted only secondarily, if at all. Sorry for being unclear there. -[[User:Kotra|kotra]] 21:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
:You just seem to be justifying splitting Latin America into two whereas I dont think any of your arguments do justify such a split and such a split merely harms the set of articles. There are avrious soluitions thta dont involve splitting this region up and we should use one of them, I think you underestimate how much of one region Hispanic America is, the idea that Brazil and Colombia are in one region and Mexioc, honduras etc in another region simply fails to reflect the reality and there is consistency of AoC in spanish speaking Latin America as attitudes are very similar, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:24, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
::Yes, I am justifying breaking Latin America in two, but for good reasons: (1) the definition of Latin America is vague at best, (2) both the Latin America/North America model and the Americas model are inconsistent with the other AoC articles, (3) Age of consent is a legal issue, not a language or cultural issue, and (4) the purpose of splitting the AoC articles is for length, not to group them into similar regions. I have provided examples backing up each of these arguments. I have no problem with Latin America, and I'm not totally ignorant about it, either. I work for a nonprofit organization that is devoted to economic development in Latin America and the Caribbean through venture capital and private equity (lavca.org). My work requires good knowledge of LAC and its diversity. But I know when the more universally accepted continent model should be used, and that is the case here. I welcome you to prove me wrong, because I would prefer to leave the articles alone if I was convinced they were better that way. -[[User:Kotra|kotra]] 22:13, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Well I disagree, and AoC is very much of a cultural/political issue, I see you are knowledgerabl;e ont he subject which, from my POV, makes your argument less comprehensible, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:18, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
== Johnston ==
Could you please explain [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alan_Johnston&diff=143136844&oldid=143136048 this edit]? The biography section is fully sourced and contains no controversial or libellous material. Why did you remove it? It passes [[WP:BLP]] standards. The article is useless without that section.
Secondly, the kidnapping section should be a summary of the kidnapping, which was what was there, not a one-sentence "He was kidnapped on X and released on Y".
If you think it should be removed, please start a discussion on the talk page (or if you really think it's that serious, [[WP:BLPN]]) instead of unilaterally removing it. Thanks. [[User:Chacor|–]] [[User talk:Chacor|Chacor]] 01:21, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
:No the kidnapping section was a lot more than just a summary, it was paragraphs of material already at teh kidnapping article. We should be like everyone else and respect Johnston's privacy right now which giving personal details of his life is not doing, and thus the material is controversial, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:50, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
::That's nonsense. I'd challenge you to go to BLPN - there would be no consensus to agree this is controversial whatsoever. Since when has Wikipedia censored content for privacy of others? Daniel Brandt doesn't count, he's not notable. This award-winning journalist is. [[User:Chacor|–]] [[User talk:Chacor|Chacor]] 01:47, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
:Your argument seems to be that you can delete the material because it is "controversial." A BLP argument does not give you the power to remove material merely because it is controversial, it must be both unsourced ''and'' controversial. Such is not the case. This is a ''very famous'' individual, the information is widely published, there are no privacy concerns here. [[User:Quatloo|Quatloo]] 01:57, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
If unsourced then controversy is irrelevant, I am surprised to see you brin gn those 2 together. But the real question is "how does the material I removed improve the biogrpahy" and "how does its removal make for a worse encyclopedia. Johnston was not notable either until a bunch of criminals/terrorists made him so so his notabaility is as a kidnap victim and not as a journalist while he has made a very clear statement of wanting to return to obscurity. Are a few anonymous wikipedians going to stop that? IMO the bio should be merged into the kidnap article as has happened with many victims of British crimes only notabl;e for that reason, eg [[Murder of Sarah Payne]] and I am mulling over whether an afd is the answer (given the precedent of merging victims of British crimes inot the bio of the crime itself. At the end of the day I can delete because that is how things work round here, its called the edit button and there are no policies against that. People like to quote imaginary policies to justify opposing deletion of material but I have never come across a real policy that says this is unacceptable), [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:57, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
==I may not be able to edit?==
In the arbitration case involving Attachment Therapy, etc. an editor has requested an injunction so I cannot edit any pages. See: [[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration%2FAttachment_Therapy%2FWorkshop&diff=143821515&oldid=143814865]]. Just want you to be aware so that if that is done you don't think I've lost interest in the various Pedophile related pages. [[user:DPeterson|<span style="color:red;">DPeterson</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:DPeterson|talk]]</sup> 22:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks, your a pal. [[user:DPeterson|<span style="color:red;">DPeterson</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:DPeterson|talk]]</sup> 23:00, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
==[[Melbourne]] and [[Auckland]]==
Hey SqueakBox, Melbourne is further south than Auckland. The coordinates are on their respective Wikipedia article pages. In any case, it doesn't matter. As it was pointed out though by [[User:Dentren|Dentren]], the discussion of the southern most city is kind of pointless given that it depends on criteria.--[[User:Just James|Just James]] 01:34, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
== [[Alan Johnston]] Hatnote ==
Sorry for the delay in replying. (I lost my first reply in a browser crash.) I'm British and I would also spell it ''A'''l'''an'' by default (which is supported by 206 v. 56 [[ghits]]); that is exactly why the hatnote should be on [[Alan Johnston]] as people hearing the name would expect it be spelled that way. The spelling of the surname is irrelevant as they are both ''Johnston''; I decided not to disambiguate [[Alan Johnson]] in the hatnote as his name is pronounced differently, albeit slightly.
[[User:Joeblakesley|'''Joe''' Llywelyn Griffith '''Blakesley''']] [[user_talk:joeblakesley|<sub>talk</sub>]] [[Special:Contributions/joeblakesley|<sub>contrib</sub>]] 12:40, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
:I've put it back. By all means revert if you have a valid argument against it. —[[User:Joeblakesley|'''Joe''' Llywelyn Griffith '''Blakesley''']] [[user_talk:joeblakesley|<sub>talk</sub>]] [[Special:Contributions/joeblakesley|<sub>contrib</sub>]] 03:29, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
==When Jonathan Died==
Sex Games is exactly right. Have you read the book recently? [[User:Tony Sandel|Tony]] 22:48, 12 July 2007 (UTC)Tony
:That is a matter of interpretation. To call child sexual abuse sex games is bizarre to say the least, downright abusive, IMO. Of course I have never read the book, what you think such filth gets sold where I live, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:06, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
== You removed my entry ==
you deleted ''[[Ganja Butter]]'': Eatable oils are used for [[solvent extraction|extraction]] of the THC from large amounts of Cannabis leaves. The resulting oil is often used in baking cakes.
I was trying to add useful information. I am sorry but "Ganja Butter" should be included. My link page well ok I should have made it better before saving it, I will get a better brief page about that. The leaves are not smoked I was talking about an extraction process using food grade oils, this is commonly done on leaves.
How about we get it right instead of you just deleting my stuff. Thanks.
:Please source, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
== Don Murphy on Transformers ==
Why do you feel his involvement in Transformers is not of interest? [[User:Zanimum|Zanimum]]
:Because the subject doesnt want it and I think we should always listen to the subject of a bio, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:05, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
:: Did you actually read what I had just added, or did you just freak out when "OMG, zanimum edited, must revert!"? Because I was adding about how he empowered Transformers fans to have a legitimate say in the movie, such as the exclusion and appearance of characters. I see absolutely no reason that he wouldn't want to promote this level of communication and fan participation. Murphy has only spoken out against references to Tarantino. -- [[User:Zanimum|Zanimum]] 17:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Murphy has spoken out against the article as a whole. And I had never come across you before today so the idea that I would revert because you made the edit is utterly not so. I think the problem was the other editor who revetred my efforts on the article and described me as a committeee. If you revert me I certainly wont revert you again, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:50, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
::: Murphy has pointed out that the article is illegal but that doesn't seem to matter so you should add it [[User:FoolsRushIn|FoolsRushIn]] 05:27, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
== [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Jimbo_Wales&curid=2829412&diff=144447425&oldid=144444828 Please explain] ==
why you are so insistent on removing humour from Wikipedia. — [[User:Springeragh|<span style="background:#808;color:#fff;text-decoration:none;"> '''''$PЯIПG'''''</span>]][[User talk:Springeragh|<span style="background:#808;color:#fff;text-decoration:none;">rαgђ </span>]] 18:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
:I just responded on your talk before receiving this, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:36, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
==Cannabis (drug)==
What's up with trashing the page with that venn diagram? Also it turns out that diagram is under mediation on the [[psychoactive drug]] page: (the diagram is unreferenced and false; plenty of people oppose it; it can and will be removed in accordance with WP:V until it is sourced)
[[User:199.125.109.99|199.125.109.99]] 23:05, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
==Re: Second city of the United Kingdom - Request for Rational Debate==
As a recent, and possibly significant, contributor to the [[Second city of the United Kingdom]] article, I'd like to direct your attention to this edit on the Talk Page regarding a [[Talk:Second_city_of_the_United_Kingdom#Request_for_Rational_Debate|Request for Rational Debate]] on the subject of the article. All the best. [[User:Sprigot|Sprigot]] 15:12, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
==Rape victims category controversy==
The rape victims cat has now been depopulated and only contains fictional victims, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:37, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
===Sally Yoshino===
Hi, SqueakBox. I'm wondering what your reason is for removing [[:category:Rape victims]] from the [[Sally Yoshino]] article. You cite "trolling" in your edit summary. It's a legitimate category, and Yoshino says in interviews that she was a victim of rape (it's cited in the article). So, unless you have a reason that Yoshino should not be in this category, I'll add it back later. Regards. [[User:Dekkappai|Dekkappai]] 18:42, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
=== Trolling? ===
Hi, I saw that you removed some pictures and categories saying ''rm trolling''. Why was that? :) I don't know about other articles but those [[Sri Lankan]] articles which you removed [[:Category:Rape victims]], I feel we should keep the category as it is. --[[User:Lahiru_k|<span style="color: blue">'''♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Lahiru_k|<span style="color: blue">walkie-talkie</span>]]</sup> 18:44, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
=== wth ===
What do you have against child molestation and rape? Many of these people are victims of rape In the case of [[Charlie Keever]] they found semen from his killer in his mouth? How do you suppose that go there???? his genitals mutilated. I am reverting your edits. What you are doing is trolling. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 19:47, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
:What have I got against child molestation and rape? Quite a lot actually. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 06:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
::I am reporting you to an administrator you are using wikipedia to make a point. THis is not about supporting victims. This is stating facts, everyone who knows these cases knows their perpetrator was convicted of raping the victim. Wikipedia is not your soapbox. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 20:08, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
===reply===
The category is outing rape victims, that is not acceptable on wikipedia, we are not here to troll the subjects of our articles which is what this category does, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:09, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
: So your issue seems to be with the category, SqueakBox, not its inclusion in particular articles. I'll revert your edit to [[Sally Yoshino]] then (who "outs" herself in interviews, by the way), and you can put the category up for a deletion discussion if you wish. Thanks. [[User:Dekkappai|Dekkappai]] 20:14, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
::No body is outing anybody. We are telling the facts concerning the case. This "outing" stuff is in your mind. You can not go around unilaterally removing a valid category just because YOU don't like it. Wikipedia is not a place to prove a point; doing so is disruptive behavior and it may lead to being blocked. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 20:20, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
:::I suggest that the issue is with the category itself, not its placement on particular articles. If it is placed on an article without a reliable source to back it up, certainly it should be removed, as with any unsupported, controversial claim. But as for removing it from all articles, whether the sources support it or not-- that indicates that the category itself should be brought up for a deletion discussion... Nevermind, I see someone just deleted the category... [[User:Dekkappai|Dekkappai]] 20:43, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
::::All right. If it is deleted then so be it. I had no clue this had happened. Glad to put the issue to rest. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 20:49, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
===Haley Paige===
What definition of 'trolling' are you using here? How is it you feel the category you removed does not apply? [[User:Valrith|Valrith]] 23:16, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
:Exactly. You can't go around accusing people of trolling. It puts users on the defensive. Had you told people the category was deleted and that's why you're removing it people may have been more understanding. The assumption of good faith works reciprocally. I'm sure the person who made the category was not trying to "out" anyone like you say. The majority of articles under that category was of people who are already dead, so [[BLP]] is invalid. Oh well, that's a different topic. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 01:01, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
::She's alive. See [[WP:BLP]], the category has been deleted as a hopeless blp nightmare that should never have existed, the cat was, IMO, trolling which explains my thought out edit summary, and even dead people deserve our consideration. If the person was being well intentioned it still created a bad product whose end was precisely to out people. Online is real life too and we all have to behave responsibly. If you are really on the side of victims and their families I hope you will support blp on this project, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:03, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
:::I am referring to people who are dead. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 01:06, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
::::But the cat wasnt specifically about the dead, and if it were my wife/child/parent who was dead dead I wouldnt want that eternally made public on wikipedia, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:48, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
:::::Well if they are [[WP:NOTABLE]] and we can write about them in Wikipedia, there is nothing you can do to stop the world from knowing about it. Facts is what we write in Wikipedia not someone's fantacy as to what and what should not be. Thanks [[User:Taprobanus|Taprobanus]] 16:19, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
::::::Well, the fact that someone erroneously added it to an article about the living doesn't mean the category is wrong. I realize people misused it and for that I'm glad the category is gone. It appears like no one set any strict rules for the category, and some people went carte blanche using it. That's unfortunate. The name of the dead can be included so long as there is fact, supporting they were raped and murdered, and there is secondary reliable sources. What you or I want is not important here. What is important is enforcing and following wikpedia's criteria and policies. Wikipedia is not censored, nor does it have to change itself to make sensitive people happy. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 05:00, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
===Cat:Rape victims===
I have rectreated it and have asked an ANI finding that it should be listed for XFD, not a speedy. Just that you know [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#.5B.5BUser:Russianname.5D.5D]][[User:Taprobanus|Taprobanus]] 16:17, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
===Cat deleted from article===
Hi there, I've noticed that you have deleted the category "child molestation victims" from the [[Axl Rose]] article a few times with the rationale that it is a blp vio. I do appreciate your concern for wanting to keep blp violations out of Wikipedia, but I don't think that this qualifies as one. Rose himself has stated in several interviews, cited in the article, that he was abused, he's talked about it onstage, he's written lyrics that refer to it, and he has also stated that by going public with it he hopes to help others. I would say that because he has been open about it in major media outlets, it wouldn't qualify as invasion of privacy, and that because the information comes directly from him and there's proof of that, it's not unsourced either. If there are thoughts I'm missing on this and a rationale for leaving it out of the article, please share them. Thanks and best wishes, [[User:DanielEng|DanielEng]] 21:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
:I still think it shouldnt be in a category though I agree that in this case to mention it in the bulk of the article is okay. At the end of the day I got rid of any doubtfuls and if this isnt a doubtful I guess you can return it, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:38, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
=== [[Dru Sjodin]] ===
Instead of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dru_Sjodin&diff=146590751&oldid=143879930 calling] the addition of Category:Rape victims to this article "''unsourced spec''" you could have simply asked for a source. A source has now been provided which specifically states that this woman was a victim of kidnapping, murder, ''and'' rape. Simply asking for a source or providing one yourself is certainly better than labeling something as "''unsourced spec''." --[[User:MatthewUND|Matthew<span style="color: green"><b>UND</b></span>]]<sup>([[User talk:MatthewUND|talk]])</sup> 22:17, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
:Sounds nice but contradicts our policies and I am not willing to see people labelled as rape victims here for even 1 minute without a source. We are in the real world and we must all start behaving more responsibly in these delicate issues. if it were my sister/mother/daughter I would be appalled especially with a wrong label, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:27, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
::You miss the point totally. Asking for a source in a matter like this is absolutely a good idea. It would also be wise to remove the contested material (which you did) and then ask for a source (which you didn't) before the material is added again. On the other hand, it is a very bad idea to call something in an article "unsourced speculation" simply because it lacks a source and you don't know if it is true or not. By acting as though a thoroughly documented and publicized fact such as Sjodin's rape is "unsourced speculation," you show that you clearly are not familiar with the subject of this article. Also, please don't act as though anyone would mean harm by including this category in an article like this. Unfortunately, Sjodin is famous ''because'' she was kidnapped, raped, and murdered so a category like this in an article like this is a no-brainer. You also act as though Sjodin's family would be upset to see this category in this article when, in fact, they would obviously be far more hurt seeing an editor call their daughter's brutal rape "unsourced speculation." I would also point out that your interest seems to only be in this particular category and not the body of the article itself. You removed the rape victim category from the Sjodin article, but you did not remove any of the rape victim text from the article itself. If you feel that something is so "speculative" in nature, your interest in the matter should move beyond the category to the body of the article itself. Again, asking for a source is a good idea...labeling something which you are clearly not familiar with as "speculation" is a bad idea. --[[User:MatthewUND|Matthew<span style="color: green"><b>UND</b></span>]]<sup>([[User talk:MatthewUND|talk]])</sup> 06:29, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
=== Attacking ===
Wikipedia is neutral. It does not attack, nor does it coddle anybody. Get over yourself and stop trying to act like a victim's advocate. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 23:06, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
:Get over yourself? What gibberish is that? How old are you? You may believe that wikipedia is neutral and therefore we can stalk or out whoever we want but many people dont believe such superficial stuff, hence our BLP policy. Its you who are claiming to be a victim advocate while acting in ways that troll victims and their familes. I am not a victim advocate (although I am a serious crime victim having been macheted a few years back and nearly died from the skull fracture) but I am an experienced wikipedian and I absolutly believe that we must be careful and sensitive towards the subjects of our articles, and many, many others believe this as well. Heard of Daniel Brandt? He is the individual who has drawn the stalking nature of wikipedia to the attention of many like myself who were unaware of it before. That you havent got to that point yet is lamentable and hopefully you will do eventually and that you wont damage too many people in the process. By coddling are you actually admitting you dont care about victims and their families? So no wikipedia is not magically neutral, it may be so if we make a huge effort but to assume it is so anyway is naive, and dangerously so, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:38, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
::The information in my user page refers to the notion that criminals are held accountable and deserve a punishment befitting their crime. The only people, who attacked or hurt the victim are the criminals. I find your use of the word "troll" to be highly offensive as it suggest that you think I'm on the same level as their perpetrator. I'm not a stalker and I don't know any stalkers. You're going all carte blanche on this term and it is way out of line. You are being way more offensive to me then anything I'm saying about crime victims. I did nothing to them, and these are articles are doing nothing to them. As far as the category is concern it should only apply to people who are dead and if there is credible evidence to support that they were raped. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 23:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
::I certainly do not mean to imply you are in any way the perpetrator of any of these nasty crimes, apologies if you really think that. I dont feed real trolls and am trying to dialogue as your user page stronlgy implies good faith. But we have genuine issues here at wikipedia. People like Brant consider that articles on people who dont want them is itself stalking those people and I am genuinely trying to minimize harm done and not sensationalise these cases or violate the privacy of victims and their families. To have a child raped and murdered and then for that to appear on wikipedia (which anyone with access to the interent can edit) must be extremely distressing, dont you think. Its taken me years to get to this position, others here feel the same (hence Zscout deleted it as a blp nightmare). If it survives the deletion debate will you then support me in changing the name to decesaed rape victims or some such so we can ensure no living people are involved. This is an important area in which you have an interest and your help would be apprecuated. Same with changing bios to x murder case, this is all donme to protect victims and their families, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:08, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Wikipedia has strict policy on what makes a person or event notable. So long as they meet that they can have an article and I find your term "stalking" as exaggerating. We are not giving away their address, we are not giving away their phone number. Wikipedia does not advocate making articles on people who don't want one. None of the article's are sensationalized and if you find one that is; change it. I've written some of them myself and I always use very formal wording. Furthermore, plenty of victim's families have gone publicly and spoken about their loved one's murder. Some have written books or formed victim advocacy groups, so you're partly wrong if you think these people don't want their stories to be told. Marc Klaas, Mark Lunsford, Erin Runnion, Sharon Rocha, John Walsh, Magi Bish, and more are people who've made books or established foundations about the death of their loved one's. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 00:36, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
::::For the reasons you outlined I dont oppose the rape victims advocacy category which is appropriate for these cases. It's not me who coined the term stalking for wikipedia articles and it took me a while to agree that this is the case. Wikipedia may not actively advocate articles on people who dont want them but cases such as [[Don Murphy]] and [[Barbara Schwartz]] indicate these do happen in spite of peoples objections. As I said yesterday I got started on this by wikipedia review, and I am trying to protect the privacy of individuals and their families, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:41, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
:::::Well, whoever it was that coined the term is very wrong. All it did is allow people such as yourself to abuse it and describe people who are innocent of stalking. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 01:03, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
::::::Sharply disagree and if you think I am abuising anything I am wasting my time and we are getting nowhere. How trying to get rid of an outing/stalking cat like rape victims is abuse is completyely beyond me and I dont kn ow how you can say this if you really are a good faith user. I think this conversation is over, please dont continue it on my talk page, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:19, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
=== Your redirect of Megan Kanka to the Timmendequas article ===
A few months ago I proposed that it be done the other way around, but now I see that your way is best. Thank you. I have changed the Timmendequas article to get rid of all the 'allegedly's and bring it more into line with Megan's. --[[User:CliffC|CliffC]] 01:23, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
=== yeah right ===
changing the title of articles or making redirects, and removing categories is not proof you are on the side of crime victim's. None whatsoever. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 03:50, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
:My overall edits are, whatever you claim. And you clearly are not on the side of victims, you seem obsessed with outing them and I have wasted too much time trying to persuade you otherwise. using wikipedia to advance yoyur lets out victims agenda is not acceptable behaviour on wikipedia. I believe there are going to be efforts to contact the press and organisations like AI (not by me) by people pissed off with this trolling of the victims of crime. Ya basta. IMO the sooner trolls like yourself are outed the better, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:53, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
::The only one pushing an agenda is yourself. You obviously came here thinking you can censor wikipedia. This outing stuff is your opinion, not a fact. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 04:04, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
:Yeah, right, I've only been here a month and I dont really give a shit abiout vidctims, I'm just here to troll you. And if you believe that...now please go away, and if you want to edit here do so in a constructive manner and not with a fierce determination to out victims. If you really believe your own waffle I feel soruy for you but one day you'll have to grow up and take responsibility like the rest of us. Your agenda appears to me to be to troll victims, that doesnt make you a perpetrator but you arent much better and you disgust me personally because of your actions. Now please go away, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:29, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
::I'll go away as soon as you seize from this sanctimonious attitude you have. Wikipedia does not need anymore self-appointed do-gooders. Real crime activist are legislating tougher penalties for first time sex offenders. Those are the real people caring about crime victims. All you're doing is disrupting articles and deleting and renaming anything you don't like. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 05:04, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
=== ANI ===
Hello. I have started [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=146810039&oldid=146809910 this thread] about your behavior of the past few days. Please do take the time to comment. Thank you. [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 18:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
:I think you have taken it to the wrong place. Glad to see you recognise there are ethical considerations and if you start making unsourced claims that anyone was raped then wiould be the moment for AN/I, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:43, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
::I can't escape the feeling you won't care but I find your accusations and insinuations both petty and hurtful. I have not, never have, never will support the inclusion of unsourced claims that person X was raped. I do not support hunting down rape victims and plastering their face all over Wikipedia for enjoyment and I cannot for the life of me imagine how you could get that impression. I do care deeply about Wikipedia and I think your actions are being detrimental to the project. It's great to have ideas for how to make Wikipedia better. We all do. However, most of us recognize that what seems like a great idea might not be seen as a positive change by others and we accept the need to make our case first, open a discussion and remain open-minded. In the very little interaction I have had with you I have seen you completely lose track of [[WP:CIVIL]], I have seen you refuse to discuss with me or anyone else for that matter the depopulation of the category for rape victims (until after the fact of course), I have seen you call for sanctions against other editors when clearly simple dispute resolution avenues can still be sought. You claim on your user page to be a grown man: please start acting as such. Don't go on crusades: you've been here long enough to know that it won't get you anywhere. Cheers, [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 20:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
::I havent claimed to be a grown man, you can judge that one for yourself, all I do on my user page is say who I am and where I am coming from, though acting like a man is vital to my work not just here but throughout my life, nor to the best of my knowledge have I sought bans on anybody re this issue and certainly not on FfJ for his user name. Depopulating based on policy vios doesnt need disciussing first, just afterwards. This cat is causing a lot of controversy and I am very unhappy that Zscout's speedy was reverted. I also take great care with civil so I see your comment as more of a rant than anything serious to be honest, please get your facts, provide diffs for your accusations etc etc. FfJ is blocked right now while [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=147520575 this] is what our founder thinks about this case, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC) [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:06, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
:::If diffs are what you want then I'd say that [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=146590317 this] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=146815207 this] qualifies. So do most of the diffs I cited at ANI. But all of this is besides the point and you may just be able to hear what I'm saying if you took the time to cool down and listen. I'm saying: don't go on crusades and don't start labeling everyone who disagrees with you as a troll or an imbecile. This is a collaborative project and it is not viable if editors forget about what this entails. Cheers, [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 22:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
:::P.S.: thank you for the Jimbo quote. However, I prefer to [[WP:JIMBOSAID|think on my own]].
:Good you can think for yourself! Me too. And I am very calm and if I do get worked up I go offline. I disagree that I am on a crusade but I do take privacy concerns very seriously and like many other people I dont believe wikipedia has the right to stalk or out its article subjects. If people give me a hard time (as they are) re this cat it just shows I am doing my job and I really think if we dont get these issues sorted the long term viability of the project is seriously threatened. This lis no lame eidt war, this is real life and the subjects of our articles are/were real people and that demands our respect. You might care to take a look at [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=10763&pid=38958&st=60&#entry38958 this] forum page, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:20, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
::See here it is in a nutshell. I'm not here to tell you your opinion on the category is worthless. We do have a slight disagreement on it, although not as deep as you seem to believe. What I am trying to say is: unilaterally and aggressively enforcing changes which you ''know'' are likely to be controversial is completely unproductive. You chose to depopulate the cat first and ask questions later. The result was a couple of revert wars, a couple of complaints on ANI, a trading of insults with Ffj (which of course deserves his full share of the blame), a lot of explaining your point to 10 different people who complained about your actions, lots of ill will and lots of comments on the CfD. Now think about it for a second: what would have happened if you'd taken my advice a month ago and created the CfD? That's right: none of the above except the "lots of comments on CfD" part. Added bonus, you would have had more credibility when arguing about the cat's deletion. As a side note: I've said it before on ANI (and oddly you seemed to agree) discussions on Wikipedia Review cannot replace discussions taking place on Wikipedia. I know you are a big believer in the Brandt Gospel but you simply can't assume that conclusions reached in a thread in the WR forum should dictate what needs to be done on Wikipedia. [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 22:47, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
:Yeah but I wasnt a Brandt admirer, I really had to learn that one, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:54, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
=== re "Edit Wars" ===
I guess it takes two sides to create an edit war. As I remember, I don't exactly agree with your world or wiki view - but you have always been someone who ''argues'' their case rather than just pushes. Remember, if it ain't worth fighting for it aint worth nuffink. [[User:LessHeard vanU|the one pulling down the barricade you are manning! :~)]] 22:18, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
=== My Name ===
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/User_names Well, it looks like you wasted your time.] No body there thinks my name is inappropriate. In addition, the very day I started posting here under this name a really well respected administrator was welcoming me. He made no comment about my name. Are you just doing this as payback for reporting you to the 3RR board? That's very disappointing if you are Squeak. I thought you were more mature then that. Oh well. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 04:08, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
:Of course it wasnt payback and if the community thinks its fine that's cool by me, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:38, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
=== [[:Category:Rape victims]] and [[Billie Holiday]] ===
I don't know what sort of grievance you have against [[:Category:Rape victims]], but please resolve it without continuing to vandalize [[Billie Holiday]]. Thank you. — [[User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[User talk:Malik Shabazz|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 23:16, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
:Dont accuse me of vandalism for removing unsourced statements, you need to act in a good faith way, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:17, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
::I assume good faith until another editor starts acting in bad faith. While this category is being discussed, you're de-populating it. ''For the third time.'' That's bad faith. — [[User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[User talk:Malik Shabazz|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 23:24, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Actually enforcing our policies around that cat is good faith and ignoring our policies and accusing me of vandalism is bad faith. Desist from your bad faith allegations, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:45, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
=== 3RR ===
I would just like to let you know that you're one revert away from violating the 3RR on [[Charlie Keever]]. Here are the diffs:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Charlie_Keever&diff=147341179&oldid=147340578]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Charlie_Keever&diff=147341542&oldid=147341386]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Charlie_Keever&diff=147341835&oldid=147341699].
Sorry I said you had actually violated in on AN/I. I hadn't counted them. [[User:I|<span style="font-family: Times New Roman"><big>'''i'''</big></span>]] <span style="font-family: Times New Roman"><sup>[[User talk:I|<span style="color: #000033">(said)</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/I|<span style="color: #000033">(did)</span>]]</sup></span> 00:53, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
== Re: Sock ==
Maybe, maybe not, but it sure is awfully suspicious how he suddenly jumped in specifically to make a controversial edit that you were arguing for just moments before. It's even more suspicious how quickly you noticed his sockpuppet label.
Regardless, you accused me of being a sockpuppet on far less substantial grounds than this. I will be going through all typical procedures to determine whether this "new user" is a sock of yours or not. [[User:Mike D78|Mike D78]] 04:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
No I didnt and I am a far more experienced user and cos Im not in the first world it woulod be harder for me to have a sock anyway, I'm in a very small country and if you go through the procedures expect the results that will inevitably happen. You have a record of trolling me (4 fake AN/I reports in one day etc) and I have litle patience for pedophile activists who want to use wikipedia to promoter there "lets fuck children agenda". Now go away, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:32, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Your accusations against me grow more deranged and distorted everytime you bring them up. I have not trolled you, and the three (not four) AN/I reports I made concerning you were for three separate incidents over the course of a week. Apparently you still feel that revert warring and calling me a "wanker" and a "pervert" was appropriate conduct on your part, though?
Anyway, an admin agreed with me that the actions of the user were highly suspicious and blocked him as a suspected sock, so it's a moot point now. [[User:Mike D78|Mike D78]] 06:55, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
At least 2 anons have expressede their disgust re this page within the last fortnight. Random, I hardly think so. You trolling? definitely. But a sad day for wiklipedia with admins suppoerting pedophuiles who want to get everyone in on the act and nmolest our children (ie pro pedophile activists), [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:50, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
:Squeak, your emotionalism regarding this topic prevents you from even coming close to approaching it with a proper attitude. A couple of anonomous users having a problem with a controversial article is no justification for anything. You need to learn quit treating editors with whom you disagree with such contempt. [[User:Mike D78|Mike D78]] 21:23, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
::Emotionalism? Nah, not on this subject. Maybe about Jah Rastafari, my newly adopted country or things concerning my work but not about pedophilies, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:25, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
== Cropping ==
Greetings. I notice you've done some image cropping for Wikipedia, and that can really improve the visual appeal of articles. I've been adding pictures from the Commons to articles on birds, and many of them ''would'' be good pics, but really need to be cropped. If I post a list here, could you crop these and reupload them to the Commons? Thanks, – [[User:Quadell|Quadell]] <sup>([[User_talk:Quadell|talk]]) ([[Special:Random|random]])</sup> 01:32, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
:No problem, and if time is a bit tight I can always get one of my employees to do it (practice is good), and I have a commons account already (but dont leave messages there as I hardly ever open it). I look forward to your list, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:51, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
::Excellent! I've got lots. ''Lots.'' These images vary widely in quality: some only need a minor crop, while other need more significant changes. You may judge that a few are best as they are, and I'll gladly trust your expertise. If changed, they should probably be uploaded under a different name; some are nice compositions as artistic photographs, but should be cropped for use in a taxobox. Thanks! – [[User:Quadell|Quadell]] <sup>([[User_talk:Quadell|talk]]) ([[Special:Random|random]])</sup> 03:06, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
:I'm moving them to [[User:SqueakBox/images|here]] please keep it on your watchlist and add more and comments there. I wont start until next week but I will let you know when I am on the case. Cheers, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:07, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
== Revert ==
Good call. I hadn't seen the two prior ones. [[User:Durova|<span style="color:#000099; font-family:Verdana;">Durova</span>]]<sup>''[[User talk:Durova|Charge!]]''</sup> 02:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
== Spanish considerations ==
Thanks for going the extra mile on AN/I and being willing to consider how you come across to others, whatever your intentions. I think speaking multiple languages on an international encyclopedia is reasonable, but others, apparently do not, and your willingness to look at it from multiple perspectives shows you know the value of language. [[User:KP Botany|KP Botany]] 06:45, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
== Re: your post ==
I replied on my talk page. [[User:Oleg Alexandrov|Oleg Alexandrov]] ([[User talk:Oleg Alexandrov|talk]]) 00:35, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
== Query of Warning ==
please can you explain why you gave the following warning:
"Thank you for experimenting with {{#if:{{{1|}}}|the page [[:{{{1}}}]] on}} Wikipedia{{#if:{{{diff|}}}| as you did with [{{{diff}}} this edit]}}. Your test worked, and it has been [[Help:Reverting|reverted]] or removed. Please use [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|the sandbox]] for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the [[Wikipedia:Introduction|welcome page]] to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.<!-- Template:Test (first level warning) --> [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:48, 29 July 2007 (UTC)"
[[User:Danielspencer91|Danielspencer91]] 19:01, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
:Your worm messages stuck on peoples user pages, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:02, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
* soz, wont do it again. [[User:Danielspencer91|Danielspencer91]] 19:10, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
**Cool, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:12, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
== Sorry! ==
<div style="float:center; border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">[[Image:Smiley.svg|left|62px]]
{{{1|[[User:Danielspencer91|Danielspencer91]]}}} has smiled at you! Smiles promote [[Wikipedia:WikiLove|WikiLove]] and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! <br /> Smile at others by adding {{tls|Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
</div><!-- Template:smile -->
PS i have also apologised to everyone did it to.
== Hiya ==
Quick clarification needed, you've asked me to avoid "start[ing] a new thread on a talk page"
I'm not sure which page this is about, making it difficult to check what you're asking me to avoid. Any chance of clarifying? A diff or page link would probably be enough to let me check what you'd like.
Many thanks! [[user:FT2|FT2]] <sup><span style="font-style:italic">([[User_talk:FT2|Talk]] | [[Special:Emailuser/FT2|email]])</span></sup> 22:48, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Its on the history of wikipedia talk page [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_Wikipedia&diff=prev&oldid=147937371]. I made a thread about it right above yours, perhaps you didnt see me? [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:49, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
: I went straight to "+ new section", so I didn't. I see you've re-merged the two, probably a good thing. Discuss there? [[user:FT2|FT2]] <sup><span style="font-style:italic">([[User_talk:FT2|Talk]] | [[Special:Emailuser/FT2|email]])</span></sup> 23:09, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
::Cool, and yes we do have a disagreement that has nothing to do with this so lets keep discussing, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:11, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Okay, see you on that page for that question (the documentary).
In general so's you know where I'm coming from, if ever relevant, I try to work from a point of view of strict neutrality, which means (tongue in cheek) if both sides are convinced I'm working with the other, I'm probably about on track. (See also, [[m:The wrong version]].) My main focus apart from authoring and cleaning up articles is addressing mis-use of policy, so for example, messy AFD debates where the policy related issues need examining, messy policy pages that don't help users to understand what's meant, and problematic editing that harms the editing environment in a way that policy doesn't support. On the flip side, I also bend over backwards to support and explain to well meaning folks what's up, since the best way to get good work done is if we help others to do so too. More on me, is on my [[User:FT2|user page]], if you need to check.
All the best and see you on [[History of Wikipedia]]. [[user:FT2|FT2]] <sup><span style="font-style:italic">([[User_talk:FT2|Talk]] | [[Special:Emailuser/FT2|email]])</span></sup> 23:28, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
== Mike Reid ==
Don't know if it's edit conflicts or something but you seem to be reverting to incorrect versions of the page. My last 2 edits have restored correct info. [[User:Exxolon|Exxolon]] 00:18, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
:My edits are absolutely good faith round this brilliant actor in this sad time, diffs might help but there has been a shit load of vandalism today and if I am making mistakes please let me know, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
::Sure thing. This edit put Sean Slater instead of Frank Butcher back as his EE char - [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mike_Reid_%28entertainer%29&diff=147952651&oldid=147952532] as did [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mike_Reid_%28entertainer%29&diff=147951665&oldid=147950959] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mike_Reid_%28entertainer%29&diff=147940813&oldid=147940802]
and this edit put a 'spam' template on the page - [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mike_Reid_%28entertainer%29&diff=147940633&oldid=147940521]
The rest of your edits are absolutely fine. [[User:Exxolon|Exxolon]] 00:29, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
*Addition - this edit I've already mentioned also readded fake film roles - [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mike_Reid_%28entertainer%29&diff=147952651&oldid=147952532]
[[User:Exxolon|Exxolon]] 00:34, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. The trolls have got to me by confusing me aboutn what is what so your input is super-cool, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:39, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
== Murder Victims ==
Not surprisingly, I agree with you for the most part about moving entry's from "Victim's Name" to "Murder of Victim's Name," unless they have enough verifiable and encyclopedic biographical information to warrant an entry on their own. I reached out to [[User:El_C|El_C]] for advice on how best to accomplish a mass move like that, and am waiting to hear what he has to say. To me it's obvious, but as you've no doubt seen, murder victims (especially kids) really incite people's passions and they can put on blinders and refuse to see logic. Anyway, I think I'm going to be working on this for the next few weeks, and hope I can get your support if I'm able to get the proposal off the ground. [[User:AniMate|AniMate]] 01:31, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
:Yeah I certainly wouldnt dream of suggesting we move [[Ian Gow]] to [[Ian Gow murder]] et al but for unnotable people I think it shows respect and we need to do it if we are to construct a serious long-term online encyclopedia. And its the poor departed kids who are the most important. El C has my full confidence as an admin. You are on my watchklist and lets stay in touch, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:37, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
==Your welcome message==
Sorry about that - I didn't realise it was templated like that. You may want to think about subst: ing your welcome template in the future to avoid hassles. Sorry again, [[User:WilyD|Wily]][[User talk:WilyD|<span style="color:#FF8800;">D</span>]] 22:08, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
:I always subst it when adding it to new user talk pages, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:10, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
::Oh, sorry. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ARaveonpraghga&diff=143472662&oldid=108125128 It wasn't you] who did it. I hope you can understand why I was confused. Cheers, [[User:WilyD|Wily]][[User talk:WilyD|<span style="color:#FF8800;">D</span>]] 22:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Okay, I was somewhat concerned you didnt like the template content but I see that wasnt the case, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:16, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
==BLP==
Just because the person is living doesn't mean the user name has to be removed from the title of a subsection. If you notice her user name was used more than four times throughout the discussion. I didn't see you remove those mentions. Why not? Your rationale would seem to apply to those as well. Also, Jimbo along with a number of admins commented there and had no problem with the title. I think you are overreacting. I would like you to put the title back to its original state. [[User:KnightLago|KnightLago]] 02:11, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
==Axl Rose again==
Hi Squeakbox, I noticed you removed the cat we discussed from the [[Axl Rose]] article again, claiming it was "unsourced and not even in the text." I was under the impression we'd already talked about this. If you had taken the time to read the very first paragraph in the "Early life" section of the article, you'd have noticed that the information is '''right there,''' and that two references from reliable third party publications, in which Rose describes his abuse in his own words, are listed. The editors who have worked on Axl's article have made a concerted effort to ensure that everything written, linked or categorized has been sourced. I do appreciate your zeal against unfounded claims of abuse, but please take the time to actually '''read the article and check the references''' before you say something is unsourced and delete it out of hand. Thanks. [[User:DanielEng|DanielEng]] 03:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:I read it and could find no specific reference to this event, so instead of telling me to do what I have already done please poin t out where specifically in the text it says he was molested, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:23, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
::Then you weren't reading it very carefully, because it's right there and I don't see how anyone could miss it. And I already ''told you where to find it:'' the very first paragraph of the "early years" section, but if you need even more handholding than that: ''Axl Rose was born as William Bruce Rose Jr. in Lafayette, Indiana to parents Sharon E. and William Rose. His father left the family when Rose was two years old. As an adult, after recovering repressed memories in therapy, Axl publicly stated that he was sexually abused by his biological father.[2][3]''[[User:DanielEng|DanielEng]] 21:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Well I believe the cat is already deleted, eitehr that or will be soon based on the cfd, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:55, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
== NAMBLA article ==
This is a controversial article, and a controversial and abhorrent group to many (including me). However, this is an encyclopedia, and they are notable, and boldly redirecting it just because you feel like it is not acceptable. Please don't do that again. [[User:Georgewilliamherbert|Georgewilliamherbert]] 19:00, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:Its going to afd, I had to try the redirect first though, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:02, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
::Well, you can AFD if you want, but I predict a speedy keep. You're not doing yourself any favors here... [[User:Georgewilliamherbert|Georgewilliamherbert]] 19:03, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, nor are you, and we are not here to promote pedophilia. You are not doing yourself any favours is much closer tot he mark esp if you find this group abhorrent, I know exactly what I am doing which is trying to puirge pro pedophilia POV from this encyclopedia. If you want to oppose that toppth and nail people will draw their own conclusions, and I hope you actually also support our NPOV policy [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:07, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
::::If you start deleting encyclopedic content out of process, I'm going to block you, as much as I hate the pedophiles myself. What you're doing is not NPOV. Stick to AFDs, please. [[User:Georgewilliamherbert|Georgewilliamherbert]] 19:10, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:::::You what? Blocking me would be a very bad idea, especially for inititating an afd, please stop. It appears you hate me more than pedophiles, eh? and that makes you very biased, and blocking me for being BOLD woulkd aloso inevitably lead to a review of your admin actions. You cant just go around blocking good faith users or threatening to do so, now please back off. IMO your threat is letting power gop to your head but you are taking on the wrong person because of my good faith in all my edits and my good understanding of our policies and my considerably greater experience of wikipedia than yourself. But if there is a specific policy that prohibits redirecting articles while invoking [[WP:BOLD]] please let me know, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:12, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
::::::I wouldn't do anything to anyone for doing an AFD. That's letting the community be heard. You appeared to threaten above to take further BOLD actions. I told you, and am telling you again, that you overstepped with the first redirect/deletion, and to be careful in further actions here. It doesn't matter how much you or I hate the organization and pedophiles - they're famous and imfamous, and their notability is clear. We don't censor Wikipedia. If you start taking your personal bias to delete the encyclopedic and accurate content, without taking it to community review, that's bad for the encyclopedia. If you start damaging the encyclopedia, it's a blockable offense, and I'll block you and submit the block to ANI for review. If you stick to AFD and talk pages for proposing stuff, and don't damage the encyclopedia, there is no issue.
::::::There isn't a policy against BOLDly redirecting. But you didn't just do that; you effectively deleted a whole large encyclopedic page in doing so, and did so out of process, without any discussion on talk pages and without an AFD or anything first. That is not blockable by itself, but it is out of process and damaging the encyclopedia. Talk first, if a deletion action may be, or especially if it becomes controversial. You didn't discuss anywhere.
::::::Your comments and edits in this thread are looking rather emotional and engaged. I don't know what brought this little crusade to purge Wikipedia on, but I urge you to calm down and follow procedures and consider that you may be violating NPOV here. Thanks. [[User:Georgewilliamherbert|Georgewilliamherbert]] 19:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:::::::Wikipedia did unquestionably get infiltrated by pedophiles promoting their POV, and they are still here. You may not realise it but I have been involved in trying to remove the POV excesses of these pedophiles for months so to describe it as a little crusdae is plain wrong, its an enormous ongoing NPOV promoting crusade and we are being watched by outside interested parties. IMO how we handle this issue is critical to our future as a project, this is something very much ongoing. I have no problemmwith being engaged in this and while I do have emotional feeliongs specifically about the promotion of pedophilia as a cause (rather than say treating it as an illness with therapy etc) that isnt just here today but every day. I am a well known wikipedian, a regular here with 6 times the edits you have and I dont see that I have done anything that would warrant evenm the threat of a block let alone a real one and your warning looks to me not to be in good faith. If you want to help with PAW you would be very welcome, but please dont play into the hands of pro pedophile activists as that would damage the project, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:45, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:(un-indenting for readability) If there is a real problem you need to raise awareness and get some consensus behind a wider cleanup. Going after the NAMBLA article like this (it was just closed as a SNOW for keep) does nothing but make you look like a lunatic.
:I don't know if there is a problem with promotion of pedophilia here or not; it's not something I pay much attention to in general. I can assure you that if you can show people that there is a wider problem then you'll get support for a cleanup. This was not the right way to do it. You went too far today.
:Can you start assembling evidence to support your claim that there is a wider problem, on a subpage of your user talk page or some sort? Once you have something assembled, let me know, and post something to AN. If you have a credible case I'll raise it on the wikien-l mailing list for review as well. [[User:Georgewilliamherbert|Georgewilliamherbert]] 19:51, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:I have speedy closed the AfD. There's quite simply no valid reason (note that [[WP:CENSOR|censorship]] does not count as valid) to have this article deleted. As for your previous redirect it was correctly reverted. You are letting your own convictions get in the way of the project. I should also note that once again you are defending your actions by not so subtly insinuating that anyone who disagrees with you is a pedophile supporter. Please stop. [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 19:53, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
::By the way, I just re-closed the AFD because Squeakbox reverted the close. You're not entitled to reopen it after an administrator closes it. You have to take it to [[WP:DRV|Deletion Review]]. Please don't do that again. Things like this are what are making you look unreasonable and irrational right now and why I warned you. [[User:Georgewilliamherbert|Georgewilliamherbert]] 19:55, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:Pascual is not an admin, as I am sure you knwow, so dont accuse me of reverting an admins closure. of course it goes rto DRW as you both voted and controversially speedy closed which is completely out of process and a further abuse of your adnmin poowers (as was calling me a lunativc). keep digging! [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:00, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
::Actually, Pascal ''is'' an administrator. [[User:I|<span style="font-family: Times New Roman"><big>'''i'''</big></span>]] <span style="font-family: Times New Roman"><sup>[[User talk:I|<span style="color: #000033">(said)</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/I|<span style="color: #000033">(did)</span>]]</sup></span> 20:02, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
::Indeed, I am an admin. (and my name is Pascal not Pascual) (oh and I did not vote on that AfD) [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 20:03, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Interestingly, while [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Listusers&limit=1&username=Pascal.Tesson Special:Listusers] shows the admin bit, Pascal isn't on the [[Wikipedia:List of administrators/P-Z|List of Administrators]] for some reason. I can understand confusion here. Pascal, you should fix that. [[User:Georgewilliamherbert|Georgewilliamherbert]] 20:13, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
::You may think I look like a lunatic but that merely confirms my belief that you arent being good faith. Doubtless you think El C a lunatic too? That, at any rate is a personal attack which doesnt strengthen your case4, please remain civil if you are going to post further messages to me as otherwise I'll take your insults directly to AN/I. The snowball was out of process and I suggest you threaten to block that user as well. This issue is already being dealt with in an off site arbcom case, I suggest you contact the arbcom for details. I dont want your help in any way, thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:56, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Please do not take this to deletion review. This article will not be deleted, and should never have been nominated. [[User:Friday|Friday]] [[User talk:Friday|(talk)]] 20:05, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:Be my guest and take it to DRV. I'm not quite sure why you think I don't expect opposition. I do. I also expect experienced Wikipedians like you to know what a frivolous AfD nomination is. [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 20:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:Well El C and I are about as experienced as one can get and he certainly did not consider it frivolous. We arent here to promote the fringe beliefs of pro-pedophile activists (who wrote the article) and so at the least this should have been allowed to run 24 hours, not quite sure why you think it was a snowball or how an article like this by a bunch of extreme minority trolls (ie NAMBLA) deserves any consideration here. [[Criticism of wikipedia#Fanatics and special interests|Wikipedia as a corporate sex offender]] is merely confirmed by your action. And if you think there is anything frivolous about propmoting pedophilia perhaps you would care to explain it, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:36, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
::I suppose two editors can be simultaneously misguided. You are truly deluding yourself if you think you will get this article deleted through AfD and I firmly believe that this is what just about every admin will tell you. [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 20:47, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:::I strongly object tot he idea that my actions are misguided, and actions can absolutely be the opoposioite of misguided without gaining the support of the whole community. Some thought my actions in getting rid of the rape victims cat was misguided but that was a success from my POV and naturally i only expect success in some of my fd actions, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:Squeakbox, you are incorrect that there is any Arbcom mandate to remove any article connected with pedophilia or pro-pedophile organizations. Non-notable organizations and articles that cannot be sourced to reliable publications can of course be deleted, and articles can be rigorously pruned of pro-pedophilia, non-NPOV content and violations of the BLP policy, but NAMBLA at least is a very well-known organization, even if you or I would rather the organization had never existed. Thanks, [[User:Morven|Matthew Brown (Morven)]] ([[User talk:Morven|T]]:[[Special:Contributions/Morven|C]]) 21:27, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
I dont think I implied that, indeed its clearly nott he case as they would have been salted in March if that had eben the case, but there is a behind the scenes case re the actions of editors and it was to this that I was referring. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:For the last time SqueakBox, stop accusing everyone of being pro-pedophilia. Wikipedia is not a corporate sex offender and I never said that promoting pedophilia was frivolous. You know this full well and your remarks are insulting to me and to the rest of the Wikipedia community. You have been blocked previously for violating [[WP:NPA]] and were put on npa parole by ArbCom. You are quickly exhausting the community's patience. [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 21:39, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:You completely misunderstood me. See [[Criticism of wikipedia#Fanatics and special interests]], its not me who coined that term and to block me for quiting a wikipedia page would be a misue of the blocking tool from soemone who has already showed prejudice against my work here, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:44, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
::I'm not exactly sure how one can understand ''"Wikipedia as a corporate sex offender is merely confirmed by your action.''" any differently. I'm not showing prejudice against your work as I have tried many many times to explain but I do have very serious concerns about your ''modus operandi'', so did the arbitration committee, so did Georgewilliamherbert and Morven a second ago. Now you can of course choose to ignore this for a little while but it is incredibly counterproductive both for the project as a whole and for your own goals here. [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 21:57, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Well the arbcom case was completely different and involved an SPA who was pursuing me for months after making vicious attacks against my wife and was a long time ago, best forgotten. Note that Google is considered an active corporate sex offender (something I totally agree with though they are better than they were) and the passive is what I would see as misguided actions by some editors here who clearly arent pedophiles or even supporters of pedophiles, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:02, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
::::Looks like we've been outnumbered, which isn't the first time. And should not be taken as representative outside of Wikipedia. [[User:El C|El_C]] 02:56, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
:::::Representative of what?! Those who don't want factual information about a contemptible group to be known? After you wipe Wikipedia clean of all the pedophile groups it seeks to report on in a NPOV, will you then move on to murderers, rapists, gays, [[Operation Rescue]], [[NORML]], feminists, and all the other groups that one self-anointed protector of public decency or another wishes wouldn't exist? That's not why we are here. You all hurt your cause more than help it. --[[User:DavidShankBone|David Shankbone]] 03:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
::::::Long live hyperbole! [[User:El C|El_C]] 03:08, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
:::::::"Love live ignorance!" -- El C. --[[User:DavidShankBone|David Shankbone]] 03:11, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
::::::::And you signed my name and everything. Touché! [[User:El C|El_C]] 04:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
===Misunderstood?===
::Squeakbox, pretty much every response by you under this heading involves you saying someone else misunderstood you. Perhaps this indicates you should take a lot more care with what you say, so that you cannot be so easily misunderstood. You seem to be repeating the error again and again of saying something in a needlessly inflammatory and/or ambiguous way and then getting upset that others take offense.
::Yes, Wikipedia needs to be rid of pro-pedophile content for the good reasons that it is certain to be failing NPOV and sourcing to solid sources. Editors who state that they are pedophiles or pro-pedophilia are a problem, as are their edits. However, some topics related to pedophilia are (unfortunately, perhaps) important, and you are doing yourself no favors by trying to get the NAMBLA article deleted or in warring with editors who are quite sensible and certainly not in favor of pro-pedophile content remaining in Wikipedia. Thanks, [[User:Morven|Matthew Brown (Morven)]] ([[User talk:Morven|T]]:[[Special:Contributions/Morven|C]]) 22:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
=== Please don't archive active discussion; this is not very helpful===
You archived a current discussion on this page which was quite active, simply because (it seems) you felt uncomfortable about it and wished it gone.
Please don't do that. It doesn't do you any favors and doesn't make you look good at all.
I reverted your archiving once but I won't do it again, for now at least; however, archiving as a "I won't talk about this anymore" statement is not very collegial or useful. [[User:Morven|Matthew Brown (Morven)]] ([[User talk:Morven|T]]:[[Special:Contributions/Morven|C]]) 22:08, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:I dont think there is anything else to say really. i feel thoroughly attacked for what I consider good faith edits and am being told suddenly after 30,000 edits that I am allegedly exhausting the community's patience in a few hours (code for we'll get you blocked indef if you keep disagreeing with us). There are better things for us all to do on wikipedia and this discussion is actively harming the project, besides I have nothing more to say on the issue but will continue to do my best to promote NPOV re pedophilia and all sex related issues, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:11, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
::Refusing to agree with you about deleting the NAMBLA article is actively harming the project? That seems a little presumptuous on your part, although you are entitled to your opinion. I must reiterate that even if you wish to say nothing more on the topic, removing the entire section of your talk page at that point does not do much good for others' perception of you and your willingness to communicate with regards to your editing. [[User:Morven|Matthew Brown (Morven)]] ([[User talk:Morven|T]]:[[Special:Contributions/Morven|C]]) 22:14, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
(ec) This entire discussion not merely other users part in it is what harms the project, IMO. People are welcome to disagree with me about NAMBLA or any other action I take but threatening me with blocks for good faith edits etc is damaging as is any insinuation that my afd was made in bad faith. If you were going to revert this thread you needn't have reverted other threads too and it is all archived on a page anyone can read and which I link to at the top, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:19, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
::To add: I at least was not threatening to have you blocked, indefinitely or otherwise, coded or otherwise. I would, however, request that you examine your own behavior and communication, which is not helping you. I would have hoped that after 30,000 edits you would have learned to communicate with your fellow editors a little better than this. [[User:Morven|Matthew Brown (Morven)]] ([[User talk:Morven|T]]:[[Special:Contributions/Morven|C]]) 22:17, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
:::I generally have an excellent relationship with fellow editors, and unquestionably have learnt to communicate ebtter than in my earlier days here as my contribs, block log et al clearly show, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:19, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
::::You call that a block log? ''[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:El_C This]'' is a block log! :) [[User:El C|El_C]] 02:43, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
:I sent you an email. Oh and by the way, El_C is just cheating. Half his blocks are self-imposed and I'm afraid he's suffering from blocklogitis. :-) [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 03:03, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
::Yes, it's true, I'm not very good. :/ [[User:El C|El_C]] 03:09, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
:::Admit it, you've been doing it to yourself on purpose, haven't you. [[User:Georgewilliamherbert|Georgewilliamherbert]] 03:12, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
::::I'm incompetent, not histrionic. [[User:El C|El_C]] 03:15, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
:::::Not histrionic, masochistic. 8-) [[User:Georgewilliamherbert|Georgewilliamherbert]] 03:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
::::::Let's just say that I [[User:ST47/Stats#Admins_by_number_of_blocks|block a lot of people]], often under the influence of free drugs! [[User:El C|El_C]] 03:26, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
:::::::Masochistic? Now, now, let's not turn Wikipedia into a sex offender! :-) [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 03:31, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
:Hmm, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:22, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
::Too pisssed to contribute right now but happy August to everyone, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:26, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
:::Meh, can I ask then that perhaps you wait until you're not quite as pissed before sending me email? Would be much appreciated. Cheers and good night. [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 04:29, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
::::Pissed has too meanings, and I am not doing anything rigth now, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 06:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
== Thanks for joining the crime project! ==
I have seen from your statements and edits that you very interested in victims rights,especially victims of rape and sexual abuse, which I think can be a great asset to our project. While I agree that Wikipedia should not be a place foe memorials I think that some editors take this to far and delete even the most basic facts of a victims life. I hope that you can help us to keep this balance between not making memorials, but also, not making it wikipedia just a biography of criminals. If you would post some of the crime related articles you think should be made or articles that you think need work on the project talk page we can try to get other people interested in these articles to help you out. Thanks, [[User:Jmm6f488|Jmm6f488]] 07:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
== reverts ==
Can you explain to me your reason for reverting some of my recents edits [[Talk:nymphet#Definition|here]]? [[User:Ospinad|Ospinad]] 09:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
==IPlayer==
In the UK the american spelling for computer program has become standard, programme is now only used for television and theatre programmes, so I'm reinstated my Iplayer changer [[User:Vicarage|Vicarage]] 16:54, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
:Microsoft have tot ake some of the blame, methinks, eg program files, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
==I'm surprised==
That instead of trying to delete legitimate articles, that you and your friends haven't weighed in on debates like this:<br/>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Positive_friendships_between_men_and_boys_in_literature_and_film<br/>
--[[User:DavidShankBone|David Shankbone]] 17:11, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks. I am here and I have voted, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
== [[User:UnclePaco/Sandbox2]] ==
I keep seeing you around, but don't think I've ever said hello. Hello! I don't understand the speedy request at [[User:UnclePaco/Sandbox2]]. It's Paco's user space and no other criteria under speedy apply. Am I misunderstanding something (always a distinct possibility). [[User:Carlossuarez46|Carlossuarez46]] 01:20, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
:Yes, its that my edits are also in his user space. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=SqueakBox&namespace=2&year=&month=-1 Here] you can see that some of my edits to the Oduwole article are now those same edits are recorded in Uncle Paco's user space. I dont know what the GFDL considerations are but I am unhappy about this. There may be bLP concerns too but at the very least I'd like my edits deleted from this page. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:38, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
::Moving an article from main (article) space to user space has the affect (as in this case) of making it appear that those who editing the article did so in user space (if looking at the list of ''their'' contributions); only when someone looks further (at the article history) will it be apparent that the edits took place in main space.
::Unfortunately, I don't think you [[WP:OWN|own]] your edits (in the sense of being able to withdraw them if you decide you're unhappy with their use), regardless of their ___location on Wikipedia.
::Regarding [[WP:BLP|BLP]] concerns, that is still a valid policy for an article that isn't in main space (because it's indexed in Google, and because it's still visible, in general). In this case, the article seems to be pretty BLP-defensible (at least from my quick look) - the small amount of text looks like it is sourced, and the word "allegedly" is used. If in fact the citations don't support the text, or there is additional (sourced) information that is missing that changes the basic thrust of the article, you might try further editing of the article to improve it. (A user doesn't "own" a draft of an article, even in his/her userspace, though generally other editors are polite and leave it as is, but BLP should issues override politeness concerns.) -- <span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva; font-size:15px;">[[User:John Broughton|John Broughton]] </span> [[User talk:John Broughton |(♫♫)]] 21:33, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
== [[WP:BLOCK|Blocked]] ==
<div style="padding:5px; border:1px solid #c0c090; background-color:#FEC;" class="user-block"> [[Image:Stop x nuvola with clock.svg|40px|left]] You have been '''[[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]]''' from editing for {{{{{subst|}}}#if:31 hours|a period of '''31 hours'''|a short time}} in accordance with [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|Wikipedia's blocking policy]] for violating the [[WP:3RR|three-revert rule]] {{{{{subst|}}}#if:Anti-pedophile activism|at [[:Anti-pedophile activism]]}}. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek [[WP:DR|dispute resolution]] rather than engaging in an [[WP:EW|edit war]]. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may [[Wikipedia:Appealing a block|contest the block]] by adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "nowiki" tags. --><nowiki>{{</nowiki>unblock|''your reason here''<nowiki>}}</nowiki><!-- Do not include the "nowiki" tags. --> below. {{{{{subst|}}}#if:{[[Image:Information.svg|25px|link=]] Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to [[Wikipedia:Talk page|talk pages]] and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should [[Wikipedia:Signatures|sign your posts]] by typing four [[tilde]]s ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button [[File:Insert-signature.png|link=Wikipedia:How to sign your posts]] or [[File:Signature icon.png|link=Wikipedia:How to sign your posts]] located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. <!-- {{sig|}} -->}|[[User:AGK|<span style="color:green;">'''Anthøny'''</span>]] 13:51, 2 August 2007 (UTC)}}</div><!-- Template:uw-3block -->
''Kind regards'',<br/>[[User:AGK|<span style="color:green;">'''Anthøny'''</span>]] 13:51, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
:Yep, that was my fault. I should have counted and will take greater care in future. I wasnt aware of having done it but I recognise that is no excuse and that edit warring does the project no good, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:31, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
== Just wondering? ==
Is this the new version of [[Pro-pedophile activism]][[Talk:Pro-pedophile activism/temp]] you are suggesting. It has your name on it but all the edits seem to be by [[User:Mike D78|Mike D78]]? [[User:Jmm6f488|Jmm6f488]] 23:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
:I merely linked to it from the original for GFDL purposes and dont support the way he is developing this in any way, shape or form. Mike and I tend not to see eye to eye on pedophile issues, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:06, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
As I've gathered. I to have problems with this article. I have no problem with the topic itself being presented, just in the way some of the scientific studies are presented. I am concerned that many of these studies have not been through the proper process of peer review. Anyone can make a sociological study say anything. At least in my opinion a study should be able to be duplicated by many other researches and achieve the same results. For instance I bet if I flipped a coin enough I could get it to land up heads five times in a row. This would not mean that may experiment should be given much weight. If the process was opened to peer review, researchers would find yes, it is possible for a coin to land heads up five times in a row, but it is more scientific to say that a coin will land heads up and tails up the same amount of time provided the coin is unweighted.
I think an encyclopedia article should give weight to minority opinions but that to keep it encyclopedic they should be given the proper weight. I feel that certain people on this topic are giving non-peer reviewed hypothesis each weight to those that have gone through the peer review process and had their results duplicated many, many times. Certain studies are citied for example that say, sexual activity between adults and children have no ill effect on children. Even proposing such a study seems to be in itself unscientific. By ill effect what is meant? I'm paraphrasing from the article of course, but this seems to be the gist of what is being said.
I think that if everyone could get together and establish what criteria should be used to cite a study or scientific source, on both the pro and anti sides, then maybe some of the present disputes could be settled. [[User:Jmm6f488|Jmm6f488]] 23:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
:I am sorry that SqueakBox doesn't like the way my draft of the article is coming along, although that is by no means meant to be the final version. The intention was to gather several relevant sources together, then choose the best ones, referenced in the most concise way, to include in the final article. I have asked several people specifically to help me in doing this. I believe that the way I have reorganized the information, however, when compared to the current state of the article, is definitely an improvement.
:In response to Jmm6f488's comments, the scientific studies mentioned are peer reviewed, and I thought that including the opinions of other academics, such as ethnologists, sociologists, etc., that activists commonly cite would be relevant (Harris Mirkin is a person frequently quoted by activists, as are some of the other individuals mentioned). It may be that things could be balanced better, however, and as I said, I have specifically asked others to help me improve this draft.
:Giving the proper weight to minority viewpoints is certainly important, but when the article itself is dedicated to a minority viewpoint, then most of the article is obviously going to be concerned with the arguments related to that viewpoint (similarly, the article on [[Decriminalization_of_non-medicinal_marijuana_in_the_United_States|marijuana decriminalization]] is mostly concerned with arguments supporting a pro-cannibis position--the arguments against decriminalization are rebutted by pro-legalization viewpoints). [[User:Mike D78|Mike D78]] 10:07, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
== Día de Lempira ==
Sorry, didn't notice it wasn't about public holidays... BTW, nice dogs! (and nice wife - ''definitely'' not a dog ;-)) --[[User:Targeman|Targeman]] 23:49, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
== hello squeak.... ==
hope you're good! - I'm not sure if we've met before, but I thought I'd ask for your advice on the [[Jonathan King]] page - mainly because I've noticed a) that you're uncompromising in the way you deal with what you feel is right, and b) because you've been involved in discussion about how to deal with pro-paedophile perspectives.
There are issues on the page with the weight to apply to his convictions, and also some issues perhaps around the regular editors of the article....... your thoughts would be cool... [[User:Purples|Purples]] 00:45, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
==Totnes community mag==
Hi squeakbox. Just so you know I have placed a notability tag on totnes community magazine.
[[User:3tmx|3tmx]] 09:28, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
== To bad about the postive man boy category ==
I feel bad for [[Tony Sandel]]. I don't think he meant to be creepy. Check the link. [[User:Jmm6f488|Jmm6f488]] 10:55, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
== DB stuff ==
I've decided to drop the DB redirect proposals, mainly because someone took the time to explain properly. See my comment [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:ElinorD&diff=149670681&oldid=149665263 here]. [[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] 01:52, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
:Cool, dude, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 05:30, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
== Hi ==
Re your revert in [[Alice Miller (psychologist)]], can you discuss it in talk page? I am going for a trip; won't pay my internet service and won't be editing WP on a daily basis for a long time. I wish we could address this issue before the weekend. —[[User:Cesar Tort|Cesar Tort]] 14:41, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
==Totnes Community Mag==
Squeakbox. I have nominated [[Totnes Community Mag]] for deletion [[User:3tmx|3tmx]] 08:37, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
== linking does no harm the text remains the same ==
For edits to disambiguation pages, such as [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Weed_%28disambiguation%29&curid=1440567&diff=149865202&oldid=147902389 this one], please refer to [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages)]]. Thanks! [[User:Ewlyahoocom|Ewlyahoocom]] 09:34, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
== Jimbo ==
Please read the talk discussion if you haven't. I haven't looked at your diffs, because this edit warring is not okay. It's rather embarrassing that people are doing it on founder of Wikipedia's bio. He confirms that the cited Oregonian article is correct. [[User:VanTucky|<span style="color:#E49B0F">VanTucky</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:VanTucky|(talk)]]</sup> 20:13, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
:I've removed the date completely, I wont revert anyone who undoes this byut given the talk page comments it doesnt look inappropriate, and nor does the totally disputed tag, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:25, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
== Johnston's education ==
Hi SqueakBox, the source for his education at Dundee is the same one as the source for his Cardiff studies. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6442663.stm The small box at the side of the article here]. [[User:Chacor|–]] [[User talk:Chacor|Chacor]] 02:11, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
== Thank you ==
Thank you. [[User:TedFrank|THF]] 17:34, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
==criticised or criticized==
The problem is that US and British spelling has diverged in the spelling of some words. No matter which is used someone will get annoyed. [[User:Kwork|Kwork]] 19:29, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
== Support ==
Thank you for your support, surprised and a little shocked by it but it was welcome. Thanks for that - genuinely, thanks.--[[User:Vintagekits|Vintagekits]] 20:53, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
==Aleman==
Here is the link I [http://www.envio.org.ni/articulo/1598 promised]. I may add this and another one if I see some positive info about Aleman in it. I scanned the first part, and it seems like a detail deal of what happened. To summurize, Aleman hoped to control Bolanos, use him as a puppet and pull a Somoza-style of being president every other period. But Bolanos managed to go loose (with aide from the FSLN.) The FSLN helped becuase with Aleman in prison, Ortega gained much power. He negotiated prison benefits for Aleman in exchange of politcal favors. I hope you enjoy the piece. If you have any questions ask me. Finally, I placed an unbalance tag on the Aleman page. See the talk and I await your comments.[[User:Brusegadi|Brusegadi]] 04:18, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
:A [http://youtube.com/watch?v=TaqyIS4fPoY video]. Keep in mind it is recent, by that time the media had turned its back on Aleman. Begin watching at 7:10 (seven minutes and 10 second.) That is where the relevant stuff begins. I add it because Aleman says one of the things that he is quoted saying in the link above (about Bolanos "breaking the code of politcal ethics of Nicaragua." look at minute 8:00 of the video for that.) I will add to the main talk if deemed necessary. Feel free to do the same.[[User:Brusegadi|Brusegadi]] 04:27, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
==Harold Shipman==
You added that it was important to the article to mention that [[Jonathan King]] was a convicted [[sex offender]]. I'm not saying that you were wrong. I am just wondering your reasoning behind it? Is it that because they both have desires that are illegal and that King feels that some how Shipman is a ''victim of society'' just like him? (I put it in quotes because I know from your edits that we both realize this would be just absurd pity on there parts--"society tells me that material goods are good officer, its not my fault I robbed a bank and shot the teller its societies.") This article is under our watch at the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Criminal Biography/Serial Killer task force|Serial Killer task force]], so that's why I ask. If you could please give a good reason for its inclusion I will gladly defend the edit if other editors want to change it. [[User:Jmm6f488|Jmm6f488]] 17:20, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
==I'm sorry but there really are two separate individuals named Joseph Owens==
Hello SqueakBox -- Today you changed the stub I was creating on Joseph Owens, 1908-2005 (the longtime medieval scholar at the Pontifical Institute in Toronto) to a redirect to the Father Joseph Owens (apparently still alive) who is a social worker and author in the Caribbean. They may both be Catholic priests, but they cannot be the same person. The Toronto Owens was a highly theoretical philosopher, specializing in the study of Aristotle and Aquinas and he did not do social work in the Caribbean. [http://www.pims.ca/amici/owens.html Here is the obituary] of the Toronto Owens. I would be grateful if you would please revert your edits and restore my entry. Respectfully -- [[User:WikiPedant|WikiPedant]] 18:26, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
:We need a source for this. I know for a fact that the writer of ther Dread book was interested in Aquinas. Can you give a source that there are 2, its a coincidence that stretches toof ar otherwise IMO, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:42, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
::It is no surprise that any Catholic priest will profess an interest in Aquinas. He is one of the seminal thinkers behind the Church. It is also no great surprise that there should be 2 with the rather unexceptional name of "Joseph Owens." Anyhow here is some good evidence that these 2 are separate. Cumulatively it seems to me to be quite compelling.
::*Have a look at page 13 of [https://www.wjst.edu/File/Spring06_Light_Life.pdf this PDF copy of a Jesuit magazine]. This is the Caribbean Owens. He got an MDiv in 1971, comes from Weston Jesuit School of Theology in Massachusetts USA, and is clearly a much younger man than the Toronto Owens (who was born in 1908 and received his PhD in 1951). The Toronto Owens received all of his education in Canada.
::*The middle initial of the Caribbean Owens is "V" (see external links in current [[Joseph Owens]] article). So far as I know, the Toronto Owens never used a middle initial.
::*They belong to different Catholic orders. The Caribbean Owens is a [[Jesuit]] (with SJ after his name). The Toronto Owens was a Redemptionist, belonging to the [[Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer]] (with C.Ss.R after his name).
::*Try a [http://catalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?DB=local&PAGE=First Library of Congress search]. Select AUTHOR and search on "Owens, Joseph". The result shows 4 separate authors named Joseph Owens. The Caribbean Owens shows 2 books on Rastafarianism and the Toronto Owens shows 18 philosophy books.
::*[http://www.commondreams.org/news2006/0522-03.htm This letter] was signed by the Caribbean Owens. It is dated May 22, 2006 and concerns a local matter relating to Boston College (Weston Jesuit School of Theology is an affiliate of Boston College from which the Caribbean Owens graduated in 1971 [see bullet 1 above]). The Toronto Owens died a year earlier, in 2005 (at the age of 98), and was never educated or employed at Boston College.
::On top of this, I can give you my assurance that I am a philosophy professor right here in the Toronto area. I did not know him personally but I do know that the Toronto Owens was a lifelong academic who did not work in the Caribbean and who did not do research concerning Rastafarianism. Respectfully -- [[User:WikiPedant|WikiPedant]] 19:37, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
:::I am a bit swamped under with work right now but I will respond to this and if there are indeed 2 then we would have to make Joseph Ownes into a disambig page, please give me a few hours or until the morning. Cheers, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:47, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
::::Hello Squeakbox -- You're right, I don't have an email connection. Wikipedia is public and I prefer to avoid offline discussions. Frankly, I'm surprised that you are struggling with the obvious -- the Toronto Joseph Owens and the Caribbean Joseph Owens simply are 2 different men, roughly a generation apart in age. I discovered today that there was some rather nasty discussion of this on the [[Joseph Owens]] talk page last year and that you accused those who disagreed with you of purveying nonsense and of being vandals and trolls (which is unfortunate, since they were correct).
::::The Toronto Owens was a fulltime academic and medieval philosopher of considerable renown in his day. His interests were a thousand years in the past and lightyears from Rastafarianism, dreadlocks, or the mystical reveries induced by the mighty ganja weed.
::::But, frankly, if you can't see that these are obviously 2 different people, I don't know what else I can say. Think it over and do what you think is best. I do not have the time or the inclination to become embroiled in a discussion with such an acrimonious history. -- [[User:WikiPedant|WikiPedant]] 14:29, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
:::::The acrimony was entirely based on how it was done, some editor just trashed the article I and others had written about the author of Dread. I cant open the pdf document right now cos it makes my web browser crash. Certainly until this sisue is sorted we should just keep one article and if that is only about what is known of the author of Dread then so be it. [http://www.commondreams.org/news2006/0522-03.htm This] could be a different Joseph Ownes as the Dread author did not use the Joseph V Owens so it really is still open to debate. You obviously havent read the book Dread, it isnt a Rastafari tract but observations about their beliefs from an outsider. If you can show me that the author of Dread was a Jesuit that would be proof and I'll see if I can read that. I hope you realise that we mustnt be wrong about this and right now by just having an article on the Dread author we are at least not wrong, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:21, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
:SqueakBox, sorry to butt in but your talk page is still on my watchlist and you're being entirely unreasonable about the whole thing. One of the fundamentals of Wikipedia is trust in other editors' judgment and frankly if you can't open the PDF document than just trust that others have. You certainly have every right to complain that the article should not have been replaced but now you're just holding a grudge. Splitting in into a disambiguation page was a perfectly reasonable solution and your revert of it is absurdly stubborn. [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 19:02, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
::I'm definitely not holding a grudge and certainly Pedant's behaviour has been impeccable. I am actually taking active steps tor esolve this one and if necesary I will ring the University of Managua (I live in Central America and speak Spanish). My only concern is we get this right and I wont let this one rest in its present state. If we do confirm there are 2 Joseph Owens' we need to sort them by their catholic order (the philosopher could equally apply to both if there really are two. You are welcome to butt in and keep me on your watchlist (you are on mine along with many other users). Being based in Canada [perhaps you could shed some light on this one? Regards, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
== JK ==
I hope for your sake that you are pulling my leg with your last retort, but even then it is a degradation of Wikipedia culture. We are here to drop ego, not to beat our breast. [[User:Haiduc|Haiduc]] 03:16, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
:I was referring tot he journalist (who doesnt have an article here) and not to Kilfeddy. I dont believe dropping our egos is a part of our work here nor a requirement for being here and stand by my statement, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:06, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
== Dutroux ==
What's going on here? Why the removal from that category?
* http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Marc_Dutroux&diff=next&oldid=151039034
-- <i>[[User:Fyslee|<b style="color:#004000;">Fyslee</b>]]</i>/[[User talk:Fyslee|<b style="color:#990099; font-size:x-small;">talk</b>]] 15:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
**Its been deleted, I didnt even know it was up for cfd but that is that, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:00, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
::: Yes, I see that now. At the time of the above linked edit, it wasn't yet deleted and therefore it didn't make sense to me. -- <i>[[User:Fyslee|<b style="color:#004000;">Fyslee</b>]]</i>/[[User talk:Fyslee|<b style="color:#990099; font-size:x-small;">talk</b>]] 18:04, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
==Gary Glitter Look a like contest==
Ever thought of entering one? You’d stand a good chance based on his current look.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Marc_Dutroux&diff=next&oldid=151039034
-- <i>[[User:Fyslee|<b style="color:#004000;">Fyslee</b>]]</i>/[[User talk:Fyslee|<b style="color:#990099; font-size:x-small;">talk</b>]] 05:00, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
:Lol, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:08, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
==XavierVE==
FWIW, I agree with you about the edit summary and edit bits. What's raised concern is his stated intention to harrass users he believes to be pedophiles or pro-pedophilia. If editors ''are'' pushing such a POV, then it can be dealt with, but linking to attack pages as such on other editors' real or assumed identities and so forth isn't tolerated. I understand the difficult job that countering the pro-pedophilia POV-pushing editors is, and it's not one I envy.
Look, I'm not the one that blocked him (either time) and his fate is not now my sole ___domain or anything. Any admin can undo his block, I'm just the only one who's shown any interest in this. I will not without some substantial dialogue with him first - others may feel differently. You're free to bring the issue up at the community sanctions board, or the Admin's noticeboard, or any other place you may feel is appropriate. Until I hear from XavierVE, though, I'm just going to wait and watch. [[User:WilyD|Wily]][[User talk:WilyD|<span style="color:#FF8800;">D</span>]] 20:42, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
:I just responded on his page, and I am absolutely not criticising your current stance on this. Regards, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
::Well, Xavier's responded, and it was ... not what I'd hoped. I'm confident there's no way he'll get any unblock unless he calms down, sees why we can't allow the kind of things he was doing, and agrees to work within the system. I don't want to see anything that's helpful to pro-pedophilia POV pushers, and neither do you, but nor can we allow Wikipedia to become the kind of battleground he envisions. If you want to see him unblocked, you're probably going to have to talk to him - I know he runs pervertedjustice.org?, and could probably be contacted by email. You might wish to pursue this avenue - he may listen to you. Beyond that - I don't see what I can do for him.
::On a related note, there really isn't any reason you should have to put up with long term pro-pedophilia POV pushing - certainly things just cross the realm from content disputes into trolling. I'm sure you could find an admin who'd block anyone persistantly adding "alledged" in front of "Holocaust", and I'm sure you could find an admin who'd block anyone who was persistantly inserting pro-pedophilia, unbalanced material (albeit it'd probably have to be egrarious for a single person to act, for long term subtle stuff consider [[WP:RFC]]). Anyways, if you have any better ideas, I'm all ears. [[User:WilyD|Wily]][[User talk:WilyD|<span style="color:#FF8800;">D</span>]] 21:13, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks, I'll give this one a few days thought (both the Xavier block and your interesting comments re pedophilia as a whole on wikipedia), [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:30, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
== Jimbo's bio ==
Squeak, as someone who also been blocked for violation of 3RR, I urge you to please discuss the birthdate section that you have been reverting. I have stated my thoughts on the end of the talk page. All the best, [[User:VanTucky|<span style="color:#E49B0F">VanTucky</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:VanTucky|(talk)]]</sup> 20:53, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
:Done already. Cheers, mate, you are certainly an editor I respect, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:56, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
==sockpuppet==
:I don't want to name the other person I suspect is involved in this, but would be prepared to e-mail who I think it is to you if that helps.--[[User:Padraig|padraig]] 00:06, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
:Sure, I am very email friendly, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
==Policeman image==
Being orphaned is not a CSD category. Neither is one editor's opinion that their own image is better. For all I know, the person who uploaded this image is going to be upset by its deletion. I have to consider all sides, hence my adherence to [[WP:CSD]] where it might seem overly pedantic to you. IfD would be fine, or you could leave a note on the uploader's talk page to request deletion himself/herself if he/she agrees that your image is more appropriate. Take care! --'''<span style="background:Black;color:White"> [[User:Bsf|<span style="color: White">But</span>]]|[[User talk:Bsf|<span style="color: White">seriously</span>]]|[[Special:Contributions/Butseriouslyfolks|<span style="color: White">folks</span>]] </span>''' 01:59, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks. I am concerned for the policeman but I'll ifd it. As the licence allows for cropping I am not concerned about my making this image an orphan and the uploader hasnt been on-wikipedia a while so ifd is what I'll do, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:06, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
==URGENT==
100% agree with you in your allegations of Hameo. We must stop this user from becoming an administrator! I will be happy to work with you in any campaigns to try and convince others to vote against this user. [[User:Mattbroon|Mattbroon]] 13:13, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
=== "That" RfA ===
I am glad there are people like you prepared to make the net a safer place for kids. I have no tolerance whatsoever for paedophiles.
:Me neither, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:56, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Mud sticks and you've flung just about the filthiest mud it's possible to find, but unless you have more evidence than you presented there, I think you've scored a real own-goal at the RfA.
Could it be that you made a horrible mistake... and owe the candidate one heck of an apology? --[[User:Dweller|Dweller]] 14:29, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
:Well if I have you are right so please persuade me, I havent seen any evidence so far and none of you are worjking ont he ground on these articles (someone like Will Beback, who is, would have more value in saying this without backing it up but I've never even met you before so why do you think I am wrong), [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:27, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
:For what it's worth, I strongly echo Dweller's comments. The diffs you provided are completely innocuous and once again, you're showing extremely poor judgment in accusing a fellow editor on such thin evidence. You don't seem to realize how hurtful it can be to be wrongly accused of supporting pro-pedophile activism and this has got to stop. [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 15:13, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
::At an RfA? I made it clear it was my opinion that he was supporting a particular POV not that he was anything persoanlly and while after the attacks I received I have removed the RfA from my watchlist on the other hand I think if we cant express our opinions about editors at an RfA then where can we? I do have genuine concerns with this editor but am willing, obviously, to engage in debates that arent slanging matches. And supporting a pro-pedophile view through articles (not user space) is not a bannable offence nor does it mark one as a pedophile (which I have never claimed Haemo is) but it gives me doubts about this users suitability to be an admin and as long as we have a porcess we should stick to it.
::In life I dont see any evidence to suggest your judgement would be better than mine, Pascal, why do you think that may be so? More experience of wikipedia? more experience of life? better standing in your local community? Yopu certainly do not have any experience whatsoever from what I can see of the ped articles. So why is your instsinct to not trust my judgement. I hope you arent making bad faith assumptions about me merely because I didnt respond in the way you wanted when you first made a comment on my page while somehow magically expecting me to know you were an admin in spitye of the fact that you werent on the admin list or available on email or with anything on your use page to indicate you were an admin (all of which made it clear to me at the time that you werent an admin). I am open to any debate on this RfA issue but dont appreciate my comments being tampered with by a supporter of Haemo, as happened last night and if that has continued it'll be matter for the bureaucrats (I intend to rewatch the RfA on the 20th). Cheers, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:27, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
:::You're a serious editor and your RfA comments deserve to be taken seriously. Please note I'm not an editor of pedophilia articles, so I don't claim any special knowledge. I also agree that you are not calling Haemo a pedophile.
:::However, an allegation of pro-pedophilia activism is still a major claim and the links you provided don't seem sufficient to make the case. That doesn't make your comment false (or true), it just means more evidence is required to convince others that this is sufficient to oppose the RfA. Do you have any additional material to support your claim? [[User:Euryalus|Euryalus]] 03:06, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
::::I will try to respond whn I re-put this RfA on my watchlist on Monday, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:06, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
I don't know how good your judgment is in real life. On the other hand, accusing Haemo of supporting pro-pedophile activists when all you can provide is a link to a disagreement with you on a merge is the sign of poor judgment on Wikipedia. You seem to be oblivious to the fact that such accusations can be quite hurtful. You should really take a look at that RfA again: besides Dweller, VanTucky and myself, others have called your comment there as "troll[ing]", "a very serious, and quite baseless accusation", "ludicrous, hyperbolic and unfair accusations", "ridiculous accusations", "traumatic elements of this RfA", "serious allegation (...) not supported by the links that he provides and directly contradicted by the analysis done by User:Sirex98 [that] currently looks like nothing more than a nasty personal attack", "conclusions [not] supported by the diffs" and "outrageous". It's great to have self-confidence in your judgment but at some point you do have to ask yourself "did I make a mistake? Do I owe Haemo an apology? Should I substantiate my claims?" [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 14:54, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
:::::Well as I said I'll take a look come Monday (its my birthday tomorrow and I am trying to ease up on any commitments right now until then). My judgement is good enough to survive and even prosper here in poor, violent, Spanish speaking Honduras, I do know that, plus completing 45 years, well I am a middle aged man as of tomorrow. I figure to not get too overly involved in the RfA controversy should be a sign of my good faith right now. I am willing to admit if I am wrong generally speaking so lets just see how this one goes, eh? And if Haemo has any issues with me he is welcome to bring them here, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:01, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
==AAB, etc==
Thanks.
As far as the article is concerned, I would be happy to have a simple, short, statement in the criticism section, and the links already there previously. One or two sentences, as was there previously - perhaps it was your edit of a few months ago (or was it someone else?). It could be settled in a few minutes. [[User:Kwork|Kwork]] 00:44, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
==Great comment on Farenhorst's talkpage==
I have your edits on my watch list, in case you haven't noticed, I hope you don't mind. Anyway I agree. Pedophiles always try to say that pedophilia is a "sexuality" just like homosexuality. Except a gay man that loves a gay man at 25 will still love him at 85 just like heterosexuals. A person that only loves people till the hit puberty is not really in love with them. It would be like me saying hat I love a women but once she hits 30 I am no longer attracted to her. (of course at least she is able to make an adult decision about me) but still I would not find this love but only a sad version of lust. [[User:Jmm6f488|Jmm6f488]] 05:36, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
=="retailiate"==
FYI, [[User:XavierVE]] chose that word you changed here [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Perverted-Justice&diff=next&oldid=152104614 "retaliate"]. You can actually verify that in both the edit history and the talk. I was actually opposed to its inclusion (I also thought it was POV). I just thought that was interesting. [[User:Vagr4nt|Vagr4nt]] 05:39, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
:Yep, here's the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Perverted-Justice&diff=125938021&oldid=125934056 diff] where [[User:XavierVE]] actually contributed the term you regard as [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Perverted-Justice&diff=next&oldid=152104614"POV" and "total bullshit"]. I agree with you that "acted" is the better, more neutral term. [[User:Vagr4nt|Vagr4nt]] 09:57, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
::Cool. Yeah my edit summary was OTT unusually so but I thought the edit itself fine. Cheers, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:11, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
==[[Justin Berry]]==
You've made some serious accusations against me. Please back them up with facts so I can refute them, or withdraw them in the interest of [[WP:CIVIL|civility]]. I've bolded the words you have used to describe me and my edits so that I can answer the charges, even if no evidence has been presented.
*I (& others) should '''get''' my '''act together''' and crop the lead photo to your liking. I've refuted this factually & in detail on the article's talkpage. In short, you removed the name of the website from the image, which breaks the chain of ownership (for fair use purposes) and hides the photo's origin from readers of the article.
*'''We are not an attack site here to attack Berry''' - I'm not attacking Berry. I'm providing both sides of the story, using [[WP:RS|reliable sources]]. If Berry says he does ''X'' and a third-party source says he does ''Y'', then both should be reported, per [[WP:BLP|BLP]], as long as both are germane to the topic.
*'''Our task is to write an encyclopedia, it isn't to make statements that harm an individual's reputation''' - I'm not here to harm anyone. I'm here to tell the truth, as established by sources, per policy. Do the biographies in [[Encyclopædia Britannica]] omit '''statements that harm an individual's reputation'''? Of course not. Wikipedia biographies should not be feel-good exercises for their subjects. Further, your assertion doesn't stand up when tested against some of the most highly contentious biographies on the project, where, presumably, any change is watched by many eyeballs. To wit:
**[[George W. Bush]] "was arrested for [[driving under the influence]] of alcohol."
**[[Josef Stalin]]'s "ongoing campaigns of political repression are estimated to have cost the lives of millions of people."
**[[Pope Benedict XVI]] "was enrolled in the [[Hitler Youth]]."
:When were you planning on removing those sourced negative statements, two of which are about living persons, two of which are ''[[libel per se]]'', and one of which appears in the lede of its article? Hopefully, you weren't planning to do so, since negative material belongs in biographies just as well as positive.
The recent changes to BLP don't empower us to ignore sourced, factual information just because it doesn't toe the line and agree with Berry's self-serving account. This isn't kindergarten; Not everyone gets a gold star. Berry has done some good things, done some bad things, and had some of both done to him. All of that is part of his story, and all of that should be part of this article. The way the article now stands, people will look at it and reach a biased conclusion. This is thanks to your and Phil Sandifer's actions, well-intentioned as they may be. In your version, we mention Berry's good points but not bad points about the issue for which he became notable. Is that maintaining a neutral point of view, or is that an unintentional form of POV pushing?
I've done a ton of work on this article, beating back the [[pedophile]]s and [[hagiography|hagiographers]] alike. For you two to show up together, out of the clear blue sky, and selectively eliminate negative information about Berry is simply beyond the pale. This is an encyclopedia. Pointless scandal-mongering about Berry must be eliminated, but sourced refutation of his self-serving statements is not pointless; Rather, it is the point of policies like [[WP:NPOV|NPOV]], [[WP:AUTO|AUTO]], [[WP:COI|COI]], and [[WP:BLP|BLP]]. Otherwise, we should head right over to the biographies listed above and remove all the sourced negative material there too, so future generations will know that these people have never done anything wrong, unpopular, or controversial. Except that they have, and so has Berry. Check [[Special:Contributions/Ssbohio|my contributions]] and you'll find that I've been here all along to improve this encyclopedia, not to attack Justin Berry or harm his reputation. Content disputes are best handled by discussion, consensus, and compromise, not unilateral [[scorched earth]] actions.
If you think I'm as bad an editor as you've painted me, then [[WP:RFC|RFC]] me. Otherwise, please either defend your attacks on me & my work, or withdraw them. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 20:14, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
:I think your comparisions of Berry, who is marginally notable, with public figures such as W.Bush, the Pope and Stalin is plain wrong and we should nott reat him like a public figure. I also fail to see how his making a business allowing people to use the internet while ensuring privacy has anything to do with his anti-pedophile activism and your basic assertion that these 2 are incompatible I find an astonishing piece of original research. Re the pic my concenr is the Mexican employee from McDonalds which IMO is not fair use and particularly to have here face oin this article. Do we have her written permission for this? I think bnnot and that is a poor interpretaion off air use. I was merely following up on Phil's work. I've seen him around as a good editor for the almost 3 years which I have been editing this encyclopedia and I do support his stance re both BLP and pedophilia issues (eg he did the same to child pornography recently). The thing is the public hasd a right to know about negative sides of the Pope and W. Bush even though they are living while Stalin is now a historical figure but Berry is marginally notabvle so just to find bad stuff about him and put it in the article on the grounds of NPOV is not, IMO, acceptable for wikiepdia to be doing, and especially where the justifications for the material's inclusion on NPOV grounds is original research, as I have just outlined. BLP does empower to protect marginally notable people, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:34, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
:Oh and by the way I ahve no intention of taking you to Rfc nor can Isee that I have attacked you personally in any way, though I am sorry if you have taken it that way, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:35, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
::*Your describing me as comparing Berry to the Pope, Josef Stalin, or President Bush is mistaken at best, disingenuous at worst. I made (clearly, I thought) a limited use of those three people to refute your assertion that we must omit '''statements that harm an individual's reputation'''. You did not limit this assertion to people who manufactured their own notoriety like Berry. I cited the most incontrovertible examples where your assertion fails to produce encyclopedic content, which is what we're here to do.
::*How is it that you describe a published article from a third-party source as [[WP:OR|original research]]? Did you read the article? Did you read the other sources? I didn't write the article. I didn't write Berry's commentary on the other sites. The article was researched, written, and published. For backup to that '''published''' article, I included references to Berry's own advertising, both on one of the sites he operated and on the auction site where he sold these sites. The allegation of original research does not stand up to even cursory examination. Citing a published source is not original research, by definition. Wikipedia contains the research done by the authors we cite. How is this original research? You've raised the novel claim (that wasn't made in your original rationale) of original research without citing facts, while I've cited my sources showing that the research is not original to me. Further, BLP doesn't say to throw the baby out with the bathwater. If you felt there was OR in that paragraph, you could have deleted something less than the whole thing & still eliminated the OR you perceived.
::*You assert that my action is '''just to find bad stuff about him and put it in the article''' when I have specifically and explicitly stated how the material is relevant to Berry's current activities as a speaker and Internet safety expert. He has simultaneously told parents of the value of monitoring their children's internet use while at the same time giving those children a way to circumvent monitoring and filtering software, both at home and away. On top of this, he was actually profiting from playing both sides of the issue, first as a public speaker, and second as the operator & salesman of these open proxy sites. Since you assert that I'm just trying to put irrelevant bad stuff about Berry in the article, do you believe I was lying every time I asserted otherwise? If I'm accepted as being truthful, then you necessarily have to admit that my reason why I make an edit is more accurate than yours, since I'm the one who made the edit.
::Now, as to the "public figure" question: What would you call a person who has professional representation and charges a $5,000 honorarium (plus expenses) to give public speeches and presentations, if not a public figure? Berry made himself a public figure, first through his multiple pornography businesses, then through his dealings with [[Kurt Eichenwald]], and now through his work as a paid public speaker. A figure doesn't get a lot more public than one who voluntarily and continually thrusts himself upon the public stage. He's not sitting in his bedroom in Bakersfield anymore.
::I am sympathetic to Justin Berry. His abuse at the hands of his father and other men shocks my conscience. However, it does not drive me to mislead Wikipedia readers by giving them an inaccurate, partial, sanitized version of the story of which even [[Pollyanna]] would approve. The article cannot be NPOV if it bases almost everything on how Berry tells his own story. Plenty of other people were there and have been interviewed, a great number by Debbie Nathan for her feature article in ''[[Counterpunch]]''. Have you read it? I have it on PDF & would be glad to mail it to you, or it should still be available on-line. Read the sources and you'll see that they support my position on this. I know you're only trying to do what's right, but burying Berry's activities and allowing his self-serving statements to gain the "Wikipedia seal of approval" is no way to write a neutral, factual encyclopedia, which is what we both want. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 22:33, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
==[[Rebirthing]]==
Hi I saw you mention it on the talk page of Ippy. If you want to be a dear, you could help find some sources for the [[Breathwork]] and [[Rebirthing-Breathwork]] articles.[[User:Merkinsmum|Merkinsmum]] 02:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
:I'll see what I can do about the rebirthing-breathwork, I was really inot the breathing (but more scepticval of the Orr based philosophy) 88-91, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:34, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
==Random award==
Shakti looks like my newest addition, Fluffin. I don't really know how to upload pics though. Anyway, what a lovely cat!:)[[User:Merkinsmum|Merkinsmum]] 02:56, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
:I would second that award! [[User:BrianWalker|docboat]] 03:59, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
::Thanks, moving to user page, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
:::Yeah she has a new best friend in my 11 month old niece, 14 still going on strong. I must get some pics of my current 3 cats as poor Cookita died from eating rat poison (a big issue here), [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
==Helping to repeal [[User:XavierVE]]'s ban?==
I read a comment from you here: [[User talk:Swatjester/archive11#Xavier]] in the talk archives of the moderator who initially banned Xavier for a day. The one he was actually responsible for doing this against was me (although someone has misled people by [[User_talk:Welland_R#XavierVE|saying it was someone else]]). While an insult against this person would be completely unwarranted, I believe that Xavier does legitimately believe his libelous personal attack to be true when used against me. I believe he trusts very much in the competancy of his staff at Perverted-Justice, and they indeed have profiled me as a 'known [[pedophile]]' on their 'corporatesexoffenders' [[wikisposure]]. My edit in question was in regards to this organization, and believing the entry about me to be true, jumped to the conclusion that I was trying to create an inaccurate wikipedia article out of personal bias. While this isn't true (nor is much of what is said in the wikisposure article on me), I don't think Xavier should be held at fault for jumping to this inclusion. A 24-hour cooldown period was certainly warranted until this was sorted out, but definately not a permanent ban. Swatjester asked that you contact [[User:Kurykh]] (the moderator who instated the indefinate ban on Xavier) regarding your thoughts on this. I'm about to go check out [[User talk:Kurykh|his talk page]] now after writing this, so hopefully you have and I can join in helping you get Xavier unbanned, since his ignorantly insulting me was the thing that apparently ignited this whole debacle. There do seem to be other issues related to this, so I don't feel this alone is at fault for his indefinate ban (something about "''stated intent to further disrupt Wikipedia via more frivolous allegations, incivility''" according to Kurykh) so I'll look into this before deciding that the ban was a total mistake, but if Xavier legitimately did not believe his allegation was frivolous (even though it was) I don't think he should be punished forever by being banned from Wikipedia. He seems to have been a dedicated editor after all, and once he does realize that I am not a pedophile and that his Wikisposure co-workers have made a mistake, he would have no reason to continue allegating that I am a pedophile or be uncivil. If his account is unblocked, then he would have no further reason to disrupt Wikipedia by making additional accounts or to promote other posters on the [[Perverted-Justice]] forums to do so. He should be given this chance to make amends. In the meantime, while his namecalling was unwarranted, the removal of the paragraph I added really wasn't. A tag would have been enough because it could have been fixed up or sourced eventually, but removing it doesn't do any harm. I'll be submitting better sourced information later, but that can be organized off the main page and done on talk pages beforehand. [[User:Tyciol|Tyciol]] 16:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
== GFDL vs. vandalism ==
Hi. This is in regards to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Phil_Sandifer&diff=152507956&oldid=152499703 your comment] at Phil Sandifer's talk page (he apparently doesn't want the discussion to continue there so I'll come here...). I found a quick mini-discussion where {{user|Deskana}} explained about removing vandalism and how it's bad in regards to GFDL: [[User talk:Wknight94/Archive 9#Re: GFDL violations]]. His example pages are where I got the idea that you could not remove vandalism edits unless they were the ''last'' edits in the page's history. Of course your scenario goes a step further where there is more serious vandalism and [[WP:BLP]] violations in the edit history... —[[User:wknight94|Wknight94]] ([[User talk:wknight94|talk]]) 20:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
== User page deletion??? ==
I am extremely confused by your most recent message on my talk page... I noted that WilyD had ''fully protected'' the page [[User talk:XavierVE]], which makes sense because a) the user in question is indefinitely blocked, and b) the user in question made a lot of people angry prior to being blocked. So in other words, the only people who would possibly have an interest in editing the page would be people trying to attack the blocked user.
Similarly, I thought it would make sense to fully protect the page [[User:XavierVE]] because, again, the user in question is indefinitely blocked, so therefore there is no one other than an administrator who could legitimately edit the page... XavierVE cannot edit the page because he is indefinitely blocked, and no other non-admin user has legitimate reason to edit the page. The only reason a person would edit the page would be to vandalize it. So therefore it seems logical to me that it should be fully protected.
Perhaps I should have reserved my comments about my personal disdain for XavierVE, as they are not directly relevant to whether the page should be fully protected. You are probably right about that. But your message really confused me... I did not write to WilyD to attack XavierVE, I wrote to WilyD to protect his former user page from abuse! --[[User:Jaysweet|Jaysweet]] 23:12, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
:You refactored so I think you know what is going on and well done for doing so. I reserve my disdain for the pro-pedophile activists (and the child sexual abusers as well of course though we dont see that directly happening here, at least I hope not and am unaware of anything like that here but very aware of what to do were it occurring here), [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:24, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
== RfA comments ==
Hello. I'm uninvolved in the current RfA of Haemos, but have noticed the recent issues on the page as part of watching [[special:recentchanges|RC]].
While your [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/SqueakBox_and_Zapatancas#SqueakBox_and_Zapatancas_placed_on_personal_attack_parole |personal attack parole]] has recently ended, it would be wise to assume that this sort of behavior has not been approved of in the intervening year. Specifically, when you're dealing with other human beings, one or two diffs does not make someone pro-paedophile, nor does it give you just reason to accuse someone of such vileness.
I've noticed others have redacted portions of the opinion and would request that you not edit-war over this. While it may well be an important issue on-wiki, it's neither proven to be the case in his situation, nor is it worth dragging someone's name through the mud simply to garner more opposing votes in an RfA.
I appreciate your consideration of the matter. <b><i style="color:#FF00FF;">~Kylu ([[User:Kylu|<span style="color:#FF00FF;">u</span>]]|[[User talk:Kylu|<span style="color:#FF00FF;">t</span>]]) </i></b> 01:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
===Some trolls===
::I am aware of the now out-dated parole (based on a dispute with a user who insulted my wife and eventually got completely removed from the site after the setting up the BlackApe account, the kind of trolling that wouldnt be tolerated in 2007, and the arbcom are certainly aware of my activities. This is an RfA so the normal rules of good faith dont apply as we are trying to figure out good faith and IMO my behaviour has not in any way been disruptive in the RfA nor remotely similar to anything that brought me to arbcom (by one individual who should ahve been troll blocked from the start for squealingPig offensiveness that you cant even begin to compare to any edits I have made, something I am sure the community would endorse. So nothing to look at here, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:49, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
:::Anyway given haemo's anti ped declaration i have withdrawn my oppose and struck my original statement, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:11, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
:Edit-conflicted trying to post that statement and its reply here. :)
:Please be aware that Google and other sites mirror and copy our writings here, so when you refer to someone whose real name is listed here, it causes irrevocable associations with those people. I personally abhor linking anyone's real name with any unverified assertations, and even implying something as grotesque as paedophilia with someone's real name could cause them real-life suffering. While I sympathize with your plight at that time, trading personal attacks certainly isn't the way to cause these problems to go away, and furthering that sort of incivility is in fact pointing all of Wikipedia in exactly the direction we don't want to go.
:I'd beg you, a long-time user and certainly aware of the rules of conduct here and of polite society in general, to please keep in mind that what you're doing to others may well be what you objected to having done to you in the past. My apologies that you had to undergo such cruelty in the past and that I was unaware of it at the time, however.
:I certainly hope you (nor anyone else here) has to suffer that sort of indignity.
:Best wishes. <b><i style="color:#FF00FF;">~Kylu ([[User:Kylu|<span style="color:#FF00FF;">u</span>]]|[[User talk:Kylu|<span style="color:#FF00FF;">t</span>]]) </i></b> 02:14, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
::I am very aware of BLP issues, indeed some would say I am obsessed by them. Cheers for making contact anyway, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:17, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
:::You say so, Squeakbox, but the fact is that you are still quite willing to jump into accusations against your fellow contributors that are not supported by the evidence. I confess myself quite disturbed that after being '''repeatedly''' warned about this in the strongest terms you have not changed your behaviour. [[User:Morven|Matthew Brown (Morven)]] ([[User talk:Morven|T]]:[[Special:Contributions/Morven|C]]) 04:26, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
:Its an RfA and I was giving my opinion, nothing more. I then withdrew it on the basis of Haemo's clear statement. Nothing to look at here and certainly not to bve compared to any event in my past editing here. Though I would say the day we try to stop experienced editors giving their considered opinions on an RfA (which is a violuntary process for those submitting to their peers' judgements) is the day the RfA process becomes meaningless. lets not allow that to happen, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:17, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
::::I've had similar challenges in dealing with you, SqueakBox. Do you [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]] in my editing? The cumulative effect of your allegations makes it difficult for me to continue to [[WP:AAGF|assume the assumption of good faith]] on your part. I will state, categorically, that I am not a ''vigilante'' who needs to ''get'' his ''act together''. As far as your comments above, regarding your personal attack parole, I'm not sure that saying (in effect) "the other guy was worse than I was" mitigates your personal attack on him, as defined by ArbCom. Just as two wrongs don't make a right, two personal attacks don't cancel out to [[WP:CIVIL|civility]].
::::{{cquote|''Wikipedia's articles are no place for strong views. Or rather, we feel about strong views the way that a natural history museum feels about tigers. We admire them and want our visitors to see how fierce and clever they are, so we stuff them and mount them for close inspection. We put up all sorts of carefully worded signs to get people to appreciate them as much as we do. But however much we adore tigers, a live tiger loose in the museum is seen as an urgent problem.'' -- [[Wikipedia:Beware of the tigers]]}}
::::You edit with a great passion regarding victims of [[child sexual abuse]], but keep in mind that a fierce passion, like a fierce tiger, [[WP:TIGER|can be seen as an urgent problem]]. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 05:10, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
:::::I dont appreciate being called a tiger, I'm not an animal, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:20, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
::::::While man is an animal, I take your point. Please accept my apology. It wasn't my intent to say you were actually a tiger, but rather to make a metaphorical comparison within the meaning of [[Wikipedia:Beware of the tigers]]. Rest assured, I don't think you're a tiger. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 23:28, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
:::::::Thanks. I am fascinated by wild animal programmes and we certainly are a type of animal and I sometimes wonder how different we really are (as much from the herbivores as from the carnivores) but you undertood my point which is cool, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:34, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
::::::::I've been the same way for a long time... When I was a child, I used to watch a program called ''[[Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom]]''. It's the first documentary-style animal show I can ever remember seeing. There was also a fictional series, ''[[Daktari]]'', centered on an African wild animal hospital and sanctuary. In any regard, it's nice to just take a minute to become acquainted as people; It might smooth any rough spots we encounter while editing the same article. I'm just an ordinary guy trying to increase the availability of knowledge in the world, or something like that. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 03:26, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
==Your edit to [[Wikipedia:Deletion guidelines for administrators]]==
Just a reminder that it's disruptive to delete Wiki ''guidelines and policies'' based on POV or [[WP:IDONTLIKEIT]], especially those intended for administrators. As it says on the page itself, '''When editing this page, please ensure that your revision reflects consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on this page's talk page.''' You can't just delete a policy point because you personally disagree with it. Since you're neither an admin nor do you have any demonstrated consensus on the Talk Page for your change, and you've been on Wiki long enough to know how policies and guidelines here are developed, you must know this edit was completely out of line. [[User:DanielEng|DanielEng]] 04:34, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
:Well there was an edit button, and my edit was, IMO, definitely for the best of the project. To edit war over such a line without a lot of consernsus or even with it would be completely unacceptabl;e but not only did nobody revert me in days but I wouldnt have reverted in this case under any circumstances because it is policy, albeit a policy that I think is deeply wrong and that gives admins a bad idea of their responsibilities here. I would also remind you that admins do not have special editing rights on policy [pages according to curent policy so I am not sure why you imply that could be the case, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:14, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
:::Yes, there was an edit button, but that wasn't any old article. The point is, you can't delete something on a Wiki policy page that offers instructions for administrators based on your own personal opinion. It wasn't "just a line," it was part of a set of instructions that apply to every single user.
:::'''The page explicitly states that ''anything'' that is changed must be done so with the consensus of the community.''' Asking for a consensus if you wanted to change that part of the policy would not have been instigating an edit war, it would have been the right thing to do. If you really feel the policy is "deeply wrong," it behooves you to start a discussion about it and see if anyone else shares your opinion. If there are others who feel the same way, well, they'll support you. If not, you'll have to accept that the policy exists for a reason, and its existence is justified. '''Your own personal beliefs don't carry enough weight to change policy for every editor on this site.'''
:::As to the "well, nobody reverted it for a few days" defense, it's baseless. As you know, disruptive edits and vandalism can sometimes sit on this site for days before they're picked up. I doubt many people think to watch the guidelines page.
::::I'm really not going to argue about this with you anymore. You were wrong to change a policy page without asking for consensus, you've been here long enough to know better, and if you do it again, I'm making an ANI report about it. I do consider it disruptive editing. [[User:DanielEng|DanielEng]] 06:34, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
:::::Oh I agree that reverting it would be disruptive and as I stated have no intention of getting into edit wars over policy pages so this wont be going to AN/I, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:05, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
::For anyone reading what I deleted was '''When in doubt, don't delete.''' [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Deletion_guidelines_for_administrators&diff=prev&oldid=151912351], [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:54, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
:::That seems like a good guideline. Since an administrator's deletion can't be reviewed or reverted by ordinary editors, if the admin has doubts about the deletion, it probably is best not to delete. The admin can always edit content the normal way. Use of admin tools is not actually required. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 03:43, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
::::To me it seems like a guideline that respects our editors more than the subjects of articles (or like PJ, people who surface in articles about things) and while I appreciate what you think, Ssbohio (obviously, given our conversations) I do believe those mentioned in articles should be our first priority. Just as we do actually delete copy vios and unfair images if there is doubt so this policy needs to be extended to all living people if not well beyond to all semi-notable articles. I am reluctant to get involved in a policy discussion as the last time I did it sucked up a lot of my time, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:37, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
==Your suggestion on Jimbo's page==
It's been addressed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Biographies_of_living_persons/Archive_4#Semi-protected --[[User:PTR|PTR]] 21:48, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
:It was your suggestion not mine. I note a "German" solution was talked about, to be implemented within the year and that is only a month away now. I dont know who the anarchist group WAS (who started the BLP page) was referring to but IMO an anarchic structure sums up many of the problems of wikipedia today and I would oppose such an anarchic group (if it exists) in the strongest possible way. Perhaps Jimbo has changed his mind over the last year given the various events we have seen, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
::Sorry, I meant your suggestion that I post it to WP:BLP. :) --[[User:PTR|PTR]] 00:14, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
:::You should do, the fact that it was spoken about 11 months ago in one tiny thread makes no difference to that, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:15, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
::::Semi-protection by default is antithetical to our being ''the encyclopedia anyone can edit''. If an article is problematic, then semi-protection or even full protection would be called for. When I first got here, I thought we shouldn't allow IP editors at all, but only let logged-in users edit. However, from everything I've seen here, it's a good thing that anyone can edit this encyclopedia, therefore articles shouldn't be protected by default from editing. I know it's more work for us, but we're either the project we claim to be, or we aren't. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 04:54, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
:::I think before Citizendium we could have dont hese things more easily (insist on a proper registration process etc) but now it is too late but these are worrying issues with no easy solution, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:38, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
== [[The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc.]] ==
Sorry, I still don't see any valid arguments for deletion in your !vote, just [[WP:IDONTLIKEIT]] mixed with [[WP:JNN]]. But, whatever, if you think you've said something clear maybe somebody else will get it.
In any case, what do you think about my reduction of the article to essentials, [[User:IPSOS/The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc.|here]]? I agree that the article the way it stands is pretty pretentious, but that a reason to tag the article for tone and/or other things, not for deleting it. Care to critique my effort to NPOV it? (Let's keep it off the AfD page). [[User:IPSOS|IPSOS]] ([[User talk:IPSOS|talk]]) 01:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Squeak, sorry, looking at your User page you seem to be a really nice guy and I would like to have a coffee with you in real life. So I am surprised by my reaction to your views - there is a mismatch. I must be missing something, so if you want to chat on email or my User page, please do. And I will buy the coffee. [[User:BrianWalker|docboat]] 02:21, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
==Regarding BLP==
The BLP page says that there must be consensus to undelete material deleted via BLP. I haven't seen any information stating that the guy's real name should not be revealed. In any even, Von Xavier is very much a public figure, and the name has been revealed. He is no longer a private citizen. If a reliable source covers his name, then the name should stay. [[User:WhisperToMe|WhisperToMe]] 03:04, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
:Why? Its off topic, doesnt make the article better, there is no consensus to have it and the subject is opposed to its invlusion, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:17, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
::On the other hand, those aren't the criteria for removal of content under BLP. He's a public figure, and his legal name is not private information. Also, we're not here to do the bidding of the subjects we write about. I think this comes down to an ordinary editing question, not a BLP issue. On balance, I'd keep his name in it. He sought & courted publicity. Now that he has it, it's hard to argue that he really wants to be a private person. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 03:51, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
== Child sexual abuse ==
: Before reverting or re-reverting the article [[Child sexual abuse]] again, let's discuss it on [[Talk:Child sexual abuse#Censorship|the Talk page]]. This will help insure [[WP:AGF|Good Faith]], [[WP:Consensus|Consensus]], and avoid the dreaded [[WP:3RR|3-Revert Rule]]. [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] 23:04, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
::Agreed, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:06, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
== Thanks for clean-up of [[Joseph Owens]] articles ==
Hello SqueakBox -- Thank you for your help cleaning up the Joseph Owens situation. The disambiguation page looks good to me and each article now describes the appropriate individual. As time permits, I'll expand the article on the redemptionist Owens. Thanks again -- [[User:WikiPedant|WikiPedant]] 18:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
:You're welcome, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:25, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
== Links ==
Stop for a second - the link is red! [[User:Giano II|Giano]] 21:49, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
:Cheers. Doh! [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:54, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
==ArbCom==
You didn't notify me, but my return wasn't advertised! <span style="font-family:Verdana;">[[User:One Night In Hackney|<span style="color:#006600">One Night In Hackney</span>]]<sub>''[[User talk:One Night In Hackney|<span style="color:#006600">303</span>]]''</sub></span> 22:32, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks, it's only a flying visit for the ArbCom case, plus maybe an edit here and there while it's ongoing. I knew all about the case, I've already made my statement. <span style="font-family:Verdana;">[[User:One Night In Hackney|<span style="color:#006600">One Night In Hackney</span>]]<sub>''[[User talk:One Night In Hackney|<span style="color:#006600">303</span>]]''</sub></span> 22:46, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
:Squeakbox, how long do we have to post a statement on this.--[[User:Padraig|padraig]] 23:48, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Not quite sure but my guess would be not less than a week, these arbcom cases are mostly very slow. But the sooner the better, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:52, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
:If its about a week that plenty of time, I hope to get it done in the next couple of days, just I have a busy day most of tomorrow.--[[User:Padraig|padraig]] 23:57, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
::I am sure a couple of days wont be a problem. The guy to ask is [[User:Newyorkbrad]] as he is a clerk for the arbcom and could give you much more precise advice, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:59, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
==Fidel==
thank you for your civil, although slightly condescending, response. i'm sorry my addition was not agreeable for you, but it was not a test. have a good day. -g
:He isnt dea yet, if he was it would be all over the news, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
==[[Cunt]]==
"rv silly we dont fact tag common sense common knowledge" - Oh well, I thought what I was doing was correct, but nevermind. [[User:Scarian|<span style="color: black; font-family: tahoma">Scar</span><span style="color: black; font-family: tahoma">ian</span>]][[User_talk:Scarian|<span style="color: red"><sup>Talk</sup></span>]] 20:44, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
:Its just too obvious for a fact tag, itd be like saying "water is necessary to maintain human life{{fact}}", we need fact tags for anything that might be disputed or incorrect but this is not neither. Cheers, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:46, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
::Yeah. No worries here. [[User:Scarian|<span style="color: black; font-family: tahoma">Scar</span><span style="color: black; font-family: tahoma">ian</span>]][[User_talk:Scarian|<span style="color: red"><sup>Talk</sup></span>]] 20:51, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
== Rumours of Castro's Death ==
[http://www.nbc6.net/news/13965316/detail.html?rss=ami&psp=news This is being covered by NBC now], so it might be worth [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fidel_Castro&diff=153424072&oldid=153424063 undoing this edit] and adding it, however I have no interest in getting involved in this and if it is real it will show itself soon enough, so I'll leave it up to you --<span style="font-variant:small-caps">'''[[User:Lucid|lucid]]'''</span> 21:43, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
:I think its in safe hands now, and the rumour is building apace but we musnt anticipate and I'd accept rumours as rumours but not as stated fact int he opening. if he is RIP, I say, and hopefully this country can now better integrate inot the region (which is in n o way a suppor to the US position), [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:20, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
===RE:Arbcom===
I wouldn't worry much about them, he clearly isn't familiar with the policies actually I would love it if he opens a RfC asking for an apology, that would be hilarious. Bilingue? cuidate mano. - [[User:Caribbean H.Q.|<b><span style="color: #0000DD"><span style="color: #0066FF">Ca<span style="color: #0099FF">ri<span style="color: #00CCFF">bb<span style="color: #00EEFF">e</span>a</span></span>n</span>~</span><span style="color: #FF3333">H.</span><span style="color: #FFCC00">Q.</span></b>]] 00:48, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
:Claro que si, que soy bilingue. Pues soy un ingles pero aqui en Honduras la gente habla espanol, y yo tambien. Y no estoy preocopado por nada en este caso, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:58, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
::Ah ya veo, no ahi razón para preocuparse lo que el esta pidiendo va en contra de [[WP:HARASS]] de todos modos. - [[User:Caribbean H.Q.|<b><span style="color: #0000DD"><span style="color: #0066FF">Ca<span style="color: #0099FF">ri<span style="color: #00CCFF">bb<span style="color: #00EEFF">e</span>a</span></span>n</span>~</span><span style="color: #FF3333">H.</span><span style="color: #FFCC00">Q.</span></b>]] 01:16, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
The only land between me and my beloved home country is, at it happens, Cuba. Vamos adelante todos, digo yo, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:04, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
== IJsselmeer ==
You undid changes without giving any reason why those changes were bad. "Bad faith editor" does not say why my changes were bad. ("Hitler wore a moustache. So wearing the moustache is bad."…) <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Nnemo|Nnemo]] ([[User talk:Nnemo|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Nnemo|contribs]]) 22:52, August 25, 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:You called Laurie Pycroft a wanker in the article space as well as on his user page here. That makes you a bad faith editor and all your edits need to be scrutinised and if there is the slightest doubt they need to be reverted. TYhje only reason I havent reverted the Dolphinium edit is because I was able to verify its veracity. You have brought this on yourself, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:32, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
::Regarding Laurie Pycroft, [http://sqrrl101.livejournal.com/148908.html let me quote him: “Regarding the issue of my masturbatory habits, I believe that it is a healthy practice which I personally enjoy.”].
::Regarding “all your edits need to be scrutinised and if there is the slightest doubt they need to be reverted”, you should read ''[[Help:Reverting]]''. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Nnemo|Nnemo]] ([[User talk:Nnemo|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Nnemo|contribs]]) 00:16, August 26, 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::Dont be crass. Wanker is an insult and you well know it. Your response merely confirms your bad faith attitude. Please change your attitude if you wish to stay here as other editors dont need to suffer your abuse while your vandalism of our encyclopedia is completely unacceptable and your lame excuse merely compounds that unacceptability, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:27, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
::::“Wanker” doesn't mean anything bad. Wanking is healthy and relaxing. You should do it more; it would help you [[Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot|stay cool]]. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Nnemo|Nnemo]] ([[User talk:Nnemo|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Nnemo|contribs]]) 01:36, August 26, 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::::That is total rubbish. Masturbation is healthy etc especially in the young when a sexual relationship may not be appropriate but wanker in British English is an insult, and a serious insult. See [[WP:NPA]], this was a serious violation of that policy, equal to calling someone a motherfucker in American English. Your vandalism of the main space and your repeated attacks after being warned against this user are a fact, now either start editing properly or dont at all, but do not try to play smart or cocky with me or any other editor here, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:54, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
==RFC/User- Kwork==
I have initiated a RFC/User on Kwork based primarily around his actions on the [[Alice Bailey]] page. Please feel free to add comments.
[[Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/kwork]]
[[User:Sethie|Sethie]] 19:15, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
:Yes I just saw that and see my name mentioned and as someone close tot eh AAB teachings, which is of course not the case as I hadnt even thought about her in well over a decade until I got involved inn the wikipedia article. I am going to think about this one before I comment and/or decide if to endorse the basis for the dispute. Cheers, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:21, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
== new policy ==
any thoughts about [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=next&oldid=154478162 this]? [[User:Slrubenstein|Slrubenstein]] | [[User talk:Slrubenstein|Talk]] 22:49, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
==[[Cuba]] & [[Fidel Castro]]==
I guess 'El Jigue' has taken over those article's talk pages (again), using them for 'rumor updates' & 'commentary on Cuban events'. I guess, he'll never quit. [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] 17:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
== [[:Category:Survivors of sexual abuse]] ==
I thought you might be interested to learn that a new category, [[:Category:Survivors of sexual abuse|Survivors of sexual abuse]], was created today. — [[User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[User talk:Malik Shabazz|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 19:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks for the tip, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:46, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
== Quick comment ==
Hey SB. No no no, I'm not here to complain about your edits. Well maybe a little bit, but that's not my main point. I'm just here to ask you to keep cool when arguing against MoritzB: he has been involved in a number of edit wars and I don't think raising the tone will do much good. He's already recruiting ammunition for these disputes [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Titanium_Dragon&diff=prev&oldid=154709241] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RWR8189&diff=prev&oldid=154697934] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Eschoir&diff=prev&oldid=154697430] and you can do more interesting things than falling into that trap. Best, [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 03:31, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:42, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
==Wikipedia Review==
Well I was reading the wikipedia review topic and I waltzed on up to a person who can communicate for me. I can't register an account because I don't have the time or money to go and get a paid e-mail account. If I e-mailed a response to all readers could you post it for me? It is completely understandable if you couldn't, but I would really appreciate it. Not being able to tell your side of the story is incredibly frustrating. If you agree to, please send an e-mail response. Yours, [[User:Saturday|<span style="color: OliveDrab">'''Satu'''</span>]][[User talk:Saturday|<span style="color: OliveDrab">'''rday'''</span>]] <sup>[[Special:Contributions/Saturday|<span style="color: OliveDrab">Contribs</span>]]</sup> 07:24, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
:Check your email, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
==[[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/The Troubles]] opened==
Hello. The above named arbitration case, in which you were named as a party, has opened. Please submit your evidence directly on the case page, or, if needed, submit it via email to an arbitrator or an arbitration clerk.
For the Arbitration clerk committee,<br/>
- [[User:Penwhale|Penwhale]] | <sup>[[User_talk:Penwhale|Blast him]] / [[Special:Contributions/Penwhale|Follow his steps]]</sup> 11:46, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
:Pleased to hear that. At least it confirms bringing this case was a good call, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:31, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
==How?==
How is nomming an article for deletion trolling? [[User:Bravedog|Bravedog]] 17:34, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
:We cant be wasting our time with silly nominations of articles that clearly wont be deleted. Please dont waste other editors' time. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:42, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
== Homosexuality and Pedophilia ==
Hey Squeak, I know we've disagreed in the past, but I know that we both vehementely disagree with MoritzB trying to conflate homosexuality and pedophilia. I unfortunately have to be someplace without an internet connection until late monday, so I fear this crap is going to get placed in the article if I'm not around to be my usual noisy self. I would appreciate it if you could keep an eye on this debate for me while I'm gone. Muchas gracias! [[User:VanTucky|<span style="color:#E49B0F">VanTucky</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:VanTucky|(talk)]]</sup> 04:21, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
:Not to butt in but you may want to share your thoughts on the ANI thread about MoritzB. He's been a one man wrecking crew all over the wiki... [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 04:26, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
::Thanks, and hey, VanTucky, we also have had agreements, no? [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:07, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
== Your page ==
Cool page! --[[User:Rory666|Rory666]] 07:08, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
== In my thoughts... ==
Although we have our differences (and oh! what differences they are), please accept my concerned thoughts and [[lapsed Catholic]] prayers for your safety and that of your loved ones, [[canidae]], [[felidae]], and [[hominid]]. Rest assured, I have it on good authority (it was published in ''[[GenerationQ]]'' -- kidding, kidding!) that ''Felix'' will deposit on your doorstep an entire [[shipping container]] of [[Marmite]]. Anyway, I've been concerned at your absence and wanted to check in. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 00:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
:Everything is fine here, the hurricane has passed to the south of us and while their is lots of rain the wind is mild, no power cuts and am just on the computer less because we havent really been at work today. Its more worrying in the capital and much less worrying here than it was, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:04, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
::While it is unfortunate that this hurricane had to go to ground anywhere, I am relieved to hear that it's left you relatively unscathed. I look forward to your renewed contributions at [[Talk:Justin Berry]], though I'd look forward to it even more if you suddenly started agreeing with me. :-) --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 04:11, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
:::Glad you're all right, SB. --[[User:John|John]] 04:12, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
== Re: The Troubles ==
I've reverted your edit [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/The_Troubles&diff=prev&oldid=156341750 here] because at this stage of ArbCom case you will need an Arbitrator to list/delist parties. If you have a question, feel free to post to my talk page and ask there. - [[User:Penwhale|Penwhale]] | <sup>[[User_talk:Penwhale|Blast him]] / [[Special:Contributions/Penwhale|Follow his steps]]</sup> 20:25, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
:Okay, thanks for fixing my mistake, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:27, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
== Personal attack??!! ==
I didn't attack you. I just corrected one small edit you had made. It isn't accurate to write "GNR (Portuguese police)" because GNR, a National Guard or [[gendarmerie]] (a military body charged with police duties among civilian populations), is usually known as the Guard (''Guarda'') and the designation "police" is almost always used for the PSP - Polícia de Segurança Pública. Finally, the PJ - Polícia Judiciária is known as the ''Judiciária''. I didn't know we can't use the "undo" button - if that was what you tried to say to me. Cheers. [[User:Page Up|Page Up]] 03:03, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
:Sorry I am a bit stressed, I do know gendarmerie is a french word but your new edit was cool. Perhaps I am getting stressed cos I dont like the Portuguese police and judiciary and feel desperately sorry for the McCaan's (my own dislike is personal and as far as that isnt acceptable here at least I am admitting my prejudice), I see you are Portuguese or at least a native speaker, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:08, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
==edit warring==
And stop accusing editors in good standing of "trolling". Take a break, SqueakBox. You're too experienced and too good an editor to behave like this. --[[User:ElKevbo|ElKevbo]] 03:18, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Removing a POV tag is trolling, adding it isnt, simple as that. And templating the regualrsd is not acceptabl;e, donmt do it again, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:20, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
:Dude, your spelling is atrocious, your attitude bizarre, and your behavior intolerable. Seriously - I know you're better than this as I've seen you around quite a bit. You're obviously not yourself tonight. TAKE A BREAK. --[[User:ElKevbo|ElKevbo]] 03:22, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
:And this dispute has now been (erroneously, IMHO) posted on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#MMWS_-_accusation_of_edit_warring.2C_trolling_for_duplicate_tag_removal.3F ANI]. :( --[[User:ElKevbo|ElKevbo]] 03:25, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
:Spelling. That's so 20th Century, its called typos and it has nothing to do with spelling. All I want is for the NPOV tag to stay, its a reasonable request and its not asking too much as the article is POV. Best wishes. Cheers for the heads up re AN/I, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:26, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
::Bah. Spelling '''is''' important when the medium being used is written. :)
::I don't understand why you are insisting on having a separate NPOV template instead of allowing the issue to be noted in the "Multiple issues" template that is already in the article. Can you please explain? --[[User:ElKevbo|ElKevbo]] 03:28, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
:Oh I dont doubt the importance of spelling, its typing I find difficult. This article is so POV, I do intend to seek out some other refs but NPOV demands both sides are prevsented and as I made clear on the talk that isnt happening in this article. That some rascist editors are targetting it (eg the banned fourdee) is ample evidence of that. I am baffled as to why anyone would remove the NPOV tag, I never do that before resolving the issue, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:35, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
::Please answer the question: Why do you insist on a separate NPOV template when the other one communicates the exact same idea but with less clutter? --[[User:ElKevbo|ElKevbo]] 03:38, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
::I removed the blue tag. I want the orange tag there and I have fully explained my reasons. The article presents one side of an argument and not the other. I dont understand what the controversy is as I removed the unnotable blue tag, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:44, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
:::No, I'm afraid that you haven't answered the question. I don't see a need to for multiple templates when one easily suffices. --[[User:ElKevbo|ElKevbo]] 03:50, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
::::Nor do I. That is why I have removed the blue tag. An orange NPOV tag was created for a reason and it should stay as an orange tag. What is the problem? Anyway I see others are now edit warring, i wont touch the article till teoimorrow but gibvenm editors like fourdee have edited the article its POV status is inevitable, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:52, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
== Chaminade ==
You removed an alumnus from Chaminade with a strange comment addressed to (??? somebody you called "you" ???) about outing concerns. Also strange, removing him because he doesn't want an article seems opposite to your position on the articles for deletion page - and before a decision was made on deletion. The guy is a public figure with his own web page & yet says he does not want anyone to write about him?!? I am confused.--[[User:JimWae|JimWae]] 05:31, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
:The chap is Don Murphy and he strongly objects to his article, see [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don Murphy (2nd nomination)]]. While the article will likely remain given his objection and that his notability is as a film producer it feels like a good idea to not have the school he went to, which has nothing to do with his notability, recording the fact. Its a highly problematic article and the guy is very pissed off with wikipedia. Hope this helps and am willing to discuss further, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:43, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
==sockpuppetry!==
The edit you reverted was actually me, carelessly logged in under an alternate account, as [[User:DanB_DanD|my userpage]] explains. Sorry! I don't intend to create the impression that there are several of me. [[User:DanB_DanD|<span style="color: darkpurple">Dan</span><span style="color: black">'''B'''</span>†<span style="color: blue">Dan</span><span style="color: darkblue">'''D'''</span>]] 18:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
:Oh! That's cool then, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:05, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
==Translation, please==
Just now you wrote [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/The_Troubles/Workshop&curid=13032340&diff=157055368&oldid=157055166 here]: "'''Oppose''' No reason why good faith editors shouldnt be ab,le to revert PA's or BLP vios re VK and his talk page,"
What are (is) PA's or BLP vios, please?
You should realise that I'm still trying to learn about all these abbreviations. Sorry to trouble you. [[User:W. Frank|W. '''Frank''']] [[User talk:W._Frank|talk]] [[Special:Emailuser/W._Frank|✉]] 01:34, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
:If you stick up a WP: in front of these terms it should make it clear, ie [[WP:BLP]] and WP:NPA]], [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
::Thanks for the quick and helpful response, SqueakBox - it's appreciated and sorry to be so dense! [[User:W. Frank|W. '''Frank''']] [[User talk:W._Frank|talk]] [[Special:Emailuser/W._Frank|✉]] 01:56, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
== Carry over from Jimbo's talk ==
{{cquote|'''''Oh I do like wikipedia and its precisely because I want a good project that I ahve made my comments. 3 million articles is just plain silly and we clearly need editors and admins who nop better and who dont see us as "we can do what we like and out who we like" project. People who pursue the endlessly more articles approach are not people who love wikipedia, I am certain of that, and your claim to the high ground, Springer, is both tragic and silly, as is you r toast to 3 million articles…'''''}}
Would you rather me toast that we dwindle back to 1 million? — [[User talk:Springeragh|<span style="background:#808;color:#fff;text-decoration:none;"> '''''$PЯING'''''εrαgђ </span>]] 19:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
:No, I think we should stay with 2 million more or less, and as I said I was making a serious point not wanting to be a party-pooper, and hopefully Jimbo will read my serious popint and take it on board. I was an inclusionist but evnets this year have made me a deletionist, Daniel Brandt, Don Murphy etc. I feel its preciselty because I love wikipedia that I feel this way though I do ioncreasinly feel I am involved in damage limitation. I guess att he end of the day how many sourced, notable article do we need to reach the aims of the project to cover knowledge in the world is a valid question, if we do actually need 3 million articles I wopuld rather it happened in 2032 than in 2009. Cheer, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:18, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
::Well, if we have 3 million articles, and 2 million of them are good (NPOV, sourced, &c.), then ⅔ of our work is already done. We are always growing of course—that's why we have backlogs—but as the total number grows, the number of good articles, as well as the number of (officially) [[WP:GA|Good Articles]] grows as well, and it will be impossible to have all of our material top-notch. — [[User talk:Springeragh|<span style="background:#808;color:#fff;text-decoration:none;"> '''''$PЯING'''''εrαgђ </span>]] 19:41, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
==Thanks!==
{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|lightblue}}};"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | [[Image:Adminship.png|100px]]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''My RFA'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | ''¡Hola!'' thanks for participating in [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Caribbean H.Q.|my request for adminship]], which ended with 51 supports, no opposes, and one neutral. I hope to accomplish what is expected of me and work to help those that lent me their trust. Your help when the Castro rumor broke and the integrity you show when trying to keep the articles bias and speculation free is also appreciated, take care. - [[User:Caribbean H.Q.|<b><span style="color: #0000DD"><span style="color: #0066FF">Ca<span style="color: #0099FF">ri<span style="color: #00CCFF">bb<span style="color: #00EEFF">e</span>a</span></span>n</span>~</span><span style="color: #FF3333">H.</span><span style="color: #FFCC00">Q.</span></b>]] 23:58, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
|}
==McCaan==
A couple of references have been added. The reference to the McCann's friend involvement in launching the false kidnap thesis was taken out due to not having enough time to dig for it. --[[User:Mecanismo|Mecanismo]] | [[User talk:Mecanismo|Talk]] 18:03, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
== Murphy info from eBay ==
You may want to take another look at http://listing-index.ebay.com/movies/Don_Murphy.html ... they are just quoting the Wikipedia article. --[[User:B|<span style="color: maroon">B</span>]] 17:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
:Yes, Murphy himself just pointed this out at WR, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:22, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
==Fair use disputed for Image:PLHNR.jpg==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|32px|left]]
Thanks for uploading '''[[:Image:PLHNR.jpg]]'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at [[Wikipedia:Non-free content]] carefully, then go to [[:Image:PLHNR.jpg|the image description page]] and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline]] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our [[WP:CSD#Images/media|Criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|Media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->[[User:BetacommandBot|BetacommandBot]] 23:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
==Fair use disputed for Image:PLHum1.jpg==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|32px|left]]
Thanks for uploading '''[[:Image:PLHum1.jpg]]'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at [[Wikipedia:Non-free content]] carefully, then go to [[:Image:PLHum1.jpg|the image description page]] and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline]] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our [[WP:CSD#Images/media|Criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|Media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->[[User:BetacommandBot|BetacommandBot]] 23:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
== [[Jimmy Wales]] parents ==
Actually the link in that very paragraph is a source for the mother's name,
and [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Archive_3#My_grandmother.27s_name_is_Erma]] is Jimbo himself trying to make the correction to his article, after prompting from his mother. He and his mother don't seem to think they're privacy violations. I'd recommend putting them back. --[[User:AnonEMouse|AnonEMouse]] <sup>[[User_talk:AnonEMouse|(squeak)]]</sup> 20:46, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
==[[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Attack sites]] opened==
Hello, SqueakBox. The [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Attack sites|arbitration case]] in which you commented to has opened. Please provide evidences on the [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Attack sites/Evidence|evidence page]] for the Arbitrators to consider. You may also want to utilize the [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Attack sites/Workshop|workshop page]] for suggestions.
For the Arbitration Committee,<br/>
- [[User:Penwhale|Penwhale]] | <sup>[[User_talk:Penwhale|Blast him]] / [[Special:Contributions/Penwhale|Follow his steps]]</sup> 21:06, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
== Image:justinpicture1.jpg listed for deletion ==
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, [[:Image:justinpicture1.jpg]], has been listed at [[Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion]]. Please see the [[Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2007 September 15#Image:justinpicture1.jpg|discussion]] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. [[User:DanB_DanD|<span style="color: darkpurple">Dan</span><span style="color: black">'''B'''</span>†<span style="color: blue">Dan</span><span style="color: darkblue">'''D'''</span>]] 00:07, 15 September 2007 (UTC) <!-- Template:Idw -->
I guess this notification is a bit redundant as you've already commented on the nomination! :)
:Best to stick to process, though, eh? And as I have said elsewhere I fully endorse this deletion, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:08, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
::It's an excellent example of gaming the system to gain the advantage. Both of you knew (or should have known) that I was responsible for the uploading of the image, yet both of you took no action to notify me of this action. It's amazing the extent to which foundational principles of [[wiki]] can be trampled in order to satisfy one's personal perspective. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 01:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
:::The image you uploaded was deleted last month, see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Justinpicture.jpg&action=edit. Anyway there is plenty of time to object tot he deletion at the ifd, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:14, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
::::Yes, and I agreed with your cropping the picture, once you discussed it & gave justification. This is entirely different, becuse the image is to be deleted, not replaced with a different version. You knew, for a fact, who was responsible for putting that image up in the first place. You chose not to inform me of the deletion nomination. Coincidentally (or deliberately as the case may be), it was to your advantage that I not be told, as I would surely object. It was, to say the least, convenient for you to "forget" where the image originally came from. Under GFDL, the image page should have reflected the origin of the original picture, since attribution and . It didn't. Again, that omission worked out to your advantage. Things either fortuitously went your way, or deliberately so. It strains credulity to assume that omissions you made helped your cause by accident. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 03:50, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
:Well my apologies, it wasnt deliberate, I'm too old a hand to ganme the system especially re an image (look above and see the 2 fair image deletion requests that I am myself very unhappy with (Lincoln Thompson being one of the few articles I am genuinerly passionate about here). I think if I had ifd'd it myself you'd have a point...well you have a point, I certainly dont want to exclude you and my apologiers but it was not deliberate. I live in Honduras in a poor area so Im genuinely sympathetic to the Mexican worker but also I am happy to engage in arguments and diiferences with you but dont want to game the system to gain an advantage. I see from your user page that you are a mature and responsible adult, wish you the best and am happy to listent o anything you have to say, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
::I'm glad for that. I feel that you're an exceptionally skilled editor, but that you believe in your position so strongly that it sometimes distorts other issues. I can sympathize with that. I have the same problem when editing on LGBT issues & aviation issues. What is your opinion as to Berry's notability? Hopefully, we can at least both agree that there should be an article on him, even if we disagree about its contents.
::Looking at it from the economic orientation you used above, what fo you think we should do considering the number of relatively poor Mexican women who Berry paid to appear in pornographic videos for his website? To me, it has the same feel as those pornography studios who go to eastermn Europe & take advantage of economic conditions there to find "new meat" for their movie productions. What should the article say about Berry's actions in this regard? It currently says nothing. The issue has been covered in court documents, in CounterPunch, and (I think) in the NY Times. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 22:14, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
== [[Truth in Numbers: The Wikipedia Story]] ==
You began to list this article for deletion on 12 September but did not complete this properly. Please either correct the afd listing (following the instructions at [[Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#How_to_list_pages_for_deletion]], in particular the instructions for listing articles that have already had an afd using ((subst:afdx))) or remove the tag. [[User:84.64.25.108|84.64.25.108]] 12:23, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
:Er, no, the article was deleted in March, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:00, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
::Since the article was re-created post-March, for it to be deleted again it would have to be nominated (again) for AFD or prod'd via [[WP:SPEEDY]]. There is nothing (except salting) on Wikipedia to prevent an article's recreation, this is encouraged as there is always a chance the newer version will be better. [[User:84.64.25.108|84.64.25.108]] 00:09, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
:No it doesnt, it means you are trolling. Now go away, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:12, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
::I'm sorry, I thought I was being perfectly reasonable in pointing out that you may have made a mistake. Since you don't appear to appreciate any guidance or criticism in respect to following deletion procedures on Wikipedia - I'll leave you alone. [[User:Foxhill|Foxhill]] 00:52, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
:::Thanks, there are cases where procedure would be speedy or afd but given the subject matter and the previous afd this isnt one of them, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:48, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
== AN/I ==
I don't want to break the 3RR any more, or so I assume, than you do, and so rather than risk getting myself or both of us blocked, I had to [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#A concern about potential ageism|take it to AN/I]]. I hope you understand. — [[User talk:Springeragh|<span style="background:#808;color:#fff;text-decoration:none;"> '''''$PЯING'''''εrαgђ </span>]] 03:28, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
:We have age consent laws for a reason, and it certainly isnt ageism, the very idea that you8ng people suffer from ageism is political correctness gone mad, they just have to wait to grow up, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:51, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
::Wait to grow up. That's comforting to hear. I'll have to tell my seven months old daughter that. She probably won't look forward to over seventeen years of discrimination. — [[User talk:Springeragh|<span style="background:#808;color:#fff;text-decoration:none;"> '''''$PЯING'''''εrαgђ </span>]] 00:57, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
:Indeed she probably wont like to here it but for the next 17+ years she cant buy alcohol (hopefully not cigarettes either as there is a law change in the pipeline), vote and if she contracts debts you will be responsible for them. And as he rf ather I am you will be setting your own limits as all good parents do (no you cant stay out till midnight at 14 on a school night).
:Why I oppose discrimination against blacks or women is because that is inherent to their nature whereas one grows out of youth, and soon enough too. All young people want to grow up as quickly as possible but when you get to my age you want to slow it down. As [[Benjamin Spock]] said "dont be in such a hurry to smoke and drink, you'll have plenty of time when you are an adult. On the other hand I oppose ageism against old people much more, if you are told you are too old to work at 60 or 65 there is no wating for that sentence to pass, you are stuck with it forever, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:06, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
::I agree with not buying alcohol or tobacco, in fact, if I could I would pass a law making it illegal for anyone, but I can't. As for voting, that is mostly understandable in that they are probably not quite mature enough to understand that the person they would want in office will affect perhaps the entire city, county, state, or even country. This maturity comes for some at 13, some at 15, some maybe later, but the law had to be set somewhere. The detriment of staying out until an ungodly hour on a week night is obvious, and it is only the hardest-willed and most rebellious children that I have seen who cannot see the reason after it is explained to them.
::I oppose ageism toward the elderly fully as much as you do, and the only reason I would not hire one (if I, for example, owned a business, which I do not) is if he or she was not physically fit for the job. Obviously there are very few 80 year old men who can build a house. For a desk job that might be different. However, notice how very few older people actually still do work; they are retired and most of them want to enjoy that.
::This would probably make no sense and be extraordinarily annoying to you if it did not have to deal with the current subject, that is, sexual feelings in children. For reasons you will probably understand, I will not tell you how old I was when I first had sex, but it was younger than 18, to be sure. Without digging a deeper hole for myself, I will say that when I say that children can have sexual feelings, I speak from experience. You have clearly read all the age of consent &c. articles much more than I have, and so I assume you have noticed that some jurisdictions have close-in-age exceptions. They are there for a reason. And really, you have to consider that if you changed the word "children" to "black people" or "homosexuals" in the opening sentence of the article, and removed the word "feelings" with the rationale you provided, someone (not me, but still someone) would get you for discrimination. Thinking about that usually helps when editing controversial child-related subjects. — [[User talk:Springeragh|<span style="background:#808;color:#fff;text-decoration:none;"> '''''$PЯING'''''εrαgђ </span>]] 01:25, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
:::Yes well I was older than you are when I first had real sexual expericence (not snogging) though I have made up for it since.
:::But I think we are possibly confusing the word feelings. I had sexual sensations as a child but my feelings towards the opposite sex (not being gay) didnt awaken till I was 14 and looking back on it the reasons I didnt lose my virginity till much later are because of a mixture of a Christian upbringing (that I still took seriously when I was young even when I "converted" to Rastafari (and I am not religious any more)) and just not being ready. I realise that people are ready for sex at different ages, but it was the emotional feelings I was assuming we were talking about in the article. I and any of us regulars have the right to demand that any info is sourced, perhaps I should just have said "rm unsourced" but I did think an explantion was warranted and I dont believe your last point is valid as I dont believe anyone would think I was discriminating agaisnt children for stating such a fact. I know children and teenagers tend to think they are an oppressed class but equally most middle aged adults think that is completely not so. Also there are far too many young, pregnant girls (12 upwards) here where I live in Honduras and abortion is illegal (I fervently support abortion and as a result I dont edit that article, Pascal take note if you are reading this thread). Anyway thanks for taking the time to debate this issue which is certainly both interesting and relevant, and as you can see my own take is no less full of grey shades than anyone else's. And, hey, good luck being a Dad, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
::::OK, I have a little mixed feelings with this now, and it sounds as if you don't want to argue anymore, so I'll try not to make it sound like it.
::::Perhaps we should put a reference after the word "feelings" in the article (not a source, but a reference as you will see), which says something along the lines that feelings could mean several different things, and maybe try to clear that up.
::::I do agree with you that children and teens are not an oppressed class. Subject to a little discrimination here and there, and every so often you hear of harrassment among themselves, but that isn't really oppression I think.
::::As you can see I gravitate towards controversial subjects, and of course that always has the risk of being misunderstood; I have had heated arguments even with close friends about such things as pædophilia, homosexuality, &c. &c. but, thank you for the well wishes. I appreciate it. — [[User talk:Springeragh|<span style="background:#808;color:#fff;text-decoration:none;"> '''''$PЯING'''''εrαgђ </span>]] 04:54, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
== Signing the Signpost ==
I'm not sure I understand exactly what you're saying, but if the bot is clogging your watchlist, you can click the "hide bot edits" link above the namespace selector, and the Signpost edits will disappear. [[User:Ral315|Ral315]] [[User talk:Ral315|»]] 06:43, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Its not so much my watchlist as it just seemed foolish for one bot to follow another thus, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:41, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
: That wasn't happening, as far as I know. Another bot delivered it last week, because my internet connection was unstable, but other than that, I'm the only one who delivers the ''Signpost''. [[User:Ral315|Ral315]] [[User talk:Ral315|»]] 22:07, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
::Ahh that explains it. I know all about unstable internet connections and having to meet deadlines. Anyway thanks for your time and keep up the good work, I keep it on my user page and it replaces itself automatically which is pretty cool, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:09, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
==Cleopatra==
"Claim what you like but to say that Cleopatra wasn't African is to have a poor level of geography, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:52, 9 September 2007 (UTC)"
Cleopatra was African because Egypt was in Africa.. She just wasn't black like most Afrocentrists claim. Most Egyptians are non-black and related to Semetics. Cleopatra was a Caucasian Ptolmeic Greek.
[[User:Intranetusa|Intranetusa]] 19:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes I dont believe I claimed she was bl;ack, many Afircan arent as the common definition of black refers to sub-saharan people but Egypt is a part of Africa so she was African. Africans are people from Africa or with ancestors fronm Africa, not black people as we commonly use the term in English, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:30, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure what I may have posted about Cleopatra since it was a long time ago but I pretty sure that's what I meant when I edited it. [[User:Intranetusa|Intranetusa]] 02:55, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
==[[Axl Rose]]==
Please refrain from violating [WP:CIVIL]] and [[WP:NPA]] in your edit summaries. Calling the editors who work on the page "abusive" and threatening RfC or mediation action if anyone dares to revert your personal edit is both uncivil and disruptive. For what it's worth, I don't know who added that cat and it does appear to be inappropriate to the article so I don't mind its removal, but I didn't think the edit summary diatribe was necessary. Not to mention that a request for mediation or RfC in this case would be laughed out the door, since you have absolutely no grounds. As I recall, previous reversions to your edits of Axl's article were when you made disruptive edits and removed information in the text that was both apparent and clearly sourced. [[User:DanielEng|DanielEng]] 21:06, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
:The cat was deleted so actually I think my edit summary was fine. And your claim that this abuse of the cfd would not be accepted by rfc , mediation etc is probably correct as it is simple case for deletion and pointing out to the person who inserted it the reasons why, then if they do it again subjecting them to warnings, blocks, etc. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
:IO also note you made a PA against me without a shgred of evidence to back yourself up (ie no diffs). Good idea to let me know if you want to post about me at AN/I, and please spell my name correctly. It appears to em that you disagreee with my edits, wehich is fine, and then engage in PA's and opther justifications for me simply being BOLD which is not fine, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:26, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
== [[Haile Selassie]] ==
Greetings, there is a user who has been edit-warring and now arguing on my talkpage that Mengistu Haile Mariam should be listed in the boc as the "successor" (''de facto'') to H.I.M. Haile Selassie I. This is of course legally and factually incorrect both from the Imperial Constitution POV, but also from the opposing POV of Marxism, which is why the Marxist Derg never proclaimed Mengistu as a "successor" to His Majesty. Besides, if anything, you'd think [[Teferi Banta]] might have been called His Majesty's immediate successor from the Derg POV. Regards, [[User:Til Eulenspiegel|Til Eulenspiegel]] 14:19, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
:I think its been fixed, if you think otherwise give me a shout, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:41, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
== Fair use image ==
The image I changed on your user page was a fair use image. They are not allowed on user pages. However, I tried to leave a link and something that looked decent enough. If you would like, I can play around with the box a little more to change it if you don't like it. Mahalo. --[[User:Ali'i|Ali'i]] 19:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
:No problem, I removed the entire image, fair use is important, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:36, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
::Mahalo nui... that works too. --[[User:Ali'i|Ali'i]] 20:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
== PJ ==
I think you have a misunderstanding of the BLP policy. It does not apply to neutral information, such as a famous person's name. It applies to poorly sourced, or unreliably sourced negative information. When a piece of information is sourced by MSNBC, New York Times, and Rolling Stone that establishes both notability and reliability. [[User:Swatjester|<span style="color: red">⇒</span>]] [[User_talk:Swatjester|<span style="font-family: Euclid Fraktur"><span style="color: black">SWAT</span><span style="color: goldenrod">Jester</span></span>]] [[WP:CLIMBING|<small><sup>Denny Crane.</sup></small>]] 23:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
:Yes but how does it help the article to include the information and how does it hurt it to exclude it. Surely BLP is also about taking the subject's views into consideration and Xavier has made it clear to me in a private email (and I know it is him) he doesn't want his birth name included. So it is not an RS issue but it is a notability issue (and I others dont think this info is notable enough for inclusion, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:58, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
::It helps the article by establishing the name of the director of the organization. As for notability, the fact that it was covered by the NY Times, MSNBC, and Rolling stone, as well as dozens of other sources, is clear proof that it is notable. As for what Xavier sent you in a private email, is irrelevant. If he has a problem with it, he can contact the Wikimedia Foundation. [[User:Swatjester|<span style="color: red">⇒</span>]] [[User_talk:Swatjester|<span style="font-family: Euclid Fraktur"><span style="color: black">SWAT</span><span style="color: goldenrod">Jester</span></span>]] [[WP:CLIMBING|<small><sup>Denny Crane.</sup></small>]] 00:33, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
:::"An important rule of thumb when writing biographical material about living persons is "do no harm". Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid, and as such it is not our job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives. BLPs must be written conservatively, with regard for the subject's privacy.
:::When writing about a person notable only for one or two events, including every detail can lead to problems, even when the material is well-sourced. In the best case, it can lead to an unencyclopedic article. In the worst case, it can be a serious violation of our policies on neutrality. When in doubt, biographies should be pared back to a version that is completely sourced, neutral, and on-topic."
:::This kind of sums up why this info should not be included. I am not interestsed in back-door deals re this issue and certainly dispute that the subject's views are of no importance tot he editors of the article. Merely because something is in the NYT etc does not mean we have to include it or indeed that the information is notable enough for our purposes. I certainly agree we need to recognise the founders but we have done that in my version too as Xavier is clearly identified by his legal name. Unless there is a serious reason for this inclusion (ie that it makes the atrticle better) it should be removed, and as Xavier is clearly identified already by his legal name and has never publicly been known by the birth name its incvlusion does not make for a better article nor its inclusion for a worse article. This is not a conservatively written sentence, its a radical, sensationalist sentence, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:52, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
:::::He is a public figure. The paragraphs you cite do not apply...the information is well sourced, not unencyclopedic, neutral, and on topic. It does no harm, it is not sensationalist, it is not a "titillating claim", and there is no good reason to exclude it. It makes the article more complete. It fits in with our other articles on people who have changed their names: we use their original names too. It does not matter what is currently his legal name. We are not writing this article for him. We are writing it for the user who is reading this and wants to know more about PJ and its founder. And we're using the information given to us by some of the most notable of all sources. This information BENEFITS the article.[[User:Swatjester|<span style="color: red">⇒</span>]] [[User_talk:Swatjester|<span style="font-family: Euclid Fraktur"><span style="color: black">SWAT</span><span style="color: goldenrod">Jester</span></span>]] [[WP:CLIMBING|<small><sup>Denny Crane.</sup></small>]] 01:10, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to bed for the night, we can continue this tomorrow. [[User:Swatjester|<span style="color: red">⇒</span>]] [[User_talk:Swatjester|<span style="font-family: Euclid Fraktur"><span style="color: black">SWAT</span><span style="color: goldenrod">Jester</span></span>]] [[WP:CLIMBING|<small><sup>Denny Crane.</sup></small>]] 01:45, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
:Yeah I'm going off now too. Cheers, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
::While I think that it's poetic justice to have his personal information on the Web, that's no way to make decisions about what goes in an encyclopedia. The standard you propose above, SqueakBox, seems to me to be higher than the current community consensus standard for such an inclusion. While I disagree with your view that BLP tells us we mustn't have his name in the article, I can see an argument being made about whether it adds to the article. Ordinarily, in an encyclopedia, when the real name of a person who uses an alias is known, it is reported. In this case, what harm is the inclusion doing to someone who has sought and courted media interest and publicity for his project for years? On the other hand, what contribution is the information making to the article? These are primarily, to my mind, editing questions, not questions of BLP. Could [[WP:MC|mediation]], a [[WP:3O|third opinion]], or a [[WP:RFC|request for comment]] help move the article past the impasse? --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 03:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
:::Work took me longer than I thought, now I'm headed to bed. Ssbohio, yes I agree, so long as a fair and random supply of reviewers get brought in. [[User:Swatjester|<span style="color: red">⇒</span>]] [[User_talk:Swatjester|<span style="font-family: Euclid Fraktur"><span style="color: black">SWAT</span><span style="color: goldenrod">Jester</span></span>]] [[WP:CLIMBING|<small><sup>Denny Crane.</sup></small>]] 03:59, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
== Question ==
Why do you have such a huge talk page archive? Wouldn't it be easier to split it up into sections of 20, 25, or 30 headings? — [[User talk:Springeragh|<span style="background:#808;color:#fff;text-decoration:none;"> '''''$PЯING'''''εrαgђ </span>]] 03:28, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
:Nope cos I use a search buttion to search and searching 10 archives ior whatever would be tedious in the extreme. I used to have an enormous talk page but was eventually persuaded to archive it. I have no intention of making more than 1 archive page, we should be designing wikipedia for computyer friendliness and I think the current archive policy, which makes search well nigh impossible, is what needs changing as search buttons like big pages, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:08, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
:I figure that its not fair to make my talk page huge because people use it whereas my archive is only occasionally used so it seems fair enough to me, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:37, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
==AfD nomination of [[Volcano Vaporizer]]==
[[Image:Circle-style-warning.svg|left|48px|]] In view of your many edits to the [[Cannabis (drug)]] article, you may be interested in participating at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/{{{2|Volcano Vaporizer}}}]]. Thank you. -- [[User:Jreferee|<span style="font-family: Kristen ITC; color: #2A52BE">'''Jreferee'''</span>]][[User_talk:Jreferee|<span style="color: #007BA7"> T</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/Jreferee|<span style="color: #007FFF">C</span>]] 16:32, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Penwhale|My RfA]] ==
I owe you a big thank you for supporting me in [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Penwhale|My RfA]], which was successful with 67 supports and 20 opposes. - [[User:Penwhale|Penwhale]] | <sup>[[User_talk:Penwhale|Blast him]] / [[Special:Contributions/Penwhale|Follow his steps]]</sup> 23:56, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
== [[Chris Langham]] ==
Many people have strong feelings about him but this does not mean that we should expose Wikipedia to a possible libel action. Langham, through his lawyer, made a statement stating he was not a paedophile but trying to purge his own demons. Neither the professional assessors who saw him pre-sentence nor the judge who sentenced him expressed the opinion that he was a paedophile.He was convicted of downloading child pornography: this is an offence, whatever the reason behind it (clinical research, curiousity, prurience etc). It is not necessary to spell these things out: people will form (and have formed) their own judgement. --[[User:Roger Davies|<span style="color: maroon">'''R<small>OGER</small> D<small>AVIES</small>'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Roger Davies|''TALK'']]</sup> 18:48, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
:I've posted this to [[Talk:Chris Langham#"Convicted paedophile"]]. If you think a response is appropriate, that's probably the best place for it. --[[User:Roger Davies|<span style="color: maroon">'''R<small>OGER</small> D<small>AVIES</small>'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Roger Davies|''TALK'']]</sup> 18:56, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
==Necesito ayuda con la clase española==
I'm taking my first Spanish class in college and I was wondering if you'd be at all interested in conversing with me, in simple form, to improve my skill? --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 03:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
:Tal vez, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:08, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
:Pero no se comop conversariamos y yo, como los hablan espanol; como nativos, lo hablo bastante rapido a pesar de mi acento gringo, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:38, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
::I think the gist of it is that I won't like it because you speak Spanish fast enough (quickly?), unimpeded by your foreign accent. Am I close? --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 01:38, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
:Yep, and while my accent is not perfect (not a good one to imitate) I am understood by people here where I live. Learnign a foreign language is great, it was the best thing I ever did and utterly transformed my life (I was 35 when I started), [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:14, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
::''Tengo treinta y cinco años, también.'' 96% of the people in Ohio are monolingual. I'm already a homosexual; Once I become bilingual I could be in a fraction of 1% of the population for unusualness. :-) --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 05:41, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
:::If, say, 10% of people are homosexual, and the fraction of homosexuals that are bilingual is the same as that of non-homosexuals, then you'd be in a fraction of 10% of 4% of the population that are both bilingual and homosexual, which is 0,4% of the total population (I think). You would be in a fraction of 1% if, for instance, 25% of the population were homosexuals and the percentage of homosexuals that are bilingual were the same as that of non-homosexuals, or 10% of people were homosexuals, but being bilingual were three times more common among homosexuals than among non-homosexuals (I think). [[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]] 05:56, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
::::On the other hand (and I hope A.Z would agree with me) the great thing about learning another language is the ability to communicate with people you would have been unable to communicate with before. I reckon that the level of homosexuality (open or otherwise) is similar in Latin America to what it is in the English speaking world, with much higher concentrations of openly gay people in less provincial places, that anyway is my experience. Certainly it was speaking Spanish with my wife that really got me to grips with the spoken language (albeit having previously studied it much more on a written level) and having a partner and speaking their foreign language with them is the besty way to learn, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:49, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
:::::English is a special case, because it's currently the ''lingua franca'', so it's very satisfying to learn it and be able to know that you can read all important things that are published, and communicate with a third of the living human beings. Other than that, I enjoy the learning itself, and achieving higher levels of understanding, and realizing that today I can understand something that I couldn't yesterday, and that I watch a movie without reading the subtitles. Of course I also want to learn Spanish, and able to speak it when I travel to other Latin American countries and Spain (I intend to go to these countries one day, but I've never been to them before), but I feel that Spanish will be considerably less exciting than English and other languages, because it's so similar to Portuguese and, frankly, there's not that much to learn besides pronounciation. [[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]] 03:19, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
== <del> Unacceptable edit </del> ==
<del>I see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pro-pedophile_activism&diff=159476218&oldid=159475757 this] as destructive behavior that can affect other editors, Wikipedia, and people that read Wikipedia. I suggest that you refrain from editing pedophilia-related articles. </del>[[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]] 06:58, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
:It isnt acceptable to either claim my attempts at NPOVing a totally disputed article are destructive let alone that, in your opinion, I should desist from editing pedophile related articles. Check the history of the PPA article for some background on the endless socks of banned users that have made the article into such a POV mess but do not tell me what articles you think I can or cannot edit, especially given I am a regular editor and mature adult (what we in English call a grown-up) with substantial experience on the project not some newbie who doesn't know what he is doing. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:11, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
::<del>I believe people don't access Wikipedia's articles interested in your rants. That page shouldn't be protected: you were the one causing trouble and you should be the one blocked, so people who are interested in writing an encyclopedia can edit the page. That you are a regular editor is yet another reason why your edit was so incredibly unacceptable: you certainly had a lot of time to learn how to write a decent article. If after 30,000 edits you weren't able to do it, I feel other editors have no reason to keep trying to teach you while you disrupt Wikipedia like that. Your comments on your alleged maturity, your comment regarding your age, your comment on experience on the project, and you teling me that I don't know what I'm doing and that I'm a newbie all back up my feeling that you should be banned. It's people like you that make Wikipedia not so great. The next time you add something like that to an article, I will ask an administrator to block you. </del> [[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]] 21:40, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
:You are just demonstrating your bad faith and if continuie like this you are likely to be the one to be blocked. Admins do not block people for disagreeing with you and given you havent made a single constructive point I assume your comments to be pure trolling from a user who appears not to understand good faith. I'l,l be keeping a good eye on your edits from now on, now please leave my talk page in peace. I certainlyu did not say you were a newbie and have already checked out your edit count etc.. To accuse me of causing the page lock is plain silly, check the 3rr page and the admins comments for an understanding of why the page was actuially locked, but then empty acusations filled with seething anger apear to be your speciality. Any further atempts to write top me here on this subject will be treated as hostile as you have shown a serious lack of good faith. if you wish to edit the pedophile article like anyone else you are welcome to do so, if you just want to block users who disagree with you you are in the wrong place, while if you think you can iontimidate me with your bad faith rant you have chosen the wrong person to troll, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:56, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
::I'll preface this by saying that some of my differences with SqueakBox run so deep that a week's work with a shovel wouldn't fully unearth them, but, in other areas, he & I are on the same page. So, take this for what it's worth:
::SqueakBox edits the lede to begin ''Pro-pedophile activism or Pro-paedophile activism (Commonwealth usage) encompasses pro-pedophile organizations and activists that argue for certain changes of criminal laws and cultural response in order to allow pedophiles to abuse children. The obverse movement is anti-pedophile activism, which aims to protect children from predatory pedophiles.'' Much as I sympathize with his sentiments, such emotionally-charged terminology is sure to generate more heat than light. It doesn't sound like a neutral approach to the subject (and the subject doesn't sound neutral to begin with, but that's a separate matter).
::Instead, try this on for size: ''Pro-pedophile activism or Pro-paedophile activism (Commonwealth usage) encompasses pro-pedophile organizations and activists that argue for certain changes of criminal laws and cultural response in order to remove barriers to what they see as sexual freedom and youth liberation but what the vast majority define as [[child sexual abuse]]. The counter-movement is [[anti-pedophile activism]], which acts to further what it sees as protecting children from predatory pedophiles, but what pedophile groups have viewed as harassment, intimidation, and entrapment.''
::Is that language less strident regarding pedophiles? Of course. Is that a problem? I think not. The vast majority of us already know that in Western culture, an adult having sex with a child is a form of abuse, without needing to be told. Sometimes it's better to neutralize the emotional appeal in the language when it's clear that the message has already come through loud and clear. No one is going to read the second version of the lede and suddenly reverse their thinking about pedophilia. The same change of tone can be applied to the rest of the edits, as well. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 02:09, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
:::Ssbohio, I do not see how an adult having sex with a child is necessarily a form of abuse. I realize that people can abuse children, and adults, and old people, and I find any form of sexual abuse repulsive, including that of children, but children certainly don't dislike all things sexual, and they could, I think, find someone older than them to be sexually attractive.
::::Let's be clear: It's not the age of the child that matters -- don't jump to conclusions yet -- it's the ability to give informed consent that matters. If you slept with a 35-year-old (my own age) who was inacpable of informed consent, either through illness, developmental delay, or intoxication, my response to you would be the same. It's wrong, objectively, because it imposes your wishes on someone incapable of consenting. A child (and I'll speak strictly of children, leaving edge cases like teenagers aside) isn't in a position to grant or withhold consent for much of anything. Could there, somewhere, at some time, have been a consensual relationship between an adult and a child? Given a large enough sample set, every outcome is represented, even that. So, in strict language, it isn't a necessity that it be abuse. The thing to understand is that society regulates itself not on the basis of [[outlier]]s but on the basis of the median. By analogy, simply because one or two may be able to drive safely at 100 mi/hr, that doesn't in itself argue in favor of repealing the speed limit. We have to legislate in away that protects the vast majority in the middle, even if it restricts the liberties one might otherwise take, especially with a child. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 21:05, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
:::::I can see that, and I think I agree with you. Do you have an opinion on which way would be the best to legislate, I mean, which legal age of consent for having sex would be the best in order to protect the vast majority without restricting more liberties than necessary?
:::::I also have another question: don't parents always do things to children without their consent, as in making them do things that they didn't decide to do, such as taking classes that they don't wish to take, going to places where they wouldn't want to go, spending time with people they don't like, eating things they don't like? What I mean is: why is having sex with a small child, in order to obtain sexual pleasure for yourself, without their full consent (that they can't give because they don't have the cognitive skills needed to make such a decision), more abusive than teaching the child your own religion without them having consented, than making the child wear clothes that they didn't choose to wear, than taking the child to a school they may not like to go, so you are happy and you feel pleasure because they will learn your religion, look good to you, and go to a school that you like, etc? Many adults may not like you to hug them, but people hug small children even though they didn't agree with that (because they are incapable of deciding whether they want to do that or not), and they do it so they and the child feel pleasure. What is different with sex? [[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]] 03:38, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
:::SqueakBox, I think I was too disturbed by your edit, and it made me see you as an evil person that should be banned from here. I made up my mind, and every time I thought of trying to converse with you, I remembered of your edit and I thought that the kind of people that inserts without any sources, nor consensus, their own personal opinion, and an attack, in the introduction of an article, being an experienced user, was someone with whom there was nothing else to be talked. Being capable of writing "falling in the hands of pedophiles" after 33,000 edits made me think you were a lost case. You were, to me, using Wikipedia as your soapbox, and I was sorry that other editors had to deal with what I thought was such an obvious disruption from an established editor that had years to learn that what he was doing is wrong. I am not sure now whether I was right about you being evil. I am sorry for the way I acted, and I hope you forgive me for accusing you of being destructive, and suggesting your block, without even hearing what you had to say about the matter first. [[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]] 02:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
::::Well thasnks for that. Of course I am not evil, well all humans contain good and evil to some degree but I am a law-abiding guy trying to generate some money in this poor Caribbean Latino city in which I live and integrating into the local culture, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:59, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
:Ssbohio, I appreciate the suggestion. Here's my two cents on the matter:
:The majority of users working on editing the article have actually agreed on the version of the introduction that exists now. You might want to offer your input on the current version of the intro, which reads, in part: <i>Pro-pedophile activism or Pro-paedophile activism (Commonwealth usage) encompasses pro-pedophile organizations and activists that argue for certain changes of criminal laws and cultural response associated with pedophiles and adult-minor sexual relations.... Some pro-pedophile activists advocate social acceptance of adult sexual attraction to minors and legalization of adult-minor sexual activity, which is currently defined as child sexual abuse. The movement stands in contrast to anti-pedophile activism, which aims to uphold and apply more rigorously current laws.</i>
:I think this version does a good job of briefly laying out the subject of the article while remaining neutral. I think it's best to save a more detailed description of the views for later in the article, where they can be explained better. I think if we try to go into too much detail in describing the views of both sides, as it were, in the introduction, we risk distorting and oversimplifying them (for instance, it's not only pedophile groups that consider some aspects of anti-pedophile activism to be entrapment).
:Let me know if you think the current version of the introduction is a good solution. [[User:Mike D78|Mike D78]] 04:11, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
:::Here's my view, Mike: The language above is objectively neutral. However, this isn't a situation where the median point is at the center of the spectrum. Far more people believe that adult-child sex is harmful and represents a danger to children than believe that it is an acceptable practice. In order to avoid giving [[WP:UNDUE|undue]] weight to a minority view, the lead has to more closely reflect the more-widely accepted view. I don't think the version above necessarily does that as well as other language could. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 21:05, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
::::Do you not feel that the clause "which is currently defined as [[child sexual abuse]]" reflects the widely-accepted view? [[User:Mike D78|Mike D78]] 23:06, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
::No I am not happy with the current version and intend to re-edit it freshly when it gets unlocked. I will, though, make sure I reference new material I add. There is clearly not a consensus re the opening, that is why the article is tagged as totally disputed and if we exclude the indefinitely banned users I see very little consensus. I think the opening is critical and needs to have some fundamental criticisms of the movement. Certainly the kind of people who wrote Megan's law and tried to pass Sarah's law in the UK would not be happy with the PPA view bnecoming law, and that is to say the very least of it, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:59, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
:::That was directed at Ssbohio, not you, Squeak. You've already shown that you don't intend to cooperate with the majority of users editing this article.
:::And don't think that referencing some news article that states popular opinion about pedophiles is going to justify any introduction that is worded similarly to the one you tried to force into the article previously.
:::I would suggest you post your proposed introduction on the talk page of the article so other users can collaborate with you on it, rather than unilaterally deciding how the introduction should read.
:::<i>"There is clearly not a consensus re the opening"</i>
:::What are you talking about? Most users have clearly stated a preference for the introduction as it reads now. [[User:Mike D78|Mike D78]] 22:48, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
:Err, this is my user page so its a good idea to expect me to repsond what you have to say here. You simply are not going to get your way, ie keeping the article POV from a PPA perspectiove and your threats make that no more of a likelihood. The article is totally disputed and when the edit button re-appears I dont believe I need to get your permission to use it. You can state till you are blue in the face that most users support your beloeved version but once we remove the banned users from the equation there is no consensus of any sort and this sounds tome like a POV pushing tactic on your behalf. I am committed to an NPOV article and most importantly an NPOV opening so that we can remove the totally disputed tag. You only seem interested in pedophilia articles from your contribs which makes you an SPA and POV pushing SPAs are not popular on wikipedia for obvious reasons. Users like me, A.Z, Homologeo and Ssbohio are not SPAs and therefore are far more worthy of respect because we care about the project overall and not just our little agendas within it, and you would do well to keep that in mind. We have been around the block several times with this. As they say round here "Basta ya", [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:28, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
::''"You simply are not going to get your way, ie keeping the article POV from a PPA perspectiove"''
::I never suggested this was my goal, nor do I believe the article has the shortcomings you claim it does. FightingForJustice has stated that he thinks the article is for the most part fine as it is now; I hardly think he's a pedophile apologist.
::''"your threats make that no more of a likelihood."''
::What threats have I made?
::''"when the edit button re-appears I dont believe I need to get your permission to use it."''
::Quit distorting things; many users have disagreed with your edits, not just me. You obviously don't need persmission from anyone to make any particular edit, but you ''do'' need consensus if you wish for your edits to stand.
::''"once we remove the banned users from the equation there is no consensus of any sort"''
::Haven't the banned users already been dealt with? And yet a majority of users still dispute many of your edits, because they are bad, inappropriate edits to any objective user.
::''"You only seem interested in pedophilia articles from your contribs"''
::I have a limited amount of time to devote to Wikipedia, and unfortunately, a large amount of it has been devoted to defending myself against your accusations.
::''"Users like me, A.Z, Homologeo and Ssbohio are not SPAs"''
::So why have you repeatedly simply dismissed their concerns with your edits?
::''"therefore are far more worthy of respect because we care about the project overall and not just our little agendas within it, and you would do well to keep that in mind. We have been around the block several times with this."''
::Indeed we have, but you seem to have learned little, as you repeatedly arrogantly suggest that the fact that you have edited here longer means that you can disregard what I and others have to say. That is simply not the case. [[User:Mike D78|Mike D78]] 20:44, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
A.Z. I hope you did not seriously mean that you cannot see how an adult having sex with a child is a form of abuse, considering it is a felony crime in the United States. [[User:Swatjester|<span style="color: red">⇒</span>]] [[User_talk:Swatjester|<span style="font-family: Euclid Fraktur"><span style="color: black">SWAT</span><span style="color: goldenrod">Jester</span></span>]] [[WP:CLIMBING|<small><sup>Denny Crane.</sup></small>]] <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|signed but undated]] comment was added at 04:31, 25 September 2007 (UTC)</small><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:It is also a serious crime in the UK and in Honduras where the penalties are very stiff. I imagine it is no different in Brazil, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:01, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
::I'm the last one to carry the banner for pedophilia, especially considering my personal history, but I do have to point out the logical issue here. It's a case of cause & effect. Sex with children/adolescents is illegal because it's wrong, not the other way around. Its illegality is caused by its being inherently wrong, so the illegality can't be used as evidence that it's wrong. If the pedophiles had their wish fulfilled and all [[age of consent]] laws were abolished, pedophilia wouldn't become right, because it's inherent flaws are unchanged: there is no informed consent, so the act itself can never be ethical. The reasoned debate comes in the "[[edge case]]s." In Ohio (my home state - [[Ohio State University|Go Bucks!]]), the age of consent for male-male sex used to be 21. Even so, that doesn't make someone who wants to have sex with a 20-year-old into a child molester. That's what I mean by an edge case. Just like it wouldn't be unethical (in my opinion) to be intimate with that 20-year-old, by the same logic, it would be unethical for me to be intimate with someone younger, even if the age of consent were lowered or abolished. Legal & illegal intersect with right & wrong, but they're not the same thing. It may be too late in the night for it, but I hope I'm making sense... --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 05:22, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Bucks? What is that referring to? There is a US case of a 17 year old boy serving 10 years for having had a 15 year girl give him oral sex. That is an edge case and totally ridiculous but if someone your or my age were in his position, Ssbohio, IMO, the full weight of the law should be applied, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:24, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
::::Bucks are [[The Ohio State University]] [[Buckeye]]s, particularly the familiar name for the University's [[American football]] team. As far as your contention, I generally agree -- 15 is awfully young to my 35-year-old eyes. However, in terms of the [[bell curve]] and [[normal distribution]] of population, a more than trivial number of 15-year-olds may be capable of informed consent. In Ohio, 16 is the [[age of consent]], so 15 isn't far-fetched. In other states, the age of consent is 18, and in yet others, 14. Other nations have even wider age of consent variations. While I still think it's a particulrly horrid idea, I don't necessarily see it as rising to the level of illegality. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 21:05, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
:::::Its just I grew up in the original Bucks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:18, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
:::You make a lot of sense. [[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]] 05:26, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
::It's an interesting discussion, Ssbohio, but these talk pages are typically for discussing improvement of articles rather than the subjects of the articles themselves, so I'll refrain from adding my $0.02 and taking this further off topic.
::What is your opinion of the introduction of the article as it currently stands? [[User:Mike D78|Mike D78]] 14:37, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
:::Actually Mike this is my talk page and the comments of Ssbohio are entirely appropriate, we dont have to keep strictly on the topic of an article here, just on the topic of wikipedia as a whole, which we are doing so please don't maske such comments on my talk page discouraging discussion or trying to guide discussion in any way. My opinion is that the opening is totally disputed and needs changing, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:24, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
::::Um, this discussion clearly is not "on the topic of wikipedia as a whole."
::::Regardless, it's been deemed in the past that these kinds of discussions are disruptive and that arguing a particular viewpoint is enough to get one banned from Wikipedia. So a fair discussion on this topic is obviously impossible, and at any rate, discussion of actual strategies to improve articles is obviously far more productive.
::::Finally, my question was aimed at Ssbohio, not you. As long as you continue such conduct as forcing major edits on articles without consensus, then edit warring when several other users challenge your edits, your opinion on this matter will mean little to me. You need to learn to play by the rules.
::::''"My opinion is that the opening is totally disputed"''
::::This opinion simply has no basis in fact. I can show you edits where several other users have supported the intro as it stands now, and edits where at least six users have disagreed with the version of it you kept edit warring to restore. I see almost no support for your stance. [[User:Mike D78|Mike D78]] 19:07, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
:::::Mike, wide latitude has traditionally been given to comments in ''Userspace,'' as opposed to article talk pages. A discussion of issues surrounding pedophilia would generally, in my undeerstanding, be ok on this page, but not, for example, on [[Talk:Child sexual abuse]]. Or at least, that's how I see it. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 21:05, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Mike, if you want to ask Ssbohio questions do so on his talk page, not mine which is not a general discussion page but my talk page for discussing things releeavnt to me. Your comment "Regardless, it's been deemed in the past that these kinds of discussions are disruptive and that arguing a particular viewpoint is enough to get one banned from Wikipedia" seems like troling to me and I would ask you to be civil on my talk page if yopu want to remain welcome here, nobody is going to get blocked for the discussion we are haviung and your continually trying to threaten to block people is the only disruptive thing hapening on this page right now. You have absolutley no authority to see anyone blocked on wikipedia and the louder you shout about your precious, albeit totally6 disputed, version the l;ess likely you are to see it stay, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:13, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
:''"Mike, if you want to ask Ssbohio questions do so on his talk page, not mine which is not a general discussion page but my talk page for discussing things releeavnt to me."''
:The issue of the introduction is obviously relevant to you and asking a user a question related to a Wikipedia-related topic already under discussion here is entirely appropriate. I wish you would quit wasting my time with such petty nonsense; you're so obsessed with making dubious accusations of trolling and inappropriate conduct against me and others that's it's no wonder so little is ever accomplished with you in editing these articles. All you are doing is playing the system, making petty accusations against users you disagree with rather than actively seeking consensus with them as you should.
:''"nobody is going to get blocked for the discussion we are haviung and your continually trying to threaten to block people is the only disruptive thing hapening on this page right now."''
:Either you've misunderstood my comments or you're diliberately distorting them. I never threatened that anyone would be blocked. What I said was that arguing a particular point of view on this subject is frowned upon, to the extent that users have been banned in the past for arguing points of view that were deemed to be "harmful to Wikipedia's reputation." So a fair discussion is obviously impossible. Nowhere did I try to discourage anyone else from offering their opinions here; I just gave my reason for not entering into the discussion, and instead tried to steer things back to the original subject at hand, which has yet to be resolved.
:''"the louder you shout about your precious, albeit totally6 disputed, version the l;ess likely you are to see it stay"''
:This seems like a far more malicious comment than anything I have said here. I've already offered to show you evidence that a majority of users support the introduction as it stands now; do you intend to provide any evidence that the intro is "totally disputed," as you claim? If not, I would again ask that you quit wasting my time with such petty discussion, as I'm sure we both have better things to do. [[User:Mike D78|Mike D78]] 19:50, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
::If you wish not to waste your time then I suggest you do not post here to my talk page again, but in all honesty I think you are wasting your own time and then blaming me for it. I am happy for you to ask Ssbohio questions here but unhappy when you get narked at me for answering any question on my talk page. You are certainly right that self-identifying paedophiles get blocked but I am unaware that people supporting a pro-paed line get blocked, indeed I am certain that is not the case, wikipedia tends to stamp down much harder on [[LaRouche Movement|La Rouche]] supporters who can self-identify but cannot actively use wikipedia articles to promote the La Rouche cause, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:58, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
:::''"in all honesty I think you are wasting your own time and then blaming me for it"''
:::I'm not supposed to defend myself when you accuse me of trolling, being a sockpuppet, etc., etc.?
:::''"I am happy for you to ask Ssbohio questions here but unhappy when you get narked at me for answering any question on my talk page."''
:::Well, I think you've already made your opinion about the current introduction clear, and I wanted to get Ssbohio's input on it, since he was posting about the subject here.[[User:Mike D78|Mike D78]] 20:14, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
::::No problem, and you are certainly welcome to continue commenting on this page and I respect your defending your viewpoint, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:41, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
== rasta reverts ==
Excuse me, but what are you doing to all of my edits regarding {{tl|rasta-stub}}? It was decided [[Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion#.7B.7Brasta-stub.7D.7D_.2F_Cat:Rastafari_stubs|here]] that rasta-stub would be deleted, so I am removing it from the articles. Please stop reverting me. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Amalas|Amalas]] ([[User talk:Amalas|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Amalas|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
:Ahh I did not know that. I checked that the stub had not not been deleted by checking the previous version and didnt have a clue as to why you were removing the stub. It seems that it has been deleted because that is what Grutness wanted as nobody else expressed an opinion. I unfortunately missed the debate and very strongly oppose the deletion so will take it to DRV. I stronlgy suggest that in the future you delete the stub first instead of assuming people know what you were doing. This has been handled incredibly badly, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
::(edit conflict)I am sorry that you missed the debate. However, I'm pretty sure the deletion is going to stand. I know that there were 58 or so articles (which is close to 60), but many of them had very little to do with [[Rastafarianism]] as a religion. Most of the articles were about bands or musicians who just happened to be a Rastafari. (Also, apologies if I'm using the terms incorrectly. I'm fairly ignorant of the terminology) Note that we don't put {{tl|Christianity-stub}} on every article of someone who happens to be a Christian. If you can come up with 60 ''existing'' articles that are related to Rastafarianism as a religion, then you might get it reinstated. Sorry to step on your toes. Have a great day and happy editing. [[User:Amalas|<b style="color:maroon;">~ Amalas</b>]] [[User talk:Amalas|<span style="color:navy;">rawr</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Amalas|<sup style="color:navy;">=^_^=</sup>]] 21:19, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
::(edit conflict) I did not delete the template first because I do not like leaving red links on articles. A lot of times, I can't go through and remove all the templates right away, so the red link would end up sitting there. Sorry for that confusion. [[User:Amalas|<b style="color:maroon;">~ Amalas</b>]] [[User talk:Amalas|<span style="color:navy;">rawr</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Amalas|<sup style="color:navy;">=^_^=</sup>]] 21:19, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
The problem I have is that this was discussed without resolution months ago and while I kept an eye on the category for weeks I then assumed the decision to try for deletion had been abandoned. Grutness is not consensus and he knew vvery well my opposition to the stub being deleted, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:23, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
:The discussion had been closed for a long time. I closed it on the 20th ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion/Log/2007/September/12&diff=prev&oldid=159173719 diff]) so why didn't you say something then? Grutness was the only one who voiced an opinion, so 1 vote of delete is still more than any other votes. [[User:Amalas|<b style="color:maroon;">~ Amalas</b>]] [[User talk:Amalas|<span style="color:navy;">rawr</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Amalas|<sup style="color:navy;">=^_^=</sup>]] 22:36, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
::If i had known it was up for fd I would have commented and had been watching for this for weeks after the discussion. The first I knew that someone had decided to fd was when I saw you removing the stubs. I have DRV'd it with my reasons, I should have informed you of that as I now see you are the closing admin, I have a large watchlist and the cat just got missed by me, much to my frustration as I expressed a number of reasons in the initial debate as to why this cat should not be deleted, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
:::Typically, we only inform a template's creator when something goes up for SFD. I did noticed the DRV and I have already added some things to the discussion. [[User:Amalas|<b style="color:maroon;">~ Amalas</b>]] [[User talk:Amalas|<span style="color:navy;">rawr</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Amalas|<sup style="color:navy;">=^_^=</sup>]] 22:54, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
::Actually it was now retired Codex Sinaiticus who created the stub, not me, and asked me to opine when the stub was first debated on a page whose name I forgewt where dodgy stubs are debated. My frustration is that we had that debate and I was expecting the stub to be fd'd but then it never was and I assumed because my arguments as to why to keep it were accepted, and thus for it to suddenly be fd'd months later and then deleted with no debate when it was known that there were counter arguments that should have been considered. Unlike most stubs on the page where it was first flagged this one was strongly disputed and it seems to me that these concerns were known about (certainly by Grutness) and yet not brought to the fd debate, and I had no idea it was up for debate. So I am unhappy about the deletion, believe if I had had my say it would not have been deleted due to lack of consensus and that this is what should have happened. It feels like the arguments I made in the first palce were disregarded and thus pointless and if Grutness had tried to go for an fd when this stub came up for discussion (as he should have done) then the deletion would have failed. So Im ma defionitely unhappy about the turn of events, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
== Three revert rule block ==
<div style="padding:5px; border:1px solid #c0c090; background-color:#FEC;" class="user-block"> [[Image:Stop x nuvola with clock.svg|40px|left]] You have been '''[[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]]''' from editing for {{{{{subst|}}}#if:48 hours|a period of '''48 hours'''|a short time}} in accordance with [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|Wikipedia's blocking policy]] for violating the [[WP:3RR|three-revert rule]] {{{{{subst|}}}#if:Pro-pedophile activism|at [[:Pro-pedophile activism]]}}. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek [[WP:DR|dispute resolution]] rather than engaging in an [[WP:EW|edit war]]. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may [[Wikipedia:Appealing a block|contest the block]] by adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "nowiki" tags. --><nowiki>{{</nowiki>unblock|''your reason here''<nowiki>}}</nowiki><!-- Do not include the "nowiki" tags. --> below. {{{{{subst|}}}#if:{[[Image:Information.svg|25px|link=]] Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to [[Wikipedia:Talk page|talk pages]] and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should [[Wikipedia:Signatures|sign your posts]] by typing four [[tilde]]s ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button [[File:Insert-signature.png|link=Wikipedia:How to sign your posts]] or [[File:Signature icon.png|link=Wikipedia:How to sign your posts]] located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. <!-- {{sig|}} -->}|[[User:Sam Blacketer|Sam Blacketer]] 10:25, 27 September 2007 (UTC)}}</div><!-- Template:uw-3block --> [[User:Sam Blacketer|Sam Blacketer]] 10:25, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
:Squeak, as part of the [[loyal opposition]], I have to say that I have felt your frustration. I understand why you did what you did & I might have done the same, but doing it is still a problem. Looking at [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pro-pedophile_activism&diff=160586912&oldid=160565773 this 2-hour span of time], you apparently reverted edits 4 times. Even though the [[WP:3RR|3-revert rule]] isn't a hard and fast kind of thing, you went pretty much over the top in exceeding it. You and I both occassionally need to [[meatball:DefendAgainstPassion|defend against our own passions]] when it comes to this topic area, as do others, since issues like this one [[WP:TIGER|are seen as an urgent problem]].
:From one perspective, you let the rightness of your cause get away from you. From another, you let yourself be [[stampede]]d [[lemming|over the cliff]] by the actions of others. For me, when the tension I feel from [[Justin Berry|my most-edited article]] or any other part of the project gets to be too much, I go over to my watchlist or to [[WP:RCPATROL|recent changes]] and do some ordinary housekeeping work. I add [[WP:STUB|stub-tags]], I [[WP:COPYEDIT|copyedit]], I fix issues with the wiki markup in tables and infoboxes. In short, I do anything other than work on the article that's stressing me out, until the stress has passed. I'm not always successful, but I know I have to distance myself from the issue with such [[busywork]]. This is just my perspective, and I hope it's taken in the spirit in which it's offered.
:'''To reviewing admin(s)''': this is a good, passionate editor. While I see the rationale for the block, if there is an option to shorten or lift it, I would support such a decision. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 16:09, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
::I agree with Ssbohio. There have apparently been many banned users working on this site and I would suggest that this is a set-up job involving the anonymous 82.45. Look at this comment http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3APro-pedophile_activism&diff=160720203&oldid=160661999. This looks like a very dodgy statement to me and by blocking Squeak wikipedia are actively taking the side of the paedophiles, and not for the first time.[[User:Pol64|Pol64]] 16:58, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
:::I have made a check user request against 82.45 here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/User:82.45.15.121. If he is the sockpuppet of an already banned user as appears to be the case you would have been completely justified in reverting him from what I understand of the rules here. He certainly should not have been reporting you either if he is in fact already banned. I will let you know how the case goes as if the check user comes out positive you could probably argue to be unblocked on that basis. Thanks for the welcome message which contained many useful links to pages about wikipedia policy. I have been reading up and also on the whole drama that has been taking place here with the paedophile articles. Very interesting.[[User:Pol64|Pol64]] 18:16, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
I have unblocked SqueakBox per evidence that convinces me that [[User:Mike D78]] is the sockpuppet of a banned user. Reverting edits by banned users is an exception to 3RR. This is not meant to be any criticism of the original block, but I do not think it needs to stand given the conclusions of investigation into the user he was reverting. <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|scribe]]</span> 18:28, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks. I wont edit anything related to pedophile articles or their talk pages until the block would have ended as a sign of good faith, I wasnt going to contest the ban because I was wrong to edit war, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:38, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
===[[User:82.45.15.121]]===
Just to let you know - I also looked into this editor. I am informed they are unrelated to [[User:Mike D78]]. <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|scribe]]</span> 19:54, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks, though obviously there could be other explanations such as soembody on holiday or starting college in a new city but I have always said that check user is better at proving guilt than innocence. Cheers, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:19, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
== Thanks ==
Just wanted to thank you for helping to defend against the IMHO flawed proposed changed of Myanmar to Burma. I'm retiring from that 'discussion' because of the time it's taking and I'm also finding it somewhat depressing reading some of the comments. I largely agree with you that ultimately the official name is what matters although as I've also pointed out, the idea that Burma is the most common usage also seems flawed. [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] 18:02, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
:Indeed. And while I am certainly not unsympathetic to the protestors cause I dont push my political opinions here at wikipedia. I agree it is a very depressing thread, and I think the real point is that as the official name Myanmar is inevitably the common usage term too. The oposing arguments would be like the Spanish wioikipedia calling the UK England because the majority of Spanish speakers think the country is called England (in my experience), [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:11, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
== Actually... ==
I've been keeping an eye on all this drama, and adding a tag is still ''not'' harassment, just as adding a notice that you're being accused of sockpuppetry is ''not'' harassment. Honestly, would you rather ''not'' know that there was a sockpuppetry case opened about you, regardless of how many others were opened? Also, please do not attempt to tell me what to do, when I am in no way breaching any policy. Thanks, [[User: Lychosis|<b><span style="color: blue">Lychosis</span></b>]] [[User_Talk:Lychosis|<span style="color: #000000"><sup><small>'''T'''</small></sup></span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/Lychosis|<span style="color: black"><small>'''C'''</small></span>]] 19:45, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
:What is harrassment is making a new clainm when the old one isn't closed yet, and as Dyklops has done that he is harrassing me, especially as it is the 3rd identical allegation in one week. Anyway a fat it will do Pol64 top know as he can't edit, being blocked. This is a violation of my privacy givent he request has been declined twice, so please do not collude in that harrassment, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
::I believe it would have been started as the last one, started by the IP, had been rejected, if I'm not mistaken. Something about it having turned into a debate. Now, how is this a violation of your privacy? Sorry, if I'm missing something, but that just doesn't make '''any''' sense. Thanks, [[User: Lychosis|<b><span style="color: blue">Lychosis</span></b>]] [[User_Talk:Lychosis|<span style="color: #000000"><sup><small>'''T'''</small></sup></span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/Lychosis|<span style="color: black"><small>'''C'''</small></span>]] 19:56, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
BLP and a knowingly false accusation, I have the right to privacy and given this case has been declined trying to link me to som ex-copper in London and a UK IP address is absolutely a violation of my privacy. Editors have the right to edit here without harrasssment and Dyklos is using this toi harrass me. One supicion fine, two looks like trolling and 3 (as Dyklos appears to be the IP) is clear harrassment. Our policies protect our editors and just because an admins have blocked all Dyklos' friends is not a justification for him trolling me, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:11, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
:How do you figure that they're the IP? Could you point me towards some evidence regarding that? Just kinda curious as to how you're drawing that conclusion. Thanks, [[User: Lychosis|<b><span style="color: blue">Lychosis</span></b>]] [[User_Talk:Lychosis|<span style="color: #000000"><sup><small>'''T'''</small></sup></span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/Lychosis|<span style="color: black"><small>'''C'''</small></span>]] 20:13, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
::No I cant and I have not made any proper accusation but read the case and I am sure you can figure it out for yourself, this isnt a case for Sherlock Holmes but one of simple harassment of an innocent user, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:17, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
:::I've read the case, and I don't see the resemblance between the IP and [[User:Dyskolos]]. Also, I don't understand why you wouldn't just let this blow over. Let them look into it. If you're not using sockpuppets, your name is cleared. Isn't that less complicated than continuing with the drama that's already started? Thanks, [[User: Lychosis|<b><span style="color: blue">Lychosis</span></b>]] [[User_Talk:Lychosis|<span style="color: #000000"><sup><small>'''T'''</small></sup></span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/Lychosis|<span style="color: black"><small>'''C'''</small></span>]] 20:24, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
::::It's already ben looked into twice and this user is, IMO, both a banned user and probably this IP for ther reasons I gave on the page. Check user has been done, certainly re POL64, and there is nothing else to do. I edit from Latin America and always have done, if Dyklos wants to request anopther checkuser opn me he can but this kind of trolling cannot continue on and I have had plenty of it befopre from now banned PPA supporting editors which in itself is aenough evidence that Dyklos is a banned user and therefore all his edits can be subject to revert according to our policies, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:31, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
:::::Let me see if I read this right. What I got out of that was, "People have trolled me before, and that is evidence that Dyskolos is a banned user, and also a troll." Did I read that paragraph wrong? Thanks, [[User: Lychosis|<b><span style="color: blue">Lychosis</span></b>]] [[User_Talk:Lychosis|<span style="color: #000000"><sup><small>'''T'''</small></sup></span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/Lychosis|<span style="color: black"><small>'''C'''</small></span>]] 20:34, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
::::::If you want to read the whole case be my guest but I am not willing to explain anything more to you. Seen how many socks have been blocked re this issue, Farenhorst, Voice of Britain, Jim Burton, Mike D78, Samantha Pignez to name a few so i have every right to make assumptions after all the endless bullshit from these troll users and please dont come here and challenege me on this agin. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:37, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
==Major new update to the Bailey Biography==
I've posted a major update to the biography. It contains new sections and a reorganizing of headings and subheadings in way that more closely approximates AAB's life and work. It is throughly referenced and with some new references throughout, together with quotes and paraphrases that closely matches the citations. It includes many new details and documentation on her life and conflict with the Theosophical. Kind Regards to all. [[User:Jamesd1|James]] 16:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
===Bailey article about to be gutted===
They've now come up with a reinterpretation of Wiki rules to support the hypothesis that AAB can not be cited at all. Imagine that... [[User:Jamesd1|James]] 21:30, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
== To adress the talk page of the Pinochet article, among others ==
[[Talk:Augusto Pinochet|Why do you want to have the Pinochet page totally free from criticism of the man?]]
You call anyone that tries to remind people of all the crimes of Pinochet, and you refer to them as "Leftist POV-Pushers", among others (slightly hypocritically, I might add, seeing as you yourself gave a wish to have more "Pro Pinochet POV" in the article, rather than have it written from a Neutral Point of View).
My point is, SqueakBox, you can't just omit uncomfortable facts about the man because you think they may damage his reputation as a hero that "Brought democracy to Chile and "saved" it from Communism". There are two sides to every story, nothing is ever as black and white as it seems, etc. etc.
The talk page for [[Talk:Margaret Thatcher|Margaret Thatcher]], and others is the same story.
So come on, let others get their argument in as well. [[User:172.141.167.35|172.141.167.35]] 18:05, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
:Err I am anything but pro Pinochet but I believe we are here to write an encyclopedia not to push our political views, and I removed the dicrtatorship bit again but I did not write the article. Margaret Thatcher is another matter, great lady but I still edit her article following NPOV, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:10, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, yes, but I may remind you that "Pro Pinochet POV" and "Left wing POV pushers" were direct quotes, not an exaggeration on my behalf. Check it for yourself if you're still in doubt. Anyway, you're quite happy to omit uncomfortable facts about the man, so how are you "Anything but pro-Pinochet"? [[User:172.141.167.35|172.141.167.35]] 18:13, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
:Because I am trying to write an encyclopedia and we don't just do down people we dislike on wikipedia. Besides he was the legiotimate ruler of the country for 15 or so years and I am agreat respecter of legitimate governements in my editing here, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
No, we don't down people we dislike, but whether we dislike them or not, you can't just pretend that certain things didn't happen in order to create an incredibly positive view of them in the wake of all the arguments in the case "against"! Wether or not, as well, that they were legitimate doesn't mean he never did anything wrong.[[User:172.141.167.35|172.141.167.35]] 18:21, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
:Oh I certainly don't think he did nothing wrong, it was very sad that he actualised a coup against the Americas first democratically elected socialist, though it is true that I am not a socialist. We should treat Pinochet with the same impartiality as we do Castro, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:30, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
I (partly!) understand your point. However, the [[Fidel Castro]] article is better that way, because it clearly states that he has evoked both "praise ''and'' condemnation", not just "praise" or "condemnation". If anything, the Pinochet article only teeters in the line of "praise". (i.e, the actual amount of people tortured and brutally murdered under Pinochet is very rarely mentioned, as if it was unimportant, and that notion is utterly bonkers). Also, you view [[Margaret Thatcher|Thatcher]] as a "great lady". I don't mind that and am quite open to the political views of others. However, my problem with THAT article is that it rarely mentions her relationship with Pinochet, as if (AGAIN!) it was unimportant, and that notion too is totally bizzare. It was a major news story for...I don't know how long. My point is, imagining I got a transcript of her interview on ITN (where she explained her point of view of why Pinochet should get away with being evil and murdering/torturing anyone who's opinion differs from his), and put it on the page, explaining in great detail. Would it stay? Fat chance. Only because some people want to delete anything that hints that she would not be a "great defender of Liberty and Freedom!" I too disliked Pinochet's attitude to democracy (his idea of democracy is torturing and killing people, not allowing freedom of speech, but then going backwards in his views and allowing freedom of speach and other personal liberties, thereby confusing and scaring the hell out of his people into not wanting to speak out against him anyway!), and believe that [[Salvador Allende]] was much better for Chile than him. We need to get both sides of the argument (on all articles mentioned), or the arguments "for" and "against" will last forever on the talk pages. [[User:172.141.167.35|172.141.167.35]] 20:08, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
== [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mzoli%27s&diff=161663868&oldid=161661936 Mzoli Article] ==
I consider the line ''"poor black neighbo(u)rhood"'' to be extremely racist. By including ''"poor"'' it stereotypes all blacks as poor. <b><span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica"><span style="color: steelblue">CO</span><sub>[[user_talk:CO|<span style="color: steelblue">2</span>]]</sub></span></b> 22:44, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
:I dont believe it does, if you check my user page you will see what I think of rascism but for me it is an adequate description. I would more tend to the theory that those who were trying to delete the article did so because it is about a poor, black neighbourhood and they don't believe that can be notable, shame on them. Cheers, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:49, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
::There are poor neighbourhoods for every race. There are a number of communities that are all-black, or all-white, etc. That's reality. There's nothing racist about that. <span style="background:#E0FFFF;color:#007FFF;font-family:Georgia;">[[User:Nishkid64|Nishkid64]] ([[User talk:Nishkid64|talk]])</span> 23:53, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
== re: List of banned users → Wikipedia:List of banned users ==
Deletion of that redirect may be appropriate but speedy-deletion clearly was not. The page history shows that the page has existed without controversy for over two years. It did not fit any of the deliberately narrow criteria listed at [[WP:CSD]]. Please trust the discussion system to work properly. [[User:Rossami|Rossami]] <small>[[User talk:Rossami|(talk)]]</small> 03:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
:Absolute rubbish, I'm not even going to bother to say why as its a no brainer, and if you want to be part of the project please learn a modicum of our rules, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:50, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
::For what it's worth, Squeak, I was at [[WP:RfD|redirects for deletion]], saw what you did, and wanted to let you know that I fully support your deletion of this redirect. Cross-namespace redirects are almost always deletable on sight. In my view, you did the right thing. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 03:12, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
== MedCab ==
You are listed as involved [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2007-10-04_Pro-pedophile_activism here]. [[User:Dyskolos|Dyskolos]] 18:11, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
== [[Adult-child sex]] ==
I started a section on the talk page. Let's discuss the issue there. [[User:A.Z.|a.z.]] 04:49, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
=== [[Adult-child sex]] versus [[child sexual abuse]] ===
Dear Richard, your [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Human_sexual_behavior&diff=prev&oldid=162894926 repeated insistance] on the negatively value-laden term [[child sexual abuse]] is quite disruptive. You are censoring information. Please read http://groups.google.de/group/de.alt.jugendschutz/browse_thread/thread/5e34264423a97fef/6fb429122ca5c18a for the rationale for preferring the term adult-child sex. There you read: we suggested that value-neutral terms such as adult-child sex or adult-adolescent sex should be used in place of the term "child sexual abuse" under certain circumstances. Thanks for your consideration: [[User:Roman Czyborra|Roman Czyborra]] 17:31, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
::Squeak, please respond to my argument: can you comprehend the problem with the term child sexual abuse? [[User:Roman Czyborra|Roman Czyborra]] 22:17, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
:::I can comprehend the problem but actually think the phrase CSA is entirely appropriate. Neutrality or NPOV should reflect society's views on this matter and if society is not neutral in a scientifically objective sense then nor should we be, ie if CSA is the common use term, as I believe it is, then we are duty bound to use it, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:32, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
::::Thank you for the explanation. I beg to differ, though: An encyclopedia is a collection of knowledge and its purpose is to educate folks who do not have the knowledge yet. Therefore we should stick to latest scientific findings instead of society's superstitions. If you wanted to get consent from the entire society before publishing scientific findings you would get nowhere. I cannot share your trust in widespread enlightenment. Society is not neutral on certain matters but quite retarded often times in history. Or would you say that the German society's view on the Jews in 1938 was neutral? [[User:Roman Czyborra|Roman Czyborra]] 08:54, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
:SqueakBox, you can add to the section whichever references you have that say that adult-child sex is necessarily child sexual abuse. I and the other readers are interested in reading those. Just please do not remove the references that say that some people think that adult-child sex isn't child sexual abuse. This would be censorship. I typed "adult-child sex" in the search box, and I saw there was no article. I wish to have a neutral and verifiable article/section on Wikipedia about the subject. The ''more'' references there are, the better. And the ''more'' information there is, the better. The current section does not support in any way the view that adult-child sex is not psychologically harmful. All it says is there are ''two people'' that think that it may not be harmful. The readers of Wikipedia interested in learning more about the subject will understand that the information currently there is not nearly enough to have an informed opinion on the subject, and won't use that information alone to develop such an opinion. The section alone will not make anyone intelligent suddenly change their opinion about adult-child sex. More information is needed, that says what their opinions are based on, and how old are those children that they talk about, and what people with different opinions have to say about it. More references are needed, so we can read the books that they wrote, but not fewer references, nor less information. [[User:A.Z.|a.z.]] 19:12, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
::What is disruptive is the creation of the sub-section to HSB which is extreme ped POV pushing without trying to gain consensus fiorst for what is a piece of OP. Creating this redirect, which I have rfd'd, was also disruptive, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:52, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
:::SqueakBox, I have addressed those concerns on my post above. I am sorry that's the way you react, calling me disruptive. All I want is to improve Wikipedia, and I am doing this. I don't think content should depend on consensus (I believe you have said the same thing before), but, in this case, there is consensus for that section to exist. [[User:A.Z.|a.z.]] 20:11, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
::::Since you guys are talking here, I felt that I would jump in. That section should be clear that by "children", it does not mean a late adolescent such as a 17-year-old, and that while those two peope feel that actual child-"sex" may not be harmful to children, that view (obviously) goes against the widely-detailed documents that state that it is harmful to children...or that section shouldn't be there at all. Right now, it acts as though [[Age of consent]] is actually usually applied to an actual [[child]]. If it means adolescents as well, then that section should either have the words child (or children) and adolescent (or adolescents) in its heading, as well as its text...or should have the word "minor" (or minors) in its heading, while it also distinguishes between children and mid-to-late adolescents in its text. [[User:Flyer22|Flyer22]] 20:16, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
:::::You have an excelent point, Flyer. If one incorporates 17 year olds as children then it is easy to say in some cases children can have sex with adults and not in any way be harmed by it if by some you refer to 16 and 17 year olds (16 is the Age of Consent in the UK) without drawing a tight line but that would be being profoundly dishonest as younger children being coerced into sex with adults (coercion being an absolute in these cases) is harmful and we must not confuse our readers, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:38, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
::::::Exactly. [[User:Flyer22|Flyer22]] 04:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
:::::::I think children have way more intelligence then you two are willing to give them credit for. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 04:49, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
::::::::I know that response was probably more so directed at '''SqueakBox''', considering that I didn't mention the subject of coercion (even if I did/do acknowledge my feelings to being a lot like SqueakBox's on this matter), but I do give children plenty of credit intelligence-wise, and I also know that children (I'm not talking about 16 or 17-year-olds here, obviously...though it's not exactly absent there either) can be coerced into sexual situations. And even when that child says "yes"...I would not consider it as sex in the sense of two older adolescents or two legal adults having sex, but rather as sexual abuse. [[User:Flyer22|Flyer22]] 00:31, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::The idea adult-child sex thus necessitates two ideas: [[child]], and [[sex]]. The [[child]] page says "[a] child (plural: children) is a boy or girl who has not reached puberty, but also refers to offspring of any age." The first one clearly applies. Pedophilia is a mental condition, and thus satisfies neither, but child sexual abuse does fulfill both things. A.Z., I think that a historical, sociological, and cultural look at adult-child relationships should not go under any page titled adult-child sex but rather adult-child relationships. Moreover, I think that much of it has already been covered by [[child sexuality]]. Flyer22, I think that Wikipedia also is not to make any judgments on the existence of non-harmful child sexual abuse.--[[User:The Scarlet Letter|A]] 01:32, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
::::::::::That phrasing, "non-harmful child sexual abuse", even sounds wrong to use. If it's non-harmful, it shouldn't be called abuse. Do you feel that I was making judgment on whether an adult (or adolescent, for that matter) engaging in a sexual act with a child could actually be considered non-harmful to that child? If so, well, I don't feel that it was truly judgment, but was rather about what is widely documented as harmful. Wikipedia follows this, and any material we add to Wikipedia challenging that, I feel should be judged. In fact, we're judging that now...on how, what, if to include this material due to its controversial matter. Yes, my personal feeling is that an adult or older adolescent engaging in a sexual act with a child is sexual abuse, but I'm not letting that get in the way of my pondering on where or if to include the issue cited above on Wikipedia. I'm not trying to go for [[censorship]]. [[User:Flyer22|Flyer22]] 04:16, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
::::This is not my discussion, but I feel compelled to note that a.z.'s comment above, "I don't think content should depend on consensus" is just about the strangest thing I've heard in quite some time. What else should content depend on? [[Dadaist]] poetry technique? Fluctuations in the [[ionosphere]]? Wait... don't answer that, unless this is your talk page. Squeak, have you actually said something like that yourself? I'd be surprised if you did. [[User:Eaglizard|Eaglizard]] 10:23, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
=== Sorry ===
I didn't see you had added a new reference. I thought it was the same as before. Sorry. I'm going to read the reference now. [[User:A.Z.|a.z.]] 21:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
:You are welcome, always check what you revert before doing so, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:49, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
== Dyskolos ==
[[User:Dyskolos|Dyskolos]] has apologised to you on his talk page. They have also retracted their comment about baby rapers. Do you think they should remain blocked? [[User:A.Z.|a.z.]] 03:24, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
:Yes, that wasn't an apology, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:49, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
== Congrats! ==
Congrats again, this time on [[User:Lundiaka|Lundiaka]], and [[User:Dyskolos|Dykolos]] been awhile since I could comment, but hey, it looks like you're just down to needing to off [[User:A.Z.]] and [[User:Fighting for Justice]] and you can finally have your way.
P.S. You may see this as a blatant trolling attempt and... well, it is... but that doesn't change the fact that from this outside observer's vantage point you appear intent of cramming 'your' (somewhat POV) version of an article intro down people's throats without seeking consensus, because in your opinion they're all socks or PPA's... despite you showing you're, if not a APA, a big supporter of their movement.
Also, I do have a current, unblocked wikipedia account, before you dismiss me as a banned user, etc. I just refuse to use it on this subject, I'll stick to music and videogames, thank you very much. I don't feel like dealing with on site wiki-stalking and real life retaliation. [[User:70.123.189.59|70.123.189.59]] 00:07, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
:Actually and for the record my commitment is to wikipedia and making an impartial encyclopedia for our times, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:25, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
== A personal note ==
Hiya SqueakBox! I was coming by to say thanks for helping with [[Krotona]], but then I noticed that involved discussion about child sexual abuse and ... oh my. It had simply not occurred to me that the NAMBLA types would be yet another faction on WP, although its certainly obvious now, in retrospect! I don't envy you that battle. (Rev. suggested by my inner attorney: I do not here mean to imply that any editor[s] above are now, or have ever endorsed or been associated with NAMBLA, only that I am certain some editors somewhere on WP ''are''.)
And speaking of battles, I hope you won't hate me if I take the risk of being a bit presumptuous, giving personal advice to a relative stranger and all. But as I was looking over a few of the diffs and discussion above (and you're right, that was ''not'' an apology!), I noticed something in your comments that made me want to share with you something from my own experience. Specifically, I have found that, when I am typing rapidly, and then I look at the preview and see a half-dozen "fat-fingered" typos in my text, this is a ''sure sign'' that I am becoming emotionally heated, and that I need to cool off before continuing. In fact, I now ''routinely'' abort my comments when I find this happening, and simply come back and start over after a few hours of doing something I enjoy. This has helped ''immensely'' in reducing the number of posts I've made that I've been forced to regret and/or apologize for. Which is not to say you've made any such posts. It's just my experience, for whatever its worth, with cash value not to exceed $0.02US. :) [[User:Eaglizard|Eaglizard]] 10:08, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately it doesn't just happen for me when I am emotionally fraught though that does make it worse and what your message indicates is that that is how people interpret these typos. I have finally resigned myself to using Mozilla spellcheck and though it drives me mad when I am writing in Spanish and I dislike when it tries to get me to spell in American I am getting ot grips with it and it does spot my typos. So hopefully no more, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:49, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
:Ah, I understand. I just noticed in particular those typos that come from typiong wortds tooo fast, you see? :) It's hwere you hit two keys at once, or reverse common letters.... lol And yes, on a serious note, I think my interpretation won't be uncommon. On the other hand, it's just more a less a "don't forget to have a nice cuppa" sort of comment, and your many contributions to WP speak for themselves. :) [[User:Eaglizard|Eaglizard]] 08:50, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
<div style="width:300px; background-color:#f9f0C9; border: 1px solid #888850; padding:2px;">[[image:Chocchip smiley.png|left|90px|]]<small>In the interest of promoting sweetness and light, you are hereby granted the coveted '''[[User:Pedia-I/SmileyAward|Random Chocolate Chip Smiley Award]]'''<br />originated by [[User:Pedia-I|<span style="color:darkblue; font-size:larger; font-family:Constantia">Pedia-I</span>]]<br />([[User:Pedia-I/SmileyAward|Explanation and Disclaimer]])</small></div>
:Thanks, cuppa sounds very English, like a cup of tea, something I haven't had in years, not that I am complaining! And cuppa is the only word in this paragraph that my new found spell check doesn't like, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:39, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
==The recent Nambla edits==
Given your stance on BLP, it surprises me that you allowed unsourced material, including a photo of a child, to remain in the article. If you look at the uploading editor's contributions, you'll see that this is probably a subtle form of vandalism and a libelous attack on another person. Please be more careful about what you allow in an article, even if the material happens to match your personal standpoint on a subject. [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] 06:45, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
::Thanks, I was working late after a massive internet outage all day and missed what you say but wholeheartedly agree, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:09, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
:And I noticed above that you also use Mozilla spellcheck, and it drives you mad when you type in Spanish. I, too, use it, and have it installed for both English And Dutch. if you go to Mozilla extensions, you can install a Spanish dictionary, too, and toggle back and forth, depending on which language you're using. Hope that helps. [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] 08:35, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks, I'll look into that, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:09, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
::Thank you for your good grace in accepting my crabby feedback. I know you're a conscientious editor who makes solid contributions. I shouldn't edit before my coffee kicks in. Always a pleasure editing with somebody I trust, even when I do not always agree with their positions. [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] 18:18, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
:::Did you see SqueakBox's latest contributions to the article on [[pro-pedophile activism]] and the respective talk page? They may be in good faith, but they don't seem solid to me. He had been reverting back to his consensually rejected version time after time, although he seems to have stopped now. That version said something like "the pro-pedophile movement wishes to change laws and society's perceptions in order to allow pedophiles to abuse children". [[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]] 18:44, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
::::No evidence my version has been rejected and anyway to replace a sourced section with an unsourced one is not acceptable, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:55, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
:::::I have explained to you at least three times that your version is not referenced. The evidence that your version has been rejected is that not one single other editor supported your version. I personally don't think that the number of people who support a version is as relevant as whether it is referenced or not. [[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]] 19:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
::::::Consensus does not trump policy so I agree with your last statement but it is simply false that I am the only editor to support my version anyway and inserting false statements (whether unintentional or not) is unhelpful, please take care in what you say. And the version Fighting reverted to today was unreferenced, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:23, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
:::::::I agree that any version should have references, so much that I disagree with Wikipedia's policy that only "assertions that are likely to be challenged" should be referenced because I think ''all assertions'' ought to be referenced. I'm sorry that I had inserted a false statement. I just saw, when looking at the edit history, that Pol64 supports your version. [[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]] 20:04, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::All challenged material needing refs is a pragmatic approach given the vast quantity of unref'd material, especially in stubby articles, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:45, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
== Minor change to a post of yours ==
I made a minor [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard&diff=164153751&oldid=164153430 change] to a post of yours. When I first read the comment, it looked as if I were the author. I hope you're OK with that. [[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]] 22:56, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
:Looks fine, thanks for the heads up, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:57, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
== Yamakiri on Firefox on Jimbo's talk page ==
I hope you don't mind that I undid your undo; just since it was Jimbo's talk page I thought that if Jimbo wanted it off he (well, or maybe an administrator) could remove it. If you still want it off though I would not be opposed to asking Yamakiri if it is fine with him if we remove it. — [[User talk:Springeragh|<span style="background:#808;color:#fff;text-decoration:none;"> '''''$PЯING'''''εrαgђ </span>]] 03:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
:Not at all, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:52, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
== Edit summary ==
I wonder whether that [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pro-pedophile_activism&diff=prev&oldid=164149956 edit summary] was on purpose. [[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]] 05:19, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
:Never mind. I saw now that you do it all the time :-) [[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]] 05:21, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
::Just my little joke, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:52, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
== Edits ==
Hey,
Thanks for cleaning up my introductory paragraphs at [[illegal drug trade]]. Of course, the introduction as well as the rest of that article could still use a ton of improvement!
You might enjoy using [[Firefox]] for a number of reasons, one of which is that its built-in search (Ctrl-F) also will search through textareas (e.g. the box in which one edits Wikipedia content). It's a useful feature, and Firefox comes packed with lots of other useful features, and is [[open source software]].
By the way, you've got a pretty wife!
Thanks again for the help with the article. --[[User:Daniel11|Daniel11]] 07:51, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
== See the Talk page ==
See the Talk page of [[History of West Eurasia]]. If there is such a place as "West Eurasia", wouldn't there be a Wikipedia article about it, before a "history" of it is written. Please help, instead of obstructing progress in building a reputable encyclopedia. What is next, "History of Northeast Oregon"? [[User:Libertyvalley|Libertyvalley]] 19:13, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
:I suggest you learn how to do an afd properly if you wish to afd the article. Your lack of ability to do this probably means you aren't yet ready to be nominating articles for deletion. Please do not accuse me of obstructing when I am working clearing up your mess. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:17, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
::Please point me to the Wikipedia page about "West Eurasia". I would like to know WHERE this mythical ___location is before I help to improve the HISTORY of the ___location. [[User:Libertyvalley|Libertyvalley]] 19:19, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
:Well read the article, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:21, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
::Thank you for your help. I am beginning to understand now. [[User:Libertyvalley|Libertyvalley]] 19:32, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
::If you follow the afd instructions on the page I gave you then it will be perfectly valid and the community can vote on it, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:33, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
I was going to give you a "heads-up" about your appearance (your debut?) in article space at [[West Eurasia]], but it would appear you're ahead of me! Regards, [[User:Bencherlite|Bencherlite]][[User_Talk:Bencherlite|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 19:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
:Certainly my debut in that part of the world, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:00, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
::And you've been deleted... still, I doubt you're disappointed!
==Ta==
Thanks SqueakBox for your Welcoming and the useful links you gave me. -- M.W.
== Pro-pedophile activism ==
Hey, just droppping you a note that I volunteered to mediate this case. It looks like everyone's willing to work out a solution, and I look forward to working with you. I've noticed the case has been open for a bit, so I just wanted to ask you to weigh in when necessary. Thanks. [[User:Tehjustice|justice]] 21:29, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
=== Apologies ===
SqueakBox, I feel I should apologize for the statement I made before you had weighed in about thinking you were wrong. (I will post this message on the case page as well) While it is my personal opinion that some of your edits have violated wiki's policy, the statement I made, especially in the way it was phrased, made it appear I was 'taking sides', which is certainly not my place as a mediator. While I do retain my opinion personally, please understand I will make every effort to set it aside as we sort through all this, and I believe everyone should have every opportunity to provide evidence in their favor. I will make every effort I can to ensure that your side of the issue is examined carefully, and all evidence you bring is gone over. The same goes for everyone else involved. Please remember, though, I'm human, and it's impossible for me to not come to a conclusion about this ;). I have already stated my current opinion, but it was made on a face-value judgement, and it will change if reasonable evidence is brought against it. Thanks. [[User:Tehjustice|justice]] 02:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
:Well let's see how it goes. I certainly do not believe I have violated any policies whereas those who oppose me contain editors who have been indefinitely blocked multiple times for serious policy violations, basically cheating using socks. Mediation is not about content disputes and I would like some background as to why you think I have broken wiki policies and whether you think those who are opposing me have also done so, ie I have issues re your neutrality already and that is not good, especially given the mix of your lack of experience and the issues involved here. I also think you need some background to the case and should try to talk to someone on the arbcom re the 20 odd indefinitely banned users (not all different people) who have been banned re this issue and inappropriate editing. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:39, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
== BLP Stuff ==
Obviously I don't want to get in an edit war, so why is this a BLP violation? (BLP is WP:BLP?) [[User:81.149.250.228|81.149.250.228]] 17:03, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
:You already have and because the guy is alive, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:10, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
:The Mona Lisa is a great solution, IMO, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:12, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
== [[:Loving Sander]] ==
Why did you remove the prod notice from this article? --[[User:Orangemike|<span style="color: darkorange">Orange Mike</span>]] 17:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
I didn't, someone else did and any editor can do so so the person who placed it originally was in the wrong to replace it, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
:? I thought it was taboo to remove such notices, and that the proper response was a "hangon" tag? --[[User:Orangemike|<span style="color: darkorange">Orange Mike</span>]] 17:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
::Prods are meant to be deleted by anyone (that's how you contest them). Hangon is for Speedy Deletions (CSD or DB tags) [[User:Swatjester|<span style="color: red">⇒</span>]] [[User_talk:Swatjester|<span style="font-family: Euclid Fraktur"><span style="color: black">SWAT</span><span style="color: goldenrod">Jester</span></span>]] [[WP:CLIMBING|<small><sup>Denny Crane.</sup></small>]] 18:06, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
:::Exactly, and it wasn't me who actually removed it, I reverted its replacement by the person who originaly put it there, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:15, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
:::Indeed I have now voted to delete in the afd, so I was following procedure not expressing my own view, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:11, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
== [[:Kurt Eichenwald]] ==
I noticed you had been doing some work on the Kurt article, and thought I'd mention that this Friday on NPR, Kurt is going to reveal why he forgot to mention the $3100 he gave to Berry.
In a story to air Friday on NPR's All Things Considered, Eichenwald reveals a secret that he had carefully guarded for more than two decades. His epilepsy had triggered so many and such severe seizures that, according to his neurologist, he suffers from "severe memory disruptions."
[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15430924]
So there you have it. Brain damage. You may want to mention this in the article. [[User:Enrico Dirac|Enrico Dirac]] 03:08, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads up, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:02, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
::Taken care of. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 18:42, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
==Cannabis (drug)==
Did you know that you cropped a thumbnail instead of cropping the original? [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0e/Joints.jpg] Can you re-do this so that the original resolution is maintained? [[User:199.125.109.21|199.125.109.21]] 13:54, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
:Done, see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Joints22.jpg here], [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:26, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
::Except that you don't have to change the name, just upload to the same filename Joints1.jpg with the new version. [[User:199.125.109.21|199.125.109.21]] 15:58, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
:::Oops, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:01, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
::::What you did was better though, because there is no need to retain the cropped one. [[User:199.125.109.21|199.125.109.21]] 16:06, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
== Buddhistness ==
Are YOU a [[Buddhist]]?--[[User:Rory666|Rory666]] 05:29, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
:Nope, I studied it a bit but no more, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:32, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
::Oh.--[[User:Rory666|Rory666]] 20:30, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
== Willing to try formal mediation? ==
I think you just missed my note of how I think the MedCab wasn't getting anywhere, and we might have to move to formal mediation. Are you willing to participate in that? [[User:Martijn Hoekstra|Martijn Hoekstra]] 16:16, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
:What is formal mediation? I am only willing to mediate with people who do not act as meatpuppets for banned users or who are socks of banned users, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
::I will not at this time comment on the subject of meatpuppets, as it's a very difficult one, and as far as I know, there is no policy on meatpuppets of banned users, nor is it easy to determine if someone is a meatpuppet, unless self-identified. You can read more about formal mediation in [[WP:RFM]]. It is usualy seen as the next step when RFC or the MedCab fail. [[User:Martijn Hoekstra|Martijn Hoekstra]] 16:23, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
:::Policy is that if someone acts as a proxy of a banned user they may be blocked, and this or these PA user(s) who wont say no and return many times and are under arbcom restrictions is a good example of where such a policy is likely to be enforced. IMO S***/82/Richard were/was deliberately disrupting the mediation and you failed to act so you are at least somewhat at fault for the mediation crumbling. I think some people believe this dispute resolution can be used to bring the blocking of PPA activists into an open arbcom case and therefore wish to see it disrupted (whereas I believe you are doing the mediatiion in good faith, as I was) so let me assure you that such a plan to take this to arbcom to provide a platform for this/these banned users will not work. I see no reason to up the mediation when all that is needed is for you to remove the comments by S***, Richard and 82. I suggest we wait till Justice comes back online before deciding what to do next if anything, unless you remove those comments in which case I will be up for continuing mediation, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:32, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
::::The advantage of formal mediation, is that it follows fairly strict rules, and is far less easy to be disrupted. In our case, i think that that might just do the trick. Also note that RfM is not an arbcom case. [[User:Martijn Hoekstra|Martijn Hoekstra]] 16:37, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
:::::Well avoiding disruption sounds good. I think we need to wait for Justice to return but I am certainly not saying no to formal mediation as long as it only involves established users such as yourself, Homologeo, Fighting, A.Z etc. I will not work with socks of banned users, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:42, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
:If you put a RfM in, I'd certaily be willing to mediate the dispute for you if everyone is OK with that? [[User:Ryan Postlethwaite|'''<span style="color:#000088;">Ry<span style="color:#220066;">an<span style="color:#550044;"> P<span style="color:#770022;">os<span style="color:#aa0000;">tl</span>et</span>hw</span>ai</span>te</span>''']] 16:46, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
::Okay by me, I suggest Martijn lodges it with RfM then, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:49, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
:::A [[Wikipedia:Requests for mediation|request for mediation]] has been filed with the [[Wikipedia:Mediation Committee|Mediation Committee]] that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at [[Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Pro-pedophile activism]], and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to [[Wikipedia:Mediation]]. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, '''[[User:Daniel|<span style="color:#2E82F4">Daniel</span>]]''' 07:55, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
== For you ==
{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | [[Image:Original Barnstar.png|100px]]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Original Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | You may have your ups and downs, but you stick with it and you have an absolute passion for fairness. For this reason, I present you with the original barnstar. Keep hanging in there. <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> <small>([[User:JzG/help|Help!]])</small> 20:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
|}
==Comments Made by Banned Users==
[[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]], to the best of my knowledge, even if a user is banned, if his or her comments are not disruptive, their contributions are usually not removed. Your unilateral action does not further the goals of this project. Of course I will not get into a revert war over this with you, because that would be pointless, since you never seem to back down from the course of action you want to pursue. However, I would like to stress to you that, usually, one needs to have the support of other involved editors before deleting non-disruptive comments, even if they're made by a banned user. Also, if you can, could you possibly point out how the comments you deleted are disruptive? Lastly, if there are disruptive comments, why not simply remove those, and not all commentary made by the banned user? ~ [[User:Homologeo|Homologeo]] 20:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
:You are wrong, Mike never had the right to edit and all his must and will be removed along with those of all other proven socks in this case. You shouldn't get into an edit war because I have the right to ignore 3rr in this case and you have no rights to act as a Mike D78 meatpuppet. When are you guys going to learn to stick to the rules? [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:54, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
::I'm not sure if you saw my response to your last comment on the [[Anti-pedophile activism]] [[Talk:Anti-pedophile activism|Talk Page]], but could you possibly point me to the policy that supports the unilateral removal of non-disruptive commentary. Thanks, ~ [[User:Homologeo|Homologeo]] 21:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
::I inquired of an admin on the policy you seemed to be referring to - what he said could be viewed [[User_talk:CBDunkerson#Inquiry_about_Wikipedia_Policy_regarding_Commentary_of_Banned_Users|here...]] So, you're right in that one can remove commentary made by a banned user. However, another editor has as much right to revert such an edit. Maybe it would be best for you to explain why you think the comments you're removing do not belong on those Talk Pages, especially when they're often at the center of various discussions. ~ [[User:Homologeo|Homologeo]] 23:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
:::Banned users returning are by definition disruptive and therefore the comments must be removed. The fact that you and Fightinjg restored those comments doesn't look good in terms of mediation and trying to fix the problems. The problem is someone reads the talk pages and gets a false idea of the debate because one banned suer has chosen to diss wikipedia by cheating. You do not have the right to restore comments of a sockpuppet under any circumstances, and your doing so looks to me like a bad faith action given you know the circumstances of the case and the huge trouble this banned user has brought to our site,. Persistent support of and aiding a banned suer to have influence on the site is in itself extremely disruptive and makes it almost impossible to collaborate with you, 15:43, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:43, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
If you haven't noticed, I only undid your actions once, while you, on the other hand, have removed the comments in question repeatedly. Also, unless you can point to a policy that states the restoration of removed comments by banned users is never allowed, please stop claiming that [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] and I are acting against policy. As I explained above, you do have the right to remove the commentary of banned users. However, other editors are allowed to bring those comments back. It is usually advisable to seek consensus whenever there is disagreement on whether or not comments by a banned user should remain on the Talk Page. Furthermore, it was never established that [[User:Mike D78|Mike D78]] was in fact a sock puppet of a banned editor - this was only suspected, and (as I have pointed out) the justification for that block is being inquired into at this very moment. Howbeit, even if Mike D78 was banned legitimately, there is definitely no consensus among the editors involved in editing the pro- and anti- articles on whether the this editor's commentary should remain. In fact, everyone who has expressed his opinion, except you, has been in support of keeping these comments on the Talk Pages. Likewise, please remember that editors other than the banned editor can vouch for the comments made by the latter. This is exactly what Fighting for Justice has done. Also, you have still to address the point, already made twice by separate editors, that your removal of commentary has resulted in a disrupted flow of thought and discussion on the Talk Pages - it is now almost impossible to make sense of numerous sections of text because of your edits. This is definitely more disruptive to the project than the perceived "cheating" supposedly carried out by Mike D78. Lastly, why not, instead of edit warring over whether or not the commentary in question should remain on the Talk Pages, engage the issues of the articles head-on. This seems to be a much more reasonable and productive way to proceed. What harm is there from directly addressing points of view that you disagree with? At this point, the words of John Stuart Mill come to mind:
{{quotation|... the peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error. (''On Liberty'')}}
~ [[User:Homologeo|Homologeo]] 20:44, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
:Your comments indicate you are not acc3epting the reality, which is that Mike was an abusive sock. With actions like those of yourself and Fighting it is hard to see how mediation will work, and those comments are still subject to removal and their restoration subject to meatpuppet claims. Mike's comments must be purged from the wikipedia, a scorched earth policy is the only realistic way of combatting this highly abusive user, and neither you nopr others can continue aiding, abetting and supporting this and other banned users with impunity. THis is not about censorship, it is about addressing the issue of banned users, wikipedia is not a public service and nobody has a right to edit, it is a privilege that Mike D78 never had, nor Farenhorst. Others such as Dyskolos are suspected socks so i left their comments intact whereas there is no question or doubt concerning Mike's guilt, read the block log. Your cvlaim the block is about to be removed is unsubstantiated, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:07, 22 October 2007 (UTC) [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:07, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
::I have no foreknowledge into whether or not Mike D78's block will be removed, and do not claim anything of the like. All the while, I am still perplexed by the reasoning behind this block, and am indeed inquiring into the situation by requesting more information. Also, as I stated before, I will not undo your edits again for the time being, because I want to get the input of others first, and wish to avoid another edit war (which, unfortunately, already seems to have started between you and another editor). However, it is looking like all other editors who have voiced their opinion on this issue are disagreeing with your course of action. ~ [[User:Homologeo|Homologeo]] 21:40, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Editors do not decide whether sock comments should stand, if a number of editors wish to aid and abet banned editors than those same number of editors are exposing themselves to genuine criticism of their actions as alleged consensus does not supersede policy which clearly allows me to remove those highly disruptive edits of already banned users. We simply cannot continue on with established editors supporting banned socks over other legitimate users and this will end in tears if it continues. Mike was not only obviously a sockpuppet from the beginning but a highly disruptive one who, engaging as a banned user, reported me to AN/I and edit warred with me. We are about to edit formal mediation and the issue of not only how we deal with socks but also how we deal with those who aid and abet socks is obviously the primary issue with which we have to deal and your comments are not in any sense an acceptable solution to that problem, ie what we must all do is accept that Mike was an ilegal sock and remove any trace of his former presence from the site. Only then can we address the NPOV issues, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:48, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
:Well, I think it is now obvious that you and I disagree in our interpretations of Wikipedia policy. I have already directed you to the summary an admin has provided for me of how commentary by banned users is generally dealt with. You're free to argue with this interpretation, but I'm simply going with what I see to be self-evident from the policy and from what has been explained to me by an experienced editor/admin. However, you are right in that it is very important that we figure out what should happen to such commentary - this is key to making mediation work. ~ [[User:Homologeo|Homologeo]] 22:08, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes I read that, it is the opinion of one admin and was broadly confirming what I have been saying. What is certain is that Mike had no rights to edit because of previous bad behaviour that resulted in an indefinite block and now you are claiming that this does not matter, that we need his comments, etc. Restoring these comments in this situation is pure meatpuppetry with no alleviating circumstances such as BLP concerns, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:11, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
:I'm curious to know what do you [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] mean by "this will end in tears"??? Sounds to me like a threat, something that is disallowed on wikipedia. But to me fair I'll give you a chance to explain yourself. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 01:33, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
:It could not possibly be interpreted as a threat under interpretation of the English language so no need to explain, thought I would like an explanation as to why you have been helping a sock of a banned user by restoring his comments to the talk PPA and APA pages, that makes me want to cry! [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
::Well at the very least it could be considered less then civil. So I recommend you choose your words more carefully next time. I know you care a lot about civility as you scolded [[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]], of lacking civility, for telling you things you didn't like to hear/read. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 08:00, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
:::It wasn't even vaguely uncivil, stop making insinuations that don't exist in objective reality. Yes, civility is very important but if you think that was uncivil we don't seem to be talking the same language, though as I said the suporting of socks of banned suers in evading their bans is enough to make any good faith user cry. Now please answer my question if you want to post here, don't just come to harass me over ridiculousnesses, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
::::harassment??!?!?! exaggerate much? I wrote one message nicely asking for clarification on a statement you made. You offered nothing so my confusion remains. If it was so harmless then you'd have no objection to clarify it. I do not believe for one second that Mike was a banned user. His comments were constructive and he put up with a lot. [[User:Fighting for Justice|Fighting for Justice]] 20:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
::::::What is going on here? Why are you using so many exclamation points? [[User:El C|El_C]] 21:01, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
:::::::Fighting, I have already clarified myself. No attack, just a comment about what is going on. As [[Ijahman Levi|Ijahman]] once sang, "I shed tears without shame", [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:35, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adult-child sex]] ==
'''SqueakBox''', since this article survived its deletion debate, I was wondering if you were going to take this to a [[Wikipedia:deletion review|deletion review]] or just leave that alone for now? I ask...because having "gotten to know you" somewhat, I know that this probably isn't a done deal for you, and that you may nominate it for deletion again in a month or two, probably two, and I'd rather know now what you plan to do or not to do about the outcome of this deletion debate, since I want to follow-up on this matter, if it isn't the end of it.
Given how controversial this article is, I doubt that it would be the end of it, whether from you or not. [[User:Flyer22|Flyer22]] 05:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
:I think the result was a step towards an impartial encyclopedia for our times. (<small>[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASqueakBox&diff=164631021&oldid=164607253]</small> ) [[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]] 05:47, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
:::I am not quite sure how, to me it looks like a POV fork for our times, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:04, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
::I agree, Flyer. It looks like twice the delete to the keep votes. If the DRV fails wec an take it again next month but this is clearly the first step, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:49, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
:::And done [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_October_23#Adult-child_sex here], [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:53, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
::::Have you considered merging it and turning it into a redirect? This can be done easily at any time without having to wait on a deletion review. Given the rationale of the close, I think it was reasonable so I suspect it's unlikely to be overturned. [[User:Friday|Friday]] [[User talk:Friday|(talk)]] 14:55, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
:::::I think it is an excellent idea, Friday, but (a)I have already started the DRV and (b) I am sure thaty A.Z abnd others would revert a redirect, especially if it was done by me, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:58, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
::::::Something to try afterwards, perhaps, depending how the deletion review goes. [[User:Friday|Friday]] [[User talk:Friday|(talk)]] 15:00, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
:::::::Yep. We have been here before, of course, remembering Brian Chase, and on reflection based on my greater wikipedia experience I now think you were right there and certainly that you are here too, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:06, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
::::::::Okay, '''Squeak'''. Thanks for letting me know your plans on this matter. [[User:Flyer22|Flyer22]] 17:50, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
==Neutrality, censorship, Wiki Violations==
I responded to your question on the Alice Bailey discussion page under the above title. [[User:Sparklecplenty|Sparklecplenty]] 01:21, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads up, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:23, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
::Well Kwork sounds knowledgeable to me, but whatever, I certainly do not consider myself ignorant on the subject having spent the best part of a decade seriously studying AAB, drawn there by the astrology which was a youthful passion of mine. And some of the ideas I gleaned from AAB have so profoundly influenced not just me but my perception of the world and particularly from the esoteric astrology and treatise on cosmic fire books so while AAB is not my life neither dfo i consider myself ignorant on the subject though I am also a substantially experienced wikipedian, as are others less knowledgeable about AAB, like Gordon and Mouse. Regards, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
== Feel free to move this to user space ==
{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | [[Image:Barnstar_of_Reversion2.png|100px]]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Awarded for your valiant defense of my userpage whilst I was away. Thank you! [[User:VanTucky|'''Van<span style="color:#FF4F00">Tucky</span>''']] <sup>[[User talk:VanTucky|Talk]]</sup> 02:51, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
|}
:Done, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
==Request for mediation accepted==
{| class="messagebox" style="width:90%"
|-
|[[Image:Exquisite-folder5.png|75px]]
|A [[Wikipedia:Requests for mediation|Request for Mediation]] to which you were are a party has been [[Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Guide to accepted cases#Post-acceptance|accepted]].<br/>You can find more information on the case subpage, [[Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Pro-pedophile activism]].<br/>
::''For the Mediation Committee,'' '''[[User:Daniel|<span style="color:#2E82F4">Daniel</span>]]''' 04:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
|}
<div style="text-align:center; font-size:smaller;">This message delivered by [[User:MediationBot1|MediationBot]], an automated bot account [[Wikipedia:Mediation Committee#MediationBot|operated]] by the [[Wikipedia:Mediation Committee|Mediation Committee]] to perform case management.<br/>If you have questions about this bot, please [[Wikipedia talk:Mediation Committee|contact the Mediation Committee directly]].</div>
==friendly persuasion?==
Hi SqueakBox. I noticed that Sparklecplenty told you I "hate" Alice Bailey, and I am sure you have already noticed that I am not happy about elements of Bailey's books. Nevertheless, I do wish it was easier to disagree without being an enemy. I know that I can be abrasive, but disagreements do not automaticly produce enemies. I have noticed, for instance, that John Kennedy and Barry Goldwater were actually friends even though the were political opponents.
<blockquote>[[Goldwater]] was an unwavering supporter of Wisconsin's Republican Senator Joseph McCarthy to the end (one of only 22 Senators who voted against McCarthy's censure). He was also friends with Senator John F. Kennedy of Massachusetts; in fact, Goldwater anticipated that a contest for the presidency between John F. Kennedy and Goldwater himself would have been an enjoyable experience, with lively debates between them, one of which was to be held on board a plane in flight. Goldwater was grief-stricken by the assassination of Kennedy and was greatly disappointed that his opponent in the race would not be JFK, but instead Kennedy's Vice President, the former Senate Majority Leader Lyndon B. Johnson of Texas. Goldwater disliked Johnson (who he said "used every dirty trick in the bag"), and Richard M. Nixon of California, whom he later called "the most dishonest individual I have ever met in my life." It is believed Goldwater, then a Senator, forced Nixon to resign at the height of Watergate by threatening to vote in favor of removing him from office if he did not. The term "Goldwater moment" has been used to describe a moment when members of Congress from the President's party disagree and go against the wishes of the President.</blockquote>
To me this seems good. Two people who were very opposed to eachother's views, but still were open to the humanity of the other, and could still maintain a personal friendship while opposing the ideas of the other. In fact Bailey herself warned many times against becoming fanatical in one's beliefs, a view with which I agree. [[User:Kwork|Kwork]] 21:59, 24 October 2007 (UTC) [[User:Bencherlite|Bencherlite]][[User_Talk:Bencherlite|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 20:02, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
== With all due respect ==
I am Jewish but some of my best friends are Antisemitic, Thy are not Nazi's but they are what I call mildy antisemitic. I think we can work this out without an edit war unless your motives are to help James sell his books. I don't think they are so lets work this out the talk Bailey talk page OK.
[[User:Albion moonlight|Albion moonlight]] 00:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
:I think some of my family are "mildly anti-semitic" as you put it and too anti-Israel for my liking but they are not at all Nazis, but I will openly disagree with them on this issue. Obviously I have no connection with James so no interest in selling his books and no COI on this article. I too hope we can work this out amicably. I was a fan of AAB's but many years ago and hadn't thought about her in more than a decade till I came across the article and I personally don't believe she is either anti-semitic or anti black people (I am married to one) but her style was dreadfully old fashioned and anachronistic when it was written and tends to get misinterpreted, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC) [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
== A few thoughts ==
=== Confusing text / vandalism ===
What does "A Rastaman feeling kind of red" mean? That looks like possible vandalism to me.-- [[User:Mumia-w-18|Mumia-w-18]] 15:56, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
:That is pretty clear from the link, no? It means feeling kind of stoned (red being a Jamaican/Rasta word for stoned). Never heard of anyone vandalisinf their user page, lol, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:40, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
=== The need for search while editing pages ===
Not to have a search feature available when editing hurts. I sometimes copy the entire text into a text editor and use its search features.-- [[User:Mumia-w-18|Mumia-w-18]] 16:10, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
:In Mozilla you can search the html text whereas you could not before, you can't search and replace. I would use another text editor to do that but rarely do whereas various times each day I use Ctrl F to find text in the editable page, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:40, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
== My assumptions ==
Hey Squeak, I hope when you wrote "your assumptions about my ignorance are remarkably wrong" that you were referring to cat, and not to me. I make as few assumptions as I possibly can — it's been a central focus of my entire life, in fact. I was merely responding to cat's allegations in a way designed to use them to convince her of my point. Where you actually were educated (or the question of your alleged ignorance) never entered my mind. To be clear, I don't consider you ignorant at all.
While I don't think you've expressed your point regarding the phrase in question particularly effectively, my response was to try to help you make your point, I believe. In fact, I have been skirmishing around this issue w/ cat and others for months now. I'm convinced that subtle misinterpretation and the use of loaded phrases like this one (and like "new world order") are the biggest threat to NPOV in this article, and I've been nursing a long, subtle strategy to prevent that in this article for months now. So, I certainly agree with you on this issue. (For instance, the new section on Shamballa is unintentionally POV simply because, trying to "locate" the Hierarchy in some definite spot, it completely fails to understand that the lowest point of the Hierarchy exists on the higher mental plane, where space-time simply does not apply. This is basic DK 101, but we can't expect this to be clear to everyone. I believe patience is our best friend, here. :)
How the Wikipedia process eventually solves all this in the article text remains to be worked out, of course. :) [[User:Eaglizard|Eaglizard]] 20:11, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/The Troubles]] closed ==
The above named Arbitration case has closed. The Arbitration Committee decided that ''[a]ny user who hereafter engages in edit-warring or disruptive editing on these or related articles may be placed on [[Wikipedia:Probation]] by any uninvolved administrator. This may include any user who was a party to this case, or any other user after a warning has been given''. The Committee also decided to uplift Vintagekits' indefinite block at the same time.
The full decision can be viewed [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/The Troubles|here]].
For the Arbitration Committee, '''[[User:Daniel|<span style="color:#2E82F4">Daniel</span>]]''' 08:21, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, and good about Vintagekits, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:05, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
== AZ's Talk Page ==
SqueakBox, please don't continue removing the discussion. The general norm is, as I'm sure you know, that editors may decide when to remove content from their talk pages unless something very objectionable is discovered. My guess is that JzG thought his removal would be uncontroversial, in which case it would be a perfectly justified way to avoid drama. But if some editors really want to have a discussion, it's only courteous to allow it (well, IMO, anyway), absent libel or what not. Thanks. — <span style="font:bold 11px Arial;display:inline;border:#000066 1px solid;background-color:#E6E6FA;padding:0 4px 0 4px;">[[User:XDanielx|xDanielx]]</span> <sup>[[User_talk:XDanielx|T]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/XDanielx|C]]</sub> 01:04, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
:I think Guy was completely right, and I know he won't appreciate what you did. If you keep edit warring like this the page will be in danger of being protected, and the person that would hurt is A.Z., Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:10, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
=== The Neverending Krystallnacht: A.Z. ===
I noticed you removed this section from the PAW talk page with the comment that it was a thread by a banned user. I checked the block log and didn't see blocks for either Clais41 or Homologeo, and I was wondering if you could clarify who wrote in this section that you believe to be blocked. Thanks. [[User:Enrico Dirac|Enrico Dirac]] 22:42, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
:I referred to Clais as a likely sock, and anyway this material is being removed from wherever it sprouts right now and certainly not just by me. I thought my apologies to Homologeo made it clear I do not consider him the sock of a banned user. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:49, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
::[[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]], while I accept your apology for deleting my comment, I cannot believe that you're at it again - please back up assumptions that someone is a banned editor with appropriate evidence. You're well aware of the channels that can corroborate your concerns about an editor's eligibility to editing privileges, and these channels are readily available for you to use. There is currently no justification for deleting [[User:Clais41|Clais41]]'s comments from the PAW Talk Page. This individual voiced some legitimate concerns and deserves to be heard. If it is later established that this is a banned user, then you may be justified in removing his or her comments at that point in time. However, you have not yet sufficiently explained why the comment in question should be removed, and thus I will shortly revert your action. Once again, please go through the proper channels to address your concern that this may be a banned editor before removing his or her commentary again. Also, while ArbCom is free to protect individual User Talk Pages from editing and to request that the issues brought up in the section that you deleted be kept off particular User Talk Pages, there is nothing wrong with voicing one's concern over what is happening with editors who edit pedophilia-related articles on the Talk Page of the Wikiproject dedicated specifically to this very same set of articles. Thus, if comments are posted by a legitimate editor with full editing privileges, there is no reason to avoid or remove such commentary. ~ [[User:Homologeo|Homologeo]] 23:04, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
:My advice is to not revert that particular thread. If it were purely a case of suspected banned suer that would be one thing but this is a case that the arbcom have made clear do not want discussing on any of these pages and I believe we need to respect that. Going against the arbcom doesn't do anyone any good in the structure of wikipedia, especially right now (referring to the encyclopedia as a whole right now and not this specific issue, eg Rfc/Jimbo Wales, BADSITES etc) so I ask you not to revert for that reason.
:I think how we respond to suspected banned users needs to be a theme of the mediation but that your suggestion is not how wikipedia deals with banned users with a history of sockpuppets. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:19, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits/latest]] ==
Even if you insist on having place holders (for which there is no consensus, and most of the people who wanted off the list specifically stated they didn't want a place holder in their stead), you forced people back onto the list, including me, who do NOT want to be on the list. Please revert yourself. --[[User:Durin|Durin]] 19:44, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
:Whoops, my apologies and have removed the names I added. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:36, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
==Personal==
How have i included my personal experiances on pages?? please tell me i would be interested to know. Stay away from my account. When i want you to comment i will ask you. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Police,Mad,Jack|Police,Mad,Jack]] ([[User talk:Police,Mad,Jack|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Police,Mad,Jack|contribs]]) 19:55, 2 November 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:I was referring to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Law_enforcement_in_the_United_Kingdom&diff=prev&oldid=150819970 this]. Please do not ask me to "stay away from your account" when I am only trying to be helpful. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 06:14, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Excuse me, dont tell me what i can and cant say. And how have I included personal experiances please give me a quotation. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Police,Mad,Jack|Police,Mad,Jack]] ([[User talk:Police,Mad,Jack|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Police,Mad,Jack|contribs]]) 23:14, 3 November 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:You put in "to my knowledge" in an article as re the diff, do not do so again and do not tell me that I can or cannot criticise your editing when it is inappropriate. How will you learn if you won't accept criticism? Wikipedia is not interested in what is to your knowledge or not, obviously. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
==European lawyer==
A [[European lawyer]] is allowed to practice in any European country, including the UK, where he may practice in [[English law|England and Wales]], [[Scots law|Scotland]], or [[Northern Ireland law|Northern Ireland]], each of which maintains a separate court system. [[User:Fred Bauder|Fred Bauder]] 03:13, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks for that. I guess [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Giovanni_di_Stefano&diff=prev&oldid=168869210 this] edit of mine is okay then as at the least there are England and Wales courts but not English ones. A very common mistake in Latin America and perhaps elsewhere is to confuse England with the UK. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:20, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
==Neutrality dispute tag==
Hi, I never thanked you for standing up and putting the Neutrality dispute tag on the Alice Bailey article. Best to you, [[User:Sparklecplenty|Sparklecplenty]] 00:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
==BLP==
OK. Noted for future reference. [[User:Sgt Pinback|Sgt Pinback]] 02:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
== [[WP:UAA]] report ==
Hi Squeakbox,
I removed your username report of [[User:Smartypants1001]] from the UAA board. How did you think this username was inappropriate for Wikipedia? Which of the 5 general categories does it fall under? Please make sure when you make username reports that you clearly specify ''why'' the name is unsuitable for Wikipedia; you may want to check out the [[WP:U|username policy]] on this one. Perhaps you meant to report the user for [[WP:VANDAL|vandalism]] at [[WP:AIV]]? Thanks, ~[[User:Eliz81|<span style="color:#1E90FF; font-family:Comic Sans Ms;">'''Eliz'''</span>]][[User_talk:Eliz81|<span style="font-family:Comic Sans Ms; color:#9966CC;">'''81'''</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Eliz81|<sup style="color:#1E90FF;">(C)</sup>]] 18:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
:I know what I am doing and is clearly disruptive. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:10, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
::The report was removed again. I strongly suggest taking a look at our [[WP:U|username policy]] before making any other username reports. ~[[User:Eliz81|<span style="color:#1E90FF; font-family:Comic Sans Ms;">'''Eliz'''</span>]][[User_talk:Eliz81|<span style="font-family:Comic Sans Ms; color:#9966CC;">'''81'''</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Eliz81|<sup style="color:#1E90FF;">(C)</sup>]] 18:20, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
::I have made many user name reports, pleases top being patronising. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:29, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
:::I had similar question... I posted the question to you on UAA, but it was removed. I needed to know why it was disruptive prior to block, because I can't read your mind. :o) Regards, [[User:Mercury|<strong><span style="color: #8B7B8B; font-family: Verdana">M<span style="color: black">er<span style="color: black">cury</span></span></span></strong>]] 18:25, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
:Is it not self-evident? Well it is to me. Pants refers to underwear and smartypants is an insult. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:29, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
::Now I understand where you are coming from. To me, in my area, pants would be, outerpants, with that context, I assumed the username was self referring. I'll keep an eye on the contribs. Best, [[User:Mercury|<strong><span style="color: #8B7B8B; font-family: Verdana">M<span style="color: black">er<span style="color: black">cury</span></span></span></strong>]] 18:36, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
:I think this a classic UK/US issue, I'll repost with an explanation. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:37, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
::Hi SqueakBox, thanks for posting the explanation on my page and I'm truly sorry if you felt patronized by my comments. 'smartypants' is used stateside as well, but is not considered to be offensive or insulting, any more so then say 'nyah nyah' or 'doofus'. I'll be sure to let another editor handle this report, so that more people can weigh in on the issue. ~[[User:Eliz81|<span style="color:#1E90FF; font-family:Comic Sans Ms;">'''Eliz'''</span>]][[User_talk:Eliz81|<span style="font-family:Comic Sans Ms; color:#9966CC;">'''81'''</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Eliz81|<sup style="color:#1E90FF;">(C)</sup>]] 18:54, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
:Please take it to WP:RFC for further consideration. ---[[User:J.smith|J.S]] <small>([[User_talk:J.smith|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/J.smith|C]]/[[WP:WRE|WRE]])</small> 19:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
::I have no problem with the result, its been analysed by various editors and found to be okay, I just wanted to clarify the confusion caused by my own poor initial edit summary. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:42, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:Expert editors/New draft]] ==
Thanks for the welcome message. You seem like an expert editor, so I'd like to invite you to read my new proposal for a process to identify expert editors, like yourself. I might put you in charge of approving other experts, if I had such authority (and if such a process existed in the first place). [[User:CanIBeFrank|CanIBeFrank]] 04:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
== Your The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar box on your userpage ==
It looks all weird because it extends over many other objects on your user page. Just wanted to let you know. Regards, [[User:The Scarlet Letter|A]] 23:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, it looked okay actually but while I can't write code I can fiddle about with it and managed to fix the problem. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
== Warning for 3rr an edit warring ==
On [[User_talk:Albert_Wincentz]], you left a warning for 3RR. It's helpful if you also mention the edit warring policy [[WP:EW]] in warnings like that. New users may not realize that edit warring is the problem that 3rr is meant to address, or that they can be blocked for edit warring even if they don't violate 3RR. Putting a link in the warning is an easy way to make sure they are aware. — Carl <small>([[User:CBM|CBM]] · [[User talk:CBM|talk]])</small> 02:28, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
:Yes I saw on Albert's page the blocking admin commenting on this other policy and fully agree. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:56, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
==St Agnes==
Thanks for your edit on [[St Agnes Place]]. I'm not sure what happened as I didn't intend to revert the edit in the first place. I've just installed [[Ubuntu (Linux distribution)|Ubuntu Gutsy]] and it was a weird glitch.. [[User:Secretlondon|Secretlondon]] 22:44, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
==Deleting content==
Your full of it. The list of animals displaying homosexual behavior is in the process of being sourced so you decide to delete everything they haven't got to yet? Instead of removing content you don't like perhaps you should read the article "No species has been found in which homosexual behaviour has not been shown to exist, with the exception of species that never have sex at all, such as sea urchins and aphis. Moreover, a part of the animal kingdom is hermaphroditic, truly bisexual. For them, homosexuality is not an issue."
I thought common sense was a rule on Wikipedia?
:Well if all creatures display homosexual behaviour as you say we should delete the list as it will be included in lists of all species. But I suspect you cannot source said claim. You source then you add. And I am full of what?03:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
== Rv ==
Thanks for your message. I'm aware of the meaning of rv, and used it intentionally. I don't think your edits to the article have been helpful or constructive. All the best. [[User:SP-KP|SP-KP]] 20:30, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
:Removing unsourced material is always a good idea and in this case I was fulfilling a request made by our founder, Jimbo Wales. And as I say, your edit summary reflected badly on both you and I. I hope you can see what a huge improvement my enforcing this has made to the article and thus your claims that my edits haven't been helpful or constructive are evidently the opposite of the truth as the article looks so much better. I am serious about removing other unsourced material if it is not sourced within a couple of weeks. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:53, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for this further reply. You really don't need to worry, however - Benjiboi and I have this in hand. You're clearly enthusiastic to contribute - I hope you find somewhere useful to channel that enthusiasm; there are lots of articles out there in need of work. All the best. [[User:SP-KP|SP-KP]] 21:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
::Oh I don't lack areas to contribute to. I make a habit of following Jimbo's edits as a part of my work here which is what brought me to this page though I am aware there are some similar articles with the same problem. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
== Thank you ==
<div style="padding: 5px; background: #8AA5DB; border-style: solid; border-width: 2px; border-color: #FF4F00; font-family: Tahoma, sans-serif; font-size: 100%; ">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin-top: 3px; padding-top: 9px; padding-bottom: 9px; padding-left: 9px; padding-right: 9px; width: 400px; float: center;">[[Image:Evstafiev-bosnia-cello.jpg|400px]]</div>
</div>
<div class="NavFrame collapsed" style="padding: 0px; border-style: none; font-size: 100%;">
<div class="NavFrame collapsed" style="padding: 0px; border-style: none;">
<div class="NavHead" style="background: #8AA5DB; text-align: center;"><span style="color: #002FA7">If you voted in my [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/VanTucky|RFA]]...</span></div>
<div class="NavContent" style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #002FA7">...thank you for your participation. I withdrew with 83 supports, 42 opposes, and 8 neutrals. Your kind words and constructive criticism are very much appreciated. I look forward to using the knowledge I have accrued through the process to better the project. I would like to give special thanks to [[User:Tim Vickers|'''Tim Vickers''']] and [[User:Wikidudeman|'''Wikidudeman''']] for their co-nominations.
<br/><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #002FA7">Thank you again and, best regards.</span> [[User:VanTucky|'''Van<span style="color:#FF4F00">Tucky</span>''']] <sup>[[User talk:VanTucky|Talk]]</sup></div>
<br/>
<span style="color: #002FA7"><small>'''This RFA thanks was inspired by [[User:LaraLove|<span style="color: #BA55D3">Lara</span>]]'''[[User:LaraLove/My heart|<span style="color: #00CED1">❤</span>]]'''[[User talk:LaraLove|<span style="color: #FF1493">Love's</span>]]'''</small></span></span></div></div></div></div>
==Carried over from AN==
For some reason the discussion was "archived".
:In no way am I asserting that you are related to Pol64, although from the backlog of checkuser requests it is as clear to me as it is to anyone else that a lot of suspicions have been raised, based on may I say particularly intriguing patterns. For example, your last session stopped and began directly before and after Pol64's, repeating a pattern that was identified in one of those earlier checkuser requests. I will not be drawn here, but IMO, you have something to prove.
:As for your implication about myself, I'll assume that was just heat (as it was when I was accused of being you!). I suppose everybody gets accused at some time by you (inspired, it seems by any form if disagreement). But despite the obvious flimsiness, maybe it would be a good idea to ''retract'' that comment. [[User:GroomingVictim|GrooV]] 22:26, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
:I have nothing to prove whatsoever re Pol, nor am I responsible for when he edits though I would point out I edit a lot. I don't think I need to retract any comments but will say that any new accounts appearing on the PAW articles are bound to raise suspicion, this air of paranoia I blame entirely on those blocked users who have chosen to return as socks. There is no question that both DPetersen and Pol64 have also used socks, so this isn't exclusive to the PPA editors. If you are a genuine editor please accept my apologies for wondering if you are a sock and hope, from the above, that you understand why. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
==Re: YouTube==
Sorry for that! I must've aborted the [[WP:TW|twinkle]] script thinking the task was finished. It won't happen again! [[User:Spellcast|Spellcast]] 02:39, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
:Yeah, I thought it was a mistake. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
:That was a particularly yuck story, glad your edit happened as we do not want someone like that seen as notable enough for our pages. Good edit. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:49, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
::That was a horrible story. It's a good thing he was at least sentenced and that we don't have an article on him. [[User:Spellcast|Spellcast]] 02:55, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
:::Yeah, right. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
::::Haha don't worry. Your "vote" will always be there in spirit :) [[User:Spellcast|Spellcast]] 03:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
==My housemate==
Someone who lives in our house (my sister-in-laws boyfriend) didn't return from work yesterday. He had to spend 23 hours in the sea (in diving gear) before being found and rescued. And there was me saying to people that here there is no rescue service like in the UK or US but I was wrong. They even had a helicopter looking for him. He is weak but back here and he is going to be fine. It is times like this when one wants to thank God. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:01, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
:''[[Eternal Father, Strong to Save]], / whose arm doth bind the restless wave // Who bidst the mighty Ocean's deep / Its own appointed limits keep // Oh hear us when we cry to thee / for those in peril on the sea … Lord God, our power evermore, / Whose arm doth reach the ocean floor, // Dive with our men beneath the sea; / Traverse the depths protectively. // O hear us when we pray, and keep / Them safe from peril in the deep.'' I'm glad things worked out well. --[[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] 12:58, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
==The Stranglers==
Hello, please can you explain to me what is wrong with the entries I made to the Stranglers page. It says on your talk page that you are not even Admin ?
Thanks <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Seeourbee|Seeourbee]] ([[User talk:Seeourbee|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Seeourbee|contribs]]) 21:26, 14 November 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Well what has not being an admin got to do with it? Please do understand that one does not have to be an admin to revert, well I think you know that already. If you are going to say ''revert John'' in your edit summary that is bound to attract the attention of an editor like me. I think John answered your question on his talk page. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi, no he didnt, not yet anyway. His opinion was that I didnt improve the article. I beg to differ - I greatly improved it, and I acpet that John is not a member of the Stranglers fanbase so woudl not appreciate the changes I was making. Editors / Admins etc need to understand that they do not have total knowledge of everything, surely thats the whole point of Wikipedia isnt it ? I still stand by my edits and can only see improvement on the article which, again, is the whole point of Editing isnt it ? As for admin - I had assumed that an Administrator had spotted something that I had overlooked given there level of presumed expertise in editing. I do get the feeling that your reversion was there de rigeur rather than actually apprecating the points I was editing and asking me about them specifically.
Thanks. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Seeourbee|Seeourbee]] ([[User talk:Seeourbee|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Seeourbee|contribs]]) 21:47, 14 November 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Well I certainly don't lack edit experience here myself. I certainly looked at your edits before I reverted. While the Stranglers are considered a rock band back in 77 they were also considered a part of the new wave of punk bands (as I remember well), if that whole issue was made clearer it would be helpful. Otherwise your changes werer very sweeping, I suggest you make less sweeping changes and try to [[WP:RS|source]] everything you do. I don't know about John but I used yto love The Stranglers and wish I could get a copy of their truly classic first album again. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:58, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
But again I re-iterate, what did I say that was "sweeping" ? What I did was as follows - Made a point about the reunion gig; rearranged the chronological succession of band menbers (Mk II etc) and collated a section that outlined Popular references and usages of Stranglers material. How is that against the spirit of Wiki in any way shape or form. Neither yourself of John have actually quoted my "erroneous" comments. And what part were you referring to about sourcing. The band members have physically changed, I can ref to the the official Starnglers website if that suffices ?
:You should really try to source all your changes and the Stranglers website would be a place to start. Again you can add a sourced statement about them having been a part of the [[New Wave music]] scene but do not remove the fact of them being a rock band. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:28, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
hi - but now I'm really confused. I've never edited anything to do with the paras. you allude to (New wave vs Punk vs Rock) etc. Thats always been a grey area in music and I wouldnt touch it with a barge pole. Just to clarify - I only made adjustments to the section entitled "Post Cornwell era" which explains what happened to the band since the departure of the then ledad singer Hugh Cornwell. If there's a mistake in that section (that I wrote) then I'm more than happy to accept edits etc. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Seeourbee|Seeourbee]] ([[User talk:Seeourbee|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Seeourbee|contribs]]) 22:34, 14 November 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Why not have this discussion at [[Talk:The Stranglers]]? --[[User:John|John]] 22:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
:I refer to the first bit of your edit [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Stranglers&diff=prev&oldid=171503224 here], indeed it was your removal of this rock bit along with the rv John edit summary that inspired me to revert you. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi John - yes I would agree discussing New Wave / Rock issues there, but the whole reason I started "talking" here was because my minor changes were reversed - and as I mentioned in the above paragraph I only made small changes regarding (i) Band line ups changes (that are facts), (ii) the Rounhouse gig (another fact, I was there) and (iii) a much better presentaion of the popular refs after the band changes. The fact that the Stranglers are still going strongly after 32 years is a testament to the tenacity of the the band line ups over the years (16 years before Hugh left and 16 years after). Thats the only thing I edited. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Seeourbee|Seeourbee]] ([[User talk:Seeourbee|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Seeourbee|contribs]]) 22:42, 14 November 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Hi Squeak - I see that edit now. Let me confirm that that edit from "RocknRoll" to "Punk" was NOT me. I think when John reverted my edits (see above) he went back to "Griot" date (I dont know who that is) and presumably reversed the entry made on 14 Nov 09:35 by IttyBittyGrittyindaShteCiti (again, no idea who that is). Whether they have an issue with the going back to "Rock" is up to them (I certainly dont). <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Seeourbee|Seeourbee]] ([[User talk:Seeourbee|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Seeourbee|contribs]]) 22:46, 14 November 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Okay, well you are obviously editing in good faith so i won't revert you again, anmd it was the first paragraph that raised my eyebrows as they clearly are a rock band, indeed rock music at its best. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:53, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Cheers - and for the record I totally agree. The Stranglers No.1 influence is The Doors and they certainly weren't Punk. I, presumably like yourself and most editors, like an Encyclopedia to be full of facts, and that's all I've ever edited into Wiki. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Seeourbee|Seeourbee]] ([[User talk:Seeourbee|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Seeourbee|contribs]]) 22:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
==[[Cuba]]==
Hello Squeakbox. Would you ask El Jigue to stop ''gossiping'' on 'talk pages'? He might not fully understand English. [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] 21:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
:If this doesn't work, perhaps an Administrator should 'delete' EJ's gossiping from the talk pages, everytime he gossips. [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] 22:04, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
:I had wondered about that and it may be a solution. But admins aren't the only ones who can remove "trolling" comments, any editor in good standing can do so. I'll try and keep an eye on this as Cuba certainly interests me as a country. Its the only land between where I live and where I come from and deserves to be a part of an integrated Caribbean Spanish region. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:10, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
::Thank you for your time & understanding. [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] 22:15, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
:::After having read EJ's response to you, I've lost ''all'' respect for him. <s>Is there a way all editors at these Cuban related articles, can get permission to ''delete'' his gossip postings</s> Keeping in mind, some of his posting are OK, perhaps we can set up a comittee of 'three editors', who can monitor his postings (then delete what's viewed as pure gossip). Afterall, it's no longer a lack of communication - EJ is (ironically) behaving like a Fidel Castro -his way ''or'' no way. His cries of censorship have become pathetic. [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] 20:56, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
== Talk:Burma ==
Hello SqueakBox. You have reopened a move proposal at [[Talk:Burma]] which I had speedy closed earlier. You must not overturn my decision. If you are unhappy with it, then please report it to [[WP:ANI]]. Thank you. <strong>[[User:Husond|<span style="color:#082567;">Hús</span>]][[User:Husond/Esperanza|<span style="color:green;">ö</span>]][[User talk:Husond|<span style="color:#082567;">nd</span>]]</strong> 18:08, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
:Why musn't I? I have no intention of taking this to AN/I but it was a speedy nothing and your complaint, that it wasn't posted at requested moves, has been fulfilled. If you revert me I will just start it again at the bottom og the page, you can't just make th8is decision alone given the current lack of consensus. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:49, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
I've slammed a 10 minute protection onto the talk page to try and get calm on the revert war. Please can you see [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#SqueakBox and Burma]]. [[User:Timrollpickering|Timrollpickering]] 02:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
:SqueakBox, I've blocked you for 6 hours for what is quite clearly disruption in addition to edit warring. I know your work well enough to know that you know better. [[User:TShilo12|Tomer]][[User talk:TShilo12|<sup style="font-variant: small-caps; color: #129dbc!important;">talk</sup>]] 04:07, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
:Sigh. I was only following instructions. I hope people can see that the same person who proposed the move should not weeks later be speedy closing a debate on the subject. I guess I'll have to wait till the block ends before contributing to the AN/I thread but really supporting an activist on wikipedia closing a legitimatae debate about a subject he is biased about is extremely depressing. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 10:20, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
:Anyway Burma is off my watchlist. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:05, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
=== Trolling ===
I'll accept your apology now. That was not me. [[User:Vegaswikian|Vegaswikian]] 01:26, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
"Err, when I receive your apology I will offer you something. My advice is don't assume you are in the right. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
*Sorry, but you need to learn to read. I did not post that comment. It is clear and simple. Don't try and attach me to posts I did not make. [[User:Vegaswikian|Vegaswikian]] 01:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
:What? I dont know what you are saying. Please speak clear English if you want to post on this page (or Spanish). Anyting unintelligible is unwelcome. Why are you trying to troll me?. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
::Perhaps you would care to elucidate what I need to learn from a POV pusher who thinks he can do what he wants with impunity, you speedily closed as the most involved party of all of us in the debate, and you want crat powers? Sigh. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]]
== Pol64 ==
Hi, I've suggested Pol64 contact you for a bit of informal mentoring. I hope you don't mind. I think you are likely to be on the same wavelength, from what I can make of his background, and your commitment to the project is absolutely evident. <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> <small>([[User:JzG/help|Help!]])</small> 18:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
==Myanmar==
Yep, I'm glad to see both of us putting our efforts into improving Wikipedia. I think we both are trying to achieve NPOV in the articles we edit; it's just that sometimes our definitions of NPOV are not the same. ~ [[User:Homologeo|Homologeo]] ([[User talk:Homologeo|talk]]) 09:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
== Calm down ==
SqueakBox, you need to calm down right now. Running around calling WODUP a troll is very incivil and will not be tolerated further. It's a joke. Jimbo started the joke. WODUP is quoting the joke. There is ''nothing'' trolling in this at all. [[User:Metros|Metros]] ([[User talk:Metros|talk]]) 23:40, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Claiming Jimbo lives with Bin Laden strikes me as unacceptable, and Jimbo's reponsse included the word troll, didn't strike me as a joke, and it was not me who started using the T word. Please stay neutral and don't encourage the exact same trolling Jimbo opposed, as I see you have already. Some people just can't resist, eh? Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:42, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
:No, Jimbo called the asking of the question trolling for obvious reasons. See [[Special:Contributions/68.83.50.136]], the user who posted the question in July. Jimbo decided to turn it into that joke. So here, WODUP did the same thing. It's definitely not trolling on WODUP's part. [[User:Metros|Metros]] ([[User talk:Metros|talk]]) 23:47, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
:it still looks like it, check my record, I defend Jimbo and his page. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:49, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
::And check WODUP's record and tell me why you think it's appropriate to insist that an ''admin'' on Wikipedia is a troll. Your immediate rising to calling any user a troll over this is totally inappropriate and needs to be reined in. [[User:Metros|Metros]] ([[User talk:Metros|talk]]) 23:54, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
:I didn't know he was an admin.. I'd be worried if there was no opposition to the claim that Osama and Jimbo live together. And I am completely calm, just defending what I think is right. thanks for your intervention, there are hundreds of reverts to Jimbo's talk page every month. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:56, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
::Well, I am not a troll, and I'm not the quickest server in the farm, but I don't think I'm stupid either. Your accusation of bad faith and incivility in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SqueakBox&diff=prev&oldid=172377642 this edit] really surprises and disappoints me. I had seen you around and never thought that our first interaction would be like this. <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WODUP|'''<span style="color: #4169E1">W<span style="color: #191970">ODU</span>P</span>''']]</span> 00:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
::Sigh me neither, seems like the wrong end of the stick, I was acting in good faith and am happy to recognize that you were too. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:07, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
:::No worries, mate. Have a good evening. <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WODUP|'''<span style="color: #4169E1">W<span style="color: #191970">ODU</span>P</span>''']]</span> 00:14, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
== Re. Mediation ==
Mediation on what? <strong>[[User:Husond|<span style="color:#082567;">Hús</span>]][[User:Husond/Esperanza|<span style="color:green;">ö</span>]][[User talk:Husond|<span style="color:#082567;">nd</span>]]</strong> 01:53, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
:Oh. On whether we should call the country Burma or Myanmar, not about anything else. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:55, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
::That's not something that can be decided between two users. That has already been extensively discussed last month at [[Talk:Burma]] with the intervention of a large number of users. Please get over this for now and allow some time before proposing the article to be moved back. Thank you. <strong>[[User:Husond|<span style="color:#082567;">Hús</span>]][[User:Husond/Esperanza|<span style="color:green;">ö</span>]][[User talk:Husond|<span style="color:#082567;">nd</span>]]</strong> 02:00, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
:::Well I wasn't referring specifically to you. At least one user has suggested arbcom to which I replied that that cannot happen without other steps on the dispute resolution path, hence my suggestion. This is entirely about the naming, nothing personal. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:52, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
==Legal threats==
I think by this stage you are either safe or beyond the point of no return.[[User:Geni|Geni]] 12:40, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
:Well hopefully the former. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:48, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
==Awaiting Apology==
You have scurrilously, with no foundation, posted a comment that I am "a likely sock". Clearly this is done because you are uncomfortable with the academic analysis that I have been providing. There is no basis for this. It is entirely disingenuous. I defy anyone to prove the link you have alleged, since it is entirely false. Retract and issue an apology. [[User:Strichmann|Strichmann]] ([[User talk:Strichmann|talk]]) 20:32, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
It is my judgment that you are a likely sock, of Voice of Britain/Mike D78. If you want an apology it would want to come from the user(s) who have proven time and again their unwillingness to accept being banned from wikipedia by continuously re-incarnating as socks, it is these user(s) who are poisoning the atmosphere. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:41, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
*Um, this isn't exactly acceptable behavior. I posted something to the talk page of the article. Read it carefully. - [[User:Penwhale|Penwhale]] | <sup>[[User_talk:Penwhale|Blast him]] / [[Special:Contributions/Penwhale|Follow his steps]]</sup> 00:52, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
:I am not convinced your behaviour is acceptable, if you can't be bothered to study what is going on I suggest you go elsewhere but if as a new admin want to support PPA blocked users playing sock games please don't get me involved, I am tired of being trolled. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:12, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
::Check the article talk page. I want this talk centralized on there. - [[User:Penwhale|Penwhale]] | <sup>[[User_talk:Penwhale|Blast him]] / [[Special:Contributions/Penwhale|Follow his steps]]</sup> 01:43, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
:Sure, I don't want this to be personal, I'm out for the night right now but will be back, as ever. Best wishes and hope you appreciate I am not disobeying your requests. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:51, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
::Just making a note here that I've written on the article talk again. - [[User:Penwhale|Penwhale]] | <sup>[[User_talk:Penwhale|Blast him]] / [[Special:Contributions/Penwhale|Follow his steps]]</sup> 02:20, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks for the clarification but please do not assume I cannot make accusations on the relevant talk pages, that is the place to do it and while I am not 100% accurate I am 95%; from your track record you are strongly opposoed to trolling on wikipedia so I look forward to co-operating with you in ensuring that no trolling blocked users (PPA or APA) troll the PAW pages ever again. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:50, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
== Thanks ==
Nothing florid, nothing fancy. Just thanks: for the compliments, and for the support. I'll try to wield the Mop-and-Bucket with grace and humility. --[[User:Orangemike|<span style="color: darkorange">Orange Mike</span>]] 04:08, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
==What going on?==
Hello SqueakBox. I was peeking at El Jigue's IP page (seeing how he was dealing, with his banned status); It's seems he's suggesting to someday ''identify'' those who he sees as 'Pro-Castro' editors. What's that all about? Should Wikipedian be concerned? [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] ([[User talk:GoodDay|talk]]) 01:04, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
:Can you give me a link and I'll take a look. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:05, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
::It's on his IP address page [[User: 208.65.188.149|208.65.188.149]]. Maybe I'm being paranoid (or EJ is), but this looks similier to the 'Daniel Brandt' troubles, Wikipedia was/is having. I hope I'm not over-reacting. [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] ([[User talk:GoodDay|talk]]) 01:13, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
:I wouldn't worry as no-one is going to listen to him re the press and certainly there is no evidence he is a shrewd operator in the way Brandt is. On the other hand it is an attack by a banned editor against another editor so ideally the page should be semi-protected to stop El Jigue editing on it. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:28, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
::I was starting to expect ''someday'' a masked stranger at my door, with a gun. Thanks for the reassurances. [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] ([[User talk:GoodDay|talk]]) 01:33, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
== Hello ==
Hello, sorry about that! Is it ok if I upload that page again with all the references I have put it to prove its authenticity? Take a look at my user page to see. I’m a bit uneducated in what can be put up on wikipedia. I would like to contribute pages for other professional pipers also. I just thought I’d start with myself. See Jack Lee (bagpiper). This is one of the world’s best bagpipers. Can I just ask why his page is not deleted and mine is? Not being cheeky here, could you just explain it to me? There is not really much on wikipedia about piping so I would like to contribute. I also would like to create pages for piping terms etc. For example B March, which I have linked to a wikipedia page, would explain what B March is.
I will not upload the deleted page again until I hear back from you.
This probably seems like a pretty basic question, but how do you create a box for example to contain several lines of statistics, and how would you situate in the top right hand corner of a page? Something similar to the MMAstatsbox, in Ken Shamrocks page for example.
Also when adding references how do create the name of the page instead of the page address? When I put a page as [website address/name of page] the page doesn’t come up when you click on the link so I have just kept my references with the page address.
I hope to hear from you shortly.
Ryan [[User:Ryan McFarland]]
==Copyright violation in [[:Chirilagua]]==
[[Image:Information_icon.svg|left]]Hello, this is a message from [[User:CSDWarnBot|an automated bot]]. A tag has been placed on [[:Chirilagua]], by {{#ifeq:{{{nom}}}|1|[[User:{{{nominator}}}|{{{nominator}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{nominator}}}|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/{{{nominator}}}|contribs]]),}} another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be [[Wikipedia:Speedy deletions|speedily deleted]] from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because [[:Chirilagua]] is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made.<br/><br/>To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting [[:Chirilagua]], please affix the template <nowiki>{{hangon}}</nowiki> to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at [[WP:WMD]]. Feel free to contact the [[User:CSDWarnBot|bot operator]] if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page={{urlencode:Chirilagua}} here]''' [[User:CSDWarnBot|CSDWarnBot]] ([[User talk:CSDWarnBot|talk]]) 20:30, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks, though it is a shame nobody felt able to restore the pre-copyvio version. I have re-created a stub and included the offending page as a ref but obviously without any hint of copyvio. Cheers fort eh ehads up. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:58, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
==Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PLHum2.jpg==
Thanks for uploading '''[[:Image:PLHum2.jpg]]'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at [[Wikipedia:Non-free content]] carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline]] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images/media|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->[[User:BetacommandBot|BetacommandBot]] ([[User talk:BetacommandBot|talk]]) 19:48, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
===Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PLNW.jpg===
Thanks for uploading '''[[:Image:PLNW.jpg]]'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at [[Wikipedia:Non-free content]] carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline]] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images/media|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->[[User:BetacommandBot|BetacommandBot]] ([[User talk:BetacommandBot|talk]]) 19:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
===Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PLRB.jpg===
Thanks for uploading '''[[:Image:PLRB.jpg]]'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at [[Wikipedia:Non-free content]] carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline]] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images/media|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->[[User:BetacommandBot|BetacommandBot]] ([[User talk:BetacommandBot|talk]]) 19:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
:Okay, thanks for that, I have given a fair user rationale for all 3:
# it is a historically significant logo of a notable album with its own article on wikipedia
# the logo is only being used for informational purposes;
# its inclusion in the article adds significantly to the article because it represents the subject of this article. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:24, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
== Robin Hood External Link Removal ==
Hi SqueakBox
I was wondering why you removed the link to Tim Pollard's Robin Hood Homepage? It's not spam, is of interest and relevance and is certainly as valid (and non-spam-like, if you'll forgive the term) as the Wolfshead Bowmen or the TV series fansite. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Kurgan5|Kurgan5]] ([[User talk:Kurgan5|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Kurgan5|contribs]]) 13:29, 27 November 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
== An observation ==
Let me reiterate that I have a great deal of respect for you, especially your willingness to put up with a tide of POV-pushing concerning pedophilia-related articles. I'm sure your critics have considered asking you: [[¿Por qué no te callas?]]. You've stuck yto your guns admirably. That said, I'm kind of concerned about something: I [[WP:AGF|assume]] that your intentions were pure, but an [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Angelocasio&diff=174240986&oldid=174236163 edit like this] could be seen as [[WP:CANVASS|canvassing]] or [[WP:MEATPUPPET|worse]]. A blocked editor being requested to nominate an article to AfD (one that you had previously nominated), well, it doesn't look good, you know? The mess has been bad enough at [[Talk:Adult-child sex]] that I've mostly stayed away from it, but I wanted to mention this concern to you in the hopes that you'll see my point, which I present here without rancor.
As an aside, you and I have each had reason to become interested in the [[King of Spain]] recently. I backed into my interest because of [[Hugo Chavez]], whose policies have been personally costly. I'm glad a [[head of state]] can react like any of us [[peasant]]s, when provoked. :-) Gracias, [[User:Ssbohio|Ssbohio]] ([[User talk:Ssbohio|talk]]) 11:52, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
:I hardly think my comment to Angelocasio could be seen as canvassing given he has been blocked for a spurious afd, I was just being friendly and would much rather, for the record, see PPA go down the deletion road but this user couldn't even format an afd so I wouldnt worry.
::I find your comment about Chavez about stimulates my curiosity, he has not personally affected me at all but I worry that he will. Certainly his inexcusable rudeness towards Zapatero (a politician whom not only do I respect but have had to pay a huge wikipedia price to protect his integrity) was unacceptable and gives the impression to cultured Europeans that all Latinos are rude barbarians) while his latests attack on Uribe and Colombia is equally unexcusable. Honduras is talking about contracting a $750 million debt to Venezueala over the next 2 years (the lifetime of the present government) which I find extremely disturbing and not a wise move, living in both the Caribbean and Latin America I worry that Chavez, because of his monstrous ego, could create huge damage to hundreds of millions of people including myself. Well this is my personal opinion, I will still be approaching his articlke with the samje NPOV I try to bring to all my work here. Best wishes. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
==Unacceptable==
This[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cannabis_%28drug%29&diff=174541396&oldid=174540506] is not "fixing vandalism." I realize you and I don't see eye to eye on a specific content issue--whether "marijuna" refers to cannabis (which it does!) or whether the word only refers to the drug's "herbal" form, but this is the sort of thing you discuss in edit summaries and on the talk page. You don't revert the lead to a much older (and I would argue incorrect version) and claim you are "fixing vandalism." That's very misleading.--[[User:The Fat Man Who Never Came Back|The Fat Man Who Never Came Back]] ([[User talk:The Fat Man Who Never Came Back|talk]]) 12:33, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
:Cannabis is an inclusive term, marijuana is not and the removal of hashish from the opening clearly was vandalism as hashish is cannabis, so my summary was not unacceptable and I stand by it as I stand by undoing the moving of the name to marijuana (drug) with a far more provocative edit summary. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:10, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
::Having pondered this a bit I am mop\re baffled. I presume you are not claiming that hashish is not cannabis, if it is cannabis then its removal is vandalism even under the [[Wikipedia:Avoid the word "vandal"]] essay. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
==Red links==
Hi SqueakBox and thanks for your help in Colombia articles.. we've never talked before. Just one thing that I saw and I don't think you should do is erase the red links.. red links function as a reminder that there is and article to be written. Please read [[Wikipedia:Red link]]. Thanks again and cheers--'''[[User:F3rn4nd0#|<span style="color: #6495ed"></span><span style="color: #3cb371">'''Zer0~Gravity'''</span>]] '''<sup>[[User talk:Zero Gravity|<span style="color: gray">(Roger - Out)</span>]]</sup> 01:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
:The thing with the Betancourt article is that I had redirected the red links back tot he article. That is why I removed them though in this case I do agree that these subjects are worthy of a separate article, especially the mother. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:21, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
== El Jigue ==
Thanks for the vote of confidence. I think I'm going to present this on AN, just to get some more input and perhaps get a stronger sense of whether or not this user can be considered banned. [[User:Natalie Erin|Natalie]] 20:43, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
==Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PLHum2.jpg==
Thanks for uploading '''[[:Image:PLHum2.jpg]]'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at [[Wikipedia:Non-free content]] carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline]] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images/media|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->[[User:BetacommandBot|BetacommandBot]] ([[User talk:BetacommandBot|talk]]) 20:43, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
==Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PLNW.jpg==
Thanks for uploading '''[[:Image:PLNW.jpg]]'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at [[Wikipedia:Non-free content]] carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline]] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images/media|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->[[User:BetacommandBot|BetacommandBot]] ([[User talk:BetacommandBot|talk]]) 20:43, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
==Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PLRB.jpg==
Thanks for uploading '''[[:Image:PLRB.jpg]]'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at [[Wikipedia:Non-free content]] carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline]] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images/media|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->[[User:BetacommandBot|BetacommandBot]] ([[User talk:BetacommandBot|talk]]) 20:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
== Carrying on the way you do ==
Do you, too, dislike whistleblowers? [[Special:Contributions/70.56.67.1|70.56.67.1]] ([[User talk:70.56.67.1|talk]]) 00:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
:Haven't seen it but I have heard its a good tv show. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
==Beards==
[[Beard Liberation Front|Who knew]]?? Thank you for this valueable piece of information. --[[User_talk:Endlessdan|'''<span style="color: #00DD88">E<span style="color: #22DD66">n<span style="color: #55DD44">d<span style="color: #77DD22">l<span style="color: #aaDD00">es</span>s</span>D</span>a</span>n</span>''']] 15:59, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
== Rastafari movement ==
I've requested a new peerreview because I think this article looks like it might be close to ready for FAC. —[[User:Whig|Whig]] ([[User talk:Whig|talk]]) 07:00, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
== ETA ==
I have posted a similarly message at ONIH's.
You defended in the article that the group's classification in the third paragraph was probably the most balanced. I actually think it should go second, I didnt want to de-stabilise the article after the consensus had been reach.
Now you may or not be aware that de-stabilisation has happened already and classification moved down to the 5th paragraph by a couple of editors. After this, say, "downlisting", I am missing your comments defending its previous place as you did back in the day regarding its, say, "uplisting".
If it was a matter of fairness to keep it in the third, not second paragraph, I think the same fairness and balance justifies keeping this reference third, not fifth.
Things in written tend to go a bit disparaged so, dont get me wrong, this is just a friendly notice to friendly check your current position on the matter, nothing more, nothing less. • <span style="font-variant:small-caps">[[User:Mountolive|<span style="color:#800080;">Mountolive</span>]]</span>[[User talk:Mountolive| <sup>J'espère que tu t'es lavé les mains avant de me toucher</sup>]] 19:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
==Thanks. :D ==
Thanks, darlin'. Bless. [[User:Deeceevoice|deeceevoice]] ([[User talk:Deeceevoice|talk]]) 22:58, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
== Lolicon thing... you still have me ''very'' confused ==
I responded you at the arbcom election page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2007%2FVote%2FWhite_Cat&diff=178342746&oldid=178297254] though it may be better to continue this discussion via user talk pages. --<small> [[User:White Cat/07|Cat]]</small> <sup>[[User talk:White Cat/07|chi?]]</sup> 19:21, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
:I'll see if I can find some better links. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
::I have replied to you again. I have provided the link to the actual discussion. --<small> [[User:White Cat/07|Cat]]</small> <sup>[[User talk:White Cat/07|chi?]]</sup> 19:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
:::Oh and when I closed the case, I had reopened it just a full 12 minutes afterwards. --<small> [[User:White Cat/07|Cat]]</small> <sup>[[User talk:White Cat/07|chi?]]</sup> 19:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
:I do support Jimbo's delete decision on this one. I also feel it is relevant to the arbcom election as I guess I ma looking for candidates who act very conservatively in this matter. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:08, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
==[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 3]]==
[[Image:Admin_mop.PNG|right|border ]]Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was definitely a dramatic debate! I very much appreciate your ability to keep an open mind, and for my part, I definitely paid close attention to everything that was said, on all sides. Where possible, I will definitely try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. I'm going to take it slow for now -- I'm working my way through the [[Wikipedia:New admin school]], carefully investigating the admin tools and double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, but I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are several more that I definitely want to get to [[WP:FA]] status! Thank you again for your participation, --[[User:Elonka|El]][[User talk:Elonka|on]][[Special:Contributions/Elonka|ka]] 07:27, 17 December 2007 (UTC) {{-}}
== Hi ==
Hi Richard. I just thought I'd drop by to see what you were up to. Far more active than I am, I can see. Well, I hope things are going well in your life these days. All the best. [[User:Guettarda|Guettarda]] 14:43, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
:Yep, still here, ie in the Caribbean city I have been living in the last few years, still working and still involved in wikipedia, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:04, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
== hello ==
Hi. I see you're still fighting, good on you. I've been away but I'll try to come back at least partially and help out. [[User:Herostratus|Herostratus]] 23:09, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
==Happy Holidays==
<div style="border: 1px solid #aaa; margin: 5px 5px 5px 5px; padding: 0 0 0 0;">
<div style="border: 1px dashed #777; margin: 0 0 0 0; padding: 0 0 0 0;">
<div style="border: 1px solid #aaa; margin: 0 0 0 0; padding: 0 0 0 0;">
<div style="border: 2px solid #fff; margin: 0 0 0 0; padding: 10px 10px 10px 10px; background-color: red;">
<div style="background: #B0C4DE; border: 2px solid #ccc;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin-top: 3px; padding-top: 9px; padding-bottom: 9px; padding-left: 9px; padding-right: 9px; width: 250px;">[[Image:Jeeny-xmas tree.png|150px]]</div>
</div>
<div class="NavFrame collapsed" style="padding: 0px; border-style: none;">
<div class="NavFrame collapsed" style="padding: 0px; border-style: none;">
<div class="NavHead" style="background: #eee; text-align: center;"><small>You got a Christmas card!</small> → → →</div>
<div class="NavContent" style="text-align: left;">
{| style="border: 0; padding: 5; margin: 0; background: #B0C4DE;"
|-
| [[Image:Jolly-old-saint-nick.gif|right]]
|[[Image:LGBTsleigh.png|150px|left]]
|[[Image:Xmas-jeeny-tree.png|150px|center]]
| <span style="font-family: Harlow Solid Italic; color:red; font-size: 175%;">Wishing you and yours the very best of the holiday season. May the coming year bring you peace, joy, health and happiness. God bless us, every one!</span> [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] ([[User talk:Jeffpw|talk]]) 20:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
|}
</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
== Seasons Greetings ==
Best wishes for you and yours this Christmas. Let's all have a wonderful New Year. [[Special:Contributions/Will_Beback| ·:· ]][[User:Will Beback|Will Beback]] [[User talk:Will Beback|·:·]] 19:52, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
== Founder ==
How does changing mentions of "co-founder" to "founder" fall under [[WP:NPOV]]? --[[User:Escape_Orbit|<span style="color:purple;">Escape Orbit</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]]</sup> 19:28, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
:See [[Talk:Larry Sanger]]. I do not appreciate the SPA Bramlet stalking me. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:33, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
::No one is "stalking" you. They are protecting Sanger-related and WP-related articles from your non-consensus based edits. [[User:MrWhich|Mr Which]][[User_talk:MrWhich|<small>???</small>]] 20:10, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
:::Well, gee, they got blocked for stalking. Sure looked like stalking to me, too. [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] ([[User talk:Jeffpw|talk]]) 20:15, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
::::I happened onto the Sanger article in a random article search awhile back. I have no interest in the man or his article, other than to make certain it is in compliance with applicable WP policies. SB has attempted to remove "co-founder of Wikipedia" from the Sanger article lead, against all consensus, and in direct contravention of [[WP:V]] (many reliable sources call him that). Now he's taken the crusade project-wide, removing "co-" across multiple articles in the project, without consensus, and in contradiction to [[WP:V]]. Reverting such edits isn't "stalking" at all, in my view. Sometimes admins make mistakes, and I think this is one of those times. For me, it's not personal, I'm just trying to make certain that policy is followed with regards to the articles relating to Sanger, Wales, and Wikipedia. [[User:MrWhich|Mr Which]][[User_talk:MrWhich|<small>???</small>]] 20:20, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks for explaining. I have absolutely no axe to grind on this topic, but I have to say, it looks very like having failed to get consensus on one page, you've embarked on a whole bunch of other related edits in order to make a [[WP:POINT|point]]. And quoting a policy that doesn't appear to have anything to do with it. That was what I asked about and what drew my attention in the first place, and I'm not sure your explanation has made it any clearer. --[[User:Escape_Orbit|<span style="color:purple;">Escape Orbit</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]]</sup> 00:32, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
:The policy I am quoting is entirely the correct one. I have no axe to grind on this issue either but I take NPOV very seriously and making claims of this sort, especially in articles that are not directly about either wikipedia, or Sanger, or Wales, is clearly an NPOV violation, poor edits should not stand, and lets face it thjis issue has been talked about in various places over a long time and NPOV has always been the relevant policy, so your claim that this is not so is strange. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:31, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
::No, actually. You're quoting a policy that is ''extremely'' important, but irrelevant to your argument. [[User:MrWhich|Mr Which]][[User_talk:MrWhich|<small>???</small>]] 02:01, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
::::No, you are wrong there, NPOV is my argument as it has been the argument of others before me ever since this controversy began more than a year back, merely claiming that NPOV policy is not relevant is simply not an argument. Why is it POV? Because it takes sides. This is also why there are BLP concerns, as we need to take a neutral stance between Sanger and Wales, whereas calling either of them co-founder does not a neutral view, it supports Sanger's view ina dispute. That is a clear violation of our neutrality policy, I am baffled as to why you would claim that NPOV has nothing to do with this dispute. It has everything to do with this dispute, and what I want is that we treat Sanger and Wales equally, and that is all I want. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 06:20, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
:::::Be "baffled" all you want. That you can't see that refusing to acknowledge what is [[WP:V|verifiable]] through dozens of [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] violates [[WP:NPOV]] to a FAR greater extent than not doing so speaks LOUDLY to your own problems with POV. That Sanger is the co-founder is not "in dispute" anywhere but in Wales' own mind. Find reliable sources that say Sanger wasn't the co-founder (as there are PLENTY that call him that), and then we can talk. Until then, you're simply trying to enforce your own POV across the spectrum of Wales and Sanger-related articles. [[User:MrWhich|Mr Which]][[User_talk:MrWhich|<small>???</small>]] 02:02, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Well I am certainly not baffled by your approach. Its called trolling. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:19, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
*Nope. Disagreeing with your POV does ''not'' equal "trolling", no matter how "baffled" you are or are not. [[User:MrWhich|Mr Which]][[User_talk:MrWhich|<small>???</small>]] 17:23, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
:I do not have a POV on this subject and am solely interested in neutrality. If you cannot see the trolling don't expect me to clarify it for you. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
:*Yes, you do. And you tried to enforce it over the entire project on all Wales- and Sanger-related articles. And you should know that accusing someone of "trolling", when they're not doing so is a personal attack. Stop. [[User:MrWhich|Mr Which]][[User_talk:MrWhich|<small>???</small>]] 17:42, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Indeed, enforcing neutrality is my speciality. And in this case it looked as if 90% of what I was removing was not merely POV but also troling (ie on all the articles not specifically bios of Wales or Sanger or pages relating specifically to wikipedia, and especially the refs), and of course this issue is not finished. There is no impunity merely because this issue is about our founder. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
===Stalker===
I'm sorry you had to put up with that, Squeakbox. If anything like that happens again, please feel free to message me for support. I started to revert that guy's edits, but see that it has been taken care of (what I checked, anyway). I'll poke through the rest of the diffs and clean up anything I see. Merry Christmas. We haven't always agreed on every issue, but you are a solid editor whom I respect a lot. [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] ([[User talk:Jeffpw|talk]]) 19:51, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
* Can we please have Talkpage consensus on this before *any* more changes are made? Thanks, <b>[[User talk:Black Kite|<span style="color: black"><small>BLACK</small>KITE</span>]]</b> 20:07, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
:Where? And removing a falsehood from wikipedia should be a top priority, then we can discuss it. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:27, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
::Personally I think it about time wikipedia did indeed follow [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jimmy_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=154297650 this advice] re people who keep doing this and don't make positive contributions either and hope that others who read this will do so. Havomg to put up with this is not on. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:39, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
:::Just stop, SB. You're not "removing a falsehood", you're pushing your POV against consensus and [[WP:V]]. I would be shocked that you've not yet been blocked for it, but... well, never mind. [[User:MrWhich|Mr Which]][[User_talk:MrWhich|<small>???</small>]] 01:59, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
:::So why do we mention this dispute everywhere we mention Wales, if not to push a [[WP:POINT|point]]? I understand why this subject should be mentioned in wikipedia and the Wales and Sanger articles but in almost every article in which Wales is mentioned, and merely because he is mentioned? in articles in which Wales is only mentioned in passing? Clearly this is a [[WP:NPOV]] neutrality violation violation, why should I be blocked for trying to NPOV the encyclopedia in a good faith way, and invoking the policy while I do so?. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 05:38, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
== Re: You reverted your warning ==
Let's put it this way: I expect experienced users to contact [[WP:RFPP]] and request a lock due edit warring. As far as I know, the co-founder/founder thing is a content issue and not a vandalism issue (after all the Jimmy Wales article states he is the co-founder of Wikipedia), and therefore you cannot keep reverting without warning the users and requesting a page protection. And as far as I remember, we rule ourselves by the Verifiability policy, where we need third party references to corroborate things, and not just personal comments (regardless of the respect I have for Jimbo). If we begin making exceptions for Jimbo, we may as well throw [[WP:V]], [[WP:RS]] and [[WP:NOR]] to the bin. Cheers! -- [[User:ReyBrujo|ReyBrujo]] ([[User talk:ReyBrujo|talk]]) 11:29, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
:It is definitely not a vandalism issue which is why I invoked policy (and if I forgot in any particular case that was wrong of me) but I have certainly read and hear what you are saying, besides I have no intention of pursuing this or anything much that isn't fun here until the Christmas break finishes. I did, in my defence, post the issue at AN/I after Bramlet started reverting me in a large number of articles. I certainly think we should not make excepotions for Jimbo, this means treating him neutrally not worse than we do for other living biographies, or indeed better. He is, though, becoming too much of a soft target for my liking and I may create a page on thios whole issue once the short break is over. Feliz Navidad. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:21, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
==Re: revert of 179974490 by 66.99.0.82 (Cannabis smoking)==
* I am perplexed by your brief statement "unsourced evidence indicates all smoking is harful cough cough".
* I will look for sourced evidence that 500-mg. paper-roll torches burn herb hotter than 25 mg. in a narrow-diameter one-hitter or minitoke. (See [[http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Talk:Introduction_to_Bioethics]] for speculations why researchers may be afraid to publish on this subject. See [[http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Smoking_Cessation]] for several ways to make an anti-overdose utensil, a list of healthy, legal herbs to use instead of tobacco, and other information that is pertinent to cannabis).
* Meanwhile, I added material under "bowl" (further up) attempting to warn users to burn at low temperature even if they mistakenly use a wide-bowl pipe. (The very word "bowl" is biased toward overdose because it implies bigness-- compare the Russian word Болшой.)
:1. Youngsters consulting the "Cannabis smoking" article in pursuit of information how to consume cannabis should NOT be told all smoking is harmful (I never said that) but offered alternatives to the smoking methods that are harmful (hot-burning overdose). (Though I didn't correct it, you said "harful"-- maybe instead of "cough cough" you meant "har har"?
:2. "Joints" have the utterly harmful effect that they initiate youngsters into the culture of overdose cigaret smoking which is the no. 1 genocide in the history of the planet. (It's not a cannabis overdose which is the issue here, but smoking overdoses of carbon monoxide and other toxins which can be largely avoided without abstaining from cannabis.)
:3. This article should also strongly warn throughout against the practice, glamorized by rap singers who have allegedly received payments under the table by tobacco companies, of smoking "blunts" (tbe cigar wrap contains addictive nicotine), or "joints" which contain both cannabis and tohacco (unfortunately described in "cannabis" articles in various languages throughout the wikipedia, a betrayal of first order). The synergy of cannabis and tobacco results in tobacco addiction and further health consequences which lawmakers paid by tobacco interests can use as pretext to ban cannabis.
:4. This article misleads children from the outset by showing a picture of a "joint" and some proprietary rolling papers (made, of course, by a subsidiary of one of the [[BIG TOBACKGO]] corporations), and of course a big-bowl pipe into which a gram can be stuffed.
* Because I have noticed from some of your edits that you are pro-cannabis, I hope you will take these observations to heart and try to edit this article in such a way that it does not play into the hands of [[BIG TOBACKGO]] (5.3 million deaths a year, [[WHO]]2003). I understand that unlike myself, a natural-born coward typing from big-city library computers, you have entered your name and the assholes might be able to find you. Anyway please take another look at the situation and also at some of my reverted contributions to discussion pages (I will dig them out and list them here).
It was a typo, I meant harmful. I take our [[WP:NPOV|neutrality policy]] very seriousl;y and do not edit the articles in a pro-cannabis way, indeed while I am pro legalising cannabis I wouldnt call myself pro-cannabis beyond that and certainly do not buy that it is not harmful, etc, but as an ex-tobacco smoker (clean since 94) I wouldn't call myself pro-tobacco either. I'll certainly take your points to heart, happy Christmas. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:05, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
==Re:"[[Cannabis (drug)]]:talk" reverts==
Please reconsider your two reverts of this section as I was trying to edit my own earlier contribution (notice the 66.99 numbers-- a different computer in the same anonymous library) in view to improve its information value and actually take out some of the combative rhetoric I repented of including the "Apology of a natural-born coward". (If you found that last too charming to remove, I'll probably resurrect it elsewhere anyway.) I think I'll also revive the signature I've sometimes used, [[tokerdesigner]].
Another guy also reverted part of the edits, again probably thinking I was tampering with somebody else's stuff, which I assure you wasn't the case.[[User:Tokerdesigner|Tokerdesigner]] ([[User talk:Tokerdesigner|talk]]) 17:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
===Canada===
P.S. What I'm asking you to do (above message) is edit in detail rather than just push the one button. Check out my edits of the earlier 66.99 stuff and maybe you'll agree it's an improvement.
Concerning your subsequent discussion with the Canadian research, here's another instance, I think, of the problem I'm trying to address. If you had the time (or the money, because it seems one has to subscribe to the magazine to read the research), I wonder if you wouldn't find that the Canadian research is based on how many hot-burning overdose "joints". 400 mg. and up, etc. What I'm trying to inject into these wiki articles is that if a non-overdose smoking method was used-- limit 25 mg. per toke-- close to zero health issues would result from either cannabis or tobacco.
By the way congratulations on quitting in '94, I'm particularly happy the assholes aren't getting any of your money to invest in trick propaganda to snare children into nicotine slavery.[[User:Tokerdesigner|Tokerdesigner]] ([[User talk:Tokerdesigner|talk]]) 20:01, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks for your message. My doctor warned me in 97 that the problem with smoking cannabis is that it burns too hot, and he was probably right, but tobacco closes the lungs down so you can't cough, horrible. I did try eating grass some time ago (fried in an oil) and while it was very strong it made my piss smell odd and I was left feeling it was probably a lot less healthy than smoking, and the ridiculous piece I quoted from the BBC about holding it in makes me think they were only testing poor adolescents from the first world (where the price is much higher). I always used to hold tobacco smoke in as my body was craving nicotine whereas the cannabis smoking experience is very different and one should hold the smoke in less (at my age one really has little choice lol). I'll try to not to get involved in edit disputes with yourself anyway. Happy holidays. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:12, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Hey that's interesting about frying and after legalization maybe I'll be able to afford that.
===Holding it in versus a Rebreather (air bonnet)===
Recently Dr. Tashkin was quoted, maybe inaccurately, about holding in cannabis smoke too long. I'm not trying to needle you into vastly increasing your smoking, I'm against overdosing on carbon monoxide, but the system I'm talking about, which some Wiki editors keep erasing when I try to sketch it in, is (a) use the least amount, 25 mg. in a narrow crater, (b) suck as slow as possible (if you have a transparent tube you want to see the smoke meandering through it), and (c) (boy, they'll never let this in, but it's utterly harmless compared to serving extra tokes) breathe in and out of a one-liter sack several dozen times.
The point is-- you get more cannabinol (or nicotine, if you were still into that) on each additional inhalation, but no more carbon monoxide (the most damaging of all ingredients) because that was entirely absorbed on the first inhalation. I find almost no evidence on the internet that anyone is aware of this obvious physical issue, otherwise, maybe the "joint" and the big-bowl bong would disappear from history. I think all the psycho and motivational problems attributed to cannabis are due to overdosing on carbon monoxide (along with heat shock to the cilia etc. and the sedentary "culture" borrowed from cigaret ads about sitting around waiting to see what it feels like)-- entirely avoidable technical errors based on imitating whatever the tobacco industry teaches in its overdose advertising.
But when I try to inject any of this into the wikipedia, editors say "The Wikipedia is not a set of directions how to do something (especially illegal)." Meanwhile, if you check out certain articles, such as "joint" or "blunt" you can find paragraph after paragraph of minute directions how to smoke overdoses, and routine observations about cannabis that "It's usually mixed with tobacco". Kids reading the Wikipedia expect it to tell them how to use cannabis, and they take that "mix with tobacco" history as if it were advice. "This is how it's done" equates to "Here's how you do it." Each article has a picture of a big "joint", big bowl bong, etc. and youngsters take that as an indication what they are to do.
Well thanks for the New Year greeting and same to you.[[User:Tokerdesigner|Tokerdesigner]] ([[User talk:Tokerdesigner|talk]]) 22:25, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
== Merry Christmas ==
[[Image:Christmas_tree_bauble.jpg|left|thumb|200px|Wishing you the very best for the season - [[User:Guettarda|Guettarda]] 03:48, 25 December 2007 (UTC)]]
== Merry Christmas ==
{| class="messagebox standard-talk" style="border:2px solid green; background-color:#C80815; font-size:10pt"
|align="center"|[[Image:Christmas tree2.jpg|50px]]
|
<span style="color: #FFFFFF">Merry Christmas, my friend. May this find you in good health, good spirits, good company, and good finances. If any of these be missing, may God see fit to restore you in good time. — [[User talk:Springeragh|<span style="background:#808;color:#fff;text-decoration:none;"> '''''$PЯING'''''εrαgђ </span>]] 05:16 [[25 December]], [[2007]] (UTC)</span>
|align="center"|[[Image:Julkrubba.jpg|125px]]
|}
==AfD nomination of [[Legal intoxicants]]==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|48px|left]]An article that you have been involved in editing, [[Legal intoxicants]], has been listed for [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deletion]]. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Legal intoxicants]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:adw --> --[[User:BJBot|BJBot]] ([[User talk:BJBot|talk]]) 18:19, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks a lot for the heads up, I have expressed my opinion. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:51, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
== Encyclopedic treatment if Wikipedia founder issue ==
The issue of what to say in this wikipedia about who is the "founder" of wikipedia is an issue that is best finessed. Words have many meanings. Jimmy founded the Wiki'''M'''edia Foundation. Bomis founded Nupedia. The Wikipedia community and encyclopedia were founded by Sanger in some ways, yet it is also true that he was an employee. But employees also create books and software and get credit for their creative work. Writing off Sanger now after he was given credit in the early years is like a company removing an author's name from a creative work after a falling out. Even where legal, it is unethical. Further there are other founders. The wiki software has a different creator. The idea of Wikipedia came from yet a different person. The idea of free culture has yet further fathers. Encyclopedias should be written thoughtfully, with attention to exactness. Please don't hurt our reputation by making this appear to be Jimbo's Blog. Thank you. [[User:WAS 4.250|WAS 4.250]] ([[User talk:WAS 4.250|talk]]) 01:44, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
:I agree there are subtle nuances to this one. I also think we should not turn this encyclopedia into Sanger's blog, which is far closer to the truth. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:29, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
::Oh, BS. You've been shown multiple reliable sources that verify that Sanger is the co-founder. Stop being obstinate. [[User:MrWhich|Mr Which]][[User_talk:MrWhich|<small>???</small>]] 15:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
:::BS? Multiple sources do not justify what you and others are trying to impose on wikipedia, which is POV. I can get multiple sources that Hitler was a dictator but this does not mean that we have to call him a dictator every time he is mentioned in any article. You are fundamentally misunderstanding both our [[WP:reliable sources]] guideline and our more important [[WP:NPOV|neutrality policy]] in order to try to impose a POV solution that suports the assertion of one party in a dispute (Sanger) as if it were the only point of view, and over a range of articles that have nothing to do with this dispute. For you to call me obstinate based on your desire to be partial on this one is a completely unnecessary personal attack and if you attack me again on this page I will ban you from it as civility is important to me, and besides calling me obstinate won't achieve whatever it is you are trying to achieve. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:45, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
:::I like how people throw around sources while very rarely reading them. For example, the link on AN/I to a google news search of '''"larry sanger" co-founder''' is cute, but [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22Jimmy+Wales%22+founder&btnG=Search+Archives&oe=utf-8&um=1&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 this search] for '''"jimmy wales" founder''' does much the same thing, with about the same accuracy. A mixture of press releases, interviews, and the occasional satirical piece. A google search, no matter how pretty, isn't a reliable source. There's a wealth of conflicting information out there, and while some could go through it all trying to make a case one way or the other, it'd be impossible to frame it as other than Original Research. Wikipedia is too close to this one, we've even been used as sources in this issue. We cannot take a neutral stance on founder/co-founder, we ought to distance ourselves. Don't go with Sanger's or Wales' perferred versions, just note the disagreement where proper, and move on. (see also [[Talk:Wikimedia_Foundation/Archive_2#NPOV]] for similar discussion) --[[User:InkSplotch|InkSplotch]] ([[User talk:InkSplotch|talk]]) 15:56, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
::::Thanks for that, InkSplotch. My take is we must be neutral and nothing else, I certainly do not support taking sides in this dispute between Sanger and Wales, and as I said myself at AN/I I want to build up some more data on this one (especially how we treat the issue throughout wikipedia, ie where we treat it). Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:07, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
== [[Talk: Assassination of Benazir Bhutto]] ==
Hi... As I read [[WP:BLP]], all the rank speculation about the President being behind the assassination has got to go:
:Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material — whether negative, positive, or just questionable — about living persons should be removed immediately and without discussion from Wikipedia articles, '''''talk pages''''', user pages, and project space. [[WP:BLP]] (bolding/italics mine)
What do you think? --[[User:Rrburke|Rrburke]]<sup><small>([[User_talk:Rrburke|talk]])</small></sup> 16:30, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
:I fully agree, this kind of stuff has no place on wikiepdia. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:31, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
::Do you want to pull it? I can do it later, but I'll be away from the computer for the next little while. Be prepared for a good many angry responses, reversions, and accusations of "censorship". You may have to point editors repeatedly to [[WP:BLP]] and end up issuing some [[WP:3RR]] warnings and reports. Consider using [[:Template:BLPrefactor]]. There may be a relevant warning template header to put at the top of the talk page to prevent the addition of similar material -- I just can't think of one off the top of my head. If you have the chance, also check [[Talk:Benazir Bhutto]] for similar comments. Cheers. --[[User:Rrburke|Rrburke]]<sup><small>([[User_talk:Rrburke|talk]])</small></sup> 16:43, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
==This article sez so==
They speak of a flight at 3 o'clock [http://www.liberation.fr/actualite/monde/300696.FR.php] [[User:Radio Guy|Radio Guy]] ([[User talk:Radio Guy|talk]]) 00:23, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
I don't think one article justifies a current tag. I hope she is released, see my comment [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AJimbo_Wales&diff=179976675&oldid=179970910 here]. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:27, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
== Tired of your subtle slights and attacks ==
Squeak, your edit comment of ''"err do not tamper with my comments that will not be tolerated although you are"'' was inappropriate in two ways. Firstly, the first half is a factual inaccuracy. I did not alter comments at all. I modified the heading to match already-existing headings. You don't like it, you can change it back, which you did when leaving the above inappropriate comment. Secondly, I see an underhanded low-level personal attack in your comment and that is uncalled for. I have not attacked anyone personally, in spite of your (and Will's) absolute refusal to even read the comments on the Talk page (as far as I can tell, since I laid out the policy verifications and rationale and still that's not enough). Let's assume that you and he do actually read them, you still act in an NPOV fashion and then leave these little tidbits. I find it uncivil. [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 02:41, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
:Sigh. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:43, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
== [[Giovanni di Stefano]] ==
I have performed a quick selective deletion on that article (an IP showed up by mistake and the editor expressed privacy concerns). I'm sorry but I fear that removed a few contribs of yours. If you need to redo them just ask me and I'll provide you the text. Sorry again! -- [[User:Lucasbfr|<span style="color:darkgreen;">lucasbfr</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Lucasbfr|<span style="color:darkred;">ho ho ho</span>]]</sup> 16:43, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
I just rewrote it again and no problem at all. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:49, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
== Talk:Haile Selassie I ==
Please check out [[Talk:Haile Selassie I of Ethiopia]], a user has appeared who is arguing his own doctrine that Rastafari is supposedly "incompatible" with Haile Selassie I's own views as a Christian, even after I have advised him that this opinion is not neutral. [[User:Til Eulenspiegel|Til Eulenspiegel]] ([[User talk:Til Eulenspiegel|talk]]) 01:04, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads up, I have now cited the uncontroversial material that the fact tags demanded be cited. The [[Christafari]] POV (to put it one way) will always come up re HIM, I guess, as these folk believe strongly and like to use wikipedia to express that belief. But really, regardless of one's beliefs re HIM, this kind of material has no place in the article. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:06, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
::And greetings - I have offered to mediate on the cabal page at [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2007-12-30_Haile_Selassie_I_of_Ethiopia]- if you have any problems with that, please let me know. If not, I have left you some homework :) [[User:Docboat|docboat]] ([[User talk:Docboat|talk]]) 08:17, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
:I have issues with the mediation as premature but, while not knowing you, I am happy to accept your mediation and go along with the process in spite of reservations. I am committed to researching for better and more substantial refs re the divinity issue. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
:: Hi Richard, I saw the spat at the Haile Salassie talk, I'm kind of hoping you can help out a bit by focusing back on content, in detail, without speculating on the motives of the source or the editor. Sometimes [[WP:ATT]] can help - "According to X, ''blah''" - but sometimes not. I'm not clear as to whether the issue is of [[WP:UNDUE]] or not, but I am sure that Picaroon is not grinding an axe here, I think he genuinely wants to help (he is, in my experience, a good guy). Whatever, have a happy New Year in (checks watch) 26 minutes local, a bit longer in the sunny place where you are. Cheers, <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> <small>([[User:JzG/help|Help!]])</small> 22:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
:And it all worked out well and amicably so I am sure Picaroon was there to help and I already knew this user a bit. Its not so much suny here, I expect we get as many clouds and as much rain as you do, but it is significantly warmer, I am still in t-shirt and shorts with all the windows open even though it is a very rainy, gloomy day, and like so many days here but the warmth is something else. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
== Socrates2008 ==
Please take a look at [[Talk:Patrick Haseldine#Edits]] where the dispute with South African editor [[User:Socrates2008|Socrates2008]] continues.[[User:PJHaseldine|PJHaseldine]] ([[User talk:PJHaseldine|talk]]) 12:46, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
:Hello SqueakBox. [[Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Alternative theories_of_the_bombing_of_Pan_Am_Flight_103.2FPatrick Haseldine|There is a case open]] on the [[Patrick Haseldine]] article at the [[Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard]]. Since you have taken part in discussions on the Haseldine article, it would be good to have your input to the COI case. On paper it seems that it is now time for longer blocks, but I note that you have cautioned Socrates2008 about his behavior, so there could be more to the story. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 17:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
:I have given a response, looks to me like 2 editors in a conflict and I am not sure that COI should allow one of the 2 to "win" the dispute. I am anyone disinterested and will certainly keep my eye on the article(s). Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
== Block log link ==
Hi! Regarding [[User:SqueakBox/welcome]], I'd just like to point out that one can, in fact, link directly to [[Special:Log/block]]; there's no need to use external link syntax. —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 21:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
:Done. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
==Talk page==
Thanks for the talk page help. Hard-banned {{vandal|Primetime}} was recently discovered to snuck back and he's angry about being found-out. [[Special:Contributions/Will_Beback| ·:· ]][[User:Will Beback|Will Beback]] [[User talk:Will Beback|·:·]] 22:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
==[[:Hippie/temp]]==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important yellow.svg|left|48px|]]
Another editor has added the "{{tl|prod}}" template to the article [[Hippie/temp]], suggesting that it be deleted according to the [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed deletion]] process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also [[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not]] and [[Wikipedia:Notability]]). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at [[Talk:Hippie/temp|its talk page]]. If you remove the {{tl|prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion]], where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. <!-- Template:PRODNote --> [[User:BJBot|BJBot]] ([[User talk:BJBot|talk]]) 21:14, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
==Alleged conflict of interest==
Grateful to have your reaction to my edit yesterday to [[Talk:Patrick Haseldine#Alleged conflict of interest]] and also to the "suggested improvements" section. Thanks.[[User:PJHaseldine|PJHaseldine]] ([[User talk:PJHaseldine|talk]]) 11:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
:I moved the Rusbridger (1991) citation into the [[Patrick Haseldine]] article. There is more to do there (a long list of suggested improvements). [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 14:23, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
==AfD nomination of [[Parents Without Rights]]==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|left|48px|]]An editor has nominated [[Parents Without Rights]], an article on which you have worked or that you created, for [[Wikipedia:Deletion process|deletion]]. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "[[WP:NOT|What Wikipedia is not]]").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at {{#if:Parents Without Rights | [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parents Without Rights]] | [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parents Without Rights]] }} and please be sure to [[WP:SIG|sign your comments]] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the [[WP:AfD|articles for deletion]] template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you.<!-- Template:AFDNote --> [[User:BJBot|BJBot]] ([[User talk:BJBot|talk]]) 13:31, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
==[[:Adult-child sex]]==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important yellow.svg|left|48px|]]
Another editor has added the "{{tl|prod}}" template to the article [[Adult-child sex]], suggesting that it be deleted according to the [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed deletion]] process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also [[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not]] and [[Wikipedia:Notability]]). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at [[Talk:Adult-child sex|its talk page]]. If you remove the {{tl|prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion]], where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. <!-- Template:PRODNote --> [[User:BJBot|BJBot]] ([[User talk:BJBot|talk]]) 23:14, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
== Stop it ==
Edit warring on a users own page isn't helpful. I'm not sure his page is either, but I suggest you unwatch it and ignore.--[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]]<sup>g</sup> 02:09, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I'll rfc this user tomorrow, I am tired of being insulted and he can't just use wikipedia to attack people. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:12, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
:RfC'ing is better than edit warring.--[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]]<sup>g</sup> 02:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
::Well exactly. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
:::I strongly suggest that you disengage from this user. I have told them that I believe their comments are inexcusable. I also believe that your continued engagement will not help this situation at all. I hope that you will disengage immediately. - [[User:Philippe|Philippe]] | [[User talk:Philippe|Talk]] 05:26, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
::::Sure. All I want is for them to calm down and stop attacking. If this doesn't get resolved within a few days I will certainly go to rfc but I hope you can solve it satisfactorily yourself and will certainly not engage in any way with this user while this is happening. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 05:31, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
== Merger of [[cannabis (drug)]] and [[hashish]] ==
I'm not sure where you proposed this merger. It wasn't templated on either of the two pages, and doesn't appear to have been mentioned on either talk page either. I've reverted it pending some sort of public discussion. [[User:Zetawoof|Zetawoof]]<sub>([[User_talk:Zetawoof|ζ]])</sub> 04:31, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
:Well that isn't helpful, edit warring never is. Talk:Cannabis (drug)#"in its herbal form"]] was the most recent, the other has been hidden in the archives. Why have you reverted. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:38, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
:: Because there's a well-defined process for proposing a merge (see [[WP:MERGE]]), and this process wasn't followed. Additionally, looking at that talk page archive, there was never any semblance of a consensus to merge. [[User:Zetawoof|Zetawoof]]<sub>([[User_talk:Zetawoof|ζ]])</sub> 07:14, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
:I think you are either misunderstanding or wikilawyering, the "well-defined" processes include what I did, without the slightest doubt nor was there any serious opposition to my proposal. You haven't explained your actions at all but hashish is cannabis, why have an article on hash and not weed. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:58, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
:: Part of the merge process is placing a {{tl|merge}} (or {{tl|mergefrom}}/{{tl|mergeto}}) template on each of the articles involved. With regard to the actual merits of the merge, hashish is a form of cannabis, just as [[chewing tobacco]] is a form of [[tobacco]] - they're separate products with different histories and uses; as such, and because the two articles are both quite long already, I see no reason to merge them. [[User:Zetawoof|Zetawoof]]<sub>([[User_talk:Zetawoof|ζ]])</sub> 02:07, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
How is hashish used differently to grass. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:09, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
: I'm not entirely sure, myself (as I'm not a cannabis/hashish user). However, the information in the articles [[hashish]] and [[cannabis smoking]] seem to suggest that there are significant differences in usage. (For instance, hashish is often eaten, whereas cannabis is not.) The fact alone that hashish has been recognized as a distinct product for 700-800 years - it was mentioned by [[Marco Polo]]! - should be sufficient, though. [[User:Zetawoof|Zetawoof]]<sub>([[User_talk:Zetawoof|ζ]])</sub> 06:53, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
::Actually [[cooking with cannabis]] would contradict what you say, I believe, space cakes etc are certainly eaten, and [[bhang]] is not a product of hashish as the leaves are used. The main difference seems to be in geographical distribution, classic example being that in India in the tropical south weed is used and in the desert north hash is used. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:39, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Pro-pedophile activism]] ==
Please could you take time to pop over to the [http://www.martinp23.com/medcom/index.php?title=PPA_talk:Pro-pedophile_activism MedCom wiki] so we can have a go at solving the dispute? It's been going on for a while now, and we really need to get cracking to come to an amicable end. Thanks, [[User:Ryan Postlethwaite|'''<span style="color:#000088;">Ry<span style="color:#220066;">an<span style="color:#550044;"> P<span style="color:#770022;">os<span style="color:#aa0000;">tl</span>et</span>hw</span>ai</span>te</span>''']] 20:04, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
:Okay. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:58, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
::Is that a private conversation, or are other interested Wikipedians welcome? --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]][[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]] 05:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
:its closed, so yeah, private, but if you want to join you should ask Ryan, Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 05:40, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
::I left some new alternatives. Could you take a look? [[User:Martijn Hoekstra|Martijn Hoekstra]] ([[User talk:Martijn Hoekstra|talk]]) 11:49, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
::Sure. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:36, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
== Note ==
Please stop reverting and discuss your changes on the talk page. Any further reversions will result in a block for disruption. This message has also been placed on [[User:Homologeo]]'s page. [[User:Nakon|<span style="color: #CC5500">Nakon</span>]] 06:18, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Whoops I reverted because I thought that was Homologeo. All I ma trying to do is make constructive edits and it is not helpful whenm any edit I make to the article is reverted by people with a grudge againstr m,e and whio apear to be engaged in pedophile advocacy. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 06:23, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
:That's two unfounded accusations, one of which is a [[WP:NPA|personal attack]]. Who do you accuse of having a grudge against you? And who do you accuse of [[pro-pedophile activism|pedophile advocacy]]? --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]][[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]] 22:02, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
:Well if you don't have a personal grudge against me please don't act as if you do. And its never a good diea to be an advocate for anything on wikipedia. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
::Your assertions are unfounded. I've refuted your untruths and put up with your insinuations of impropriety. That's [[self-defense]], not bearing a grudge. Now, would you please answer my questions? --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]][[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]] 00:58, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
==AfD nomination of [[Chillum (pipe)]]==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|left|48px|]]An editor has nominated [[Chillum (pipe)]], an article on which you have worked or that you created, for [[Wikipedia:Deletion process|deletion]]. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "[[WP:NOT|What Wikipedia is not]]").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at {{#if:Chillum (pipe) | [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chillum (pipe)]] | [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chillum (pipe)]] }} and please be sure to [[WP:SIG|sign your comments]] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the [[WP:AfD|articles for deletion]] template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you.<!-- Template:AFDNote --> [[User:BJBot|BJBot]] ([[User talk:BJBot|talk]]) 22:59, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
== Personal Attacks by many on many ==
: I've mentioned this before, but I think you have a very low threshhold for "personal attacks". Some people have been marginally/arguably uncivil toward you, but you have been to others too. Let me ask you this (to illustrate and hopefully to understand how you are looking at all this):
: ''How is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SqueakBox&diff=prev&oldid=183571315 being called a '''coward'''] any worse than [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AVigilancePrime&diff=182671701&oldid=182655908 being called a '''lout''']? (Or ather, calling someone either?) Per [http://M-W.com Merriam-Webster] (using noun definitions, of course), a '''Lout''' is '''an awkward brutish person''' and a '''Coward''' is '''one who shows disgraceful fear or timidity'''. I want to understand how you see these and how you justify one being a personal attack and one not.''
: [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 06:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
:Calling me a coward is not marginally uncivil, it is completely out of order and one of the worst personal attacks I have had the misfortune to suffer on wikipedia. if I remember correctly you irritated me when you started implying that I wasn't using my brain, etc, which while not the same level of PA certainly showed that you were provoking me. Think of WWI, there was no worse insult than being called a coward and I don't think things have really changed. I consider myself a warrior not a coward, and thu8s it is. I have no idea who fiughting for Justice is but attacking from anonymity....is well....we can each figure that for ourselves, eh? Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 06:20, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
:: I think the two are close enough to similar. At least - looking on the bright side - you can understand why SS is so upset about his "honor being impuned". :-) (For the record, I wasn't saying you weren't using your brain, I was saying that it didn't take much brainpower to see my point, which means that it shouldn't be too exhausting for anyone, including me.) [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 06:35, 11 January 2008 (UTC) <small>And I do understand coward being a great attack, but just as bad as boorish in this context of Wikipedia.</small>
:::I don't believe I have impuned Ssbohio's honour but his continuously calling me a liar is very tiresome to say the least, its the kind of thing people get sued for. Not that I am in any way saying I would (and my reputation where I live isn't affected by my identity as a user on wikipedia anyway) but you know what I mean, I am sure. Lout to me just means some young person who slouches a lot which is pretty mild. And actually I found it almost impossible to follow your girllover argument that night. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 06:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
::::*I found examples of times when you impugned my honor going back at least to November, then I got tired of looking, so I'll limit myself to five recent accusations of dishonor that you've made: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ssbohio&diff=183006640&oldid=182622340 deliberate disruption], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ssbohio&diff=183020670&oldid=183019164 bad faith & discourtesy], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ssbohio&diff=183020862&oldid=183020670 viciousness], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ssbohio&diff=183025685&oldid=183024952 atrociously breaching basic civility], and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ssbohio&diff=183044318&oldid=183030180 being an uncivil trolling hysterical idiot & an intolerably rude brat]. How can you not believe that you've impugned my honor?
::::*If you desire not to be called a liar, then you need to speak the truth about what I've said and done, instead of making untrue statements like those above & others. Also, it's a good thing I'm not more like you, or else I'd take your ''get sued'' comment as a [[WP:NLT|legal threat]], the way you took my ''[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Adult-child_sex&diff=183483008&oldid=183477212 beating me up]'' comment.
::::*Likewise to you, my reputation at home isn't affected by what happens here; However, my personal honor in this community is important just as it is in my hometown
::::*Since, by your own admission, the term ''lout'' refers to the person and not their edits, would you agree that it is a (however mild) [[WP:NPA|personal attack]]? --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]][[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]] 12:52, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
: I agree that SS is getting tiring (in the "Lies! It's all lies! bit). He's passionate, I'll give him that. So are you. Just about different things. So am I, just about different things. Passion is good. The internet brings together a lot of us that have totally different views and that makes for a lot of friction sometimes too. That's what you and I have had a lot of and that's what you and SS have now. So is the way of the internet, eh?
: When you say "that night" I infer that you have since followed it well enough. It doesn't matter much anymore anyway as it's totally moot. I'm enjoying my popcorn and watching WikiCNN... :-)
: I do think that you tend to get offended far too easily online. I can too, but I do try to assume copious amounts of good faith and will write as much even. (Granted, sometimes it's in the form of "I'm sure you didn't really mean...") As for being sued for lying, that's almost always a [[frivolous lawsuit]] unless the offended party is in the public eye, and then even it's a rough sell to a jury (and harder to a judge).
: Best of luck dealing with SS, working with me, and avoiding Justice. [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 06:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
:: Every time I read the phrase "avoiding Justice," it makes me chuckle. I know what you mean, but the juxtaposition of the two terms strikes me as humorous. Considering all that's gone on, I can also see where I might be somewhere behind Squeak in the lineup of people who are easily offended here. As [[Ambrose Bierce]] (I think) said: ''Infancy is the time of life when Heaven lies about you. The rest of the world commences lying about you soon after.'' :-) We would all do well to remember that any perceived lies, insults, or incivility should tend to reflect more poorly on the one dishing it out than the one taking it. I'm planning to increase the size of the [[grain of salt]] I take things with on this project; It may need to be the size of a [[salt lick]] to have much effect, however, given my devotion to [[honor|personal honor]]. --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 05:06, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
: I know what you mean. I wrote that late at night and didn't even catch onto it until the next morning (or next night), and at that point, since nobody had seemingly noticed (or at least balked), I didn't want to draw attention to it by changing it. But it is funny. I think (hope?) that all three of us see it as a humorous misstep and not intended in the less benign interpretation of the phrase. Anyway, that grain of salt thing is certainly fitting. And no calling [[Dibs]] on honor... It's like [[Cooties]], we all have it by the time we're adults. Long as you don't hang it out there like a pair of [[Fuzzy dice]]. I'm glad we're not all victims of the [[Hate Plague]] (oh wait, that one [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hate Plague|got deleted]], thank God!). I'm just happy we're not all being so [[Vorpal]] nowadays...! [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 05:44, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
=== En Espanol ===
::Yes I have certainly had good connections with SS in the past though not with fighting. I am looking forward to the [[Eric Volz]] (an article I have edited a lot) interview with Anderson Cooper on CNN tomorrow,just saw a preview, we get lots of English language US TV down here, thank goodness, and while I love Spanish TV, just not all the time. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 06:53, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
:::Yes, we've had good conversations in the past, and potentially in the future we can have good (if halting) conversations ''en español'' as my skill improves. I'm taking my second course and the additional verb tenses are kind of kicking me around, so it may be a while... :-) --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]][[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]] 12:52, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
:Good luck with improving your Spanish, for me it was 5 years of hard, frustrating work before I got the hang of it, now nearly 5 years later and it is becoming more fluid and natural [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
::Thanks... I'm finding it frustrating in this class, particularly, because the video and listening exercises emphasize different regional variations, which is really slowing down my comprehension. Also, the professor wants me to buy a $115 on-line access code in adition to my book, workbook, study guide, & CDs. It might be cheaper (& more effective) to move south and learn [[osmosis|osmotically]]. --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]][[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]] 15:34, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
:::Sorry for butting in, but that last remark just begged for a reply. When I moved to Holland, almost 15 years ago, the first thing I did was enroll in language school, as I had never spoken in a language other than English. It was frustrating and didn't help much. I finally dropped out, and just learned from watching the soaps on tv, and fracturing the language in the streets until I got my point across. Practice, practice, practice with native speakers is what I found worked the best. Just my two pesos. :-P [[User:Jeffpw|Jeffpw]] ([[User talk:Jeffpw|talk]]) 15:56, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
: "Dos pesos?" [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 16:00, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
::::I definitely just learnt the regional Spanish from Spain (as one does in England). While I was fortunate enough to have a Spanish girlfriend (and though we spoke in English I could always practice my Spanish with her) but my main way of learning in those first 5 years was reading newspapers with a dictionary. As Jeff says, it is practice that makes perfect. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:01, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
== 3rr report ==
FYI: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR#User:SqueakBox_reported_by_User:Lawrence_Cohen_.28Result:.29 here]. I'm doing the anon one now. [[User:Lawrence Cohen|<span style="font-variant:small-caps; color:#800080;">Lawrence Cohen</span>]] 16:21, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
:I'll assume good faith and that you were confusing User:Jimbo Wales with Jimmy Wales. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:20, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
:: Wow. I just clicked through the entire day's edit history on that one-by-one. That looked fun. Too bad I couldn't get in on that... it would have been GREAT practice for the new rollback feature! Ah, see SqueakBox, I'm not that bad after all... (I at least registered!) Anyway, it looks like you've had an eventful day. [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 03:25, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
:::Yes well I wont be registering. I note some admins are offering the feature and others taking it away. And I find the undo feature quite adequate. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:39, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
:: I meant registering on Wiki (rather than being an IP, like the guy you were fighting all day). I was not in favor of rollback, but asked for it to see how it worked. I tested it on my own pages first, and good thing as I learned it worked more/better/further back than I had thought/expected! Overall, though, I like it so far. Used it only a couple times. I can see a HUGE amount of room for abuse, though, and that of course concerns me. Still, sometimes (like today), it would have been both functional AND fun to use on IP's litte whine-and-vandalize spree! [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 03:43, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
== Re:Comment tampering ==
Oh sorry about that, it was because the script picks up innapropriate words, and it picked up 'nigger', i thought it was vandalism so i reverted it, i probablys should of checked what context it was used in first. Thanks. '''<span style="background:Red;color:White"> [[User:Sunderland06|<span style="color: White">Sunder</span>]][[User talk:Sunderland06|<span style="color: black">land</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Sunderland06|<span style="color: White">06</span>]] </span>''' 18:13, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks for the explanation, this was a double entente of the N word which is, IMO, offensive, though depending on use. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:01, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
== [[2008]] ==
thanks for fixing my edit [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2008&diff=183968462&oldid=183968261 here] --[[User:Antonio_Lopez|<span style='color: #00ff00;background-color:#000000;'>Antonio Lopez</span>]] <sup> [[User_talk:Antonio_Lopez|<span style='color: #ff0000;background-color:#000000;text-decoration:underline;'>(talk)</span>]] </sup> 03:14, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
== Apologies ==
It was not bad faith, I nominated the article for deletion, as a useless redirect, you were the good user to revert the vandal move user's edits. That user was indef blocked just today, so as I nominated it, Twinkle saw you as the original creator.
My apologies.
--'''[[User:Thehelpfulone| The Helpful One]] '''<sup> [[User_talk:Thehelpfulone| (Talk)]] </sup><sup>[[Special:Contributions/Thehelpfulone| (Contributions)]] [[Wikipedia:Editor_review/Thehelpfulone|(Review Me!)]]</sup> 18:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks for the explanation, sounds like their was bad faith but not on your part. I have never used twinkle but if it is generating such bad accusations against good faith vandal fighters then we have a problem and this probably should be posted on AN/I as some more thin skinned or less experienced user might well feel trolled and leave the project. And yes someone moved Brian Eno to Brian Emo and I reverted. To stick templates on anti-vandal users talk pages accusing them of vandalism is simply way unacceptable. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:44, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
::I have posted at AN/I, not because of you but because of the automated process. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:51, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
==Better source request for Image:HaileSelassieIthefirst.jpg==
Thanks for uploading '''[[:Image:HaileSelassieIthefirst.jpg]]'''. You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the [[copyright]] status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the ''exact'' source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source ___domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [{{fullurl:Special:Log|type=upload&user={{PAGENAMEE}}}} this link]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|Media copyright questions page]] or me at my talkpage. Thank you. —[[User:Bkell|Bkell]] ([[User talk:Bkell|talk]]) 08:15, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks. I now have changed the url to [http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/I?fsaall:1:./temp/~ammem_mwCM::displayType=1:m856sd=fsa:m856sf=8b09881:@@@mdb=mcc,gottscho,detr,nfor,wpa,aap,cwar,bbpix,cowellbib,calbkbib,consrvbib,bdsbib,dag,fsaall,gmd,pan,vv,presp,varstg,suffrg,nawbib,horyd,wtc,toddbib,mgw,ncr,ngp,musdibib,hlaw,papr,lhbumbib,rbpebib,lbcoll,alad,hh,aaodyssey,magbell,bbcards,dcm,raelbib,runyon,dukesm,lomaxbib,mtj,gottlieb,aep,qlt,coolbib,fpnas,aasm,scsm,denn,relpet,amss,aaeo,mffbib,afc911bib,mjm,mnwp,rbcmillerbib,molden,ww2map,mfdipbib,afcnyebib,klpmap,hawp,omhbib,rbaapcbib,mal,ncpsbib,ncpm,lhbprbib,ftvbib,afcreed,aipn,cwband,flwpabib,wpapos,cmns,psbib,pin,coplandbib,cola,tccc,curt,mharendt,lhbcbbib,eaa,haybib,mesnbib,fine,cwnyhs,svybib,mmorse,afcwwgbib,mymhiwebib,uncall,afcwip,mtaft,manz,llstbib,fawbib,berl,fmuever,cdn,upboverbib,mussm,cic,afcpearl,awh,awhbib,sgp,wright,lhbtnbib,afcesnbib,hurstonbib,mreynoldsbib,spaldingbib,sgproto, this]. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:13, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
::Thank you. I think you have the right idea, but that link doesn't seem to work for me. All I get is "Temporary file open error. Display failed." Perhaps if you can describe to me the steps you take to get to the page containing that photo, I can help you figure out a URL that works. —[[User:Bkell|Bkell]] ([[User talk:Bkell|talk]]) 00:21, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
== Recent edits to Burma ==
Hi there! I reverted the edits of "the country" to "Burma" because that's the country's name, and to simply repeat "the country" over and over again is a grammatical travesty. Also, you reverted my removal of useless sections, most of which consisted of simplistic lists of things not befitting of an encyclopedic article about a country. See [[India]] and [[Germany]] for examples of FA-quality country articles. I would appreciate it if you would undo your revision. Thanks! --[[User:Hemlock Martinis|Hemlock Martinis]] ([[User talk:Hemlock Martinis|talk]]) 23:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
:Well edit warring certainly won't fix this but I am keen on finding a solution, see my talk comments. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:13, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
==No need==
Hi SqueakBox, no need for the welcome, i am a [[User:LaNicoya|regular editor]] just using my I.P. to tag all the Nicaragua-related articles (don't want to clog up my main account. Well, can you let me know the |Nicaragua=yes addition does not fit the code? [[Special:Contributions/71.108.114.128|71.108.114.128]] ([[User talk:71.108.114.128|talk]]) 02:26, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
:Hola, Nicoya. Que habido? Nunca me imaginaba que era usted, pero es que tampoco puedo ver como el codigo suyo sale en la pagina que vemos los lectores. Pensaba que era alguien diciendo como "Viva, Nicaragua", Nicaragua, yes" pero la segunda vez chequeaé los editos de su IP y asi veía que era alguien en serio. Pues [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AEric_Volz&diff=184404012&oldid=179802330 mirá esto]. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:00, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Hola! Nada nuevo, de regreso en L.A., estuve en Nicaragua por un mes. Ya lo vi, pero que tiene? Really? Importance mid? Will you start tagging too? Heheh! --<small><span style="border: 1px solid">[[User:LaNicoya|<span style="background-color:white; color:#008800"> LaNicoya </span>]][[User talk:LaNicoya|<span style="background-color:#008800; color:white"> •Talk• </span>]]</span></small> <small>03:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC)</small>
== Good Afternoon ==
: Squeak, I just wanted to drop you a note and say "Hi". I had been reading around a lot lately and came across, among many things, [[Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/SqueakBox (3rd)|this]]. While I disagree with you in many methods and manners of editing, I acknowledge that you've been run through the ringer by some. I can see why sometimes you come across as aggressive and not assuming good faith, and that's understandable. I thought that sockpuppet thing was ridiculous, and while I can see why it may appear like that sometimes, I have never believed you and Pol to be "related". I actually would expect the opposite, that based on my interactions with you on Wiki, I have no reason to think you'd use a sockpuppet, ever, and many reasons to disbelieve it. Anyway, I thought I'd just let you know that I see it and support you in that respect. Otherwise, just hope you're having a nice day. [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 00:16, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:HolokittyNX]] ==
Per your comments at the above discussion, please read [[WP:AGF]]. If you would have paid attention to the discussion above you would have seen that I withdrew the nom before you even commented within a few minutes of nominating it. Further, I left a message on her discussion page apologizing that I read it too quickly as I was going through multiple user pages. There was no reason to make an accusation of a bad faith nom. --[[User:Strothra|Strothra]] ([[User talk:Strothra|talk]]) 02:07, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
:When I pressed the edit button you had definitely not with drawn your copmment and I am not accusdtomed to checking editable text for edit conflits nor had I seen that note when I edited. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:10, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
:: Either way, Strothra, your own comment of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AHolokittyNX&diff=184631514&oldid=184630074 "I was skimming a lot of these."] lends credence to the view that you were haphazardly going about and looking for pages to delete instead of actually looking at the page's content as one would/should expect. I find Squeak perfectly justified (this time) in his view that you appeared to be acting in bad (or at least marginal) faith. <small>''This coming from someone he has incorrectly accused of bad faith before even!''</small> [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 02:16, 16 January 2008 (UTC) ''''':-)'''''
:::I think its true to say Kitty and I see very little eye to eye, this was not a defence of a user I consider a friend (as happens a lot) but a genuine feeling that the mfd was very inappropriate. if all she did was spam that link into the main space then sure, but she doesn't. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:19, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
:::: And I agree with you totally on this point (as one having been accused of bad faith, as I mentioned, I feel you were fully justified in this instance and wanted to voice as much). [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 02:25, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
:::::Note that the version I tagged for MfD was a clear violation of [[WP:USER]], see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AHolokittyNX&diff=184630882&oldid=184629547] and was legitimately tagged. Also, I was not "looking for pages to delete." --[[User:Strothra|Strothra]] ([[User talk:Strothra|talk]]) 02:25, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
:::::: [[WP:UP#NOT|Howso?]] Also, I said "credence to the view". [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 02:30, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
::::::I actually found the information extremely useful in giving me a sense of who Kitty really is, and admire her not being anonymous while editing the pedophile articles. So I found the information highly relevant to her work here on wikipedia. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:41, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
== Regarding categorizing victims of child sexual abuse ==
You inquired in a (now deleted) edit comment about why I recreated an already CFD'ed category, i.e. [[:Category:Child sexual abuse victims]]. Obviously I couldn't know about the existence of such a category as the previous one was named [[:Category:Child molestation victims]]. Having updated myself on the [[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 July 31#Category:Child molestation victims|deletion discussion]], I perceive there to have been a significant minority opinion to keep that category. Since my opinion clearly is that a category of this nature is warranted and justified, I have done a little field work and compiled [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Meco/Sandbox&oldid=184981667 a table] which I hope you will take some time to study. I welcome your reaction to this and hope for a constructive dialogue. __[[User:Meco|meco]] ([[User talk:Meco|talk]]) 15:00, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
:There are 2 problems. One is we don't want a list of child sexual abuse victims and the second is that they were not all impeccably sourced anyway. I'll take a look at your table when I get off work. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:17, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
== Disruptive behaviour and revert-warring ==
You are rapidly heading towards 3RR. The situation is this - a neutral admin made a determination (and to say there is consensus in *any* direction, for or against, at this time is just not in line with facts - the situation within the article and talk page is just short of war). You and a couple of other editors made some massive changes which upset that balance. I have restored it to exactly the version that neutral admin determined was the least-worst version at the present time. Should you continue to behave in a confrontational and non-negotiable fashion about your edits on this topic, you're likely to get blocked. [[User talk:Orderinchaos|Orderinchaos]] 17:09, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
:Didn't appear to be neutral to me and that was one revert I made whereas you made several. You wheel warred against another admin and used your admin powers on the article and then acted like a normal editor. I thought Penwhale was neutral but can't begin to say the same for you. I trust you won't be blocking people you engage in edit wars with, especially after your wheel warring. Anyway I have moved things along with an afd, lets hope that resolves it one way or another. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:20, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
::*Note in the above the "neutral admin" I referred to was Nakon, not myself. All I did was tried to stop an edit war and facilitate discussion which neither side seems remotely interested in pursuing, each side insisting it has consensus by some warping of the facts.
::*My statement above (I did word it carefully) did not say that I intended to block you - as I said at AN/I at the time, [[WP:BLOCK]] precludes such - I was more advising you that that was a likely outcome based on actions.
::*Also, please read [[WP:WHEEL]] carefully - my actions were most definitely not wheel-warring, and the actions I effectively reversed which were taken by Herostratus were a breach of [[WP:PROTECT|Wikipedia's protection policy]].
::*When I started to see some of the "proposed edits" by one side of the debate it took everything I had to stay neutral (you can read it on the talk page of the article), and I'm more than slightly offended at your characterisations of myself on that front.
::I would like this matter to rest - I have never dealt with you before and this is not my usual editing area, and like you said, there is no reason for us to fight. [[User talk:Orderinchaos|Orderinchaos]] 12:10, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
:Yes I am very happy for this to rest. I did feel yesterday that certain people were trying to provoke an argument between you and I. Best wishes. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:08, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
::You accused Order of [[WP:WHEEL|wheel-warring]] (among other things), Squeak. I think you did more than enough to provoke an argument without any outside help. --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 06:28, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
== Comment on Jimmy Wales' talk page ==
Hi there. Thanks for the answer there. Well, I still can't believe that the contributions will be held forever. I mean, I heard, that old contributions were removed. I also heard that contributions can get deleted by an oversight if someone has a serious request for that. Well, ya like [[Reggae]] too? You got a buddy! [[User:Dark Kyle|D@rk]] [[User talk:Dark Kyle|<sup>talk</sup>]] 22:14, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
== Editor652 and the Honduras numbers ==
I've placed a level-4 warning on his talk page, because it is apparent that he won't stop without a pretty severe warning, and probably a block or two.[[User:Kww|Kww]] ([[User talk:Kww|talk]]) 03:16, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
:Yep, I saw. If you arent an admin you might want to post a thread about him on [[WP:ANI]]. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:18, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
::I was just going to go through AIV, but I put up an ANI notice. On a personal note, it's nice to talk to another English-speaking Caribbean dweller ... I'm about 2000km east of you, in Bonaire.[[User:Kww|Kww]] ([[User talk:Kww|talk]]) 03:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
:Indeed it is, I am in La Ceiba, couple of years younger than you, and wouldn't change where I am for the world. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:56, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
:::I seem to recall listening to a [[shortwave]] [[pirate radio]] station out of Bonaire, back before the Internet... I think I got a [[QSL card|QSL postcard]] from them some years ago, and the picture on the card was of a beautiful place that well fits the name "tropical paradise." --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 04:33, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
:Well I am half a mile from the sea but its too dangerous to go down there (gangs and that). Some paradise! But I'd rather have the internet than the sea any day, and I get to see the mountains facing south, awesome and 600 metres higher than the [[Ben Nevis|highest point]] back in [[Blight|Old Blighty]]. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:38, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
::I remember singing pub tunes with a guy from Southampton. ''Take me back to dear old Blighty // Put me on the train for London-town.'' Those were good times. --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 06:31, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
== Message from Editor652 ==
You wanna Know something im living in Honduras too.So you should understand but i dont want to look for those pages again.As i said a million times the edits i did do my country of birth arent made up.There are in google and other wikipedia pages.For the black popoulation of honduras Im a black Honduran. -Editor652
Like my wife and family. Onde estas ahorita. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:25, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
:¿Qué significa "onde estas ahorita"? Gracias, [[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 04:37, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
:Where are you right now? Onde is donde (pronunciation) and ahorita is ahora. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
::Let me see if I follow: ''Donde'' is replaced with ''Onde'' (why is that?), ''tu'' is understood, and ''ahora'' is replaced with ''ahorita'' (Por que?), yielding ''where are you right now'' instead of ''donde estas'' which asks ''where are you''. I think I have the basic structure down, but it's easy for a little change (donde > onde, ahora > ahorita) to derail me. --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 19:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
:::It should strictly always be written donde, it would be a bit like writing waer for water, though obviously it makes more sense (Spanish people here know what written onde would mean), the first d just gets dropped and its just the local accent (I have heard it on Mexican tv but not in Spain). Ahorita for ahora is more slang, kind of like buenisimo instead of bueno, if I had been writing to a Spanish person (and they don't say ahorita in Spain) or someone not from here (South America etc) I would have written "Donde estas ahora?"I can well imagine the local idioms I am using would easily derail you, it wasn't that long ago that I was in the earlier stages of learning Spanish and it was the hardest intellectual thing I have ever done in my life. But at your age I didn't speak a word of Spanish or any foreign language and never imagined my life would unfold as it has, so there is plenty of time for you to become really good, and best wishes in doing so. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:10, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
== Moving content at [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Adult-child sex (2nd nomination)]] ==
Why did you move a portion of the AfD's content to the talk page? [[User:Tijuana Brass|Tijuana Brass]] ([[User talk:Tijuana Brass|talk]]) 05:08, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
:''(later)'' ...okay, I see what you were trying to do here. I'm going to remove the content in question from both the AfD and talk page, since this AfD is not the appropriate forum for such a discussion. [[User:Tijuana Brass|Tijuana Brass]] ([[User talk:Tijuana Brass|talk]]) 05:16, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks. I put it on the talk page as a compromise but fully agree it had no place on the project page or its talk page. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:05, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
:: Noted why the discussion is important (and Squeak '''should''' be happy that I'm voting '''for''' him and his Crusade. [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 05:18, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
:::The only crusade I am on is an NPOV one. While I think abusing children is unacceptable I am not on a crusade against pedophiles and welcome pedophiles editing both wikipedia and the PAW articles as long as they edit the latter in an NPOV way (as I try and do around cannabis, Rastafari, offshoring and other issues I am passionate about). Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:14, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
::::I beg to differ. NPOV wouldn't require the kind of tactics you've used here. NPOV asserts itself; If anything, it requires hard work to keep a particular POV in an article, as editors like [[User:Rookiee|Rookiee]] and [[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]] have found out. There have been pitched battles to keep out or remove practically every [[character (computing)|character]] that anyone wanted to add to this article, battles that you, me, and many others have been involved in. Where has it gotten us? The article is once more the subject of admin protection and a contentious AfD. After all the effort expended, we're just about right back where we started. For every possible [[WP:RS|reliable source]] supporting a [[WP:FRINGE|fringe theory]] or [[WP:BIAS|systemic biase]], there will be ten (or 100) refuting it. The [[marketplace of ideas]] could work, if allowed to. --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 19:42, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
:I will say my NPOV crusade goes beyond just the pedophile articles, I think it is very important in the bios of living people too, I really regret that A.Z. ever started the article, I was looking the other day and an editor (who participated no further) redirected it within 14 minutes and all that did was to trigger massive edit wars over where to direct it to until I rfd'd it, which was the only solution I could see at the time, but A.Z. disagreed and came up with another solution, ie to create the article, and so it has gone on. For me its the title that io find unacceptable, I honestly believe that allt eh material that has ever been in that article should be in other articles including CSA, AoC, age different relationships, etc. And to be honest i think the onl;y thing will achieve is to clarify that there is no consensus whatsoever re this article. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:17, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
== Regarding the ongoing AfD... ==
SB, if I can make a suggestion, it would be better to not respond to comments such as those which you've identified as trolling or personal attacks over the past few days. I don't mean to suggest that it's right for anyone to take shots at other editors, but given your involvement and personal interest in this AfD, it tends to provoke stronger responses than if third parties step in to deal with them.
Just a suggestion. Thanks. [[User:Tijuana Brass|Tijuana Brass]] ([[User talk:Tijuana Brass|talk]]) 21:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
:That is fair enough. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:58, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
::Much appreciated. [[User:Tijuana Brass|Tijuana Brass]] ([[User talk:Tijuana Brass|talk]]) 23:20, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Please don't continue with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TlatoSMD&diff=186275375&oldid=186274539 this thread]. It's not beneficial for either of you and just agitates the situation further. Another admin decided that canvassing took place and reverted it. Let's leave it at that. [[User:Tijuana Brass|Tijuana Brass]] ([[User talk:Tijuana Brass|talk]]) 04:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:Okay, I have no problems with stopping, I'll stay away from this one right now, other than on my talk page, until the DRV closes. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:10, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
::Thank you, I appreciate it. As you already know, the strong opinions revolving around this article aren't mixing so well. I don't want to see the DRV descend into another flame war. [[User:Tijuana Brass|Tijuana Brass]] ([[User talk:Tijuana Brass|talk]]) 04:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:::FWIW, I think I can set a good example by following your advice, and I mean a good example for the encyclopedia, and for other, perhaps including younger, editors. I have plenty else to be getting on with, I am definitely here for the encyclopedia overall and the more editors as a whole learn to take a step back from thorny issues the better. I did so recently at [[Haile Selassie I of Ethiopia]] which, God knows, is a subject I actually care much more about. Que le vaya bien, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:31, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
== Regarding PPA at MedComWiki ==
When you have a few minutes, please visit MedComWiki and provide your assessment of the version of the introduction now under consideration. Many thanks, [[User:Welland R|Welland R]] ([[User talk:Welland R|talk]]) 14:47, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
:Okay. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
==Please no edit warring==
Tlato, I am not planning on leaving but I am not going to edit PAW until the DRV closes. But I certainly will continue editing other non-related issues, so please can you not post to my talk page until the DRV closes. I will re-engage at that time. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 05:08, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:Thank you. That's all I needed. There's really no point for immature edit warring in order to prevent civil communication when all I wanted was a serious answer from you. --[[User:TlatoSMD|TlatoSMD]] ([[User talk:TlatoSMD|talk]]) 05:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
::Okay. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 05:17, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:::I won't engage with you on AN/I, Tlato. What do you think of Jimbo being called co-founder of wikipedia? Of Myanmar being called Burma? Well I think these issues are also important but if you want to talk to me about sockpuppets please do so here. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 05:50, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
== ANI notice ==
FYI - [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive358#Requesting an opinion|WP:ANI#Requesting an opinion]] . - [[User:Rjd0060|Rjd0060]] ([[User talk:Rjd0060|talk]]) 05:54, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks, and I read the thread. For the record I am only commenting on user talk pages re PAW (and vandalism patrol, obviously) until this DRV debate is closed so I haven't posted at this AN/I thread. The point that perhaps people have missed is that it was a safe bet because it is unprovable whether Tlato is a sock of VoB and/or BLueRibbon as neither have edited in more than 3 months, besides there is a thread at Grooming's talk that throws the whole validity of RCU into doubt, something I have long been aware of. For the record I would never sacrifice my editing privileges on the encyclopedia as a whole in order to promote NPOV at the PAW articles, though up till now nobody with the power to enforce and indef block has suggested that I need to make such a choice either. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
==Freedom, censorship, pics of naked abused children==
The history of the full frontal nude pic of this naked girl who has been badly burned at the top of this article about her [[Phan Thị Kim Phúc]] might be relevant to your concerns on Jimbo's web page. WR is trying to stir up trouble by throwing mud everywhere and seeing what will stick. Frankly at some point the WikiMedia Foundation might have to sue some of these WR clowns for defamation. Greg in particular seems eager to defame Jimbo for financial profit. I thought he was smarter than that. Maybe he figures any publicity is good publicity, even a defamation lawsuit. [[User:WAS 4.250|WAS 4.250]] ([[User talk:WAS 4.250|talk]]) 11:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
==AfD nomination of Thomas Lessman==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|48px|left]]An article that you have been involved in editing, [[Thomas Lessman]], has been listed for [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deletion]]. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/{{{2|Thomas Lessman}}}]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:adw --> <span style="font-family:Futura;">[[User:A. B.|A. B.]] [[User talk:A. B.|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] </span> 14:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
==Advocacy==
I find this kind of advocacy extremely sickening so much so that I signing off WP for today. [[User:Mrs.EasterBunny|Mrs.EasterBunny]] ([[User talk:Mrs.EasterBunny|talk]]) 17:02, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
:Yes, I take your point, it was the conversations on Jimbo's talk page that drew me in to edit the PAW articles in a more neutral way, and a year I am still here. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:08, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
== Image:HaileSelassieIthefirst.jpg ==
Hello again, SqueakBox. I posted a while ago about [[:Image:HaileSelassieIthefirst.jpg]] and requested a better source. You attempted to address the issue, but unfortunately the replacement link you provided was less useful than the original one (because the replacement link didn't work). So I've restored the original source link, and I also restored the better source request for the image.
If you can just explain the steps you take to find this image on the Library of Congress website, I will gladly do my best to help provide a link that is more informative than the one we have now. Please let me know how I can help. —[[User:Bkell|Bkell]] ([[User talk:Bkell|talk]]) 21:44, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
:I use the search button this page http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/index.html, run Haile Selassie, make sure I get the gallery view and its the first pic that comes up [http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/f?mcc,gottscho,detr,nfor,wpa,aap,cwar,bbpix,cowellbib,calbkbib,consrvbib,bdsbib,dag,fsaall,gmd,pan,vv,presp,varstg,suffrg,nawbib,horyd,wtc,toddbib,mgw,ncr,ngp,musdibib,hlaw,papr,lhbumbib,rbpebib,lbcoll,alad,hh,aaodyssey,magbell,bbcards,dcm,raelbib,runyon,dukesm,lomaxbib,mtj,gottlieb,aep,qlt,coolbib,fpnas,aasm,scsm,denn,relpet,amss,aaeo,mffbib,afc911bib,mjm,mnwp,rbcmillerbib,molden,ww2map,mfdipbib,afcnyebib,klpmap,hawp,omhbib,rbaapcbib,mal,ncpsbib,ncpm,lhbprbib,ftvbib,afcreed,aipn,cwband,flwpabib,wpapos,cmns,psbib,pin,coplandbib,cola,tccc,curt,mharendt,lhbcbbib,eaa,haybib,mesnbib,fine,cwnyhs,svybib,mmorse,afcwwgbib,mymhiwebib,uncall,afcwip,mtaft,manz,llstbib,fawbib,berl,fmuever,cdn,upboverbib,mussm,cic,afcpearl,awh,awhbib,sgp,wright,lhbtnbib,afcesnbib,hurstonbib,mreynoldsbib,spaldingbib,sgproto:0:./temp/~ammem_04sX: here] which leads me to [http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?fsaall:1:./temp/~ammem_04sX::@@@mdb=mcc,gottscho,detr,nfor,wpa,aap,cwar,bbpix,cowellbib,calbkbib,consrvbib,bdsbib,dag,fsaall,gmd,pan,vv,presp,varstg,suffrg,nawbib,horyd,wtc,toddbib,mgw,ncr,ngp,musdibib,hlaw,papr,lhbumbib,rbpebib,lbcoll,alad,hh,aaodyssey,magbell,bbcards,dcm,raelbib,runyon,dukesm,lomaxbib,mtj,gottlieb,aep,qlt,coolbib,fpnas,aasm,scsm,denn,relpet,amss,aaeo,mffbib,afc911bib,mjm,mnwp,rbcmillerbib,molden,ww2map,mfdipbib,afcnyebib,klpmap,hawp,omhbib,rbaapcbib,mal,ncpsbib,ncpm,lhbprbib,ftvbib,afcreed,aipn,cwband,flwpabib,wpapos,cmns,psbib,pin,coplandbib,cola,tccc,curt,mharendt,lhbcbbib,eaa,haybib,mesnbib,fine,cwnyhs,svybib,mmorse,afcwwgbib,mymhiwebib,uncall,afcwip,mtaft,manz,llstbib,fawbib,berl,fmuever,cdn,upboverbib,mussm,cic,afcpearl,awh,awhbib,sgp,wright,lhbtnbib,afcesnbib,hurstonbib,mreynoldsbib,spaldingbib,sgproto this page]. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:58, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
::Thank you. I think I've found a URL that will work for others: [http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/fsa.8b09881]. Thanks for your help. —[[User:Bkell|Bkell]] ([[User talk:Bkell|talk]]) 22:19, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
== Pedophile ==
I haven't edit warred. I placed a cite needed tag, someone removed it without providing a source (and that is vandalism). If the term is spelled differently in the UK, that has to be sourced, period. '''<span style="border: 2px Maroon solid;background:#4682B4;font-family: Monotype Corsiva">[[User:TJ Spyke|<span style="color:Maroon;">TJ</span>]] [[User talk:TJ Spyke|<span style="color:Maroon;">Spyke</span>]]</span>''' 03:46, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
:Sigh! No, no, no, no, no. Calling several good faith users vandals is not an argument and so wont help uyou if you revert again in the 3RR report. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:49, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
::Doesn't matter now, I have added a source (something that editor Barry refused to). I still know I was right though since you are not supposed to remove a cite needed tag without providing a source. '''<span style="border: 2px Maroon solid;background:#4682B4;font-family: Monotype Corsiva">[[User:TJ Spyke|<span style="color:Maroon;">TJ</span>]] [[User talk:TJ Spyke|<span style="color:Maroon;">Spyke</span>]]</span>''' 03:55, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
::: No, Squeak is right. To be fighting over a spelling like that for a reference is ridiculous. That you started edit-warring and [[WP:DTTR|template-warning]] editors over a simple-to-find fact that is ''not'' controversial is just as ridiculous. [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 03:57, 26 January 2008 (UTC) ''''':-)'''''
::::Squak, WTF is up with you removing the source? Once again the article has NO source for that alternate spelling since you decided to remove to source (and that IS wrong). '''<span style="border: 2px Maroon solid;background:#4682B4;font-family: Monotype Corsiva">[[User:TJ Spyke|<span style="color:Maroon;">TJ</span>]] [[User talk:TJ Spyke|<span style="color:Maroon;">Spyke</span>]]</span>''' 04:42, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
:Well I could tag pedophile but that would be [[WP:POINT]], remember all British people spell it this way and your spelling is as odd to us as ours is to you. And [[paedophilia]], of course, does redirect to [[pedophilia]]. I strongly oppose referencing the British version spelling as it implies that the US spelling is more correct or more widespread, and it would be a really negative move for the encyclopedia to accept all US spellings and demand sources for all non-US spellings, such action would be highly disruptive to the encyclopedia and to US/UK relations on wikiepdia so lets not go down there. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 05:39, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
==Trolls==
You have my email. if this kind of disgusting behaviour continues please let me know but I would urge you to take the PP's to arbcom as they are clearly here on a mission. I have some other ideas too. [[User:Pol64|Pol64]] ([[User talk:Pol64|talk]]) 00:33, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
:Oh, no, I guess that might include me. [[User:Dylan and Cole Sprouse Fan|Dylan and Cole Sprouse Fan]] ([[User talk:Dylan and Cole Sprouse Fan|talk]]) 04:44, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
== Comments an AN/I ==
Thanks for the best laugh I've had all day.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&curid=5137507&diff=187381528&oldid=187381500] I'm guessing you meant "planet" but were victim of a [[Freudian slip]] (no need to respond to that). [[User:Pairadox|Pairadox]] ([[User talk:Pairadox|talk]]) 02:12, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Hehehehehe. I did mean planet but didn't have the heart to change it (laughing too hard myself). I am not the reactionary Christian conservative some think. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:17, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Haha thats great. <sup>[[User:Avruch|<strong style="color:#fff;background:#000;border:1px solid #ccf">Avruch</strong>]][[User talk:Avruch|<strong style="color:#fff;background:#000;border:1px solid #ccf">talk</strong>]]</sup> 02:18, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
== Smiley time! ==
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">[[Image:Smiley.svg|left|62px]]
{{{1|[[User:Danielspencer91|Someone dedicated to making your day a little bit better!]] ([[User talk:Danielspencer91|talk]])}}} has smiled at you! Smiles promote [[Wikipedia:WikiLove|WikiLove]] and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! <br /> <small>''Smile at others by adding {{tls|Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.''</small>
</div><!-- Template:smile -->
[[User:Danielspencer91|Someone dedicated to making your day a little bit better!]] ([[User talk:Danielspencer91|talk]]) 12:48, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
== That's too bad ==
That's too bad, cause 1. if it's my actual words it could hardly be personal attacks, 2. in my userspace it could hardly be called a personal attack, and 3. I really thought of all people you would be the most capable and have the most references for such a page. Of course, if there are no true personal attacks or name-calling, I could see the difficulty. If you change your mind, though, you are more than welcome to help me build hat page up. I would appreciate any help you could give. (Without critique and visibility, how is one supposed to improve and learn from the past, eh?) THanks, [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 04:43, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
:Basically my viewpoint is this. I am happy to collaborate in article space with you (and its subsequent talk pages), I don't own any main space on this project, but I would rather not engage in this user space stuff or have you talk about me on a user page of yours, even in glowing terms. Anyway its on my watchlist. If I wish to gather information about other users I would do it somewhere like pbwiki.com, password protecting the page so Google cant see it. Its free and doesn't seem to crash. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 05:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
:: NP. Sounds like a plan. (Granted, last time we had a "plan" you came back to bite me again.) Feel free to reply as such to the DRV page where I laid out the "stay away" program and we can go from there. (Still, if you ever run across one of those diffs that proves your allegations about me, please provide it to me... only way to learn from the past.) [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 05:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
:: BTW, of course it is... ("Anyway its on my watchlist") ...I would expect no less. That's the nature of watching someone's every move. [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 05:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC) <small>I'll have you unwatchlisted soon after this discussion finally and terminally ends, but that's just me.</small>
:::Come on, I have over 4000 pages on my watchlist. That is the wikiepdia way and I would suggest anyone who doesn't like that shouldn't work here. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 05:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
:::: 4k? You need a hobby! (Other than Wikipedia, I mean.) [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 05:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC) ''''':-D'''''
::Perhaps I do though I am not convinced that more than one hobby is necessary in life, at least not when one is working full time, as I am, and where I live is very much not the first world so certain leisure activities are much more restricted. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 05:45, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
== activity on mediation ==
Hi squeak, I would appreciate it if you could turn up your activity on the medition on PPA a notch. So far, you have made a total of 8 edits on the content there, while your point of view seems to differ the most from the other parties. It is difficult to mediate if a key party is not actively mediating. Your last comment on the content is already more than 2 weeks old. [[User:Martijn Hoekstra|Martijn Hoekstra]] ([[User talk:Martijn Hoekstra|talk]]) 17:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
:I just commented there. I was a bit worn down by Fighting but he or she appears to nhave left me alone as of late so my issues with him or her are not what they were. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:28, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
== Reply ==
"Bad revert" means that the revert itself was wrong. It was not an assumption of bad faith. "Gibberish" means that I couldn't make out what was meant by "I mma editing this page sigh!" (It is unfortunate that we are not able to edit our edit summaries.)
To clarify my reasons for reverting: Jimbo has invited users to edit his page. Your edits were wrong because they were reversions, without comment, of good faith edits made by a user in acceptance of Jimbo's invitation to do so. To say "If he can edit, why can't I?" in this case is misleading, as your edits were nothing but reverts of Assassin Joe's edits.
I know that Jimbo states on his user page "Many Wikipedians watch over my user page and will edit mercilessly or even remove altogether any bad faith alterations made." I don't believe this applies to Assassin Joe's edits because they were not bad faith. Jimbo is free to undo or change any edits he doesn't agree with.
Thanks, [[User:Mike R|Mike R]] ([[User talk:Mike R|talk]]) 16:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
:P.S. I think JustaHulk did a great job with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Jimbo_Wales&diff=187948610&oldid=187942486 this edit]. [[User:Mike R|Mike R]] ([[User talk:Mike R|talk]]) 17:12, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
:Hulk's edit looks great, I responded on the talk page as to why I think (and still think) AJ's was inappropriate. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:30, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
== Perverted-Justice page ==
Hello SqueakBox, I was wondering if you could take a look at the [[Perverted-Justice]] page when you have a moment. There is disagreement there related to the opening sentence and the inclusion of the assertion that PJ engages in harassment. As it reads now, it appears to make the claim that PJ engages in harassment as a rule. Here is a link to the discussion: [[Talk:Perverted-Justice#Harrasment]]
That addition made by [[User:Barry Jameson|Barry Jameson]] was reverted back by a few people, myself included. Then [[User:Swatjester|Swatjester]] comes in and threatens me with a 3R (although he neglects to warn Barry Jameson of the same offense, even though he had far more than 3 reverts). I pointed out that all of the citations being used are garbage (some point to comments on articles, others point to Corrupted Justice or quotes by Corrupted Justice - an unreliable source by all accounts). I'm not asking for agreement from either party, but [[User:Swatjester|Swatjester]] ignored what I pointed out, left all the citations, and insulted my lucidity. I'm not asking for sympathy, I'm asking for some assitance since if I do make any more reversions or changes I'll probably be banned. [[User:FrederickTG|FrederickTG]] ([[User talk:FrederickTG|talk]]) 03:29, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Please stop inserting weasel words int o the Perverted-justice article. I know you know what they are, and that you know they are unacceptable. Because you have not shown any inclination to stop, I have protected the page. [[User:Swatjester|<span style="color: red">⇒</span>]][[User_talk:Swatjester|<span style="font-family: Euclid Fraktur"><span style="color: black">SWAT</span><span style="color: goldenrod">Jester</span></span>]] [[WP:CLIMBING|<small><sup>Son of the Defender</sup></small>]] 22:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Well I trust you did so at the wrong version, otherwise its just fuel for an arbcom case, admions should neverbn edit and then protect ot their version. This isnt a warning its a promise (though I havent looked at the vesrsion you protected yet). You certainly canot be a responsible admin and endorse with admin powers the troling version that PJ is a harassing organisation and your endorsenment opf that killed the respect i| had for you. On average one admin gets desysoped every week and I hope when i look tomorrow I wont have to make sure you are one of them. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:05, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
==Rillington Place==
Actually there's probably a good argument for inclusion of that, see [[10 Rillington Place]]. <span style="font-family:Verdana;">[[User:One Night In Hackney|<span style="color:#006600">One Night In Hackney</span>]]<sub>''[[User talk:One Night In Hackney|<span style="color:#006600">303</span>]]''</sub></span> 17:32, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
:Hadn't seen that. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:55, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
== deleted pages ==
I deleted two pages you tagged for deletion. I am confused that you seem to have recreated your user page. You can ask for your user page (not talk) to be deleted at any time, without moving it. But "right to vanish" only applies if you actually vanish, and recreating your user page seems to contradict that. — Carl <small>([[User:CBM|CBM]] · [[User talk:CBM|talk]])</small> 18:05, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Its simple I wanted to delete the history of the user page, while I give a little info a huge amount has been removed, probably did it unorthodoxly though, and perhaps caling the page the right to vanish was incorrect but I really do/did want the edit history of my user page removed. The talk page was just a mistake, I certainly do not wish to see my talk history removed or altered. Much appreciated. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:13, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
:You can tag you user page for deletion again at any time, under either the G7 or U1 criteria. — Carl <small>([[User:CBM|CBM]] · [[User talk:CBM|talk]])</small> 20:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
:Are you leaving or staying? I noticed you were exercising right-to-vanish and thought it seemed like it would be a terrible shame to lose you as an editor. —[[User:Whig|Whig]] ('''[[User talk:Whig|talk]]''') 01:03, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
::Its the history of the edit page I wanted to vanish not me. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:23, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
{{#if:|== {{{heading}}} ==|}}
<div style="align: center; padding: 1em; {{#ifeq:{{{clear}}}|true||border: solid 2px darkblue; background-color: darkblue; -moz-border-radius-topleft: 25px; -moz-border-radius-topright: 25px;}}">
<div class="center"><span style="font-size:large; {{#ifeq:{{{clear}}}|true||color:white;}}">Hi SqueakBox, and [[Wikipedia:Welcoming committee/Welcome to Wikipedia|<span style="color:orange;">Welcome to Wikipedia!</span>]]</span> [[Image:Wikipedia-logo.png|50px]]</div></div>
<div style="align: left; padding: 1em; {{#ifeq:{{{clear}}}|true||border: solid 2px darkblue; background-color: white; -moz-border-radius-bottomleft: 25px; -moz-border-radius-bottomright: 25px;}}">
'''''[[Wikipedia:Welcoming committee/Welcome to Wikipedia|Welcome to Wikipedia!]]''''' I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to [[Wikipedia:Wikipedians|stay]]. As a first step, you may wish to read the [[Wikipedia:Introduction|Introduction]].
If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the [[Wikipedia:New contributors' help page|New contributors' help page]].
-------
Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to [[Wikipedia|the world's largest encyclopedia...]]
<big> '''Finding your way around:''' </big>
{{col-begin}}
{{col-2}}
* '''[[Wikipedia:Contents|Table of Contents]]'''
{{col-2}}
* '''[[Wikipedia:Department directory|Department directory]]'''
{{col-end}}
<big> '''Need help?''' </big>
{{col-begin}}
{{col-2}}
* '''[[Wikipedia:Questions|Questions]]''' — a guide on where to ask questions.
* '''[[Wikipedia:Cheatsheet|Cheatsheet]]''' — quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes.
{{col-2}}
* '''[[Wikipedia:Five pillars|Wikipedia's 5 pillars]]''' — an overview of Wikipedia's foundations
* '''[[Wikipedia:Simplified Ruleset|The Simplified Ruleset]]''' — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules.
{{col-end}}
<big> '''How you can help:''' </big>
{{col-begin}}
{{col-2}}
* '''[[Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia|Contributing to Wikipedia]]''' — a guide on how you can help.
{{col-2}}
* '''[[Wikipedia:Community Portal|Community Portal]]''' — Wikipedia's hub of activity.
{{col-end}}
<big> '''Additional tips...''' </big>
{{col-begin}}
{{col-2}}
* Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The [[Image:Signature_icon.png]] button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
{{col-2}}
* If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the '''''[[Wikipedia:Sandbox|Sandbox]]''''' is for you.
{{col-end}}
'' '''Good luck, and have fun.''''' {{#if:|{[[Image:Information.svg|25px|link=]] Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to [[Wikipedia:Talk page|talk pages]] and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should [[Wikipedia:Signatures|sign your posts]] by typing four [[tilde]]s ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button [[File:Insert-signature.png|link=Wikipedia:How to sign your posts]] or [[File:Signature icon.png|link=Wikipedia:How to sign your posts]] located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. <!-- {{sig}} -->}|--[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 14:37, 3 February 2008 (UTC)}}</div>
----
==User page history deletion==
Squeak, since you won't answer my question about why you had your userpage history deleted under [[WP:VANISH]] when you didn't intend to vanish, could you at least tell me why you're unwilling to answer the question? --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 04:42, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
:He was probably thinking "right to privacy" instead of "right to vanish", from what I can gather someone has been posting personal information about him that he wants removed, which anyone should be entitled to do. [[User:Til Eulenspiegel|Til Eulenspiegel]] ([[User talk:Til Eulenspiegel|talk]]) 05:07, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
::*If he was thinking ''right to privacy'', he could've said so at any point, either when the deleting admin asked or when I did. He got the page deleted under [[WP:VANISH]], a pretense, and I remain concerned about wholesale deletion of the edit history as potentially shielding it from public scrutiny.
::*From what I can tell, his first explanation was [[WP:VANISH]]. When that was refuted, he asserted that he was receiving threats. By advancing the first (false) reason to delete, it casts doubt on the second reason, as well.
::*I have no problem with an admin removing sensitive personal information, as called for by policy. What I have a problem with is an admin effectively being convinced to delete the entire page based on a false premise. I doubt that all revisions need deleted, and I doubt that the history was reviewed before deletion to see what needed to be kept, since that wasn't an issue under [[WP:VANISH]].
::I'm sympathetic to Squeak's plight, but I can't be blind to his use of speedy deletions to remove negative aspects of his editing history, and it's that pattern & practice that concerns me here. --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 14:37, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
::If you mean "why can he not simply do the deletion himself", SqueakBox is not an administraotr; only administrators have the ability to delete pages. [[User:AGK|<span style="color: #2A8B31">'''Anthøny'''</span>]] 19:49, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
:I have a right to protect my privacy, believe me. This is the same old deletionist/keepist dispute of old, Steve. I don't want to leave wikipedia I want to edit anonymously (and not deleting my talk or anything similar). Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:48, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
::Squeak, I'll defend to the end your right to protect yourself. My concern here is 100% with what else is being deleted/obscured, aside from actual personally-identifying information. It's not really a keepist position. You worked to get another page deleted that catalogued some of your less flattering edits, then you asked to have your userpage deleted per [[WP:VANISH]], which isn't an accurate reason. Taken together, these weakened my [[WP:AGF|assumption of good faith]] enough that I asked you what your actual reason for deletion was. In the interest of your privacy, please feel free to email me about this or anything else. I'm really not here to bust your chops, Squeak, only to find out what's factual and what's spin, and whether every single edit needed to be deleted, as opposed to the ones containing the problematic information. --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 04:47, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
::: I'll go one step further, Squeak (as I have mentioned a couple times already on the ANI page), and say that I support the deletion of your userpages and user talk pages. I have no issue with the page deletions, only with the hub-bub and abusiveness that the restoring admin has had to endure for following the letter of the policies. I think a better way to have gone about this would have simply been to use the {{tl|db-userreq}} tag with "rationale=no longer want user pages to exist" rather than the so-called Right to Vanish. But regardless, I have and will continue to voice support for your right to delete your pages. Anyone who wants to bring to light your poor behaviors ("alleged poor behaviors") can do so without those pages, so they are somewhat irrelevant. Let me say this one more time: I support your right to delete your own user pages and user talk pages. [[User:VigilancePrime|VigilancePrime]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 04:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC) ''''':-)'''''
:::: Yeah, what theye said. Though I want to echo it wasn´t a good idea to invoke the right to vanish, as it wasn´t applicable, and made things look dodgy. A lot of drama ensued wich could have led to the departure of IMO a good admin. [[User:Martijn Hoekstra|Martijn Hoekstra]] ([[User talk:Martijn Hoekstra|talk]]) 11:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
:You are entitled to your opinion, I disagree, I was not creating any drama. Thanks, [[User talk:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:14, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
== Double redirects ==
Is there a bot that can fix double redirects?--[[User:Lucy-marie|Lucy-marie]] ([[User talk:Lucy-marie|talk]]) 11:45, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
:Not that I know of. And come on, it only took me ten minutes. I do support a change to a more appropriate name, and if I can do it twice you can once, no? Best wishes. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:46, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
== HIM ==
I went and got myself quite obsessed with working over the Emperor's entry! Glad you like what I've done so far. How amazing is that picture of Ras Makonnen, in the entry? With lion-hair headdress, no less! Cheers, [[User:DBaba|DBaba]] ([[User talk:DBaba|talk]]) 21:46, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
You and Til, when are we gonna make HIM an FA? I can probably get some help, indeed that would be my idea of fun. Thanks, [[User talk:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:07, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
==Don't worry==
I am determined to take any measures available to ensure that your right to privacy and personal safety is protected on this site. All the best, [[User:El_C|El_C]] 00:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
:We must, indeed, protect Squeak's privacy and safety, but "''any measures avialable''" sounds rather draconian. Some attention should be paid to removing only the edits necessary to preserve privacy and safety, rather than trying (& succeeding) to lose a chunk of Squeak's edit history, especially considering his previous efforts to remove record of his past negative comments. That isn't a privacy issue; that's an issue of editor accountability. The totality of circumstances here (the inaccurate speedy-deletion request, the previous attempt to delete part of his edit history, etc) leaves me to wonder, mouth agape, at the ability of the right [[moral panic]] to start a stampede around here. We can (surely) protect privacy without allowing a user with a checkered history to prune from that history the edits he doesn't want. --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 16:42, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
::I dont want anyone pouring through my user page edit history, and identifying info is in about 95% of the edits. I have exactly the same right to privacy as every other user. Wikipedia refusing to give me this right would go me no alternative but to publicise elsewhere. My Space were in trouble recently for their failure to delete a user account, this is a basioc human right and I simply will not have my security in the hands of unknown admins, who may not even be adults. I will point out that I live in a very dangerous place with a highly level of impunity, and to protect myself is my responsibility. Thanks, [[User talk:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:03, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
== Hi Squeak ==
Could you please clarify something for ANI [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#User_talk:Squeakbox here]? Are you actually exercising Right To Vanish and leaving WP and/or this username? <span style="font-variant:small-caps; color:#800080;">[[User:Lawrence Cohen|<span style="color:#800080;">Lawrence</span>]] § [[User talk:Lawrence Cohen|<span style="color:#800080;">t</span>]]/[[:Special:Contributions/Lawrence_Cohen|<span style="color:#800080;">e</span>]]</span> 16:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
:Nope, I am exercising my right to edit anonymously. Wikipedia does not insist people reveal their identity in order to edit here, and they are not going to insist I do so either. If necessary I would edit under another identity but I have no wish to do so. I won't post to AN but you are welcome to convey this information. Thanks, [[User talk:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:03, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
::OK, thanks. Then all that has to be done is your user talk history fixed since it's so broken, and any material you need Oversighted there oversighted. I'll link back to this thread, thanks. <span style="font-variant:small-caps; color:#800080;">[[User:Lawrence Cohen|<span style="color:#800080;">Lawrence</span>]] § [[User talk:Lawrence Cohen|<span style="color:#800080;">t</span>]]/[[:Special:Contributions/Lawrence_Cohen|<span style="color:#800080;">e</span>]]</span> 17:05, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
{Unblock|I am happy to see the talk page history restored or to move my archive to correspond with it, its only my user history not my talk history I wish to see removed from wikipedia, so can we please resolve this issue amicably}
:Unblock request disabled. This account is not currently blocked. [[User:Sandstein|Sandstein]] ([[User talk:Sandstein|talk]]) 20:18, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
::Sorry, I left a pointer in this page's history, and then unblocked. It would be appreciated if you put an {{tl|archivebox}} or something like it at the top of the page, but it's not essential, any more. Sorry about the problem, and please post here again if you're autoblocked. — [[User:Arthur Rubin|Arthur Rubin]] | [[User_talk:Arthur_Rubin|(talk)]] 20:23, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
== Procedural question ==
Do you plan on archiving ''all'' discussions that contain criticism? If so, this seems to lend credence to the worries of SwatJester, SSBohio, and others regarding your motives for having your userpage(s) deleted. It doesn't look good at all. [[User:Bellwether_BC|Bellwether]] [[User_talk:Bellwether_BC|<small><sup>'''B'''</sup></small>]][[Special:Contributions/Bellwether_BC|<small><sub>''C''</sub></small>]] 15:37, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
:What? I don't understand your point. I intend to archive all discussions, yes, and merely left the 14-M discussion here as unresolved, the other comments are resolved to the best of my knowledge. I used not to archive and got persuaded to do so, unlike most experienced users I have one archive for easy access rather than 20, which would be unsearchable. And for the record I have the same right as everyone else to edit anonymously, if people have issues with that those are there issues and they need to deal with them themselves. What actually happened is that adult child sex got deleted and IMO all this harassment I am getting is because of that. But we are here to build an encyclopedia, not try to out other users identities and any further attempt to out my identity will indeed create controversy as I am at the end of my patience with all this fake drama from people who appear to be more interested in drama than in writing an encyclopedia. Thanks, [[User talk:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:42, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
::No one is trying to "out" you. You've simply had some editing disputes in the past that led people to believe you may be tyring to "cover your tracks" a bit. I was simply stating that so quickly archiving discussions regarding this matter did not look good. I don't have an opinion on the matter, and fully support your right to edit anonymously, if you choose to do so. [[User:Bellwether_BC|Bellwether]] [[User_talk:Bellwether_BC|<small><sup>'''B'''</sup></small>]][[Special:Contributions/Bellwether_BC|<small><sub>''C''</sub></small>]] 16:06, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
:Restoring my user page was actually. And I am not trying to "cover any tracks" as I have an excellent editing record here which I am proud of, and wouldn't hesitate to use on my C.V. (already have done once). But, like every other user, I have the right to edit anonymously and that is that, end of story. I have an easily searchable archive which is very easy to find, that is not the action of someone covering tracks, which as I say I ahve no desire to do anyway. If Mr Bophio thinks there are issues with my editing he can go and follow normal procedure but as there are no issues with my editing I don't believe he would get anywhere so doing. To claim I ma a problematic user is a violation of our good faith policy and directly contradicted by the facts, eg my contribs. If I were an admin I would not be being harassed like this, take not. Thanks, [[User talk:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:18, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
::No, it really wasn't. It was a [[WP:AGF|good-faith]] attempt to adhere to policy. You asked for deletion per RTV, but you didn't intend to vanish. As such, the deletion was neither out-of-process, nor an attempt to "out" you. Since you intended to simply remove the userpage per privacy concerns, you simply should have asked to have it deleted, db-author. Now that the confusion has been cleared up, I would recommend that ''all'' sides (you included) assume good faith of the actions of the other editors in the disagreement. [[User:Bellwether_BC|Bellwether]] [[User_talk:Bellwether_BC|<small><sup>'''B'''</sup></small>]][[Special:Contributions/Bellwether_BC|<small><sub>''C''</sub></small>]] 16:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
It doesn't say about vanishing and I don't agree there was any good faith in it. SJ did not inform me of what he was doing and he locked my user page, reverting a good faith deletion from a charming admin,. I bey he didnt even inform the deleting admin that he was undoing his work. Good faith it was not. By claiming I should go to Mfd he was arguing the only right I had was to have people paw over my user page history, and I had received death threats. Policy does not say some uisers have no right to anonymity. Death threats. ooh let us make it worse and SJ's bad faith comments on AN/I that death threats against me don't matter etc are the real problem. Now can we shut this conversation down as it isnt going anywhere. Thanks, [[User talk:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:38, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
== Amazing ==
I was civil, polite, and even supportive of you, and yet you respond with a curt, even angry edit summary in removing my thread. Why would you do this? [[User:Bellwether_BC|Bellwether]] [[User_talk:Bellwether_BC|<small><sup>'''B'''</sup></small>]][[Special:Contributions/Bellwether_BC|<small><sub>''C''</sub></small>]] 16:43, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
:Because I am not interested. I notice you edit anonymously, let me do so too without distracting me. Supportive of me would be to nopt bring this issue up at all. you are a newbie, please show me some respect. Thanks, [[User talk:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:44, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
::How is discussing this issue with you preventing you from editing anonymously? This is all a bit confusing to me. [[User:Bellwether_BC|Bellwether]] [[User_talk:Bellwether_BC|<small><sup>'''B'''</sup></small>]][[Special:Contributions/Bellwether_BC|<small><sub>''C''</sub></small>]] 16:46, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
::Its preventing me from editing at all by distracting me. I have no wish to pursue this conversation so lets just leave it be. God luck editing, I see you are interested in education. There are 1001 tasks that need doing. Thanks, [[User talk:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
:::Would you mind including a link to your archives at the top of this page, then, so that if anyone is interested in reading our discussions (or the others you've archived) it would be more easily accessible. Regards, [[User:Bellwether_BC|Bellwether]] [[User_talk:Bellwether_BC|<small><sup>'''B'''</sup></small>]][[Special:Contributions/Bellwether_BC|<small><sub>''C''</sub></small>]] 16:51, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
::::Its in the history. There is no obligation to archive talkpages, he could (and has) simply delete the conversation. <sup>[[User:Avruch|<strong style="color:#fff;background:#000;border:1px solid #ccf">Avruch</strong>]][[User talk:Avruch|<strong style="color:#fff;background:#000;border:1px solid #ccf">talk</strong>]]</sup> 16:57, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Hows about we just leave him alone on this issue? If he doesn't want to discuss it, that's his right, and frankly why people do personal things are ''personal'', and none of our business. Lets not be wikibusybodies. I'd say pressing the issue any more past this point would veer into harassing. <span style="font-variant:small-caps; color:#800080;">[[User:Lawrence Cohen|<span style="color:#800080;">Lawrence</span>]] § [[User talk:Lawrence Cohen|<span style="color:#800080;">t</span>]]/[[:Special:Contributions/Lawrence_Cohen|<span style="color:#800080;">e</span>]]</span> 17:00, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, did the same with me, even though I was supporting him. [[User:GroomingVictim|GrooV]] ([[User talk:GroomingVictim|talk]]) 17:30, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
:People can archive their talk however they want within norms. Simply deleting comments or threads from the live page is perfectly acceptable. If he's short right now I can't blame him, given the stupidity he's had to put up with in the past 48 hours. <span style="font-variant:small-caps; color:#800080;">[[User:Lawrence Cohen|<span style="color:#800080;">Lawrence</span>]] § [[User talk:Lawrence Cohen|<span style="color:#800080;">t</span>]]/[[:Special:Contributions/Lawrence_Cohen|<span style="color:#800080;">e</span>]]</span> 17:38, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
==Haile Selassie==
I worked so hard on this, it really pains me to see you disordering it and pulling it in a POV direction. You do not even seem to have tried to address my concerns, which I will repeat for you here:
* There is a name section. Rasta names belong there, because they are no more important than any other names.
* There are now two paragraphs implying that Haile Selassie is a religious icon, in the opening. One suggests merely that he is a religious icon, without mentioning that only a tiny minority of people believe that: Haile Selassie is simply not a religious icon in general, only to a fringe minority.
* Your version states "movement was founded in Jamaica in the early 1930s" twice in the same paragraph...
* without citing "1930s"--that's what needs to be cited.
* Lastly, although you may be passionate about it, the Rastafarian religion is not Haile Selassie's central legacy. The man ran an empire for six decades; that's who he is. For this reason, mention of Rastafari belongs at the end of the opening, just as the Rastafarian sections belongs last in the entry.
Is there anything you disagree with, that I've stated above? Let's talk this out, and let's talk it out efficiently, so I can get back to serious work on the entry and not waste my time chitchatting. I know a lot of people like to chitchat on Wikipedia, but that's not my style... And I think you know I'm the best thing that ever happened to that entry, so I'm sure you don't want to waste too much of my time, right? [[User:DBaba|DBaba]] ([[User talk:DBaba|talk]]) 01:30, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Er, what I did is absolutely not pulling it in a POV diorection but quite the opposite, it is keeping it NPOV. Selassie is highly notable as the Rastafarian God, and the Rastafari do venerate him as God. You appear to want to sweep that under the carpet. Him being a religious icon for Ethiopians is completely different from what has developed re the Rastafari and there is no probable about how they see him. Your claim that it is not his central legacy is precisely that, a claim, and indeed only history will judge that but you cannot in the meantime claim that it is only a tiny minority who claim him as the messiah. Please also do not assume I have worked less hard on the article or that it pains me any less to see you pulling it apart on what is clearly a POV crusade. Also names should always be in the beginning, your naming section is contrary to our style guidelines. It is easily citable that Rastafari began in the early thirties. Why do you challenge that fact. Your final assertion just demonstates that you are pushing a POV, please dont do so. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:40, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
:Most of that doesn't really make sense to me. Let's leave the part about my "POV crusade", which has featured meticulous research and 400 edits that you've not objected to until now, and talk about the names section first. Why are you claiming the names section is unacceptable, but only framing the Rasta names in the intro? What about the Ethiopian names and the royal titles? Is it neutral to pick your favorite names according to your POV? Am I picking names according to my POV too, or are you the only one doing that?
:It still says "movement was founded in Jamaica in the early 1930s" twice in the same paragraph: Doesn't that look really stupid to you, too? I don't know man, this is so weird of you, especially to accuse me of trying to "sweep under the rug" the Rastafari angle after I've argued to maintain it in the opening, I just don't know if you're really hearing me at all. [[User:DBaba|DBaba]] ([[User talk:DBaba|talk]]) 03:40, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
== just a general comment ==
Don't take any of that which is frequently thrown your way to heart. You're doing a great job, and you do it looking good. User:[[User talk:Dorftrottel|Dorftrottel]] 06:26, [[February 20]], 200[[Special:Random|8]]
== Question ==
I know you are a powerful editor or admin of some sort. I noticed that you removed a link to a video on the Fidel Castro talk page. Was there a reason for that, i.e. is it against the rules to post outside links? I fortunately saw the link before it was removed and it was some very interesting historical footage by the National Geographic and other sources. Just curious, as I can never figure out the rules around here. Regards, [[User:Mattisse|<span style="color: #007FFF">'''Mattisse'''</span>]] 01:13, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
:It would be better coming from a site that was not dailymotion or similar, eg could be a copyright violation, etc. I don't consider daily motion a reliable site. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:16, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
== it is referenced ==
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Larry_Sanger&diff=193185702&oldid=193151916 The fact tag was added to the references. The reference is there. The reference is the reference. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 02:47, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
:http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2006/jul/13/media.newmedia Here is the reference to support the text. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 02:51, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
::http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Larry_Sanger&curid=17605&diff=193336635&oldid=193322152 I have commented on the talk page. Please discuss. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 20:07, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
==AfD nomination of San José Pinula==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|left|48px|]]An editor has nominated [[San José Pinula]], an article on which you have worked or that you created, for [[Wikipedia:Deletion process|deletion]]. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "[[WP:NOT|What Wikipedia is not]]").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at {{#if:San José Pinula | [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/San José Pinula]] | [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/San José Pinula]] }} and please be sure to [[WP:SIG|sign your comments]] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the [[WP:AfD|articles for deletion]] template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you.<!-- Template:AFDNote --> [[User:BJBot|BJBot]] ([[User talk:BJBot|talk]]) 11:59, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
== dictator ==
someone inists on using the word dictator to refer to joseph stalin on the article [[J Stalin]] would you please put some sense into them? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.180.37.2|24.180.37.2]] ([[User talk:24.180.37.2|talk]]) 23:22, 24 February 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
=== BLP violation ===
I believe there is a serious libel BLP violation at [[J Stalin]]. The source claiming he was a criminal drug dealer is his album notes. But its a non-notable album sold at his performances and out of his car. Its unavailable and unverifiable. Attempts to place the dubious tag were agressively removed by an editor with steadfast support of the article. WP:OWN issues.[[User:Icamepica|Icamepica]] ([[User talk:Icamepica|talk]]) 04:26, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::Its not there now but I have re-added it top my watchlist. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:28, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for caring man.
user wikidemo reverted my removal of the selling candy on the bart train, and also removed my <nowiki>{{fact}}</nowiki> on the non contentious claim that he started rapping at age 13 which is cited based on unpublished album notes which cannot be found. this is on the [[J Stalin]] article, would someone intervene and revert and also discuss?[[User:Icamepica|Icamepica]] ([[User talk:Icamepica|talk]]) 07:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
user wikidemo has insisted on adding the drug dealing comments regardless of cnonsensus and blp and RS stating he doesnt care.[[User:Icamepica|Icamepica]] ([[User talk:Icamepica|talk]]) 20:49, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
===AfD nomination of J Stalin===
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|48px|left]]An article that you have been involved in editing, [[J Stalin]], has been listed for [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deletion]]. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/J Stalin (2nd nomination)]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:adw --> [[User:Icamepica|Icamepica]] ([[User talk:Icamepica|talk]]) 05:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
=== To Wikidemo and SqueakBox ===
Re these comments by the two of you: ''"appears not to be acting in good faith either."'' and ''"Just what we need, a frequently blocked disruptive editor to jump in."'' etc. at [[Talk:J Stalin]]: Would you please keep your comments on the article talk page focussed on article content, not on editors? Thank you. I'm putting a similar message at [[User talk:Wikidemo]]. --[[User:Coppertwig|Coppertwig]] ([[User talk:Coppertwig|talk]]) 03:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
:I have had enough of this and have removed all the connected pages from my watchlist, talk about being given a hard time for trying to help, and I am not referring to you Copper, but a certain editor is not being helpful. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:00, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
::I'm sorry that you've experienced frustration in this matter. --[[User:Coppertwig|Coppertwig]] ([[User talk:Coppertwig|talk]]) 12:53, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
:::Yes, me too. Regardless of whether the sockpuppet allegations re Icamepica are true or not (and they were still allegations last night) this makes no odds re the article or the possible BLP violations concerning this Stalin fellow. Wikidemo claimed it was a part of his image, and if it were proven then I would be happy to include it (like Bob Marley for instance) but that has not been proven. What I find really disturbing in this case is that Wikidemo believes that because there is sockpuppetry that this means we can ignore BLP. Convictions for drug dealing can really effect people, especially marginally notable people, and this is why I am appalled at has been happening there. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
==warning vandals==
[[Image:Information.svg|25px]] Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made{{#if:Jamie Oliver| to [[:Jamie Oliver]]}}: You may already know about them, but you might find [[Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace]] useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit was inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the [[Wikipedia:sandbox|sandbox]]. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}}<!-- Template:Uw-warn --> '''[[User:Enigmaman|<span style="color: blue">Enigma</span>]]''' ''[[User talk:Enigmaman|<b><sup><span style="color: orange">msg!</span></sup></b>]]'' 04:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
==Possible BLP concerns==
Can you add some input over at [[Talk:A. A. Gill]] please SB? Thanks. <span style="font-family:Verdana;">[[User:One Night In Hackney|<span style="color:#006600">One Night In Hackney</span>]]<sub>''[[User talk:One Night In Hackney|<span style="color:#006600">303</span>]]''</sub></span> 20:10, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
== Proposal RE: [[User:Mikkalai]]'s ''vow of silence'' ==
You are a previous participant in the discussion at [[WP:AN/I]] about [[User:Mikkalai]]'s ''vow of silence''. This is to inform you, that I have made a proposal for resolution for the issue. I am informing all of the users who participated, so this is not an attempt to [[WP:CANVAS]] support for any particular position.
The proposal can be found at:
[[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposed resolution (Mikkalai vow of silence)]]
<span style="font-family: century gothic; color:"#eeff00">'''[[User:Jerry|Jerry]]''' </span><small>[[User Talk:Jerry|talk]] ¤ [[User:Jerry/Count|count/logs]]</small> 01:58, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads-up, definitely appreciated. I see it has gone to arbcom (thanks to your header) and will post here. I welcome emails about this case as I am interested and intending to be involved as much as I can. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:58, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
== Uga Man ==
Thank you for the support of Uga Man's joke on [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Uga Man/presidential campaign, 2008]]. [[User:Basketball110|<span style="color: #00BFFF">Basketball</span>]][[User talk:Basketball110|<span style="color: #FF8C00">110</span>]] [[User:Basketball110/Quotes|<small><sub><span style="color: #a9a9a9">what famous people say</span></sub></small>]] ♣ 18:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
== PPA ==
Hey, could you go to [http://www.martinp23.com/medcom/index.php/PPA_talk:Pro-pedophile_activism#New_users_and_IP.27s this link]? I've created a proposal for the mediation to put new editors and SPA's editing the PPA page, and other related pages under the supervision of some neutral admins. [[User:Ryan Postlethwaite|'''<span style="color:#000088;">Ry<span style="color:#220066;">an<span style="color:#550044;"> P<span style="color:#770022;">os<span style="color:#aa0000;">tl</span>et</span>hw</span>ai</span>te</span>''']] 02:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
:Done. Happy editing, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:35, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
== Resolution near (?) on how to entitle Tony Sandel's lists ==
:Please visit [[Talk:List_of_works_portraying_adult_attraction_to_young_males#Requested_move]]. Tony has accepted a proposal for a new title that may put to rest objections dating back to late 2006, in which you have been actively involved. Your input in the next few days could be quite helpful. [[User:SocJan|SocJan]] ([[User talk:SocJan|talk]]) 20:38, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
::Okay
==AfD nomination of Human trafficking in Angeles City==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|48px|left]]An article that I have been involved in editing, [[Human trafficking in Angeles City]], has been listed for [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deletion]]. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Human trafficking in Angeles City]]. Your input would be much appreciated please. Thank you.<!-- Template:adw -->[[User:Susanbryce|Susanbryce]] ([[User talk:Susanbryce|talk]]) 20:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Just to let You know, I referred this to arbcom as I believe this is a banned user.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Arbitration_enforcement.[[User:Susanbryce|Susanbryce]] ([[User talk:Susanbryce|talk]]) 22:54, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
:Hard to say whether that will affect the afd, but I will certainly keep an eye on this one. Cheers for the heads up. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
== [[Wasting police time]] ==
I just wanted to say that it feels very good for us to be working together on an article. It's been too long. --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 00:08, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
:I see it is snowing a lot in Ohio. The rain of the past 48 hours here has gone and we are back to hot, sunny, even stifling weather. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:46, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
== Reddit ==
Are you alleging [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=197725929&oldid=197723960 here] that [[reddit]] is a Wikipedia attack site? [[Special:Contributions/216.37.86.10|216.37.86.10]] ([[User talk:216.37.86.10|talk]]) 19:10, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
:Yes. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:Pedophile topic mentorship]] ==
As part of the pro-pedophile activism mediation, I've created a mentorship page with appointed mentors for editors to report problems to. The mentors will be expected to keep editorial decorum on the pages and also help enforce policy derived editing on the pages. I would appreciate your input on [[Wikipedia talk:Pedophile topic mentorship|the talk page]]. Regards, [[User:Ryan Postlethwaite|'''<span style="color:#000088;">Ry<span style="color:#220066;">an<span style="color:#550044;"> P<span style="color:#770022;">os<span style="color:#aa0000;">tl</span>et</span>hw</span>ai</span>te</span>''']] 00:07, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
== Michael J. Todd ==
At least three sources state that his death may have been a suicide. I think we should at least say that much. [[User:HalfShadow|HalfShadow]] ([[User talk:HalfShadow|talk]]) 16:50, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
:Big deal, I ma sure you can muck-rake, these sources are speculation, the cause of death is unknown and we are an encyclopedia not a rag trying to make money out of the misery of others. If you cannot see that perhaps you should get another hobby. I am disgusted at these flimsy accusations appearing ion wikipedia. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:57, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
::And perhaps you should step back and calm down. We're only reporting what others have said. Others have said it may have been suicide, and so far there is no immediate proof it wasn't. To be equally fair, there's no immediate proof it was. We're not saying it ''was'' suicide, we're just saying it ''may have'' been. If it turns out to have not, we just re-edit it. [[User:HalfShadow|HalfShadow]] ([[User talk:HalfShadow|talk]]) 17:08, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
:::We should not imply suicide when all we have is the musings of a few journalists, putting it on the Deaths in 2008 page is trolling and this kind of crap just makes wikipedia seem like a gossip rag, IMO repeating slanderous allegations is not something to calm down about, not that I was uptight, i just removed the offending material, perhaps you would care to help me. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:40, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
==Shannon Matthews==
Suppose this guy is never charged, or is charged and acquitted? We've labelled him a criminal and a particularly nasty type of criminal. How much do you think he would be able to sue the Foundation for? Answer in millions, please. --'''[[User:Rodhullandemu|<span style="color: #7F007F">'''Rodhullandemu'''</span>]]''' ([[User_talk:Rodhullandemu|Talk]]) 18:02, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
:We are not labelling him a criminal at all, I assume he is innocent until (if ever) proven guilty, and I take BLP very seriously. If this were an article on him (and I would oppose having one) that would be different but what we are saying is that the disappearance of Shannon was a crime and it is quite clear that that is the case, as with Madeleine the other little girl who has disappeared in strange circumstances. The huge resources expended by the Police show they clearly were thinking a crime had taken place, and indeed the disappearance of a child and a huge police investigation is ample eviodence that a crime has taken place but none whatsoever that this chap has committed a crime himself, the crime is in the disappearance and her discovery doesn't affect that. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
::Thanks for your optimism, but I have practised law in the UK and his lawyers may disagree with you. He is clearly identifiable (or soon will be), and [[WP:BLP]] applies not only to the subjects of articles, but any person mentioned in articles. Sorry, it has to stay out until he's convicted. The huge resources expended by the police are normal for any missing child whether a crime has been committed or not. --'''[[User:Rodhullandemu|<span style="color: #7F007F">'''Rodhullandemu'''</span>]]''' ([[User_talk:Rodhullandemu|Talk]]) 18:15, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
:::Well I am no lawyer myself but I am not going to edit war with you over this point either. I suggest when his name is published we redirect to the article, BLP its talk page and watch vigilantly to make sure nobody creates an article, I certainly do not want to be part of in any way harming this individual and fully agree that BLP concerns anyone mentioned in any article, even in a case like this where he has not been mentioned by name, and while I am not in the UK I support wikipedia reporting these cases as if we were. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
::::Anyway this whole news has really cheered me up, not that I was down but you know what I mean. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:45, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
:::::Agreed, it is almost unheard of for a missing child to be found alive after 24 days absence. The family are rejoicing this evening. --'''[[User:Rodhullandemu|<span style="color: #7F007F">'''Rodhullandemu'''</span>]]''' ([[User_talk:Rodhullandemu|Talk]]) 19:47, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
::::::Indeed. And according to news reports the family are not alone in partying. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:48, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
== Don Murphy 2==
Why is it OK to mention who he is married to, but not other details from his biography? [[User:RTFA|RTFA]] ([[User talk:RTFA|talk]]) 20:58, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
:Lets try and keep personal details to a minimum in this case, please, I would rather not even include who he is married to. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:02, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
::OK, I was not sure if it was because the biography was from his official site, so he could present a date of birth to pass off as being younger. [[User:RTFA|RTFA]] ([[User talk:RTFA|talk]]) 21:05, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
:::For me the real issue is he objects tot he article existing at all. Therefore IMO if we just focus on his work (such as an opinion of his you added) I think that would be for the best, but as it happens I don't believe his website is a reliable source for anything concerning him. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:08, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
::::OK, I understand. I am looking at [http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/search/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001843484 this] right now and use it to add more detail about his professional career instead. I think a version of that link already existed in the article, but it was not well-used. [[User:RTFA|RTFA]] ([[User talk:RTFA|talk]]) 21:09, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
==[[Pro-pedophile activism|Pro-Pedophile Activism]] Intro==
[[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]], I would like to inquire why you made your most recent edit to the intro of the "Pro-pedophile activism" article. There already is an explanation of how adult-child sex is viewed by the majority in the very first paragraph, and the words are even wikified. Furthermore, most would agree that PPAs advocate for a number of different changes in mainstream legal, medical, and social takes on pedophilia. Taking this into account, why should the issue of [[child sexual abuse]] be singled out, and put ahead of everything else? Also, even if CSA needs to be mentioned earlier in the paragraph, shouldn't at least [[pedophilia]] be listed first in the sentence, considering that's what this movement focuses on? Then, from a stylistic perspective, if your addition of CSA at the top remains, one of the wikilinks to the article discussing it needs to go, because there's only need for one wikilink per paragraph, especially in an intro. The other question I had for you is in regard to you adding an attribute of "claim" to the statement that PPAs would like to change negative societal attitudes towards pedophilia and pedophiles - is there thus an implication that the PPAs are wrong/mistaken to assess the community attitude as being hostile? Wouldn't you agree with this assessment (that most people react in a negative manner to pedophilia, pedophiles, and PPAs)? I really don't want another edit war to start, and this is why I'm not reverting your edit, but instead decided to inquire about your contribution to the article via your User Talk Page. ~ [[User:Homologeo|Homologeo]] ([[User talk:Homologeo|talk]]) 21:23, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
:I believe it is needed to explain what PPAs want, and what they want is to revoke the laws and social attitudes re child sexual abuse. The problem with the PPA claim is that it may not be correct. Anyway i have respionded to Jack's proposal at PPA talk. I think any committed editor should be at least trying not to edit war and I certainly am committed to that. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:32, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
== I owe you a big apology ==
Dear Sir,
Last year (07 June), I behaved toward you in a very rude manner. You and another user had communicated on the Tony Blair talk page in what I took to be general chat rather than discussing improvement to the article. I chose to criticise this behaviour by referring to it as “stupid”(!) When you queried this disgusting outburst, I responded with an explanation of why I had objected but I did not bother myself to apologise.
On the principle of ‘better late than never’, may I now offer you my heartfelt apologies for my appalling incivility. I am very sorry (and very embarrassed) by my boorish behaviour. I have also apologised to ‘Gustav von Humpelschmumpel’, the other user whom I insulted. I am not normally given to this kind of conduct and I really do not know what came over me. There is simply no excuse.
Regards,<br/>
[[User:Conval|Conval]] ([[User talk:Conval|talk]]) 12:14, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
:You're welcome. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:24, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
==[[Sean Bean]]==
I'm a bit confused. Last night you removed a James Bond villian succession box from the article with the edit summary stating "if you want to restore the Bod villain box you must mention it in the etxt witth refs etc". What exactly is in dispute regarding this if the role is already in the lead paragraph and is in the article further down, and once again listed in the filmography, as well as on the [[List of James Bond villains]]? Thanks. [[User:Wildhartlivie|Wildhartlivie]] ([[User talk:Wildhartlivie|talk]]) 16:49, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
:There is no mention in the article itself about this, my point is if we are to have the succession box we need to mention his role in Bond films or film in the text itself. I simply do not/did not know whether this was true or not but if it is it certainly means mentioning in the bulk of the article. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:02, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
::But there is mention of it in the article. See the section entitled "Hollywood" which says ''This would be the first of several villains that he would portray.[11] He became Alec Trevelyan (MI6's 006), the major villain of the 1995 James Bond film GoldenEye...'' which was the point I was making. [[User:Wildhartlivie|Wildhartlivie]] ([[User talk:Wildhartlivie|talk]]) 06:57, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
:That is strange as I ran the string Bond through my search and the only result was for the succession box. If you haven't already I suggest you revert me. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:35, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
== North America ==
Greetings, your change in North America ingnore that the [[Middle America]] region is not a pure North American region and may include South American regions, due this is the [[North America]] article, such fact should be informed. Cheers, [[User:Jcmenal|JC]] 13:47, 20 March 2008 (PST)
:I just found that article. As a Brit I have to say I have never heard of the term Middle America used in this way but the reality is that Venezuela and Colombia are never considered a part of North America in my opinion and therefore to restore that info you must ref it, [[WP:V|verifiability]] being the name of the game. This is a difficult subject, I am aware of that so reffing any additions is necessary. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:50, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
:It is sourced see here: [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Middle%20America]. Off course Colombia and Venezuela arent considered North Americans, thats why their mention should be added. Cheers, [[User:Jcmenal|JC]] 14:00, 20 March 2008 (PST)
:::You maintain that this [[WP:NPOV#Undue weight|minority notion]] should be included, even when many others clearly don't include those territories ''at all''? The article is about North America, not what may or may not be in Middle America. Your rationale is as confused as your edits. [[User:Corticopia|Corticopia]] ([[User talk:Corticopia|talk]]) 22:03, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
::This is rarely the case, as many other sources make no mention of these countries being in the region. You will continue to be reverted, J. [[User:Corticopia|Corticopia]] ([[User talk:Corticopia|talk]]) 21:48, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Well, without verifiability. I think the problem is that all definitions of South America include Colombia and Venezuela, generally its where to place Mexico and Central America that is controversial. And sure, Colombia (the coasts) and Venezuela are east of Central America but we aren't here to describe how things are we are here to describe how they are seen, hence the verifiability element. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:53, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
:Yes: after all, the article is about North America and what comprises it, not what one of its regions (a region of the Americas which rarely includes countries from another continent) may or may not comprise. Thanks. [[User:Corticopia|Corticopia]] ([[User talk:Corticopia|talk]]) 21:55, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
==Disappearance of Shannon Matthews==
Per [[WP:LEAD]], the break by her age is jolting for a reader, especially since it's stated on the next line. The lead is meant to provide an overview, which it does. Hope you don't mind. --'''[[User:Rodhullandemu|<span style="color: #7F007F">'''Rodhullandemu'''</span>]]''' ([[User_talk:Rodhullandemu|Talk]]) 22:13, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
:Yeah, I saw that, and your edit looks great, there won't be any edit warring here. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:14, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
== Happy First Day of Spring! ==
{{Template:First Day Of Spring}}
== [[Kurt Krenn]] ==
Hi. Why don't I rewrite the article on Kurt Krenn? Why should I? The Catholic Curch of Austria is not my field of expertise, but I have been living here long enough to be able to assert that there is no incorrect or libellous information in it. Knowing that is one thing; proving it is another, and there are certainly more competent people around who know where to look up the missing references.
However, my main problem here is an over-reaction by an admin; others might even call it a slight abuse of admin powers. All the best, [[User:KF|<span style="color:#006600"><K</span>]][[User talk:KF|<span style="color:#006600">F></span>]] 23:27, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
:I would trust Doc's judgement. We need an article that is thoroughly sourced and deals with the complex issue of his resignation in a fair way. And aren't we here to write articles? Well I am, not to contest the judgments of admins. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:30, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
::SqueakBox, thanks for starting a stub on [[Kurt Krenn]]. I don't know if you have read the deleted article, but now that I've reread it I cannot for ther life of me understand why it allegedly is a page ''"that serves no purpose but to disparage its subject or some other entity (e.g., "John Q. Doe is an imbecile"). These are sometimes called "attack pages"."'' Krenn is not attacked in the deleted article. The page serves the usual purpose of a biographical article and does not "disparage its subject", let alone ''only'' disparage it. The only shortcoming of the text is the absence of one or two, maybe three, references.
::The [[Sisyphus|Sisyphean task]] that has just started is to start from scratch without the help of the deleted text. My guess is that sooner or later a Wikipedian or two, supported by some casual browsers-turned editors, will come up with very much the same article again—just because there is nothing else to report about Kurt Krenn. Personally, I hate people working against each other, but if you are all happy with it, so shall it be. Happy Easter! [[User:KF|<span style="color:#006600"><K</span>]][[User talk:KF|<span style="color:#006600">F></span>]] 23:52, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
:::I know nothing about this chap, or should I say I knew nothing about him, just noticed the thread on Doc's page. Feel free to email me the copy you have if you like. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:54, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
==Jimbo==
Are you paid by Jimbo to speak for him or something? [[User:Blofeld of SPECTRE| <span style="border:1px solid blue;padding:1px; color:#fef;background:black;">'''''♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦'''''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Blofeld of SPECTRE| <span style="font-size:12px; color: Black">'''$1,000,000?'''</span> ]]</sup> 22:56, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
:Absolutely to the contrary, I am an independent editor who has never met Jimbo, and none of mys statements could be attributed to Jimbo. People like The Rolling Stones have thousands of hardcore fans. What Jimbo isn't even allowed one. And by supporting Jimbo I feel I am supporting the encyclopedia as a whole and while I mostly like to edit biographies and related subjects I also think a bit of mop work is a good idea. I work to gain money, wikipedia is just a hobby, and I am not not cash short right now to want to be paid in my wikipedia endeavours in a way that would be controversial.
:In my work I understand some of the problems with counting the number of words without a major software overhaul which would include it in the programme but it would be an interesting challenge. Did you hear the other day somebody deleted the sandbox, and mid-afternoon US time when Western Europe was still awake, ie at the worst time, and the servers crashed for a couple of hours as you can't do that kind of thing, an admin either not thinking or simply didn't realise that you can't edit 4 years of history on a page which had I have no idea how many edit revisions but clearly enough to crash the servers. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:46, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply -I wasn't aware of that crisis no- just goes to show how fragile the system can be. Anyway in regards to Jimbo I gather he is very busy, I just feel a bit let down that he doesn't take more time to respond to editors as individuals. It seems he only comments if there is some sort of outrageous claim or editor on the prowl. I've proposed things to him like a new Wiki Translation system which I thought was a good idea, but he didn't even utter a word in response and at least say why it wouldn't be. It seems that more often or not you are the one answering his questions so this is why I asked[[User:Blofeld of SPECTRE| <span style="border:1px solid blue;padding:1px; color:#fef;background:black;">'''''♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦'''''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Blofeld of SPECTRE| <span style="font-size:12px; color: Black">'''$1,000,000?'''</span> ]]</sup> 11:24, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
== Signature Expert on wikipedia : www.hi.wikipedia.org ==
Greetings Friends on Wikipedia. I am vkvora, Male and many administrators on Hindi wikipedia say that I am terrorist where as I say all Administrators are involved in abuse of tools and three confirmed and three are in line.
Can you help me on link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jainjain
I say Rajiv Mass Administrator on Hindi wikipedia and Ravi Jain are both one and same. Friend it is easy for you, where I do not know, good english to write you. I signed as vkvora. [[User:Vkvora2001|vkvora2001]] ([[User talk:Vkvora2001|talk]]) 23:44, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
===Greetings from vkvora===
signature of Administrator Rajiv mass and his dumy Account Ravi Jain is verified. Both are one and same. Regards . [[User:Vkvora2001|vkvora2001]] ([[User talk:Vkvora2001|talk]]) 21:04, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
==AfD nomination of Don Murphy==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|left|48px|]]An editor has nominated [[Don Murphy]], an article on which you have worked or that you created, for [[Wikipedia:Deletion process|deletion]]. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "[[WP:NOT|What Wikipedia is not]]").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at {{#if:Don Murphy (3rd nomination) | [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don Murphy (3rd nomination)]] | [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don Murphy]] }} and please be sure to [[WP:SIG|sign your comments]] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the [[WP:AfD|articles for deletion]] template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you.<!-- Template:AFDNote --> [[User:BJBot|BJBot]] ([[User talk:BJBot|talk]]) 02:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
:Just to warn you that you added a vote after the nomination was closed, so other editor had to remove it [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Don_Murphy_%283rd_nomination%29&curid=16497464&diff=200370794&oldid=200370549], since you can't change an already closed debate. Cheers --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 22:13, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
::Er no, that was me who reverted myself but I am glad I am commented anyway as I am one of the very few regulars at the Murphy article. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
== PPA ==
HI --
When you have a chance, would you take a look at this [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Pro-pedophile_activism#Comments_on_updated_intro PPA talk page section] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pro-pedophile_activism&action=history recent article edits]? Thanks... --[[User:Jack-A-Roe|Jack-A-Roe]] ([[User talk:Jack-A-Roe|talk]]) 18:52, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
== replied ==
{{talkback|NonvocalScream}}
:Ta. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:07, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
== Edit conlicts ==
Sorry about stepping on you there, I thought the software was supposed to stop [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Don_Murphy&diff=prev&oldid=200409956 edits like this] when the page changes before I hit save page. *grumble* :) [[User:NonvocalScream|NonvocalScream]] ([[User talk:NonvocalScream|talk]]) 23:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
== Just a reminder ==
The "Using this page" section of [[WP:PedMen]] instructs you to "notify the users involved in the dispute on their talk page." You failed to do this for your complaint against me. [[User:AnotherSolipsist|--AnotherSolipsist]] ([[User talk:AnotherSolipsist|talk]]) 00:45, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
:Whoops, that bit missed me entirely. Well at least you know now but my apologies for failing to inform you. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
== For the record ==
Your edit summaries are really hard to read and understand. — [[User talk:Springeragh|<span style="background:#808;color:#fff;text-decoration:none;"> '''''$PЯING'''''εrαgђ </span>]] 03:29 [[24 March]], [[2008]] (UTC)
:Yes well that one was bad typos but don't generalise. Unfortunately edit summaries are both unfixable and unresponsive to spell check. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 05:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
::I wouldn't generalise if it wasn't generally true. — [[User talk:Springeragh|<span style="background:#808;color:#fff;text-decoration:none;"> '''''$PЯING'''''εrαgђ </span>]] 02:34 [[25 March]], [[2008]] (UTC)
::What, you mean like "out hgead of sstate dictator is weasel". Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:12, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Here are six examples from the most recent (as of timestamp) page of your contributions. These are not all in order, but mostly they are. There were also two edits that were mis-spelt that I did not include here because the mis-spellings were rather minor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Franz_Schubert&diff=prev&oldid=201216678<br/>
Spelling and capitalisation (caps obviously aren't quite as important but still can help some).
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Honduras&diff=prev&oldid=200920187<br/>
Spelling, and it's really a devil for other people (at least me) to read—''one vanmdalsim one bad fix restore previous''…pardon me if I'm just being dense but was that supposed to make sense?
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Remote_administration&diff=prev&oldid=200917464<br/>
Spelling, even in a short summary of two words (!).
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Heather_Mills&diff=prev&oldid=201132987<br/>
Spelling; "sunosurced"? "ehr" and "npot"??
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Martijn_Hoekstra&diff=prev&oldid=201152478<br/>
Spelling when you added your experience with Martijn Hoekstra "to my votr I knwo it isnt a lot".
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Hastings&diff=prev&oldid=201218883<br/>
"ona". Interesting.
Generally my opinion and experience with edit summaries (as well as talk page messages, e-mails, &c. &c.) is that if I have to read them twice, and especially if I have to read them more than twice, then it is usually not worth reading anyway. Not to say that your edit summaries are useless (they aren't), but in others it is often the case. Just trying to help. :) — [[User talk:Springeragh|<span style="background:#808;color:#fff;text-decoration:none;"> '''''$PЯING'''''εrαgђ </span>]] 04:12 [[27 March]], [[2008]] (UTC)
:Chill out, Springeragh. Point taken, and with total respect. I actually appreciate your thread (I wouldn't dream of removing it) and am taking what you have taken time to tell me on board, but don't expect instant results (long lasting ones are so much more important) so cheers for taking the time, and you might say my response was a revelation to me because I couldn't see what I had meant for the life of me. And my first teacher on this subject, El C, then posted a lovely card (he told me way back to always include na edit summary and I do now and for a while, so I will now work on getting my edit summaries right and interesting but always coherent. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:19, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
::I didn't really mean to sound stressed or anything. I actually edited my original post (see page history) because it sounded somewhat [[WP:DICK|dick]]ish as well. — [[User talk:Springeragh|<span style="background:#808;color:#fff;text-decoration:none;"> '''''$PЯING'''''εrαgђ </span>]] 00:35 [[28 March]], [[2008]] (UTC)
:And for the record i am developing a lot of pain in my right hand from [[Repetitive strain injury|RSI]], I don't believe we are even close top replacing a mouse but a voice response keyboard is the way to go. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
== Xavier/ Eide Real Name Sources ==
I can see no reason why you are attempting to remove relevant sources from an article. Please review [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable_sources]. There is nothing is wiki policy that suggests limiting sources to support a particular fact. There is nothing on the PJ Talk page that suggests a consensus to remove the extra sources for the Eide alias. Your removal of these reliable sources is unbecoming a wikipedia editor. [[User:Vagr4nt|Vagr4nt]] ([[User talk:Vagr4nt|talk]]) 05:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
:Policy? We are encyclopedia writers not wikilawyers and the factuality is not disputed nor ever has been so even one ref is the absolute maximum needed. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 05:58, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
:: Perhaps you have not been editing this article very long, but if you have you would remember that this point is often challenged on the basis of relevance. The additional sourcing has been established to support the inclusion of this point.
:: Furthermore, I can't see why any wikipedia editor would deliberately remove sourcing of facts. It seems downright contrary to everything we're doing here. [[User:Vagr4nt|Vagr4nt]] ([[User talk:Vagr4nt|talk]]) 06:14, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
:No I ma someone who has challenged it on the basis of relevance over a long time. But the refs don't help notability which is why we only need one at most. If you can't see why editors would remove refs in this case where there are too many (to the point of [[WP:POINT]]) then you perhaps need to ope your mind a little. I have been editing far more than you and know exactly what I am doing so your assumptions about this contradicting everything we are doing is just plain wrong, yuou may need to get a better handle on what we are doing. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 06:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
== Daniel Brandt DRV ==
If you were reading the DRV at all, you might notice that the discussion is about the redirect not restoring the entire article. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] ([[User talk:JoshuaZ|talk]]) 20:38, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
:I do realise that, Josh, ie it was the redirect that has been here months that was deleted. I was actually responding to suggestions of restoring the full article both on DRV and at the talk page. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:40, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
:: Then I suggest you make clear that you aren't necessarily intending to endorse the deletion of the redirect. If you are intending to do so, I suggest you say so. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] ([[User talk:JoshuaZ|talk]]) 20:45, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
:::Thanks for the advice and done. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
== Tokerdesigner's edits to [[Cannabis smoking]] ==
Probably Tokerdesigner was right to remove that picture of the ludicrously large joint. ;) I dunno about his/her other edits, though...
Here is the thing with Tokerdesigner: He or she believes that joints are part of a giant conspiracy by Big Tobacco (or "Big Tobackgo" as TD likes to say for some reason) to sell people on an "overdose smoking method" that allegedly heats marijuana or tobacco, take your pick, to an extremely high temperature that denatures the chemicals and makes it harmful, and that everyone would just stop smoking this way and use vaporizers instead, then nobody would die from smoking tobacco ''or'' cannabis. I am not making this up, he/she has said as much on my Talk page.
Now, there is likely some merit to ''some'' of these claims. I dunno about joints being part of a "Big Tobackgo" conspiracy, but it certainly at least seems plausible that burning tobacco or cannabis at higher temperatures and with more contaminants is going to be more harmful to your health.
But whether I think the ideas are plausible or not, it's still all [[WP:OR|original research]], and Tokerdesigner is pushing it ''hard''. A lot of his/her recent edits to [[Cannabis smoking]] are [[WP:OR]], are not [[WP:V|verifiable]], and none of them are sourced.
I don't want Wikipedia to become a place where people can [[WP:SOAPBOX|push their own personal agenda]]. So I am very concerned when I see Tokerdesigner removing a picture of a rolling machine and calling it an "advertisement for overdose smoking". Is the picture of the rolling machine appropriate? I can see an argument either way. Is TD's reason for removing it appropriate? ''Absolutely not''.
I rolled back a bunch more edits after you reverted me, but then I saw your comment and decided to undo my revert until we can get consensus. But just check some of TD's edits, keeping in mind what I have told you about the conspiracy theories, and let me know if you still think these are mostly constructive edits. I am very skeptical... --[[User:Jaysweet|Jaysweet]] ([[User talk:Jaysweet|talk]]) 21:45, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
:Also note that Tokerdesigner actually had the cajones to tell me that I should start going by my middle name instead of my first name, because when I tell people my first name is Jay I am creating a "propoganda effect" for "overdose smoking" and thereby benefiting "Big Tobackgo". I don't want to delve into ''ad hominem'' attacks here, but uh... Yeah, I dunno, take what you want from that exchange. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jaysweet&diff=196866133&oldid=196564347] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jaysweet&diff=197284496&oldid=197279679] --[[User:Jaysweet|Jaysweet]] ([[User talk:Jaysweet|talk]]) 21:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
::Thanks for the heads up, I'll do some looking around but not right now. I agree with the soapbox issue, and especially re cannabis, anyway I'll let you do what you think is best in the meantime. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:06, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
:::Your more recent edits already caught some of TD's unsourced pov edits, and I moved his pro-vaporizer paragraph down to a subsubsubsection under the smoking methods, instead of being the ''first primary section'' in the article. I don't think it's situation-critical anymore as far as letting him have a soapbox, and the whole article needs so much work, it would be a little unfair for me to remove TD's unsourced claims and leave the other 500 unsourced claims in the article :D
:::BTW, I loved the pun about the "chronic" problems with the article, ha ha ha... Anyway, I gotta go, and this article has way more problems than either of us can fix in five minutes ;) So another time... Thanks, and keep up the good work! --[[User:Jaysweet|Jaysweet]] ([[User talk:Jaysweet|talk]]) 22:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
===Re Cannabis smoking===
''You are wrong about warnings. Our only goal is to create a good encyclopedia, even in Europe many young people do not start smoking tobacco just because they smoke cannabis and we are not here to deter people from smoking tobacco, its just completely off topic (and if we were to warn of the hazards of smoking we would surely wasn't to warn of the hazards of smoking anything but that is not our role). Thanks, SqueakBox 21:42, 27 March 2008 (UTC)''
See, I followed Jaysweet's instructions and quoted the item to be answered, putting it in italics.
You are right, young people "do not start smoking tobacco just because they smoke cannabis"-- off topic, because rather, they get hooked on tobacco from following bad advice and mixing tobacco in with the cannabis. If you will check the article you will see as of 1 a.m. GMT Jaysweet has moved "Mixing with other herbs" to the '''top''' of the article, ''and'' changed the title to "Mixing with tobacco". As a former addict who got off the habit (something I haven't had to do), please think what it means when Google sends millions of youngsters around the world to this article seeking to find out ''how to'' smoke cannabis and the ''first'' advice they get is how to mix with tobacco.
===censorship===
I will be looking around to see if there is a policy on how to report or debate this, but it looks like censorship to me. Trying to be charitable, maybe Jaysweet is one of those who feel safer if the cannabis article has a facade of tobacco in front of it to protect against being cracked down on by the tobackgo police (read US Drug Enforcement Administration etc.).
I know you have been trying to be fair and impartial, but this is the one time when the exception probes the rule. If you want to follow it further, I will discuss it directly on the [[User talk:Jaysweet]] page and on the [[User talk:tokerdesigner]] page.[[User:Tokerdesigner|Tokerdesigner]] ([[User talk:Tokerdesigner|talk]]) 01:23, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
:I don't believe either Jaysweet or Until are pro-tobacco. You could just as easily say my wanting to move the joints section up the page is pro-tobacco as certainly in Europe the habit is to mix tobacco with cannabis. This is partly because until recently most cannabis was hashish in Europe and one cannot smoke hashish in a joint without mixing it with something. When I was young people who started smoking cannabis did occasionally get hooked on tobacco smoking cannabis but most people who smoked cannabis were already tobacco addicts. I then saw the next generation much more open to using pipes to smoke pure hashish. I thought Americans just smoked grass in pure joints, as Latin American do. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:32, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
::Doesn't this happen every spring? [[User:Until(1 == 2)|<small><sub><span style="color: Red">'''(1 == 2)'''</span></sub><sup><span style="position: relative; left:-33px; margin-right:-33px;"><span style="color: Green">'''Until'''</span></span></sup></small>]] 01:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
:::Ho hum. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:39, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
== Martijn Hoekstra's RfA ==
Please stop disrupting the progress of this user's still unlaunched RfA. Thank you. <strong>[[User:Husond|<span style="color:#082567;">Hús</span>]][[User:Husond/Esperanza|<span style="color:green;">ö</span>]][[User talk:Husond|<span style="color:#082567;">nd</span>]]</strong> 01:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
:Are you planning to restore my edit. If it isnt open it looks it, it also appears you are tam[pering with it, presumably with the idea that your support can be before others opposes, which smacks of cheating to me. I am posting at rfa talk. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:24, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
::Without violating [[Wikipedia:Mediation#The_privileged_nature_of_mediation]] could you explain on or off-wiki the reasoning behind your position? Usually when you and certain other user disagree on something, I agree with you. So obviously, the fact that both of you were eager to vote in opposite manners in this RfA interests me, and right now, is the primary basis of my Neutral. I can accept and respect an answer like "Opposed due to things at privileged mediation", but if you could explain more, I'd appreciate it. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 20:45, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
:::Asking him to elaborate to inform your own decision is fine - if this thread turns into a call for him to do so in order to justify his vote, then that is inappropriate and folks should recognize that it is given to voters on both sides to make a decision without justifying it extensively or at all to the community. [[User:Avruch|<strong style="color:#000;background:#fff;border:0px solid #000">Avruch</strong>]][[User talk:Avruch|<sup><strong style="color:#000;background:#fff;border:0px solid #000"> T </strong></sup>]] 20:50, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
::::Obviously if I defend Kurt's right to oppose without being berated for it, I would never dream of asking a user to justify their vote. But yes, this thread is only to help me form an opinion, not to make him, make public his opinion (thats why I left open the option of an email). '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 20:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
::::(ec)Avruch, I see where you are coming from here, but I have the very strong feeling that it is the first: MBisanz is looking for more information to base his own vote on, not a justification of Squeakbox' vote. [[User:Martijn Hoekstra|Martijn Hoekstra]] ([[User talk:Martijn Hoekstra|talk]]) 20:59, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
:::::I know, that is clear from what he wrote. It won't necessarily be why anyone else follows on to add their own request for the same bit of background. [[User:Avruch|<strong style="color:#000;background:#fff;border:0px solid #000">Avruch</strong>]][[User talk:Avruch|<sup><strong style="color:#000;background:#fff;border:0px solid #000"> T </strong></sup>]] 21:01, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
::::::I hear what people are saying, I am not well today but I will try to find something else to say, but probably not till tomorrow. I clearly know Martijn as we have done mediation together. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
:::::::Seems like its been said by everyone else, having looked at the Rfa. I find my interest is increasingly in making good article edits and not in too much drama, though the child sexual abuse articles will definitely remain very much an interest in the sense of the work to make them good articles. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:28, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
==Well wishings==
Hope you feel better. Best wishes, [[User:El_C|El_C]] and [[User:Kitty|Kitty]] 21:22, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
:[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3ASqueakBox&diff=201228497&oldid=201144885 Thanks a lot for fixing my badly written newbie user links]. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:26, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
== Dates and days of the week ==
Hi. I've got doubts about the accuracy of [http://www.calendaryear.net/ Calendar year] you are using and, as you will see, I've reverted a couple of your recent reverts that you sourced from it. Do you want to look at it again? Best.--[[User:Old Moonraker|Old Moonraker]] ([[User talk:Old Moonraker|talk]]) 14:28, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
:Do you have any specific reasons for doubting? I will look for another one, see if there are discrepancies. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
::I am very confident with [[Battle of Agincourt]]: the historian [[Juliet Barker]] has three pages in her account of the battle on how the day and date were calculated, and I have given her as the citation. [http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/calendar/ Calendar Converter] by [[John Walker (programmer)|John Walker]], the source I used for Schubert, has worked accurately for me in the past ([[Siege of Sevastopol]]) and concurs with the edit before yours. I did not revert [[Beethoven]], from Walker again, because there was no corroboration. Please check out Walker's page for yourself, I think you'll be impressed! Good luck with with your checks for other (or not) discrepancies. All the best. --[[User:Old Moonraker|Old Moonraker]] ([[User talk:Old Moonraker|talk]]) 19:21, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
:::Okay, I'll take a further look. I find this stuff fascinating and really want to get it right, so thanks for your interest. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:30, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
::::How about this one http://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/index.html?year=1828&country=1? (taken from the ELs at [[Calendar]]), it certainly agrees with your convertor on both Beethoven and Schubert's deaths, and that the latter took place on a Wednesday, and indeed that Agincourt was on a Friday. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:10, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
:::::I hadn't seen the ELs at [[Calendar]] until your suggestion. There are some very useful ones there. Thanks.--[[User:Old Moonraker|Old Moonraker]] ([[User talk:Old Moonraker|talk]]) 22:53, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
== Thanks ==
You left a newcomer welcome message on my talk page when I first joined a couple years ago and I never thanked you for it. So I'd just like to say, thanks for the warm welcome. :) [[User:Haddock420|Haddock420]] ([[User talk:Haddock420|talk]]) 19:44, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
== Adventures of the little wooden horse ==
Thanks for taking the time to work on this. Its my first and currently only article, so its nice to have someone else take an interest. --[[User:BrucePodger|BrucePodger]] ([[User talk:BrucePodger|talk]]) 23:18, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
:It was my favourite book as a young child (6 or 7), the first real book I ever read, and on many occasions, so it was a real pleasure to work on this particular article. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:19, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
:: My favourite at that age too. We were read it at school, and I ''insisted'' my parents got me a copy. --[[User:BrucePodger|BrucePodger]] ([[User talk:BrucePodger|talk]]) 23:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
:::I remember being read [[Prince Caspian]] at school age 8 and getting my parents to buy me the Narnia books but my reading the Little Wooden Horse definitely preceeded that, and I imagine my dad's copy from his childhood as it was an old blue hardback book (whereas I had a paperback version of Gobbolino). Certainly [[Ursula Moray Williams]] was hugely influential in giving me that love of reading, and it was the first book nobody read to me, I did it all myself. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:18, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
== Sanger initially proposed Wikipedia (originally a Nupedia wiki) as a feeder project ==
Here is a historical ref. --> Sanger initially proposed the wiki concept to Wales and suggested it be applied to Nupedia. * {{cite news
|first=Larry
|last=Sanger
|url=http://web.archive.org/web/20030414014355/http://www.nupedia.com/pipermail/nupedia-l/2001-January/000676.html
|format=Email
|work=Nupedia-l mailing list
|publisher=[[Nupedia]]
|title=Let's make a wiki
|date=January 10, 2001
|accessdate=2008-03-28}} Sanger initiated Wikipedia. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 02:02, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
:Well if he did it while a paid employee of Wales that would indeed indicate they both initiated it. Anyway have a look at The Guardian reference I added. Lest just keep working at getting it right, eh. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:09, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
::Your reference failed verification anyhow.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&curid=3703446&diff=201479191&oldid=201477976#cite_note-7] And saying both [http://web.archive.org/web/20030414014355/http://www.nupedia.com/pipermail/nupedia-l/2001-January/000676.html initiated] it is [[WP:OR]]. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 02:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
::According to Wales, "Larry had the idea to use Wiki software." * {{cite news
|first=Jimmy
|last=Wales
|url=http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2001-October/000671.html
|title=LinkBacks?
|format=Email
|work=wikipedia-l archives
|publisher=Bomis
|date=October 30, 2001
|accessdate=2008-03-28
|quote=}} Thanks, [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 03:10, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
::There is text in the lead that is [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|not verified]] by the citations. Can you fix it now.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=next&oldid=201580580] [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 18:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
::I recommend these [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=201434713&oldid=201260265 two edits] be reverted because those edits [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=201485341&oldid=201481828 failed verification] and "[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=next&oldid=201260265 both initiated]" is [[WP:OR]]. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 20:05, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
=== Wales current role in the project ===
::Wales is a public speaker and promoter of Wikipedia. <-- Here is a sentence we can work on. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 20:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
:::Cool. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:37, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
:::: I think this [[Jimmy Wales#Roles of Wikipedia creators|section]] would be best for [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SqueakBox&diff=prev&oldid=201661174 this information]. --> [[Jimmy Wales#Roles of Wikipedia creators]] [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 18:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
::::And then we can add something that is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SqueakBox&diff=prev&oldid=201661174 common knowledge] to the [[Jimmy Wales#Roles of Wikipedia creators|proper section]] of the article. Agreed? [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 20:05, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
::::Since its expansion he has been a public speaker and promoter of Wikipedia. <-- Here is the current version in the article.
::::I still think it belongs in "Roles of Wikipedia creators" section. The lead already says Wales is the ''de facto'' leader of Wikipedia. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 22:27, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
::::Of course, this is a wiki and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&curid=3703446&diff=202429110&oldid=202403160 things change] quickly. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 01:06, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
::::By the way, your theories about me are [[Larry Sanger|correct]]. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 01:19, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
== March 28 ==
Sorry SqueakBox, I was responsible for deleting March 28 on recent deaths. Someone vandilized it so on that occassion I removed the whole thing. Hope this clears things up. [[User:Raphie|Raphie]] ([[User talk:Raphie|talk]]) 03:00, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
:Indeed it does. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:01, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
==Fact tags in others' posts==
If you feel what I was doing [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jamaica&oldid=201512011 here] is a blockable offnse, then take it to ANI. I sincerely doubt you'll find an admin who will consider what I or the bot did to be "tampering" or a "blockable offense", but you're welcome to try. I do find your objections to "tampering" with the posts of others extremely ironic, since adding "fact" tags to someone else's post is certainly that! I certainly doubt that [[User:Vgmaster]] posted the comments in April, then returned in June to add "fact" tags to their own posts! - [[User:BillCJ|BillCJ]] ([[User talk:BillCJ|talk]]) 05:27, 28 March 2008 (UTC
:I did not say I wanted to see you blcked, please don't misinterpret my words. I made my complaint and directed it to the bot owner. The bot was inappropriately tampering with user comments, we dont use the tags on talk pages in order to maintain anything but to give examples and it was an inappropriate use of a bot. All the same interfering with user comments is a blockable offence, that is a fact,a nd of course by reverting you took personal responsibility for what your reverted to, if you check my first revert of the bot it was adding the maintenance to some tag examples that a user had added to a talk page, if on other occasions people were adding fact tags to user comments then that should always of course be reverted. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:57, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
===Tags on talk pages===
This is a minor dilemma, because some of these tags put talk pages into categories. However the crux of the matter is that those which should be putting talk pages into categories need dating, those which shouldn't be, need to be {{Tl|Tl}}'d removed or otherwise dealt with, and those that don't, if they happen to be in the same page as one that does, will not be affected by having a date parameter added.
As far as you be "extremely pissed off" that you couldn't add and edit summary,just leave me messages in the normal way if it's that important to you. ''[[User:Rich Farmbrough|Rich]] [[User talk:Rich Farmbrough|Farmbrough]]'', 10:42 [[28 March]] [[2008]] (GMT).
:Well I will now but I didn't know who you were until after I had left the message, I was writing to a bot with an unknown owner, and yes leaving edit summaries certainly is very important to me. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:01, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
::And for the record I think your bot does great work in the main space. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:04, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
== Good job. ==
Good job reverting my edit on [[User:Jimbo_Wales]]
You should be an admin.
[[User:9potterfan|9potterfan]] ([[User talk:9potterfan|talk]]) 20:44, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
:No thanks. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
== Diaper ==
Heh, at first I thought your name was SqueakBot so I figured your edit there was just automated. Then I looked back and saw that you were a real person. So basically Im writing here to tell you that I am pretty sure the word there should be ''reusable''. If you read the paragraph through it makes sense, and you can check it by reading up on the source. Basically, it comes down to this: plastic diaper manufacturers were getting scared when they saw environmentalist mommies buying into cloth diapers, so they put out some tricky pseudoscience showing that THEIR diapers were actually better for the environment. But they weren't; they were just twisting the numbers and using misleading statements such as comparing 1 cloth diaper vs 1 plastic diaper instead of 1 vs a whole truckload of them. ''<span style="color: #800000"><B>[[User:Soap|Soap]]</B></span>'' <sup>[[User talk:Soap|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Soap|Contributions]]</sub> 00:25, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
:Yes, I looked after your revert against me and didn't revert you again cos I figured you are being genuine, your response just confirms this. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
== Lima Article ==
In your edit summary you said that you sensed that something wasn't right about that poster. Well that same guy has been doing the same thing for several months now via IPs (blanking talkpage discussion on the pics, removing pics on Lima's surround slums and adding pics of Lima's more well-off areas). I've had to protect the article in the past because of him and he just doesn't seem to want to stop. There is not much we can do if this guy finds different IPs to work with to continue doing this all the time.--[[User:Jersey Devil|Jersey Devil]] ([[User talk:Jersey Devil|talk]]) 17:49, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
==Believe it or not I am a regular==
and your text is klunky, sorry. [[Special:Contributions/72.0.180.2|72.0.180.2]] ([[User talk:72.0.180.2|talk]]) 00:43, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
:We are not writing for well informed Americans. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
::I think "United States" is almost categorically preferred to "America" when referring to the US and not the larger N. American or S American continents, or some subset of those concepts. [[Special:Contributions/72.0.180.2|72.0.180.2]] ([[User talk:72.0.180.2|talk]]) 01:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
:See my latest. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:21, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
== Paedophilia ==
Hi. I don't want to immediately appear combatative by engaging you in an edit war. Can you please tell me what was "tendentious" about my editing, and why they are being removed by yourself? Furthermore, please do not refer to me as a "banned" user, as this is not the case. My earlier account was blocked and I was told to choose another username, that is all. [[User:Putting innocents at risk|Putting innocents at risk]] ([[User talk:Putting innocents at risk|talk]]) 17:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
:We are not here to promote pedophilia activism or to claim that it is natural and harmless, especially without sources but you are very lucky not top have had this alternative account blocked given your stated aim her ebeing to promote pedophilia. Given your history, if you want to edit why not edit other areas of the encyclopedia, gain a few months experience and an idea of how we work and then return to the pedophile articles. If you had come saying you were promoting an anti pedophile agenda or a pro-cannabis agenda or really any agenda you would be told the same thing, wikipedia needs dispassionate editors whose interest is the encyclopedia as a whole. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:17, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
==about the "Bong" edits==
its just that way, i live there and i know how it works. how is there supposed to be a source for this?
maybe i can add "Mega-anecdotal evidence suggests that..." if you want?
-------------
ok i see you have answered me in my talk page.
but when the "Hookah" article saying this: "The Double-Apple (Persian:دوسیب,Do-Sib) is also a very popular flavour in the middle-east by the every day hookah-smokers because of the strength", i don't see a reliable source here! (BTW, ill tell you that its not true. the double apple flavour (made by Nakhla tobacco) actually is the most popular here in israel AND in the Palestinian territories, but its popular by taste- not by strength at all).
so what-to-do in a situation like this?
if that's called also "original research", i suggest you just remove this line from the "Hookah" article and then ill understand that i cant post what i wanted to in the "Bong" article.
Thanks!
[[Special:Contributions/79.177.159.149|79.177.159.149]] ([[User talk:79.177.159.149|talk]]) 18:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
:Sources do not have to be in English, a Hebrew source, for instance, would be fine. While I know we are not 100% consistent in terms of removing original research we do try our best, mega-anecdotal is not oaky as it isn't [[WP:V|verifiable]]. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:16, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
::Ok then so what if i just depict the Bong smoking method without linking it to a place (as Israel) as a fact, as is with the other methods? will this be accepted? Because these smoking methods cannot be verified as being true or have no scientific research about them. ill try and post it this way, and you'll see how it looks like. [[Special:Contributions/79.179.112.203|79.179.112.203]] ([[User talk:79.179.112.203|talk]]) 15:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
== re [[Samuel Johnson]] ==
The great Doctor, a "hero" of mine and compiler of the first encyclopedia, also allowed a few sly bits of humour to be published in that work. Clear the articles by all means, but allow the interested to realise that there are real people - with real problems in regard of perceptions of how funny they really are - who work at building the encyclopedia. It is likely to encourage more folk to join than it will dissuade (and who wants 'em, anyway?) In short; "bread <u>and</u> circus' "! [[User:LessHeard vanU|LessHeard vanU]] ([[User talk:LessHeard vanU|talk]]) 21:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
:Yes. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
==RE: Children's rights==
Would you please remove the BLP tag you stuck on the [[Talk:Children's rights|children's rights talk page]]? I'd do it myself but don't want to misunderstand any point you might be trying to make about children's rights being alive... Thanks. • <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">[[User :Freechild|<span style="color:#C00000;">Freechild</span>]]''<small>[[User talk:Freechild |<span style="color:#C00000;">'sup?</span>]]</small>''</span> 23:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
:No, the article deals with living people so the tag should stay. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:34, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
::What sort of reasoning is that? While children may be living people, [[Children's rights]] is in no sense a [[biography]]. In order to be a BLP, an article must both have living people as its subject AND be a biography (that is, it must contain information about ''specific living individuals''). Otherwise, [[Human]], all anatomy articles, and a good chunk of [[:Category:Medicine]] would be considered BLPs. --[[User:erachima|erachima]] <small>[[User talk:erachima|formerly tjstrf]]</small> 04:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
:::Absolute rubbish, if you want to opine go do it somewhere else. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
::::I'm not able to follow your line of logic here either, and have also removed the tag. BLP does not == anything remotely related to living people. -- [[User:Ned Scott|Ned Scott]] 05:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
:To those with an anti-BLP agenda perhaps, but you could not be more wrong in reality, we don't respect living people in bios and not elsewhere and the bio refers to biographical information not a biography per se, this kind of behaviour and attitude is so tedious and just harm,s the project. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 06:04, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
::We realize that BLP applies to articles which contain substantial or contentious biographical information about specific living people, whether they are formally "biography articles" or not. But [[Children's rights]] is not such an article. It's an article that discusses issues related to an entire class of people, and contains no biographical content about anyone specific. It's an article like [[Human]], or [[Black people]], or [[Women's suffrage]], or [[India]] (the home of 1.12 billion living people, and counting!). Not like [[George W. Bush]], or even like [[Essjay controversy]]. --[[User:erachima|erachima]] <small>[[User talk:erachima|formerly tjstrf]]</small> 06:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
:Well I am not going to edit war over this, for me the important thing is to expand our article coverage over BLP, if I made a bad call so be it. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:35, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
::Anyway on reflection I want to say, thanks chaps, I dont want to push BLP too far but I was experimenting and you 2 showed me where the line is. Funnily I thought that the <nowiki>{{PAW}}</nowiki> tag would be more controversial as there are [[Pro-pedophile activism|fringe groups]] who want to assert pedophilia's rights over children as a part of children's rights and we need to be vigilant of this but I was wrong and your challenging has been cool and instructive. My BLP specific comments are elsewhere, that any article that contains any living person should be blp tagged and people without articles but mentioned in articles should be blp tagged. And children's rights fails this test. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:51, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
== BLP Discussion ==
Hello SqueakBox:
I want to say I much appreciate your comment [[User talk:Doc glasgow/The BLP problem|''here'']], about my contribution to the discussion.
Thank you and best wishes, [[User:Wanderer57|Wanderer57]] ([[User talk:Wanderer57|talk]]) 04:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
PS (Usually a PS is shorter than the main body of the message. Not this time.)
The recent discussion about the article ''[[Merle Terlesky]]'' was a real eyeopener for me about editor's attitudes. I was appalled.
The discussion was scattered widely. I'll insert links just in case you are interested to read it. (I intended to get the links together so I'll do so now.)
''[[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Merle Terlesky picture]]''
and at
''[[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Opinions Wanted]]''
:(I started a new section on the same page to try to get some other opinions.)
''[[Talk:Merle Terlesky]]'' in these three sections, which are hopefully still adjacent.
:Deleted photo
:The truth about Merle
:Safety issues?
Also there is a brief discussion here:
''[[User talk:Reginald Perrin#Re Merle Terlesky]]''
I probably was regarded as a nuisance in these discussions. I think everyone else involved was on the opposite side of the issue.
== [[:Image:Unabomber1.jpg]] ==
Hey, whats the point of making an image crop from Commons and uploading it to ENWP? Commons is supposed to be a database for images so all Wikipedias can use them, it would be greatly appreciated if you used Commons in the future [[User:Notwist|notwist]] ([[User talk:Notwist|talk]]) 19:40, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
:Okay. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:09, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
==Copyright violation in [[:Marcovia]]==
[[Image:Information_icon.svg|left]]Hello, this is a message from [[User:CSDWarnBot|an automated bot]]. A tag has been placed on [[:Marcovia]], by {{#ifeq:{{{nom}}}|1|[[User:{{{nominator}}}|{{{nominator}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{nominator}}}|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/{{{nominator}}}|contribs]]),}} another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be [[Wikipedia:Speedy deletions|speedily deleted]] from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because [[:Marcovia]] is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made.<br/><br/>To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting [[:Marcovia]], please affix the template <nowiki>{{hangon}}</nowiki> to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at [[WP:WMD]]. Feel free to contact the [[User:CSDWarnBot|bot operator]] if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page={{urlencode:Marcovia}} here]''' [[User:CSDWarnBot|CSDWarnBot]] ([[User talk:CSDWarnBot|talk]]) 22:00, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads up. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:04, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
== Stubs expanded to copyvio ==
Regarding you [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Marcovia&diff=203388375&oldid=203387410 recent edit]: removing the copyvio part of an article does not resolve the copyvio issue because the offending text remans in the history. This is why usually copyvio pages are deleted including the history. I assume that the correct way to do this is to have an administrator restore the page in its pre-coyvio state. [[User:AndreasJS|<span style="color:white;background:blue;"> Andreas </span>]] <sup><span style="font-size:13px">[[User talk:AndreasJS|(T)]]</span></sup> 22:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
:We do not allow copyviolationists to delete articles by vandalsing them and if you wish issues with this please go to [[WP:Oversight]] and the revisions can be removed. But the article which is perfectly good cannot be deleted because of a troll or the trolls would delete thousands of articles. if this happened at [[Barak Obama]] the copyvio would be oversighted and the thousands of edits would not be removed because of one idiot. That is why we have oversight. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:50, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
== [[Disappearance of Shannon Matthews]] 2==
Thanks for your help on this; I'd already decided to make those changes because I didn't like how they looked, but you beat me to it! I have added back the second woman because the BBC says in terms that she was arrested. [[User:BlueValour|BlueValour]] ([[User talk:BlueValour|talk]]) 22:54, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
:Detained is the word The Guardian are using, its how we format it it that is critical. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:07, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
::The Independent says arrested [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/shannon-matthews-mother-and-sister-of-stepfather-arrested-804801.html here] and The Guardian [http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/apr/04/ukcrime.childprotection1 here] says arrested in the initial para. I think that the Grauniad's use of detained, later, is just to avoid using the word arrested too many times. I think everyone is working well on this page to pick a responsible path through a minefield of sensitivities. [[User:BlueValour|BlueValour]] ([[User talk:BlueValour|talk]]) 23:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
==Maria Eugenia Sampallo==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important yellow.svg|left|48px|]]
A [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed deletion]] template has been added to the article [[Maria Eugenia Sampallo]], suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:Criteria for inclusion|criteria for inclusion]], and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "[[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not|What Wikipedia is not]]" and [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|Wikipedia's deletion policy]]). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the <code>{{tl|dated prod}}</code> notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on [[Talk:Maria Eugenia Sampallo|its talk page]]. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the [[WP:PROD|proposed deletion process]], the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|speedy deletion criteria]] or it can be sent to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|Articles for Deletion]], where it may be deleted if [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add <code>{{tl|db-author}}</code> to the top of [[Maria Eugenia Sampallo]]. <!-- Template:PRODWarning --> [[User:Alexius08|Alexius08]] [[User talk:Alexius08|is welcome to talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Alexius08|about his contributions]]. 02:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
:As someone from the Philippines you really should no better than to prod an article that is the main news in Argentina and has received extensive international coverage. I would classify this as medium importance, there are hundreds of thousands of articles about less important American and British subjects, please go and prod one of them, this article would never fail an afd because it is so obviously about a notable subject. Sigh. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 06:58, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
=== Maria Eugenia Sampallo 1 ===
Hello Squeakbox:
I saw your edit. I also looked at the request to reword the article, couldn't figure what to do, so I left it.
It is tricky. The problem with saying "legally adopted" is the BBC news report (ref 1) says her parents were jailed for "illegally adopting" her.
[[User:Wanderer57|Wanderer57]] ([[User talk:Wanderer57|talk]]) 18:20, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
:Have you seen my latest edit. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:32, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
::I think so. You just made one today? I have to go out but I'll look at it later.
::Maybe instead of "adoptive parents" say "her parents of twenty-five years".?? [[User:Wanderer57|Wanderer57]] ([[User talk:Wanderer57|talk]]) 18:58, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
PS I tried to use the Alta Vista translation on ref 2 but I didn't work. Have you a translation?
:::I can translate stuff from Spanish. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:05, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
::::Thanks. What I meant and should have said is, have you a translation you can post here so I can read it? My knowledge of Spanish is very limited. Hola, adios, muchas gracias, and a few other fragments.
::::[[User:Wanderer57|Wanderer57]] ([[User talk:Wanderer57|talk]]) 20:38, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
:::::Sorry a translation of what? exactly, give me a url or whatever. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:40, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
::::::Of the second reference in the article.
http://www.elperiodico.com/default.asp?idpublicacio_PK=46&idioma=CAS&idnoticia_PK=497807&idseccio_PK=1007
::::::Thanks, [[User:Wanderer57|Wanderer57]] ([[User talk:Wanderer57|talk]]) 20:45, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
:::::::Ok, thanks, I will take a look but won't translate right now as I am bogged down with real life work, though Tibia means weak,, ie the sentence wasn't sever enough, its a word used to describe luke warm water for instance, and the fallo is the judgement so the headline complains the sentence wasnt harsh enough. . Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:48, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
::::::::Anyway having thoroughly read the article methinks the BBC article was takenm from this one but it contains a bit more info which I am slowly adding. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:12, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
I also did a rewrite - you can see it in the history, but I reverted it after I put it in. Please take a look. Thanks, [[User:Wanderer57|Wanderer57]] ([[User talk:Wanderer57|talk]]) 22:17, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
;Sure, i only just caught your post above, mellowing out right now as I have to work tomorrow. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:40, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
==Re ''[[The Official Story]]''==
I like that "See also" section you added. I followed your lead and also did the same for this film: ''[[Los pasos perdidos]].'' I edit a lot of Argentinian films, especially films of the "New Wave" peridod that began in the 1990s. Best -- [[User:Luigibob| <span style="color: darkblue">'''♦ Luigibob ♦'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Luigibob| <span style="font-size:12px; color: Purple">'''"Talk to Luigi!"'''</span>]]</sup> 22:34, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
:Cool, I started learning my Spanish (years back) through good quality films, and still dream of visiting Argentina and the South Cone. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:43, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
== [[Giovanni di Stefano]] ==
Two discussions and other comments have gone in favor of "Personal legal issues/history" and no good argument (or argument at all, really) has been presented for your version of that section heading. You asked Phil if he has posted to the talk page, which he has - your last was March 13, and you have not commented since. I'm sure we would both appreciate it if you would explain your objection to a neutral heading on the talkpage before continuing to revert changes. [[User:Avruch|<strong style="color:#000;background:#fff;border:0px solid #000">Avruch</strong>]][[User talk:Avruch|<sup><strong style="color:#000;background:#fff;border:0px solid #000"> T </strong></sup>]] 18:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
==Abject apology==
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ABiographies_of_living_persons%2FNoticeboard&diff=203847751&oldid=203847597 This] was an edit-conflict; I didn't intentionally remove your comments. Still, I think that [[WP:RBI|RBI]] is the best strategy here; my own opinion. Sorry to accidentally revert you; please don't block me. :) -[[User:FisherQueen|FisherQueen]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:FisherQueen|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/FisherQueen|contribs]])</span> 22:14, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
:No, its not problem. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:19, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly]] ==
g'day squeak - nice to catch you online!
seeing as you've just signed up as interested - I thought I'd better drop you off the general note about this week's conversation.... hope it's not too awful a time for you, and look forward to chatting!
Hi folks,
I've confirmed a time for the next conversation on Tuesday night, US time, (Wednesday, 02.30 UTC). Huge apologies that this isn't going to be good for Euro folk, and I know Anthony and Peter will likely be unable to attend therefore. It's possible we need a bit of a wiki effort at the [[Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly|project page]] to better organise and plan conversations - and I'd also like to encourage all interested folks to watchlist that page for updates / changes etc. which will probably be a smoother way of staying in touch than many talk page messages (though it's great that more people are expressing interest in participating...). With that in mind, if you'd like to reply to this message, please do so at my talk page, and I'll respond as soon as I can.
If you are able to attend at the given time, please do head over to [[Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly#Confirmed_Participants]] and sign up - this is a great help in making sure everyone is around. We generally chat for about 10 minutes before 'going live' and the whole process takes about an hour, and I very much look forward to chatting to all!
best,
[[User:Privatemusings|Privatemusings]] ([[User talk:Privatemusings|talk]]) 01:03, 7 April 2008 (UTC)I
:No its actually a good time as I am on the "other side" of the pond, all I would need is to make the initial skype connection but anyway I'll sort it out tomorrow, knackered (from working) and off to bed. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:35, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
==AfD nomination of Lauren Harries==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|left|48px|]]An editor has nominated [[Lauren Harries]], an article which you have created or worked on, for [[Wikipedia:Deletion process|deletion]]. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "[[WP:NOT|What Wikipedia is not]]").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at {{#if:Lauren Harries | [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lauren Harries]] | [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lauren Harries]] }} and please be sure to [[WP:SIG|sign your comments]] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the [[WP:AfD|articles for deletion]] template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you.<!-- Template:AFDNote --> [[User:BJBot|BJBot]] ([[User talk:BJBot|talk]]) 23:59, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
:yes I saw that and indeed weakly agree with the nominator although I have tidied it up considerably. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:03, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
::I searched for something more solid to add some substance to the article, but I could barely come up with anything. Regards, [[User:NonvocalScream|NonvocalScream]] ([[User talk:NonvocalScream|talk]]) 00:20, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
:::I tinkered a bit, please take a look. The problem is it's hard to find coverage that is favourable:):) I have to go to sleep now but I hope one of us can come up with something from the google news hits I linked to on the AfD. Unfortunately a lot of them are subscription etc. only, but they are archives from real newpapers, so should be obtainable online somewhere. [[User:Merkinsmum|<b><span style="color: #FF1493">special, random,</span></b>]] [[User talk:Merkinsmum|<b><span style="color: #FF1493">Merkinsmum</span></b>]] 03:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Do you now wish to '''Keep''' the article, or do you '''Support''' deletion? Your comment in the AfD is a little unclear. [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 19:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
:Keep, I struck my delete comment based on the changes made by Merkins Mum. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:08, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
== wanna test your skype setup? ==
if so - add me as a contact : privatemusings - and we can touch base / check the tech. side of things..... cheers, [[User:Privatemusings|Privatemusings]] ([[User talk:Privatemusings|talk]]) 00:11, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
or feel free to pop into the 'virtual room' linked to from [[Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly]] - that's where we'll be having the conversation if it's stable enough.. otherwise, there is a Plan B.... cheers, [[User:Privatemusings|Privatemusings]] ([[User talk:Privatemusings|talk]]) 00:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
== Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lauren Harries ==
Hi, regarding the above AfD: you may wish to change your "vote" from "support" to "keep" -- it's not as if she's running for admin. ; ) --[[Special:Contributions/77.96.133.241|77.96.133.241]] ([[User talk:77.96.133.241|talk]]) 16:34, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
:Lol. I am not a regular at either afd or rfa, just an occasional participator. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:04, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
== Boris Johnson ==
I suggest you read [[Birthright_citizenship_in_the_United_States_of_America]] and the comments on the talk page as requested.--[[User:Sully|Sully]] ([[User talk:Sully|talk]]) 22:58, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
:I don't believe I need to do that. You need to provide [[WP:RS|reliable]] and [[WP:V|verifiable]] sources not direct me to do some [[WP:OR|original research]]. This is a BLP vio for obvious reasons and will be treated seriously in the run up to the election, please let us discuss any additions on the talk page. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
===Boris===
No problem :) I haven't edited that article for a while, and reading it felt like something was oddly missing from the first paragraph.... Cheers, [[User:DWaterson|DWaterson]] ([[User talk:DWaterson|talk]]) 00:04, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
== RFA thanks ==
Thanks for your support in my [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Lawrence Cohen|RFA]], that didn't quite make it and ended at 120/47/13. There was a ton of great advice there, that I'm going to go on. Maybe someday. If not, there are articles to write! Thanks for your support. <span style="font-variant:small-caps; color:#800080;">[[User:Lawrence Cohen|<span style="color:#800080;">Lawrence</span>]] § [[User talk:Lawrence Cohen|<span style="color:#800080;">t</span>]]/[[:Special:Contributions/Lawrence_Cohen|<span style="color:#800080;">e</span>]]</span> 17:39, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
:Yes well you certainly got a lot of support. One can styill be an effective player without the admin tools, being well known helps, plus we all have to work all the time on being better editors and getting on with our fellow editors better. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:42, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
== [[Pro-pedophile activism]] ==
Whilst I respect there's still problems with the intro to the article, might I suggest that making edits which are obviously going to start an edit war might not be the best way forward? Would you consider filing an RfC? I think it could help here and get wider, neutral views for how to proceed. It's certainly worth some consideration. [[User:Ryan Postlethwaite|'''<span style="color:#000088;">Ry<span style="color:#220066;">an<span style="color:#550044;"> P<span style="color:#770022;">os<span style="color:#aa0000;">tl</span>et</span>hw</span>ai</span>te</span>''']] 00:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Dear SqueakBox, I can understand why you feel strongly about this subject (most of us do), but let me remind you that [[Wikipedia:Neutrality#Let_the_facts_speak_for_themselves|we don't need to say that Hitler was a bad man]]. Also, we should avoid using emotional tabloid newspaper lingo just because we dislike a topic. In [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pro-pedophile_activism&diff=205457966&oldid=205455992 this] edit you have equated "pedophilia" to "child sexual abuse", citing neutrality as the reason. But this is a factually incorrect statement. A pedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to children. Child sexual abusers are a subset of pedophiles who choose to ''act'' on this attraction. They are not the same thing. [[User:Cambrasa|<b><span style="color: #990066">'''Cambrasa'''</span></b>]] 14:09, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
::Note: this distinction is not actually corrct. A pedophile is someone who is sexually attacted to children, whether they are caught acting on it or not, is more accurate. The DSM does not make a distinction between pedophiles who merely obssess and pedophiles who are also prosecuted: it includes both. Where anyone got the idea that pedophile=nonoffender, I don't know. It may be accurate to say that not all pedophiles offend (or are caught offending) but it is not accurate to say that the definition of pedophile excludes offenders, because it does not. In additon, there are absolutely no studies claiming that there is a significant subset of pedophiles who are nonoffenders. The insistence I have seen around the pedophile articles on Wikipedia that there is a "large" subset of nonoffending pedophiles, that the definition of pedophile excludes sexually abusing, and that there is no link between pedophilia and sexual offending does not line up with mainstream views and research at all.-[[User:PetraSchelm|PetraSchelm]] ([[User talk:PetraSchelm|talk]]) 21:42, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
I was very spooked last night. LCH and Ztep were clearly, IMO, troling socks whose sole purpose was to troll me. I suggest we unlock the article. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:22, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Squeak, thanks for your note. I posted a message that I think addresses your concerns re the songs article on the theater article page. (Eventually these should be bundled; I agree with whomever said that at the AfDs). Best, -[[User:PetraSchelm|PetraSchelm]] ([[User talk:PetraSchelm|talk]]) 21:42, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
==edit==
I'm not sure what your edit to the Greif article was referring to - my edit you reverted never mentioned 'vandalism'...it merely stated that the material blanked was not spam and that an article re-write would incorporate the refereneces into the article via citations and persuant to the notice. [[User:A Sniper|A Sniper]] ([[User talk:A Sniper|talk]]) 23:47, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
::I think you should both start respecting Guy, a long term admin here whose editing I fully endorse, and rollback was being used to revert Guy's edits which are not vandalism as it happens. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
:::That's fine but I don't know which user 'Guy' is, nor which edit you're referring to. Why not just tell me instead of blanking a whole section with no explanation? If 'Guy' is who removed all the links in the reference section calling them spam, then yes indeed I rolled it back, as did another user. It wasn't anything personal, but those references are needed there so that they can be cited during the re-write of the article. There isn't any spam in the bunch, according to his spam projects own essay. None solicit for anything, and all mention the subject of the article in question. No animosity intended. [[User:A Sniper|A Sniper]] ([[User talk:A Sniper|talk]]) 00:39, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
:Guy is user JzG who deleted what he considered spam. I agreed with his judgment when I saw you had reverted him, and I trust his judgment more than yours on this issue. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
== Paedophilia list articles ==
Hi SB - you seem to have missed my point. Petra removed ''all'' items from those lists - including any articles which had been correctly cited. There was no need for that, since by doing so it rendered the articles completely worthless. Certainly where there are BLP problems, the items should be removed, but in many cases hunting for citations and secondary sources was a far more logical way to go and definitely one that should have been attempted prior to the removal. I did not realise that she was a newbie (though it makes sense) - the way she was referring me to various policy pages made it sound as though she had been around on WP for years and simply needed to refresh her memory of some of the pages in question. My main point, though, is simply that removing everything from the lists, sourced as well as unsourced, was a mistake on her part. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''[[User_talk:Grutness|<small style="color:#008822;">wha?</small>]]'' 02:04, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks for the clarification, Petra is new and she does need guidance. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:06, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
::Actually I note a couple of calls on her talk page for confirmation that she's not a sockpuppet. I think that if this hasn't been done it would be very useful; she certainly seems to be a SPA, albeit probably a legitimate one as opposed to a sockpuppet - over 80% of her non-usertalk edits (140 of 171) have been on paedophilia-related subjects. However, she arrived here with very fully-formed views on Wikipedia policy and process pages - 18 of her first 25 edits were to AfD, 21 if you include here three nominations. That's a level of knowledge of process that would be rare in a complete newbie. And even if you exclude my recent run-in with her, I'm surprised to see how disruptive many of her edits have been. Though assuming good faith is the acceptable thing to do, I must admit that some confirmation of that faith would be welcome. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''[[User_talk:Grutness|<small style="color:#008822;">wha?</small>]]'' 06:52, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
:::How about some confirmation of ''your'' good faith, Grutness? Certainly if you are capable of looking up my edits and coming to ill-informed derogatory opinions about them that you post on others' talkpages, you are capable of looking at checkuser, where I have already been cleared of any sockpuppet accusations. Squeak is accused practically once a week of sockpuppetry by characters who frequent the pedo articles and don't appreciate them being made NPOV, so I imagine that will happen to me too.-[[User:PetraSchelm|PetraSchelm]] ([[User talk:PetraSchelm|talk]]) 13:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
::::Is there anything in the above which suggests a lack of good faith on my part? All I have suggested is that if you haven't been checked, it would clear the air - several other users have accused you of sockpuppetry, and there are enough causes for suspicion in your early edits that producing evidence against it would be very useful. It is worth noting that SB's early edits were, like most users', characterised by working here and there on a large number of items, without launching into process pages the instant he arrived. From long experience here an early pattern of targeted process edits is often perceived as possible evidence of sockpuppetry - as such it is not "ill-informed". If you choose to regard my describing your edits as disruptive as "derogatory", that is your prerogative, though the comments generated on your talk-page certainly indicate thatt hey have been so. Similarly, if you think that my describing your account as single-purpose is "derogatory", then consider that I only did so because your account seems to be used for a single purpose only - as i pointed out, over 80% of your edits are to one topic only. That's perfectly understandable and quite common in users who have been on wikipedia for a considerable while; for new users it is quite unusual. If you do not want to be continually accused of sockpuppetry, the best way to stop that happening is to front up to the accusations as early on as possible. As such, asking someone who has been keeping closer track of your activities whether you have been checked (rather than going through the more formal approach check-user) is surely the logical and less offensive course of action. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''[[User_talk:Grutness|<small style="color:#008822;">wha?</small>]]'' 00:26, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
*Or, you could just apologize for making the accusation, now that you know you are in error. Also, calling my edits re the naming "disruptive" is in fact derogatory. And it would mean that you are also calling JzG's edits disruptive, since I followed his lead.-[[User:PetraSchelm|PetraSchelm]] ([[User talk:PetraSchelm|talk]]) 01:23, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
**Um... what accusation do you think I've made? Did you actually read what I wrote? Did you note that I said that I considered you very likely to be a legitimate user, but was concerned that there were people accusing you of being a sockpuppet? It would appear not. There was no error on my part in that - you have been accused by others, and for your own sake it was necessary to clear things up before they got out of hand. If you feel that I've accused you of something, then I apologise - but please acknowledge the fact that I have never accused you of anything other than disruptive editing. As to my referring to your edits as disruptive, I only called them that for the simple reason that they were. I mean no offence by it, and am merely using the term as it is used for the purposes of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Many of the comments by others on your talk page point to their nature - and if you have a look at [[WP:POINT]] and [[Wikipedia:Disruptive editing]], you will see that many of the comments on your talk page relate to edits which fall well within the items listed there. However, given that this discussion seems to be going nowhere through your [[Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point#Refusal to .27get the point.27|repeated misunderstanding or misinterpretation of what I have said]], I see no reason to continue with this here, as there seems little point. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''[[User_talk:Grutness|<small style="color:#008822;">wha?</small>]]'' 02:25, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
* Squeak, I don't know if you noticed but I moved them all back to the original titles, as I did for the songs list. I think that will help with sourcing and POV issues. <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> <small>([[User:JzG/help|Help!]])</small> 12:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
== Colons and indents ==
The discussion over on [[User talk:N1995w#Please avoid edit warring]] is getting away from N1995w so I'll continue it here.
I don't know of any "page on WP" that says how the flow of conversation works, I just know by observation. On article talk pages, user talk pages, AfD discussions, and other types of discussion pages, users almost always use : or * to indent to show who they are replying to. With two exceptions noted below, I've rarely seen anything else. This convention was here well before I got here and from the looks of things it was [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sacrament&oldid=10310796 at least partially in place] when you started editing.
The two exceptions are user-page discussions and discussions that migrate to a user page, such as this one.
#User-page dialogs usually either work like other talk pages, with back-and-forth and indents, or each person writes to the other person's talk page. The former preserves the flow of conversation, the latter gets the recipient's attention faster.
#Discussions like this one that are no longer relevant to the original page they were on sometimes move to user talk pages. From there, they may stay on one page or get split between the two editors' user pages.
In the case of [[User talk:N1995w]], I joined an existing conversation and I chose to use the keep-it-on-one-page format rather than going straight to your user page. Once I made that decision, I adopted the same format thousands of editors before me have adopted: using colons to indent so you know which edit I am replying to.
[[User:davidwr|davidwr]]/<small><small>([[User_talk:davidwr|talk]])/([[Special:Contributions/Davidwr|contribs]])/([[Special:Emailuser/davidwr|e-mail]])</small></small> 03:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
== "Trolling" ==
Mate, please don't accuse VoA of trolling. The bot does a necessary job, but it broke for some reason, maybe getting revisions out of step or something. "Bot malfunctioning, please stop it urgently" would have been fine, and you'd have been thanked instead of attracting a load of finger-wagging. Have you ever done RC patrol? The level of vandalism is mind-boggling sometimes, and even humans get it wrong. <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> <small>([[User:JzG/help|Help!]])</small> 12:04, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
:Point taken. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 12:59, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
== Jack Tafari ==
Please stop mucking about with the photo size in this story. I wrote the article and provided the photo. Appreciate most of your edits, but there is no good reason to change photo size. 13:59, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
:I will say the same to you, please lets reach a compromise, perhaps 250px, butt he pic without resizing looks too large and takes away from the article. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:01, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
==[[Child sexual abuse]]==
Hi, I tried to remove a ref that is not a reliable source for this article, and somehow screwed up the whole referencing format. Can you take a look when you get time? Tks. -[[User:PetraSchelm|PetraSchelm]] ([[User talk:PetraSchelm|talk]]) 15:35, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
:Hello... I already made the repair. What happened is that when you deleted the references, you deleted the end part of a comment that went with the previous reference, and that left the comment bracket un-terminated. Comments are text that editors can only see when editing the page but that doesn't show up on the page when people read the article. Comments are made like this:
::This is regular visible text... <nowiki><!--</nowiki> ''if this was a real wikitext-comment this part would be invisibile...'' <nowiki>--></nowiki> ... and this part would be visible again.
:So when you removed the second part of the comment, you blanked out the rest of that section. --[[User:Jack-A-Roe|Jack-A-Roe]] ([[User talk:Jack-A-Roe|talk]]) 16:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
== Peter Robinson ==
Sorry about that! It didn't turn out as I had expected --[[User:Energizer07|Energizer07]] ([[User talk:Energizer07|talk]]) 21:55, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
:I can see that, its a good idea to move said article given his new role but it has to be done by an admin, I suggest a proposal on the talk page. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:57, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
==Hello==
I have seen you many times all around ... just dropped in to say a hello. --[[User:Bhadani|Bhadani]] ([[User_talk:Bhadani|talk]]) 16:36, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
== Thanks 3==
Thanks for your kind message. I assure you I am not over any 3RR on any WP page. Best, [[User:Badagnani|Badagnani]] ([[User talk:Badagnani|talk]]) 18:28, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Please [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chief_Illiniwek&curid=1037363&diff=206538002&oldid=206536291 actually look at the edit you reverted] before commenting in future, and, in this case, undo your revert. [[User:Badagnani|Badagnani]] ([[User talk:Badagnani|talk]]) 18:29, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
:Ahh you see what I mean, I removed an unreliable source per JzG, nothing controversial there but you had already reverted JzG 4 times. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:31, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Please [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chief_Illiniwek&curid=1037363&diff=206538002&oldid=206536291 actually look at the edit you reverted] before commenting in future, and, in this case, undo your revert. Please tell me what the "unreliable source" is that you removed, as I am interested to know. [[User:Badagnani|Badagnani]] ([[User talk:Badagnani|talk]]) 18:39, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
:The one removed and identified as an unreliable sopurce, please see the link on the edit summary. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:48, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Please [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chief_Illiniwek&curid=1037363&diff=206538002&oldid=206536291 actually look at the edit you reverted] before commenting in future, and, in this case, undo your revert. Please tell me what the "unreliable source" is that you removed, as I am interested to know. Please give the URL of the link you removed, and explain why it is not acceptable at Wikipedia; I sincerely want to know in this specific case. [[User:Badagnani|Badagnani]] ([[User talk:Badagnani|talk]]) 18:51, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
:Ask JzG not me. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:58, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
You made a revert, blanking a link. I simply wish to know the URL of that link which you removed, and what about it is not acceptable. I asked you kindly three times to examine the revert you made and inform me why you did so. I don't believe you've done that yet, but do request kindly that you do so. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chief_Illiniwek&curid=1037363&diff=206538002&oldid=206536291 The revert] is here. Many thanks, [[User:Badagnani|Badagnani]] ([[User talk:Badagnani|talk]]) 19:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
:You know which link I have reverted and I did so because it is unreliable according to JzG and because you were on your 4th revert. I have nothing more to say, ask Jzg and be aware of [[WP:3RR]]. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:06, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
It's much better if you actually examine the revert you made and tell me which URL you removed in your revert, and why you did so. I would appreciate it very much (and it would be less wasteful of the Wikimedia's bandwidth if I don't have to ask a fifth time). [[User:Badagnani|Badagnani]] ([[User talk:Badagnani|talk]]) 19:13, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
I have reverted [[Chief Illiniwek]] back to the previous version. The UIUC Library Archives are not on the [[User:JzG/unreliable sources]] list and are a [[WP:RS|reliabe source]], therefore there is no reason to delete for the reason you have given. Thanks for trying to clear up unreliable sources, though! There are a lot of them out there... :) [[User:Justinm1978|Justinm1978]] ([[User talk:Justinm1978|talk]]) 19:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
==AfD nomination of Radical Party of Great Britain==
I have nominated [[Radical Party of Great Britain]], an article you created, for [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deletion]]. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radical Party of Great Britain]]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. <small>Do you want to [[Template:Bots#Message notification opt out|opt out]] of receiving this notice?</small><!-- Template:AFDWarning --> [[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]]<sup>g</sup> 23:42, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
== ppa page ==
Hi - when you have a chance, would take a look [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Pro-pedophile_activism#Go-forward_consensus_process_suggestion here] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Pedophile_topic_mentorship#PPA_Page_protection_expires_tomorrow here]? Have a good weekend... --[[User:Jack-A-Roe|Jack-A-Roe]] ([[User talk:Jack-A-Roe|talk]]) 00:00, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radical Party of Great Britain]] ==
Is a partial merge of basic information and redirect to [[List of political parties in the United Kingdom]] acceptable? [[User:davidwr|davidwr]]/<small><small>([[User_talk:davidwr|talk]])/([[Special:Contributions/Davidwr|contribs]])/([[Special:Emailuser/davidwr|e-mail]])</small></small> 05:51, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
==AfD nomination of JustCarmen==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|48px|left]]An article that you have been involved in editing, [[JustCarmen]], has been listed for [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deletion]]. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JustCarmen]]. Thank you. <small>Do you want to [[Template:Bots#Message notification opt out|opt out]] of receiving this notice?</small><!-- Template:adw --> [[User:EconomicsGuy II|EconomicsGuy]] ([[User talk:EconomicsGuy II|talk]]) 06:37, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
== GDS ==
Still POV in the first '''paragraph''' unfortunately. '''[[User:Sceptre|Sceptre]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Sceptre|talk]])</sup> 16:28, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
:Yes, I am sure, I was trying to improve it not make it perfect. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:33, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
::The solution is not to remove material sourced from notable sources like BBC and the Guardian and properly attributed like you did here [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Giovanni_di_Stefano&diff=206906379&oldid=206905879], that's violating [[WP:UNDUE]] --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 17:03, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
:::Well I disagree otherwise I wouldn't have made the edit. And let me assure you I have been working with this article for a long time (have you, Enric?) and knew exactly what I was doing. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:13, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
::::I didn't even know of the existance of the article until this morning. Fortunately, I don't feel any guilt about it since [[WP:PILLARS|Wikipedia is free content that anyone may edit]] :D Even anonymous IPs can make the sort of reverts that I made, and not getting it reverted on sight if they provide good reasons from them.
::::Of course I suposse that you know way better than me what is in the article, and I normally respect that knowledge, but in this case it was removal of material sourced by notable sources that looked to me like trying to appease <s>a disrupting editor</s> an editor on very good standing that had decided to be disruptive on that article for whatever the reason he had in mind at that moment. Sorry for our first encounter being a clash on editing an article. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 22:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Could you please, please, please possibly consider just maybe making more substantive comments to the talkpage ''before'' edit warring? If I'm not mistaken, there is no requirement that all citations be to a website where anyone can grab it immediately. Citations to newspapers, books, professional journals etc. that are offline are completely acceptable. You do a lot of useful work, but when you completely ignore policies in order to push your goals for this article you sacrifice your credibility. [[User:Avruch|<strong style="color:#000;background:#fff;border:0px solid #000">Avruch</strong>]][[User talk:Avruch|<sup><strong style="color:#000;background:#fff;border:0px solid #000"> T </strong></sup>]] 19:29, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
:I am not claiming that all refs need to be to a website but if you cite a book that isn't out of print and unavailable on Amazon etc then I can go out and buy it but an old newspaper that is not online and that nobody is willing to send a screenshot of is unveriable to me and given the extremely controversial nature with BLP violation if not 100% true and given geni's track record of errors this is not reliable, for all we know Geni made a mistake. While not unaware of the subtle issues behind this case I am baffled as to why you are going so hard after GDS, especially given the endless afd comments about how we need to take care. We need to take care not be reckless and this unverifiable edit is completely the opposite of helpful. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:38, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
::Seriously - you didn't look for it at all. It ''is online'', but that is irrelevant. It is totally acceptable to cite something that is a newspaper or journal or other periodical that is not readily available to everyone in the whole world. More importantly, if you had taken 10 seconds to google it, you could have found the electronic version of the article (I posted the link to the talkpage). Given that, don't you think you should be a little more thorough before you edit war removing something in an article like this? When you remove something as libelous, defamatory, etc. you are providing ammunition to any potential lawsuit - and you should absolutely not do that if you aren't even willing to take 10 seconds for a simple web search. [[User:Avruch|<strong style="color:#000;background:#fff;border:0px solid #000">Avruch</strong>]][[User talk:Avruch|<sup><strong style="color:#000;background:#fff;border:0px solid #000"> T </strong></sup>]] 19:44, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
::And now that I've provided the link, and its clear that the removed section is sourced, will you restore it yourself and remove the disputed tag? [[User:Avruch|<strong style="color:#000;background:#fff;border:0px solid #000">Avruch</strong>]][[User talk:Avruch|<sup><strong style="color:#000;background:#fff;border:0px solid #000"> T </strong></sup>]] 19:45, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
:::Well I am not going to revert on the basis of this particular story. This was in the article before and the user Pnazionale said this was another person, not him, but nor will i edit war over this. For the record I do n ot believe editing this article as I do is in any way reducing my credibility other than that edit warring per se is not a credible approac h for an experienced editor. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
::::Another person based on what? The article pretty clearly is describing this particular Giovanni di Stefano, not some other one. If you removed information from the article because you thought it was unverifiable (it wasn't) and subsequently it was made crystal clear to you that it is verifiable and ''verified'' - don't you think you ought to put it back, and remove the tag you placed describing the article as factually inaccurate? [[User:Avruch|<strong style="color:#000;background:#fff;border:0px solid #000">Avruch</strong>]][[User talk:Avruch|<sup><strong style="color:#000;background:#fff;border:0px solid #000"> T </strong></sup>]] 19:58, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
::::There is simply no way I am adding that information, I bel;ieve strobnngly that even if verifiable we shoudl not be adding information like this to the article for reasons I explained above and which hopefully you are aware of anyway. We need to tread carefully around this article, if you add teh info yourself please do not remove the td tag. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:04, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
==Policy==
How can you possibly say that when a new person knows enough policy to defend themselves then they are not really new? Where is the policy document suggesting that --[[Special:Contributions/77.98.178.218|77.98.178.218]] ([[User talk:77.98.178.218|talk]]) 22:06, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
:Well I am neither a policy document nor a wikilawyer nor a real lawyer, nor was I biting you. Just expressing my opinion. Happy editing. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:10, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
== PPA BLP issue ==
Since you have experience with BLP issues, your opinion would be welcome [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Pro-pedophile_activism#BLP_issue in this discussion]. Thanks --[[User:Jack-A-Roe|Jack-A-Roe]] ([[User talk:Jack-A-Roe|talk]]) 05:54, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
===Award===
I give you this award for the contributions you have made to Social Issues on wikipedia[[User:Susanbryce|Susanbryce]] ([[User talk:Susanbryce|talk]]) 15:43, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks, its on my user page. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:25, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
::I endorse that award. It's well-deservd. [[Special:Contributions/Will_Beback| ·:· ]][[User:Will Beback|Will Beback]] [[User talk:Will Beback|·:·]] 21:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
:::My great passion is biographies, and increasingly so, i just love reading about people's lives and then fixing things as I go along but I think any long term regular here should also edit areas that maybe they aren't so interested in but which are crying out for attention. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:37, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
== Quick Questions ==
Hello, you may know me as a user who cammonts on Jimbos's talkpage. Not that it is a bad thing but, do you always say "Thanks," after (almost) all of your comments? I'm just curious. Also, can users add anything to Jimbo's userpage like some images of wikipedia, info about history, ect.?--[[User:RyRy5|<span style="color: navy; font-family: Times New Roman">RyRy5</span>]] ('''''[[User talk:RyRy5|<span style="color: navy; font-family: Times New Roman">talk</span>]]''''') 02:05, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
:I have made my ''raw signature'' say '''. Thanks,[[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]]'''. I would have thought that given the effort you and many others make to have stylish signature that you would have realized that. I just add the 4 squiggles without a space after the last word I write whenever I sign. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
::Thanks for your time. Keep up the good work!--[[User:RyRy5|<span style="color: navy; font-family: Times New Roman">RyRy5</span>]] ('''''[[User talk:RyRy5|<span style="color: navy; font-family: Times New Roman">talk</span>]]''''') 02:51, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
===Why this raw signature===
And I do it because in the past I was given the feedback that I had incivility issues and its part of my attempt to redress that balance and become a better editor. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:25, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
== Explain my comments ==
Hi Squekbox, <br/>
I just stopped to briefly expand on my comment [[User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Wikipedia:Responsible_Editing_Pledge|here]].<br/>
I read the [[WP:REEP|Doc pledge]] and would whole-heartedly agree with it if it was stated as a best practice, or as food-for-thought for editors who are/aren't editing under their true identities. However the part that disappoints me is where the the pledgees ''label'' other editors' activities as "unethical", "cowardly" (now removed, thanks), or even ''"against the educational and charitable principles of wikipedia."'' I don't think editors, like me, who do edit anonymously but try to uphold the word and spirit of [[WP:V]], [[WP:RS]] and [[WP:Do no harm]] deserve to be looked down upon or be so labeled. It is particularly surprising that such epithets are included in an essay that is essentially a plea for holding ourselves to higher ethical standards, and being acutely aware of the effect of our edits and comments.<br/>
Incidentally, I don't edit BLPs too often, but you can judge my edits at say [[Ronald Kessler]], [[Lisa Daniels]], [[Ivor Catt]], [[Nathalie Handal]], [[ R. K. Laxman]], [[John Kanzius]], [[Michael Jordan]] etc and decide if they are beneath wikipedia's highest standards or if wikipedia would be a better place if I stopped editing all BLPs. <br/>
'''PS:''' I don't see how one can change a pledge after it is signed. Won't it be proper to remove all signatures and ask editors to re-sign if and only if they agree with the modified language ? (I assume most will do so willingly). Regards. [[User:Abecedare|Abecedare]] ([[User talk:Abecedare|talk]]) 02:27, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
:What would be good would be just to make the proposal better but sticking to its original meaning. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:44, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
:: Thank you for giving my spiel due consideration, but I'll leave the crafting of the essay to editors more involved with the issues and surrounding debates. Cheers. [[User:Abecedare|Abecedare]] ([[User talk:Abecedare|talk]]) 02:48, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
:::Great. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:06, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
== Comment ==
I have responded on my talk page. - [[User Talk:Philippe|<span style="font-family:Papyrus, sans-serif; color:#775ca8;">Philippe</span>]] 03:26, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
==Cats==
Lol you should see the changes to [[:Category:Cities, towns and villages in Iran]] and [[:Category:Cities in Brazil]]!! Apparently there are 67,000 places in Iran alone! Any several thousand for each province where at present we only have about 30 maximum. The sooner we get these places sorted out the better . Costa Rica and Panama will need doing tomorrow [[User:Blofeld of SPECTRE| <span style="border:1px solid blue;padding:1px; color:#fef;background:black;">'''''♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦'''''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Blofeld of SPECTRE| <span style="font-size:12px; color: Black">'''$1,000,000?'''</span> ]]</sup> 21:04, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm making good prgress anyway. Category changes are visible in [[:Category:Cities by country]], but it is necessary infrastructure to prepare for filling in new articles and also to cleanup what we've got to prevent villages with populations of 200 being called "cities". Basically it marks it as settlements in a given area which is far easier and simplified I think. Then of course infoboxes and maps will need adding to every places in the world which with a locator map for most countries now, things should come on leaps and bounds [[User:Blofeld of SPECTRE| <span style="border:1px solid blue;padding:1px; color:#fef;background:black;">'''''♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦'''''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Blofeld of SPECTRE| <span style="font-size:12px; color: Black">'''$1,000,000?'''</span> ]]</sup> 21:11, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
== More on Giovanni di Stefano ==
In light of the recent activity regarding this figure I have made some major structural changes to the article. It appears to be well referenced but perhaps covers too much of his "negative side" and controversies rather that actually documenting the bulk of his legal profession work to date. There is a tag and claims that it is inaccurate. Could somebody take the liberty and inform me just what is claimed to be false, is it his 1986 fraud case or what? The articles uses reliable mainstream sources BBC, The Guardian etc so an article on him using such sources mus thave some validity even if it is not written in a completely neutral and balanced way[[User:Blofeld of SPECTRE| <span style="border:1px solid blue;padding:1px; color:#fef;background:black;">'''''♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦'''''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Blofeld of SPECTRE| <span style="font-size:12px; color: Black">'''$1,000,000?'''</span>]]</sup> 08:19, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
== Invitation to participate in a discussion Food vs biofuel debate ==
Hi dear editor. Would you be so kind to visit [[Talk:Food vs fuel]] and give us your experienced opinion on that discussion. We need more editors to give their input on the proposed article's name change. [[User:Mariordo|Mariordo]] ([[User talk:Mariordo|talk]]) 01:37, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
==AN/I==
There is a new thread on AN/I about an article you have recently edited: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=208587071&oldid=208586540] -[[User:PetraSchelm|PetraSchelm]] ([[User talk:PetraSchelm|talk]]) 19:36, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
== new zealand events ==
Can you go to [[Talk:Giovanni_di_Stefano#New_Zealand_expulsion]] and comment on the inclusion of this info? --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 21:04, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
:ha. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
::You are right it that it wasnt an actual expulsion [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Giovanni_di_Stefano&diff=209025427&oldid=208851386]. I still would like you to clarify the rest of your objections, or say if you are still holding them after my comments. I would rather answer them now than getting reverted two weeks down the road. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 16:33, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
:::Hehe, this typo [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Giovanni_di_Stefano&diff=prev&oldid=209024058] was because I was using the word search function to look for "media", and I didn't notice that I had typed the first two letters on the middle on the article before the search box had time to open. I have made that same error like 3 times already on different articles. I'll try to be more careful with the damned search box, but I'm too fast typing --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 00:47, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
:::(I looked at it again and, damn, the damned letters really landed on the worst place possible) --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 00:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
== thanks for the idea ==
I did post the Adeyto article deletion to the Deletion Review like you suggested and it was a much better thing to do. Now it's here [[User:I Write Stuff/Adeyto]] and anyone can verify the text and see if the article is that much of a spam that deserves deletion. Please take a look if you have time! [[User:Tsurugaoka|Tsurugaoka]] ([[User talk:Tsurugaoka|talk]]) 13:35, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
== [[:User:CJ2005B]] ==
You and this editor apparently had a history at one time. I thought you'd like to be notified that he's back. So far, the edit's he's done have been constructive. --[[User:Orangemike|<span style="color:darkorange;">Orange Mike</span>]] | [[User talk:Orangemike|<span style="color:orange;">Talk</span>]] 20:03, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
:My opinion was a kid with good intentions and little self-control, hopefully (if my assumption was right) 3 years should have matured him considerably, I have re put his talk page on my watchlist. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:06, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
==[[Paisa (disambiguation)]]==
Disambiguation pages are only supposed to link to entries that we have an article on, or are likely to have an article on. If you think this is a topic that we will likely have an article on eventually, then the entry can stay, but it needs to follow [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages)]]. One link per entry, and no external links. I've commented out the external link, so it is still there but unviewable, and removed one of the links. --[[User:Xyzzyplugh|Xyzzyplugh]] ([[User talk:Xyzzyplugh|talk]]) 19:03, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
:Well I only put the link in because you removed the entry, see new article. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:06, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
==New Project==
Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.
If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at [[User:Useight/Highly Active]], as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. [[User:Useight|Useight]] ([[User talk:Useight|talk]]) 17:56, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
== Mayor Boris ==
OK, he won; It'll be interesting to see how he does. Isn't it amazing how your Conservatives make our conservatives look like raving ideologues? I think Paddick would have made an excellent Mayor, however, and even Red Ken would've been better for London. I hope Boris proves me wrong. Happy editing! --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 22:43, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
:As a young man I supported Ken (when he was GLC leader) and he is clearly a politician of class, indeed probably the only classy politician Labour has after Blair's retirement but Boris is also a very charismatic politician. And of course I am conservative, I work for a small internet start-up, pure capitalism. When Hugo Chavez raised the minimum wage by 30% on Thursday to enormous cheers and others were hoping such a move would spread through the region I despaired at the foolishness of socialists, though Red Ken is clearly not a fool. And I would prefer McCain to Clinton to win the coming US election. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
::Boris has a way with people. He almost comes off as a caricature of the well-to-do British gentleman, which is endearing. Ken, who is leftist but not ([[AFAIK]]) socialist is a good man who's done a lot to improve conditions of the people of Greater London. Tony Blair, while an able politician, has as much value to me as a bucket of warm p***; Gordon Brown has half that much value. He's rather Tony Blair's own John Major. :-) That said, Paddick still seems to have been the one with the best plan and experience.
::As far as conservatism & capitalism: I don't link the two. I'm a committed liberal & simultaneously I believe that capitalism is the best, most egalitarian economic system humanity have ever devised. We simply can't make ourselves wealthy without providing for the health, education, and welfare of all of our citizens. It's the definition of society.
::Now, [[Hugo Chavez]]: I personally lost $2,000 of the money I was saving to buy a house when, on Thursday, the Chavez government went back on its word and denied final approval for the Canadian company [[Crystallex]] to begin gold mining under a contract already issued by the Venezuelan government. The had all the necessary permits. They paid all of the special fees and taxes that the Chavistas had come up with, they did everything asked of them. When their final permit was denied, the stock (KRY on [[TSX]] & [[American Stock Exchange|AMEX]]) lost 2/3 of its value. It was a [[sucker punch]], pure & simple. Chavez exemplifies all the dangers inherent in [[populism]]. His dream of a socialist paradise is an unworkable lie. You can't legislate prosperity. His nation could be immensely wealthy if he would only let it.
::And the [[2008 Presidential election]]: Has McCain been the Republican nominee in [[United States presidential election, 2000|2000]], I would've voted for him; In 2008, he's shifted so far to the right, especially on social issues, and he's such an ardent backer of the Iraq war that I couldn't possibly vote for him. I don't think the Democrats have narrowed the field to the 2 best candidates; I'd have preferred to see [[John Edwards]] or [[Chris Dodd]] be our nominee, for example. However, considering the ones we're stuck with, either is equally appealing to me. --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 23:48, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
::An unrelated query: The [[WP:DISAMBIG|disambiguation page]] at [[AMEX]] says that it's "a term used in parts of England when talking about the USA." Could you demystify that for me? Why would the USA be referred to as AMEX? --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 00:23, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
:::Ho hum. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
::::Ho hum? I shall endeavor to be less boring. :-) --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 23:25, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
:::::You are not boring, Steve, your culture is too different from mine for that to be so. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:38, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
== Real food versus rubbish ==
:I don't like cookies either. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:19, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
::Mmm... [[Cookie Monster|Me like cookie]]! Squeak, if you're not gonna eat that... :-) --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 23:25, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
:[[Image:Cabrales blue Cheese.jpg|thumb|300px|edible food]] look right, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
==[[Erik Möller]]==
Please don't revert repeatedly on this article. If a policy violation occurs, we (the community) will deal with it. [[User:Jehochman|Jehochman]] <sup>[[User talk:Jehochman|Talk]]</sup> 00:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
:Last time I checked I was part of this community too, while any attempt to try to reason with Bramlet failed. If Erik ever becomes notable we can give him an article but Bramlet seems to be pursuing his same old grudge against the WMF, and Erik is not notable right now. But anyway I will restrict myself to one revert if we get a repeat and instead inform admins such as yourself. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 12:15, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
== Against unconsulted article's name change==
Would you go to the Talk page of the article the user doing weird edits changed the name to [[Food crisis]] without any consultarion. [[User:Mariordo|Mariordo]] ([[User talk:Mariordo|talk]]) 22:35, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
:Sure, I have been following him or her and fixing errors but that does not mean I endorse the name change. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:38, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
==Hand of chipfriendship==
<div style="text-align: center;">
[[Image:Chipetting7.jpg|right|333px]][[Image:Hand-of-chipfriendship (closeup).jpg|left|333px]]
</div>This is gonna be the best chipetting season ever! <small>[p.s. we need pics of the room and its [[User_talk:El_C#Amor.27s_paw|felinhabitants!]]]</small> Best, [[User:El_C|El_C]] 07:20, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
:On the case. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:43, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
== Apologies ==
I'm sorry I came down so hard on you. I respect your position on the adult film photographs, although I disagree with it. But I thought you were repeating the false allegations. Sorry. --<span style="color: #0000C0">David</span> '''[[User:David Shankbone|<span style="color: #0000C0">Shankbone</span>]]''' 21:58, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
== [[Valleywag]] article and BLP ==
Can you keep an eye on it for BLP issues for the next few days? I will be scarce. Please be careful that no one [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=211975363 removes any valid sourcing], however, in misguided BLP/BADSITES type nonsense--even decidedly unpleasant news from the perspective of or for Wikipedia is valid, even if it's a black eye for us, unfortunately. Oh, and [http://wikimediafoundation.org/w/index.php?title=Erik_M%C3%B6ller_Deputy_Director&oldid=24415 Moller is indeed "Deputy Director"]. <span style="font-variant:small-caps; color:#800080;">[[User:Lawrence Cohen|<span style="color:#800080;">Lawrence Cohen</span>]] § [[User talk:Lawrence Cohen|<span style="color:#800080;">t</span>]]/[[:Special:Contributions/Lawrence_Cohen|<span style="color:#800080;">e</span>]]</span> 23:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
:Not Deputy director of wikipedia though, we don't have sucha position, it is of the WMF. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:52, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
== Edit summaries ==
Hey, I appreciate your contributions but [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Erik_M%C3%B6ller&diff=212138542&oldid=212138053 edit summaries like this] are not necessary, I was only doing some very minor copy-editing tweaks. I will of course respected your {{tl|wip}} tag. [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 16:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks, I have tagged for inuse, you are doing good work but I need to fix grammatical and style issues, i will only be a few mins, i ahve a slow connection amking me very vulnerable to edit conflicts. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:30, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
::Ah no worries. Thanks again for your work on the article, good stuff. [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 16:30, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Not really a fan of the blockquoting, it doesn't look that great in the article. And also per [[WP:MOSDATE]], single years should not be wikilinked in the article, only full dates. [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 16:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I think there are far too many quotes in the article, i have no strong opion on the linking of years not in dates. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:48, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
:Are you done with {{tl|wip}} ? If so, I will shorten a couple quotes. [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 16:51, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
::I am now and the tag has been removed. I'll take another look later, please bring issues to the Moller talk page thanks. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:54, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Nice work on the tweaking overall. [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 16:57, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
== Request checkuser ==
Hey, I saw your request at checkuser for Bramlet Abercrombie and found it very interesting, as I had reported the exact same user directly above you (but as a sock of another user). You may want to [[Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser|check it out]]. Thanks, [[User:Happyme22|Happyme22]] ([[User_talk:Happyme22|talk]]) 01:42, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
:Cheers for the header. I have put it on my watchlist, and Ronald Reagan too. Classic Bramlet. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:28, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
== Essjay controversy Revert? ==
Hi, Squeakbox,
While I accept that the [[Essjay Controversy]] revert was probably for good reason, I'm curious as to what that reason was, as I assumed that my link to his [[User:Essjay|old userpage]] would provide more information to browsers wishing to explore the history of the controversy themselves; can you provide more info please? Ta! [[User:Cojoco|cojoco]] ([[User talk:Cojoco|talk]]) 09:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
:It is an interesting question. I always assume we do not link to user pages in the main space but I am happy to hear other input on this issue, as I said I don'tt hink it is a good idea but I may not be right. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:08, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
::Fair enough in general, but Wiki's big enough now that references for these "Meta-articles" should I believe come from Administrative areas of Wiki itself: this was, after all, an article about the Wiki User themselves [[User:Cojoco|cojoco]] ([[User talk:Cojoco|talk]]) 00:37, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
== Irukanji vs Yirrganydji ==
I note you (possibly watching the Irukanji disambiguiation page) may have witnessed and been a little confused by User:Mikkalai's
recent moving first [[Irukandji people]] => [[Irukandji]], then [[Yirrganydji people]] => [[Irukandji]].
You will note User:Mikkalai gives his reasoning [[Talk:Irukandji#Page name| here]] .. and I have both posted on his/her talk page and [[Talk:Irukandji]] explaining why we/Wikipedia should favour the article being named [[Yirrganydji people]] in preference to [[Irukandji]].
I will wait a day or so, but propose to move the page back to [[Yirrganydji people]] for the reasons outlined .. and hope this doesn't cause any further confusion/ inconvenience?! [[User:Bruceanthro|Bruceanthro]] ([[User talk:Bruceanthro|talk]]) 21:50, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
:My interest is in the jellyfish. Lets see what Mikkalai, a user long known to me, says22:29, 15 May 2008 (UTC). Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]]
== [[Guillermo Vargas]] ==
“chained up inches out of reach of a bowl of food in [[2007]], and with the intention of repeating the performance in [[Honduras]] in [[November]], [[2008]]” is all [[WP:OR]] (except the date and place). Can you source it? It appears no where else in the article.
How do my edits to ‘’Exposición N° 1’’ amount to a [[WP:NPOV]] violation? I included more details about the exhibit (including the correct name). No violation of NPOV there. I even searched for, found, and included the original source for the claim that the dog died. Please explain your revert. Furthermore, changing “states” to “claims” is blatant POV-pushing.
On what grounds did you remove the awards? They are sourced and relevant; need I remind you that this is an artist’s bio? Please justify your wholesale revert. -- [[User:Irn|Irn]] ([[User talk:Irn|talk]]) 01:13, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
:They are not sourced in a secondary sourced, which is what would be needed to be notable. I'll find the other sources in the morning but the alleged ref from the Guaradian, making him appear Mr Nice Guy in what was an article that portrayed him completely differently is just typical of the way the article tries to portray him very positively. Really we need to move the article so it just talks about the dog scandal, not this highly unnotable artist. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
::My response is on the article talk page. -- [[User:Irn|Irn]] ([[User talk:Irn|talk]]) 01:53, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
== Cast of Characters lawsuit ==
I notice that you've put an "Article for deletion" notice on [[Cast of Characters vs. The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen lawsuit]], and I was wondering "why?", please. Clearly there are tensions being exhibited over statements that were made (perhaps inadvisably) and then subsequently removed by parties (''party'') involved in this case, but it is clearly '''very''' important as an issue and article: It was the straw that caused Mr Moore to withdraw full support for Hollywoodisations of his work. It caused the director to swear off directing, (albeit he is scheduled to be making a return this-or-next year). It caused the main star to officially retire. It called into question the moral character of Mr Moore, and highlighted oddities in how Hollywood cavalierly treats "adaptations" of works, adding, changing or removing characters, and ''maybe'' adapting in an untoward manner from materials they shouldn't. It helped cause Mr Moore & Mr O'Neill to withdraw their comic series from DC/WildStorm and take it to Top Shelf.<br/>
It's difficult to source: Mr Moore doesn't use the Internet. It was settled (allegedly, and "''reportedly''" - from the keyboard of the producer) behind closed-doors, and was thus ill-reported on. Sir Sean doesn't do many interviews. Mr Norrington doesn't do ''any''. The only group who are really interested in the ultimate outcomes of the case are comics fans, and the comics industry's "investigative journalism" errs more on the side of "gossip."<br/>
However. I don't see that it should be deleted. How can it conflict with the policy not to defame living people? The only potentially-defamed parties are surely Mr Moore, Mr Murphy, Mr Cohen & Mr Poll and 20th Century Fox. Mr Murphy has been (instrumental in) excising things he wishes he hadn't said/doesn't want reported; Mr Moore is more defamed by the claims than mention of them/commentary on them; Mr Cohen & Mr Poll felt they had a case, and (allegedly) won a settlement to not comment further, so any critique of their case is academic. Fox is a company. A company which indirectly requested radical changes to the material, precipitating the lawsuit. Suggesting which individuals ''within'' the company were responsible for such decisions could very well be defamation. Nobody is doing that, however.<br/>
I'd be interested to here otherwise, though. :o) [[User:Ntnon|ntnon]] ([[User talk:Ntnon|talk]]) 01:08, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks for your comments. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:16, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
== Your kitten ==
Your kitten picture (I saw it on Guettarda's page) is so precious. [[User:Swatjester|<span style="color: red">⇒</span>]][[User_talk:Swatjester|<span style="font-family: Euclid Fraktur"><span style="color: black">SWAT</span><span style="color: goldenrod">Jester</span></span>]] [[WP:CLIMBING|<small><sup>Son of the Defender</sup></small>]] 04:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
:Amor's elder sister Ruby just gave birth to 4 more this morning, and they are equally cute. Sigh!. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:27, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
==Voseo==
SqueakBox my point is that the voseo feature is just regional in, as you say Honduras and Guatemala, the official pronoun in those countries is and has always been "tu".
Cheers
--[[User:Fercho85|Fercho85]] ([[User talk:Fercho85|talk]]) 22:44, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
:Okay, I hear you, but it is the language of the people, in El Salavdor and Nicaragua as well I believe. People are much more familiar with the vos verbs than the tu verbs, especially the less educated people, and toimply voseo is more prevalent in Argentina than in Honduras is bound to be a false assertion givern its usage. The image on the page indicates the voseo use in El Salvador and refs re its usage amongst the perople's of central America are easy to find. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:52, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
==Tks==
That was sweet. (And your wife is so beautiful!). -[[User:PetraSchelm|PetraSchelm]] ([[User talk:PetraSchelm|talk]]) 23:44, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
== PPA page title ==
Hi SqueakBox - I thought you might be interested in posting a comment about [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Pro-pedophile_activism#Page_move_proposal this suggestion] --[[User:Jack-A-Roe|Jack-A-Roe]] ([[User talk:Jack-A-Roe|talk]]) 23:55, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
==Barnstar==
[[User talk:PetraSchelm|talk]]) 23:58, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
==Your vote requested==
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:VanTucky/Chicken_poll -[[User:PetraSchelm|PetraSchelm]] ([[User talk:PetraSchelm|talk]]) 21:49, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
== Comment ==
I noticed the comment you removed from my talk page. While I realize that you removed it after recognizing that you were mistaken in your belief that I had used a rollback on your edit, I am still concerned that you took offense by my revert. Please do not take offense as it was simply a disagreement over the removal of cited historical information. I did not state, nor mean to imply, that your edits were vandalism. --[[User:Ave Caesar|Ave Caesar]] ([[User talk:Ave Caesar|talk]]) 00:33, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
:Except it's not "cited historical information"--it's an OR inference from a fringe source, and you haven't addressed the talkpage discussion on that. -[[User:PetraSchelm|PetraSchelm]] ([[User talk:PetraSchelm|talk]]) 00:45, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
== Re. firecrackers ==
The main reason for [[Burma]] to stay [[Burma]] has nothing to do with the ruling junta, but with the common usage of the name of that country in the English language. You've actively participated in discussions about the name of that article and thus should know this by now. ''the Portuguese may wish Olivenza was theirs''? Nobody in Portugal cares about Olivenza, most people haven't even heard of it. Again, you're assuming POV agendas at random. <strong>[[User:Husond|<span style="color:#082567;">Hús</span>]][[User:Husond/Esperanza|<span style="color:green;">ö</span>]][[User talk:Husond|<span style="color:#082567;">nd</span>]]</strong> 17:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
:Well somebody obviously cares enough about this Olivenza dispute to spread it over wikipedia. And since when did the common name directly contradict the official name in any country. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:32, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
==Thank you==
SqueekBox, thank you for your support during my "melt-down" earlier on in the week. Best regards, [[User:Googie man|Googie man]] ([[User talk:Googie man|talk]]) 15:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
== WWS ubx ==
Do you want the Wikipedia welcome squad Userbox? Here's the code: <nowiki>{{WWS}}</nowiki> Cheers! And thanks for supporting! [[User:WikiZorro|<span style="color: slategray; font-family: ">'''Wiki'''</span>]][[User talk:WikiZorro|<span style="color: navy; font-family: ">'''Zorro'''</span>]]<sup>[[User:WikiZorro/Autographs|sign]]</sup> 22:28, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
:Cheers. I must restore my old user boxes and will certainly add this one when I do. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:14, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
==Lambton is threatening me==
Look on his talk page, and he says something I find rather ominous. Please help. [[User:Googie man|Googie man]] ([[User talk:Googie man|talk]]) 20:05, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
==Bitch Wars==
I thought you were a bot, since you revert edits right when I make it. Please keep the para added, content is taken from the sources listed below.
:lol. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
==Another day==
Thanks for your support. [[User:Googie man|Googie man]] ([[User talk:Googie man|talk]]) 00:17, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
==Your comment==
Thanks for your comment on my talk page and I couldn't agree more. I've read that that most children who are molested are girls, and that about 20% of women state that they were molested as children. I would say in my life, about 20% of the women I've ever known have been molested, and to some with tragic consequences in adulthood. I've been a long time editor of Wikipedia, and I never even realized the extent of the problem of with the informatino on pedophilia until I read it for myself. I consider what you, PetraSchlem, now myself, and others is a public service, since Wikipedia is now at the vanguard of information dissemination, for better and for worse. [[User:Googie man|Googie man]] ([[User talk:Googie man|talk]]) 00:27, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
==No Bias and thank you==
Just to let you know I don't have any sort of bias against boxers of anysort and I'm sorry if you somehow ended up with that impression of me. I thank you for bringing the AfD to the attention of someone who knows more about the subject than myself though. [[User:Jasynnash2|Jasynnash2]] ([[User talk:Jasynnash2|talk]]) 16:01, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
:It is bias against parts oft he world we cover poorly, such as Eastern Europe (or Africa or Latin America or large parts of Asia) that I am concerned about. I have no interest in boxing other than recognising it as a valid are wikipedia should cover. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:56, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
:: I understand your concern. I'm thinking I may have read the comment too harshly and taken it as an accusation of bias against myself. I'm sorry about taking the comment that way. [[User:Jasynnash2|Jasynnash2]] ([[User talk:Jasynnash2|talk]]) 08:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
:::Actually it was a good call, you were totally right, ie it was a hoax. I know nothing much about either boxing or the countries of Russia and Ukraine but asking 2 experts, one in each subject, uncovered it very well indeed. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
== Defending personal territory ==
Let me suggest to you that our time here is best spend editing, and not attacking or defending personal territory. [[User:Haiduc|Haiduc]] ([[User talk:Haiduc|talk]]) 18:34, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
:I do not know what you are talking about but do hope you follow your own advice and refrain from attacking others in such a horrible way in the future, that is all. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:43, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
== How was the carnival? ==
Your input is welcome at [[Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/SqueakBox]]. --'''[[User:AnotherSolipsist|AnotherSolipsist]]''' ([[User talk:AnotherSolipsist|talk]]) 19:36, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
==Lambton==
Has admitted to abusive sockpuppetry here: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Pedophile_topic_mentorship#No.2C_srsly]. Also, making more lame legal threats. -[[User:PetraSchelm|PetraSchelm]] ([[User talk:PetraSchelm|talk]]) 22:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
:Be more specific about exactly where you are claiming he did this. [[Special:Contributions/219.79.186.13|219.79.186.13]] ([[User talk:219.79.186.13|talk]]) 09:47, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
== AnotherSolipsist ==
Do you actually have any real evidence that AnotherSolipsist is a sock? By that, I mean diffs showing similar editing habits (such as editing at the same time, making the same typos). [[User:Ryan Postlethwaite|'''<span style="color:#000088;">Ry<span style="color:#220066;">an<span style="color:#550044;"> P<span style="color:#770022;">os<span style="color:#aa0000;">tl</span>et</span>hw</span>ai</span>te</span>''']] 22:37, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
:I would like an RCU check. There has never been any evidence of me using socks, other than Skanking to evade a ban, and I am not banned right now. I am a bit drunk right now (its gran carnival here) but am happy to compile a serious case tomorrow, but my intuition says this is a much more valid claim than the endless claims againt me by those who oppose my ped editing. I believe that AS is German and have long wondered where Roman (a somewhat notable German), a long term user, went. Happy to take guidance from, you Ryan, as I do trust you, that is why i went to mediation in the beginning. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:41, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
== Another sensitive editor in relation to paedophila ==
Hi. There is yet another complaint regarding yourself at [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27 noticeboard#SB.2FIncivility|ANI]]. While this is a not infrequent instance, I would comment that the discussion prior to [[User_talk:Googie_man&diff=prev&oldid=214654729|this diff]] does seem to contain some assertions that are not backed up by sources/references - and some which appear to be opinion. As we both know, ArbCom have decided that any discussion/dispute regarding paedophilia and related subjects should be referred to them, and I feel that expressing an opinion falls within the meaning of that decision. I am therefore asking that you withdraw from the discussion at talk:Googie man. Cheers. [[User:LessHeard vanU|LessHeard vanU]] ([[User talk:LessHeard vanU|talk]]) 22:49, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
:Your link is red, and I have not posted at that thread in ages. I expect to see this situation resolved, pronto. What say you. And sure I will respect your wishes. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:54, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
==JzG RFAR merged with Cla68-FM-SV case==
Per the [[Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/C68-FM-SV#Arbitrators.27_opinion_on_hearing_this_matter_.280.2F0.2F0.2F4.29|arb vote here]] the RFAR on [[User:JzG]] is now merged with this case and he is a named party. Also see my case disposition notes there. <span style="font-family: verdana;"> — [[User:Rlevse|<span style="color:#060;">'''''R''levse'''</span>]] • [[User_talk:Rlevse|<span style="color:#990;">Talk</span>]] • </span> 21:24, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
==My 2 cents==
I *would* offer you the same support you've offered me, but there are two people in this disussion I simply won't adress anymore.
[http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/156/5/786 Here's] why distress is tricky when discussing child sexual offenders. You'll see there is a high comorbidity with narcisissm, (i.e. solipsists) and narcissists don't feel distress over their thoughts and actions, and oblivious and/or indifferent to the distress they cause in others. What they really want is for all these people who are so worried about harm befalling onto other people, and children in particular to just shut up and mind thier own business. [[User:Googie man|Googie man]] ([[User talk:Googie man|talk]]) 19:27, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
== Barnstar ==
It just isn't a normal day on Wikipedia without people attacking you on ANI for your brilliant work - well done for keeping it together, normal people would've gone Postal by now. [[User:Sceptre|'''Sceptre''']]
==Can you please be more specific regarding Haile Selassie/ Bob Marley undo==
Hello. You said that my edit to the Haile Selassie article was reverted due to "poor edit summary". Would you please explain in what way the explanation of my edit was "poor"? It seemed quite concise to me. Can you explain to me in what ways Bob Marley has more to do with Selassie than say with the bands Culture or Israel Vibrations, among others, who also sing specifically about Selassie? It really seems that an image of Bob Marley on this page is gratitiduous. Thank you.[[User:Wowbobwow12|Wowbobwow12]] ([[User talk:Wowbobwow12|talk]]) 23:38, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:Bob Marley is far more notable than any other Rastafarian. Most people have never heard of Israel Vibration or Culture. This seems so obvious to me I wonder why you are asking. The article also suffers notoriously from born again Christians whop want to underplay the importance of Rastafari re His Majesty so including a picture of His most prominent worshipper seems entirely appropriate to me. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:40, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
::Could you please cite a source that says Bob Marley is "His most prominent worshipper" and also explain in full detail why it matters who His most prominent worshipper was? Clearly you have an interest in introducing Bob Marley into the article, when proper form would suggest that the article should focus on King Selassie I, not famous people who worshipped him. I do not believe in getting into edit wars, so if you wish to go ahead with your agenda, I will not resist. Nevertheless, no one can deny that this article regards King Selassie I, and that mention of ANY specific reggae singers within the article, much less photographs of them, constitutes a divergent "factoid" inappropriate for a serious encyclopedia article. [[User:Wowbobwow12|Wowbobwow12]] ([[User talk:Wowbobwow12|talk]]) 01:00, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
:::P.S. As a courtesy to you, you should know I've copied the foregoing debate to the Halie Selassie I Talk page so that others might join, if they so please. Also, please understand that I am not a Christian, nor do I have a Christian agenda of any kind. In fact, I am Hindu.[[User:Wowbobwow12|Wowbobwow12]] ([[User talk:Wowbobwow12|talk]]) 01:17, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
::::Err, it was not me who added the photo, read the Rastafari and Marley articles re prominence, and the article is about all aspects of Selassie, not just his political life. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:33, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
== [[Michael Gomez]] ==
I am aiming to nominate this article for GA and to be a FA on 21 June. If you can suggest any improvements to the article please let me know.--[[User:Vintagekits|Vintagekits]] ([[User talk:Vintagekits|talk]]) 12:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
:Its on my watchlist. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:47, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
== MfD [[User talk:PJHaseldine/Archive 3]] ==
Six months ago, you managed to spike the guns of [[User:Socrates2008|Socrates2008]] who was planning to speedy delete the [[Patrick Haseldine]] article. I'd be grateful for your support now in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User_talk:PJHaseldine/Archive_3 this latest tussle.][[User:PJHaseldine|PJHaseldine]] ([[User talk:PJHaseldine|talk]]) 16:16, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
== I'd imagine you've found [[Special:Linksearch]] already ==
But it seems sensible to make sure. Can be a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Linksearch&target=http%3A%2F%2F%2A.ipce.info&limit=100 useful tool]. Removed a direct link to NAMBLA, of all places, today. [[User:John Nevard|John Nevard]] ([[User talk:John Nevard|talk]]) 17:33, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
== Neil Goldschmidt ==
Please check out [[Talk:Neil Goldschmidt#Sexual relations or sexual abuse]]. I'm not comfortable with the article's describing this older man's sexual relationship with a 14-year-old, but I've had some opposition in referring to it as abuse. Perhaps you could take a look and give your perspective? Maybe there's another way to go about it that I'm not seeing. --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 07:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
:Yes, I got reverted pretty quickly, and have done my revert and then added a comment to the talk page. Lets see how it goes. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
::You may want to remain civil in your discourse. Directing someone to chat sites shows you misunderstand the issue at hand, as I have clearly stated on the talk page numerous times over the months of hard work we took to get this to a more neutral state so that it then ''passed'' GA that what then man did was morally and legally wrong, and despicable, and I don't like him. Its misguided and comes across as uncivil and even a little of a personal attack. But there are issues with BLP and POV in the changes you advocate. Remember that a ''neutral'' POV is required.
:::[[WP:NPOV|By value or opinion,[2] on the other hand, we mean "a matter which is subject to dispute." There are many propositions that very clearly express values or opinions. '''That stealing is wrong is a value or opinion'''.]] (emphasis added)
::That it was sexual abuse or that she was a child or that it was wrong is an opinion, '''one that I share'''. 14 years old is not a fact in any dispute, that it was illegal is not in dispute (3rd degree rape or statutory rape). [[User:Aboutmovies|Aboutmovies]] ([[User talk:Aboutmovies|talk]]) 23:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
:Nothing incivil about directing people to appropriate chat sites that fit their fringe views. On the other hand your accusation that I (and presumably everyone else who disagrees with you) misunderstands the issue would be difficult to back up. Be sure getting this neutral and fitting BLP is absolutely my concern, and failing to call this child sexual abuse is clearly a massive NPOV violation. Your claim it is all my (and every one who disagrees with you) opinions re your allegations that he did not sexually abuse a minor is simply unacceptable, and your arguments to prove this very unimpressive. I hope you will reconsider and recognise that when a man abuses a child, on wikipedia we call this child sexual abuse, and will continue to do so in spite of the former efforts others have made in the past to call this adult-child sex et al. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:44, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
::Oh an dplease do not direct me to the edit summaries help page, such a move looks not merely patronising but is certainly considered bad form. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:26, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
:::Then use the edit summary as it is intended, a summary of your edit, and not a place for commentary. Again, you are not understanding what I am saying. I've never said he didn't sexually abuse a minor. Minor does not equal child. In some instances it does, but not in all. As to fringe theories, I have quoted a variety of dictionaries that demonstrate this view, or is the Oxford American and Blacks Law dictionaries fringe? Again, we have been primarily discussing the term child, and thus your link to child sexual abuse. As to directing to chat sites, that's the last personal attack I'm taking. As I told you above, and as I have mentioned several times on the article's talk page, I do not support the actions of that person. I find it morally wrong what he did. But, per [[WP:NPOV]] which I quoted for you above and I suggest you read again, morals/values/judgments fail NPOV. Calling someone a child is a point of view, saying they are 14 years old is much more of a fact. [[User:Aboutmovies|Aboutmovies]] ([[User talk:Aboutmovies|talk]]) 07:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
::::Well I am clearly far from the only one who disagrees with you, and I find your patronising attitude hard to stomach. I suggest you read BLP before first making an outrageous attack on the girl rather than telling me to read NPOV, which clearly backs the claim of me and others and not yourself. Also try reading the CSA article, and on which I have worked extensively. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 13:27, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
:::::I don't ordinarily jump into frays on other people's talk pages, but felt the need to do so this time. In the 2 or 3 weeks I've been editing these articles, I can't tell you how many times I've been told that I am "not understanding" something. I think all of use here are smarter than the average guy at the sports bar, so I say, why don't you make yourselves more clear. As a matter of fact, this whole issue of pedophilia, child sexual abuse, and whatnot, is actually abundantly clear, very straightforward, and extremely simple. It strikes me that it's some people's Orwellian double-speak, obfuscation of facts, and abundant ad-hominems, that make the issue less clear, and hard for people like myself and Squeek, to figure out what in the hell it is you're saying, or want on Wikipedia. By the way, 14 years old is legally a child, and only a bit older than Lolita in Nabokov's book by the same name. The issues seem pretty clear to me. [[User:Googie man|Googie man]] ([[User talk:Googie man|talk]]) 14:49, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
:I've so far provided five refs defining an adult having sex with an adolescent as [[child sexual abuse]]. The term is exact in its meaning. I don't see the argument as the old PPA/APA squabble; this seems more narrowly focused on protecting Goldschmidt from being called out for exactly what he did, which, by definition, is child sexual abuse. Whether it ''should'' be considered child sexual abuse is really irrelevant to the question of whether it should be called child sexual abuse in the article, since popularly and in [[WP:RS|reputable sources]] it is defined as child sexual abuse.
:After saying all that, I do want to appeal for calm. The fact that we're all pulling in the same direction says alot about the validity of our position, since that doesn't happen too often. We need to concentrate on educating and explaining. ''Child sexual abuse'' is a [[term of art]] with a particular meaning separate from the meanings of its component words, in much the same way as [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] himself is neither a [[bubble and squeak|squeak]] nor a [[box]]. --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 18:23, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
== Hillary ==
Please note that Hillary has not withdrawn from or conceded the race yet. Thus, she is still a candidate. [[User:Wasted Time R|Wasted Time R]] ([[User talk:Wasted Time R|talk]]) 23:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
:I am not entirely sure it is her decision to make but do agree that such a word as was or formerly would need to be referenced impeccably. I'll see what I can do. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:02, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
==Reggae==
Hi, Have you been following [[reggae]] lately? There is apparently an editor or editors who consider it "dubious" that reggae music is also known as "rockers music" in the Caribbean, even though that fact is referenced. Apparently they don't consider the reference reliable enough, therefore they suppose it is bad information that cannot be verified... ? Do you know of anything that could help out here? Thanks, [[User:Til Eulenspiegel|Til Eulenspiegel]] ([[User talk:Til Eulenspiegel|talk]]) 02:09, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
==Battle of the Beanfield==
If there is "abundant video evidence" then please cite those sources, that would probably be a helpful edit. At present, I feel that history is being re-written within this article, simply because there is so little information available that satisfies Wiki' standards (or what others claim those standards to be) concerning sources. [[User:Stephenjh|Stephenjh]] ([[User talk:Stephenjh|talk]]) 21:52, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
:The issues are to do with NPOV, this is not addressing that at all, the problem is when we take the convoy's side over that of the police, really we need to trim a lot of stuff but not this, and check the video reports already in the article. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:57, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
==socks or what?==
Hi as I'm sure you know, AnotherSowhatever is accusing you of being me, or vice versa. I was amused at first but now I'm royally pissed. I'd like to blow his case out of the water but I'm not interested in getting into a prolonged fight over wikipedia especially with total strangers who I've never talked with. It's utterly ridiculous how he's treating me considering I've never done anything to him or knew he existed until the accusation. So my idea of blowing him out of the water is making very clear that we can edit at same time which means we can't be the same people. If you're interested, I'm on eastern standard time. Even if you're on the other side of the world, I'm sure there are times when we can overlap especially given that I don't need much sleep to get by. Why don't you tell me on my discussion/talk page when you expect to be on and I can try to do the same. My schedule is pretty flexible so chances are I can do whatever time you choose. I'd like to throw this in his face. Cheers. [[User:Burrburr|Burrburr]] ([[User talk:Burrburr|talk]]) 07:56, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
I am on UTC-6 in Latin America but I am British! The RCU will come across as negative, the ISPs are tiny in this smallish city, there can be no confusion here. Thanks for your message, just ignore him I say and get on with editing when are where you want. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:34, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
== Doc Glasgow's stand ==
Can you point me the way? I need to read this. Cheers, [[User:Dlohcierekim|<span style="color:#00ff00;"> Dloh</span>]][[User_talk:Dlohcierekim|<span style="color:#bb00bb;">cierekim </span>]] 15:09, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
:[[User:Doc glasgow]], [[User:Doc glasgow/The BLP problem]] and [[Wikipedia:Responsible Editing Pledge]], the second of the 3 links is the most useful, methinks. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:14, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
== Not an admin ==
Maybe you should be? Cheers, [[User:Dlohcierekim|<span style="color:#00ff00;"> Dloh</span>]][[User_talk:Dlohcierekim|<span style="color:#bb00bb;">cierekim </span>]] 15:11, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
:Methinks not. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:42, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
== Alfredo thanks you for your welcome ==
Hola, SqueakBox. Muchas gracias por la bienvenida, y un saludo. Yo también estuve por tu página de usuario hace unos días, y me quedé preguntándome de dónde eras. Es un placer encontrar gente más cercana, sobre todo cubanos. Si entendí bien, aunque vives en Honduras eres cubano. ¿Es así, o eres hondureño "de raíz"? ¿El español es tu lengua materna?
Te agradezco por los enlaces, aunque no soy tan nuevo, al menos relativamente. Pero me son útiles, puesto que mi disponibilidad de conexión es limitada y a veces paso trabajo recuperando estas referencias cuando las necesito.
Otra vez, gracias por la bienvenida y el intercambio. Ya sabes dónde puedes localizarme, así que si me necesitas aquí me tienes.
Un saludo.
Alfredo J. Herrera Lago 19:27, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
:No, te equivocastes, soy ingles, asi dije que soy compatriota con aquel otro usuario Beardo que si vive un Cuba. Y nunca ni he estado ahi, pero con familia Hondureña vivo aqui en Honduras. Y enrtre yo y inglaterra solo hay mar y Cuba. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Ahora sí, pedona, no mencionaste en tu mensaje que eres inglés y entendí mal.
Inglaterra es uno de los lugares en los que me gustaría vivir en mis próximas reencarnaciones. No sé si en realidad es así, pues muchos lugares dan la impresión equivocada a distancia, pero desde aquí parece ser un lugar bello y majestuoso, con tradición y brillo propio. Y quisiera reencarnar ahí para estar más cerca de mis héroes favoritos, que todos son compatriotas: [[Freddie Mercury]]; los otros de [[Queen (band)|Queen]] (mis super héroes); los de [[Iron Maiden (band)|Iron Maiden]]; [[Arthur Conan Doyle]]; [[Rick Wakeman]]; [[Alan Turing]]; [[John Lennon]] y los demás [[The Beatles|Beatles]]; [[Pink Floyd]]... y muchos que se me escapan ahora.
Un saludo!
[[User:Alfredo J. Herrera Lago|Alfredo.]] <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|comment]] was added at 16:48, 20 June 2008 (UTC)</small><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
== Sorry ==
I apologize for falsely suspecting you of puppeting Burrburr. --'''[[User:AnotherSolipsist|AnotherSolipsist]]''' ([[User talk:AnotherSolipsist|talk]]) 16:35, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
:As I have said elsewhere I am on 2 small isps in a remote ___location. While I did once use a sock to avoid a ban way back I do not believe using socks to game the system is in any way appropriate and have never done so in my years at wikipedia. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
==Your good faith edit to [[Ian Lavender]]==
Another editor reverted your good faith addition, however I did some digging to see where you may have picked up this strange idea from. Ian Lavender never lived in Castle Bytham although he visited close family relatives there on a few occasions. Ian's father was born and brought up in Castle Bytham but had moved to Birmingham before Ian was born. Ian was born in Birmingham and lived there until he graduated from school and became an actor.
Ian was the senior monitor on my dinner table at school, we both attended [[Bournville School]] although he was three years older than I was. [[User:21stCenturyGreenstuff|21stCenturyGreenstuff]] ([[User talk:21stCenturyGreenstuff|talk]]) 18:25, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads up. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:30, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
== [[WP:RSUE]] ==
You may be interested in this [[WT:V#Non-English sources|proposal]] to revise the text for articles using non-English sources. --[[User:Roger Davies|<span style="color: maroon">'''R<small>OGER</small> D<small>AVIES</small>'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Roger Davies|'''talk''']]</sup> 04:37, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
== Something gone wrong? ==
Hi,<br/>
It looks to me as if the bit of code that appears below the introduction to your user page has not turned out as intended?<br/>
Cheers, [[User:Flonto|Flonto]] ([[User talk:Flonto|talk]]) 11:57, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks, and removed. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:35, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
== Re:Troll ==
i just warned the user who was vandalising this page. May that be his last warning. Just tell me and I'll go straight to AIV if he comes again. --[[User:Meldshal42|<span style="color: green">'''Meldshal42'''</span>]] [[User_talk:Meldshal42|(talk)]] 23:01, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
:His response was to try and out me linking to some rubbish he wrote off site. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
::User blocked indefinitely for pedophilia-related disruption; talk page with attempted outing deleted. [[User:El_C|El_C]] 00:22, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
== [[Sid Vicious]] ==
Hi there. On March 29, you added the {{tl|BLP}} template to this article's talk page, citing unspecified 'BLP issues'. As the main subjects of the article are dead, I don't see the problem here, and have removed the template. If you feel it still has BLP issues, could you please explain them and discuss the need for the template at [[Talk:Sid Vicious#Biographies of Living Persons]]? Thank you. [[User:Terraxos|Terraxos]] ([[User talk:Terraxos|talk]]) 21:44, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads up. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:51, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
== Blanket reverts ==
I thought I had
sufficiently [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rastafari_movement&diff=prev&oldid=223204159 explained] my removal of the text about that radio show (unsourced and of unclear relevance to the article's subject), but OK, I will explain it more thoroughly on the talk page. But I don't understand why you [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rastafari_movement&diff=prev&oldid=223204946 reverted all of my edit], including the link fixing - what advantages do you see in [http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/rast.html the broken link] over [http://web.archive.org/web/20060829153306/religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/rast.html the fixed one]? Regards, [[User:HaeB|HaeB]] ([[User talk:HaeB|talk]]) 01:29, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
:Fixed. There is no question the paragraph you removed is a notable part of Rastafari history. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:44, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
::You forgot to remove the old (broken) link, but nevermind. As promised, I have now explained my concerns more thoroughly at [[Talk:Rastafari movement#The Dread at the Controls radio show and its importance to the Rastafari movement]]. Regards, [[User:HaeB|HaeB]] ([[User talk:HaeB|talk]]) 02:09, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Check this link on youtube, it's you, totally!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvgINs2bVHo --[[User:Daisy strangelove|Daisy strangelove]] ([[User talk:Daisy strangelove|talk]]) 22:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
==14-M==
Hi SqueakBox. Would you mind taking a look at the discussion of [[Talk:Spain#14-M|the 14 March bombings in Madrid]]? I would very much appreciate your input in this matter. --[[User:Dúnadan|<span style="color: blue">the</span> <span style="color: #339900">D</span><span style="color: blue">únadan</span>]] 23:35, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
:Yes, we need to keep a good eye on all this until after the elections as feelings run strongly. I agree that we should not have conspiracy theories about this in the Spain article. Thanks, [[User talk:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:31, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
::I appreciate your intervention in that matter. Indeed, I hadn't though of that myself, feelings are running strongly due to the proximity of the elections. If you feel so inclined, I would also appreciate your intervention at [[Talk:Demographics_of_Argentina#Controversial_Study]] (with "mirror-discussions" at [[Talk:White people]] and [[Talk:Southern Cone]]). A recent research study, conducted by the Genetic Department of the Univ. of Buenos Aires, confirmed by several other studies, and endorsed by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, shows that 56% of Argentines have an Amerindian ancestor. The study is endorsed by the government of Argentina as a "way to fight discrimination". Two users, but the most vociferous being Fercho86, oppose the inclusion of this information in the articles, because it is "racist". If you decide not to intervene or state your opinion, I understand.
::--[[User:Dúnadan|<span style="color: blue">the</span> <span style="color: #339900">D</span><span style="color: blue">únadan</span>]] 20:48, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
== Pro-pedophile activism mediation efforts==
Hi, could you pop over to the MedCom wiki and take a look at a way to move forward? I've copied over the introduction and would like everyone be bold an make changes to it, hopefully we should be able to thrash out a consensus. Take a look at [http://www.martinp23.com/medcom/index.php/PPA_talk:Pro-pedophile_activism#Introduction_to_edit this]. [[User:Ryan Postlethwaite|'''<span style="color:#000088;">Ry<span style="color:#220066;">an<span style="color:#550044;"> P<span style="color:#770022;">os<span style="color:#aa0000;">tl</span>et</span>hw</span>ai</span>te</span>''']] 20:04, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
:Done. Thanks, [[User talk:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:20, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
== Why? ==
Why are you deleting my text? [[User:Police,Mad,Jack|Police,Mad,Jack]] ([[User talk:Police,Mad,Jack|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Police,Mad,Jack|contribs]]) 19:58, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Because I agree with Sidaway, too much detail, and your trolling comment to him hasbn't helped your cause either. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]]
: Please don't edit war about the Ashes to Ashes content. I've started a discussion about my proposal on the talk page. If you support my edit, fine, but let's discuss our opinions with Police,Mad,Jack. --[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway]] 20:04, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
::Sure, I think one revert from a new editor can be helpful but edit warring isn't. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:06, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
A2A is repeated on BBC3 at some time or another. [[User:Police,Mad,Jack|Police,Mad,Jack]] ([[User talk:Police,Mad,Jack|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Police,Mad,Jack|contribs]]) 20:31, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
::Aah. I am English but I don't live in England, or anywhere near it. But we have been getting LoM (which I have been enjoying) and so imagine we will also get AtA. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:33, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh well surely if they did LOM i'm sure they will be obliged by the tele channel to do A2A and its repeats as well, i'm sorry about all the no life stuff by the way :) [[User:Police,Mad,Jack|Police,Mad,Jack]] ([[User talk:Police,Mad,Jack|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Police,Mad,Jack|contribs]]) 20:36, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
:I am sure of it, its a [[HBO|major US station]] that is showing them. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:29, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
::: Just in case you find you can't wait, the BBC has Ashes to Ashes on it's iPlayer [http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/ here]. --[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway]] 20:37, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
::::The player is only available in England, but the penultimate episode from 2006 is on next Sunday (I watched the one before that last night) so I am in no hurry. The time travelling idea deeply fascinated me as a child and of course I was a boy in 73. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:29, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
==Missing Afd link AND "MIRROR PAGE" , Pedophilia and Child Sexual Abuse in Fiction ==
I think I've found the discussion you are looking for; I've provided a link on the Talk page of the article. I don't know how to restore it in the form of the dead link that you removed. [[User:SocJan|SocJan]] ([[User talk:SocJan|talk]]) 05:18, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
:Have you been aware of the existence of this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_books_featuring_pedophilia [[User:SocJan|SocJan]] ([[User talk:SocJan|talk]]) 21:48, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
::Not until just before you posted. When I have the time I will investigate more fully (probably tomorrow). Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:51, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
== Re Beaconsfield ==
To be honest, I have heard the rumours that people like Pauline Quirke and Vernon Kay each have houses there, and when I'm in a better mood I'll look for the references that support that. But the Dick Turpin entry was just ludicrous so it all had to go! -- [[User:Roleplayer|Roleplayer]] ([[User talk:Roleplayer|talk]]) 21:22, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
==Disputed fair use rationale for Image:21stcen.jpg==
Thanks for uploading '''[[:Image:21stcen.jpg]]'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at [[Wikipedia:Non-free content]] carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline]] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images/media|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->[[User:BetacommandBot|BetacommandBot]] ([[User talk:BetacommandBot|talk]]) 04:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
== Blunt ==
this article should not be merged this topic fully deserves its own page just as the many other methed of smoking cannabis do
the reason there are no references is because it is all firsthand info collected by myself Potheadpoet
in my extensive experiences with cannabis
thank [[User:Potheadpoet|Potheadpoet]] ([[User talk:Potheadpoet|talk]]) 18:55, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
:Please go write a blog or something. First hand knowledge is not the way to build an encyclopedia, and indeed is strictly prohibited. Eg see our [[WP:OR|no original research]] policy. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:50, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
::Telling other editors to go write a blog or something is not very [[WP:CIVIL|civi]]l. Please don't do that. [[User:Swatjester|<span style="color: red">⇒</span>]][[User_talk:Swatjester|<span style="font-family: Euclid Fraktur"><span style="color: black">SWAT</span><span style="color: goldenrod">Jester</span></span>]] [[WP:CLIMBING|<small><sup>Son of the Defender</sup></small>]] 23:41, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
:::Sure, no problem, [[WP:BITE]] is indeed valid. I did then give a maturer response. Good to see you are still here, and look forward to collaborating with you in the future. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:44, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
== Edit-warring on VP's page ==
Please don't edit war with another user on content in his userspace. Ask him to remove it - if he doesn't, bring it to AN/I or MfD (or notify an uninvolved administrator). [[User:Avruch|<strong style="color:#000;background:#fff;border:0px solid #000">Avruch</strong>]][[User talk:Avruch|<sup><strong style="color:#000;background:#fff;border:0px solid #000"> T </strong></sup>]] 21:56, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
:Okay. I am pretty staggered not at this user because it takes all sorts but of the endless tolerance of his attacks on fellow edits et al, I agree with will Scribe on ANI22:14, 15 February 2008 (UTC). Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]]
== Doczilla's RfA ==
{|
|
<div class="NavFrame collapsed" style="border-style: none; padding: 0px;">
<div class="NavFrame collapsed" style="border-style: none; text-align: left; border: #dadada solid 2px; -moz-border-radius: 10px; background: #006400; padding: 5px;">
<div class="NavHead" style="-moz-border-radius-topright: 10px; -moz-border-radius-topleft: 10px; -moz-border-radius-bottomright: 10px; -moz-border-radius-bottomleft: 10px; background: #{{User:Doczilla/Color}}; text-align: center; padding: 2px; font-size: 160%;"><span style="font-family: trebuchet ms; color:#006400">.:[[Image:Nuvola apps cache.png|30px]] ''[[Spectres_%28album%29#Side_one|Oh, no! There goes To-ky-o! Admin Doczilla!]]'' [[Image:Nuvola apps cache.png|30px]]:.</span></div>
<div class="NavContent" style="background: none;">
{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto; text-align: center;"
|-
| align="left"|[[Image:Godzilla(01)reverse.jpg|275px|left]]
| align="center"|<span style="font-size:large">'''Thanks for !voting!'''</span><br/><br/>
Thank you for !voting in [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Doczilla|my RfA]] which resulted in the collapse of civilization with '''92''' (94?) '''support''', '''1 oppose''', and '''1 neutral'''.<br/> Blame [[User:jc37|jc37]] and [[User:Hiding|Hiding]] for nominating me, everyone who had questions or comments, everyone who !voted, everyone who tallied the numbers correctly, and [[User:WJBscribe|WJBScribe]] who closed<br/> without shouting, "No mop for you!"
<p>Seriously, your response has overwhelmed me.<br/> I am deeply grateful.</p>
| [[Image:M87 jet.jpg|thumb|<small>''[[Messier 87]]''</small>
----
[[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]]<p>'''Thank you for casting the 87th vote in support.'''</p>|100px]]
|}
<div class="NavHead" style="-moz-border-radius-topright: 10px; -moz-border-radius-topleft: 10px; -moz-border-radius-bottomright: 10px; -moz-border-radius-bottomleft: 10px; background: #FFFFFF; text-align: left; padding: 2px; font-size: 100%;"><span style="color: #000000"> [[Image:Nuvola apps korganizer.png|30px]] ''"The bad news is time flies. The good news is you're the pilot."'' - Michael Althsuler </span></div>
{{#if: {{{1|}}}| {{User:1ne/Title{{!}}{{{1|}}}}}|}}
<span style="position:-40px;left:-180px;z-index:100"></span>
<div style="position:absolute; z-index:100; center:10px; :0px;" class="metadata" id="userGrmWnr">
{| style="background-color:#CFB53B;border: solid 2px #AA0000"
|-
|[[User:Doczilla|<span style="color:green;font-weight:bold;font-size:medium;font-family: Monotype Corsiva;">Doczilla</span>]] <sub>[[User talk:Doczilla|RAWR!]]</sub> 08:12, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
| <imagemap>Image:Nuvola filesystems folder home.png|30px|Home Page
default [[User:Doczilla|In lieu of applauding you, Doczilla stomps on a warehouse.]]
desc none</imagemap>
|<imagemap>Image:Nuvola_apps_chat.png|30px|Talk Page
default [[User_talk:Doczilla|What was that? I couldn't hear you over the crunch of that warehouse.]]
desc none</imagemap>
|<imagemap>Image:Laff alert.svg|30px|Joke Alert
default [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3ADoczilla&diff=190347038&oldid=190345255 Oh, how quickly things change.]
desc none</imagemap>
|<imagemap>Image:Nuvola apps 3 cookie.png|30px|Presents
default [[User:Doczilla/RfAThanks|Hard to believe I really do have a great life with plenty of better things to do than excessively personalize these thank you notes.]]
desc none</imagemap>
|}</div>
</div></div></div>
== [[Willie P. Bennett]] ==
Thanks for adding the ref; you got there before I did. It takes me a long time to type anything. Did you go back and revert the reversion on [[February 16]], or should I do that? I have known him since he was a teenager, and was called "Pat Bennett." I shall miss him. That still means I needed the ref, though. Thanks again. [[User:Bielle|៛ Bielle]] ([[User talk:Bielle|talk]]) 06:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:You can revert me if you like but it is now in [[Deaths in 2008]]. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 06:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::Now it is in both places. Thanks again. [[User:Bielle|៛ Bielle]] ([[User talk:Bielle|talk]]) 06:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I have also corrected the date. He died on Friday the 15th, not Saturday the 16th, as I had entered. You got it right in [[Deaths in 2008]]. Thanks, [[User:Bielle|៛ Bielle]] ([[User talk:Bielle|talk]]) 18:52, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::::Great. Sa about his death, he looks like I would have enjoyed watching him. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:30, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
== Hello ==
Thanks for the welcome back. I'm glad to see there's at least one who knows I'm not a vandalising sock-puppet! --[[User:Counter-revolutionary|Counter-revolutionary]] ([[User talk:Counter-revolutionary|talk]]) 18:59, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
==Blunt==
<div style="text-align: center;"><big>'''☻ Someone has passed you a [[Wikipedia:A nice cup of tea and a sit down#February 2008|blunt!]] ☺'''</big></div>[[Image:O dutchmaster blunt2.jpg|100px]]
Take a fat hit off of this chronic, yo! Hey, can you help me with this template, by the way? [[Template:Blunt]] [[User:Ron Duvall|Ron Duvall]] ([[User talk:Ron Duvall|talk]]) 03:23, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
:OH FUCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:25, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
::That really explains a lot of nonsense edits. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/142.47.55.186|142.47.55.186]] ([[User talk:142.47.55.186|talk]]) 17:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
== Please don't think ==
that I'm airing our past disagreements for all to see, but I wanted to use it as an example to the IP. I'm afraid that even though I said I wasn't, I might have been treating the IP like a child anyway. :| Also, I agree with the second half of your statement, which I hope you don't mind that I took the liberty of removing an extra ''';''' from. :) — [[User talk:Springeragh|<span style="background:#808;color:#fff;text-decoration:none;"> '''''$PЯING'''''εrαgђ </span>]] 00:09 [[10 July]], [[2008]] (UTC) <small>P.S. Could you maybe archive your talk page so that people don't have to wade through a very long TOC and a seemingly endless page?</small>
:The page locked trying to load, lol, sure it is time to archive. Mostly its young people who hold the rebel attitude, one would almost expect it whereas we middle age people tend to be much more conservative though I have to say even in my wildest days it was all anarchy and pot, the PPA beliefs didn't even cross my mind. My own belief is that predatory pedophiles online who groom minors etc are a serious threat to internet freedoms which is why I support PJ rather than PIE. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:32, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
::Do you mean "young people who hold the rebel attitude" posting on your talk page and making it long, or arguing in defence of pædophilia? — [[User talk:Springeragh|<span style="background:#808;color:#fff;text-decoration:none;"> '''''$PЯING'''''εrαgђ </span>]] 00:38 [[10 July]], [[2008]] (UTC)
:::The latter. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:44, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
== Re:Hotmail edirect ==
When a site redirects to somewhere else do not restore the redirect, it makes us look sloppy and unprofessional. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:08, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
::That is true but the way Hotmail works is that it requires users to login first - hence the link you posted is for [[Windows Live ID]] instead and is specific to your own computer's particular session at that time. As noted by someonese else already, that link you provided contains many parameters specific to your own computer only, and not to other Wikipedia users. The "official" link for Hotmail is either Hotmail.com, Mail.live.com or Hotmail.live.com. When a user access one of these, it will determine automatically the parameters and redirects the user to the login page. There is nothing unprofessional about these links. --[[User:Pikablu0530|Pikablu0530]] ([[User talk:Pikablu0530|talk]]) 00:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
==Mills==
Taking Mills' first marriage out of the Lead is a strange thing to do (being her first husband) because Alfie Karmal was then only referred to as Karmal in the whole article. I have fixed it. I thank you.--[[User:Andreasegde|andreasegde]] ([[User talk:Andreasegde|talk]]) 20:27, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
:Its not relevant to the opening where we do not put such info (except in gher case with PM because it was notable) and I have moved it lower down. the opening was full of info that should have been lower down and Iw as fixing it, it was much better before. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:55, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
"she married '''Karm''' but they were divorced in 1991"?? I will fix it.--[[User:Andreasegde|andreasegde]] ([[User talk:Andreasegde|talk]]) 02:07, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
:What is going on here? I fixed your "On [[6 May]] [[1989]] she married '''Karm''' but they were divorced in '''1991 During''' this period" (divorce mentioned twice, and bad punctuation) and then you reverted it. Are you doing this on purpose just to annoy? Please stop it.--[[User:Andreasegde|andreasegde]] ([[User talk:Andreasegde|talk]]) 03:53, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
::Yes of course I am doing it on purpose, my purpose being to prevent useless clutter in the opening. This is not where unnotable marriages get mentioned. Please do not post with attitude on this page again. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:22, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
== [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JzG&curid=16672468&diff=226483702&oldid=226481867 Oops] ==
Of course, I didn't see your section. Sometimes the arcane programming of this place can be frustrating. :) [[User:Orangemarlin|<span style="color:orange;">'''Orange'''</span><span style="color:teal;">'''Marlin'''</span>]] <small><sup>[[User talk:Orangemarlin|Talk•]] [[Special:Contributions/Orangemarlin|Contributions]]</sup></small> 17:48, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
::It amused me you had sent a message with the same identical header like 3 days later. Its nice to see your good work here too. me I am off back to Old Blighty to bury my Granny before returning to my tropical home in a fortnight. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:52, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
:::I lost my father in 2006; Please accept my (belated) condolences. --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 16:03, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
:It was a sad but not an unhappy occasion and gave me a rare opportunity to where a suit (see my user page) as well as return to Old Blighty for the first time in 5 years. Now back home again. Sorry to here about your father, both my parents are still alive and I am 10 years older than you. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:03, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
== [[Talk:Haile Selassie I of_Ethiopia#NPOV]] ==
Hi, this is just a heads up to let you know I [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Haile_Selassie_I_of_Ethiopia&diff=227380847&oldid=227280188 removed] the note you left on this talk page, after comments from an IP at [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=227379322#Anonymous_Restoration_of_Personal_Attack_at_Talk:Haile_Selassie AN/I]. To put an end to the complaint entirely, I invoked [[WP:TALK]], specifically the allowance for the removal of comments (redacted ones tagged as "trolling", or the original comments) if they do not concern the article at hand. Hope you don't mind. All the best, [[User:Steve|<span style="font-variant: small-caps;">'''Steve'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Steve|T]] • [[Special:Contributions/Steve|C]]</sup> 09:48, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads up, I removed more material from a troll making ridiculous accusations of law breaking on the part of other editors. Not based on any evidence but just on a trolling mentality of not being able to cope with being disagreed with. I hope these issues can be resolved amicably as these kind of stupidities profoundly damage wikipedia. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:20, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
==Central America==
Hi I've begun working on the municipalities of Central America and creating some templates. I noticed you started many of the El Salvador and Honduran municipalitiwes which I'll be developing over the next few weeks like [[Apastepeque]] I did earlier. Howver could you do me a favor and move the articles out of brackets in [[:Category:Departments of Guatemala]], [[:Category:Departments of Honduras]] and [[:Category:Departments of Nicaragua]] to ..... Department. Its a standard naming convention. I moved some of the Guatemalan ones earlier but many can't be moved because of double redirects. Could you help me? E.g Totonicapán (department) should be Totonicapán Department. Everyone except Santa Rosa (Guatemalan department). [[User:Blofeld of SPECTRE| <span style="border:1px solid blue;padding:1px; color:#fef;background:black;">'''''♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦'''''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Blofeld of SPECTRE| <span style="font-size:12px; color: Black">'''$1,000,000?'''</span> ]]</sup> 20:22, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Oh you can't do this because you arne't an admin? How come you aren't an admin??? Your;re probably thinking the same thing about me [[User:Blofeld of SPECTRE| <span style="border:1px solid blue;padding:1px; color:#fef;background:black;">'''''♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦'''''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Blofeld of SPECTRE| <span style="font-size:12px; color: Black">'''$1,000,000?'''</span> ]]</sup> 20:37, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
:I am not going to become an admin either. I have more than enough responsibility in my real life. Back to CA tomorrow after 12 days back in [[Old Blighty]]. I will attend to your request when I return. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:35, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
== New Zealand thing ==
Hum, maybe there has been a little miscommunication, I thought that you had been convinced already by my arguments, because you didn't reply when I prodded the page for objections 3 months ago [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Giovanni_di_Stefano&diff=209284109&oldid=209031227] and didn't reply either when Geni said that nobody appeared to have objections [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Giovanni_di_Stefano&diff=next&oldid=209284109], and you didn't reply after I linked to the thread to say that I had consensus per [[WP:SILENCE]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Giovanni_di_Stefano&diff=227553733&oldid=227535241]. It seems that I misinterpreted your comments, sorry for my clumsiness.
Also, I see that you really oppose the inclusion of the NZ expulsion in any form [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Giovanni_di_Stefano&diff=208843881&oldid=208829142], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Giovanni_di_Stefano&diff=227492127&oldid=227482270].
Also, I see you didn't contest directly any of my arguments of how the event is actually notable [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Giovanni_di_Stefano&diff=208640982&oldid=208452543] and you didn't give any suggerence at all regarding the sourcing, and didn't review the draft that I linked, and you didn't say anything about the scheme I proposed to address the weight issues (see the same diff as before).
You also didn't propose me any alternative way to write about the event, you just appear to plain oppose the inclusion in any form.
At this point I would normally start a discussion with the other editor (you, in this case) to try to find a solution acceptable for both. However, given past miscommunication, and the lack of objective arguments that I can counter, and the lack of actionable objections that I can mend, and that other editors appear to support the addition, and that I don't want to start a revert war, I think that the only realistic alternative that I have left is making either a survey or a RfC in order to present my arguments on a single place and check if I really have consensus for this addition. I hope you didn't mind. It's nothing personal, I just happen to think that these events are notable and relevant. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 16:03, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
:I opened a RFC [[Talk:Giovanni_di_Stefano#RFC_for_New_Zealand_inclusion|here]]. Please participate on the discussion. Please remember that it's a discussion and not a poll, so you should state reasons of why you think the events are not relevant for inclusion. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 17:20, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
::Yes, opposing inclusion in any form is what I have long advocated and have mentioned on the talk page. I have been a serious editor on this article for a long time and have noticed your participation more recently and will try to engage you more on the talk page. This is a wikipedia bio and we do not need this level of detail when it is such a clear BLP issue. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:55, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
:::Hum, could you add your comment under one of the sections instead of replying to the summary? --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 18:38, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
::::Que? I just did the same as you, there are 3 options, you support the first and I support the third, or were you reading my version before I fixed it almost immediately afterwards. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:43, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
:::::Lol, I read it right before you fixed :D Sometimes I take a long time before replying because I open a few pages at the same time on different tabs and then I read them in order. Sorry for not noticing that you fixed it. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 19:04, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
I made a [[User:Enric_Naval/GDS_draft#Very_short_draft|way shorter version]] of the draft. This should remove all the appeareance of gossip. Please say if this version could be suitable for inclusion. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 20:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Heh, when that New Zealand RfC ends, I see that I'll have to open a new one for the US thing. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 23:29, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
:one should suffice. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:36, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
== Mick Jagger's parents ==
I'm curious as to why you feel his mother's date of birth should be stated and not his father's? [[User:TomGreen|Tom Green]] ([[User talk:TomGreen|talk]]) 21:20, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
:Well spotted, I was unaware of her mother's info too, and this should also certainly be removed for the same reason. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 08:48, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
== I'm baaack...! ==
Heya Squeak,
: I wanted to thank you for your welcome back to Wikipedia. I will admit at first I was not sure how to take that line, as genuine or sarcastic, but then I realized that the thought itself was a holdover from before and in violation of Assuming Good Faith. I accept that it was truly and genuinely intended, and for that I genuinely thank you.
: That said, I would also like to note that, as mentioned in email during the ban, I got a disturbing email during that ban. You know that I hate admitting when I am wrong, but I was terribly naive in believing that there was no true "organized" PPA movement. I'm disappointed with society in general, but after receiving an email offering to help me set up multiple more accounts so that "we" could continue our work... That was a bad day.
: Anyway, you were right, and I see that now. I still think that your efforts are sometimes too extreme in one direction, but I have come to understand that it's nothing more than a difference in methodology. I hope to be able to build on those moments when you and I were working well together and dsregard those moments when we fought.
: Lastly, I notced awhile back that you had made some minor changes to your profile page that had the potential to be read as troubling, and I just wanted to let you know that I did notice and hope that it was nothing more than simplifying the language on the page and not indicative of any negative events in your life. On the other hand, I wish you the best and that if anything is difficult going, that it looks up soon.
: Take Care, [[User:VigilancePrime|{{subst:User:VigilancePrime/Templates/Signature}}]] ([[User talk:VigilancePrime|talk]]) 02:01, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
== Persecution of Rastafari - Q.E.D. ==
I think you should be aware, a certain editor has just listed [[Rastafari]], as well as [[Persecution of Rastafari]], at the [[WP:FTN|"Fringe theory noticeboard"]] which is one of Wikipedia's uglier aspects, if not the very ugliest, since that is the place where a bunch of POV admins decide what ideas or hypotheses they consider "heresy" and therefore nobody is supposed to use wikipedia to learn much about them.
Regarding [[Rastafari]], he wrote "The article is a treasure trove of bullshit" - citing as evidence, the fact that it mentions people of many races follow Rastafari. He also asks if perceived persecution is a "legitimate phenomenon". I am pretty sure Wikipedia policy prohibits him from making these kind of blatant attacks on other people's belief systems. [[User:Blockinblox|Blockinblox]] ([[User talk:Blockinblox|talk]]) 11:57, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
::The fringe theory noticeboard exists to prevent people from using Wikipedia to promote pseudoscience, such as homeopathy.
::I mention that the racial claim is dubious, because Rastafari is a black nationalist movement. This would seem to suggest either one of two things: Either there are whites who are "proud that other people are black" (dubious) or there is a distinction between the black nationalist Rastafarians and their non-black counterparts? I don't doubt that there are white people and people of other races in America and Europe who claim to be Rastafarians, but the failure to distinguish these people from other other Rastafarians and the failure to even provide a source for their existence is absurd. <span style="font-size:large;">[[Zen|☯]]</span> <span style="font-family:impact;"> [[User:Zenwhat|Zenwhat]]</span> ([[User talk:Zenwhat|talk]]) 14:22, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
=== Rastafari movement ===
First of all, aside from these quotes, take a look at how much stuff there is actually sourced. There are a lot of outrageous claims made with no sources there. Aside from that, would you say that these quotes here are appropriate for a Wikipedia article?
{{Quotation|The messages expounded by the Rastafari promote love and respect for all living things and emphasize the paramount importance of human dignity and self-respect. Above all else, they speak of freedom from spiritual, psychological, as well as physical slavery and oppression. In their attempts to heal the wounds inflicted upon the African peoples by the imperialist nations of the world, Rastafari continually extol the virtue and superiority of African cultures and civilization past and present.}}
Characterizing America and the nation of Europe as the "imperialist nations of the world," is a bit POV, don't you think? [[Image:Smile_eye.png|16px]]
{{Quotation|...in the 1930s, black people were at the bottom of the social order, while white people, their religion and system of government, were at the top.}}
On what basis do we call all the governments and religions of the 1930's "white"? Again, this opinion isn't sourced or attributed.
{{Quotation|Rastas say that scientists try to discover how the world is by looking from the outside in, whereas the Rasta approach is to see life from the inside, looking out.}}
OK. Source?
{{Quotation|In 1934 Leonard Howell was the first Rasta to be persecuted, being charged with sedition for refusing loyalty to the King of England George V.}}
{{Quotation|Rastafari is not a highly organized religion; it is a movement and an ideology. Many Rastas say that it is not a "religion" at all, but a "Way of Life"}}
This quote is sourced. Similarly, I could derive another quote. On page 1 of ''Essential Buddhism'' by Jacky Sach, she says, "Just calling Buddhism a religion can cause argument, as many believe Buddhism to be an entire way of life." Putting this statement in the Buddhism article, though, would be as dubious as putting it here. The statement, "It's not a religion, it's a way of life," is a horrible cliche that has been used by countless groups to promote their beliefs as somehow being less narrowminded and more practical than others. In both cases here, we're not citing any particular facts about Rastafari or Buddhism; the claim "way of life," is merely a very common expression made by lots of people about their own beliefs.
The article is a soapbox. As you said, "it does not preswent rastafari as fact but it does present what rastas believe in".
Rather than presenting what Rastafari is from an objective perspective, 90% of the article is just rambling on about what Rastafarians say Rastafari is, without citations or with poor citations. Without attributing these opinions or providing citations for their origin, or by having poor citations, that is misleading. Imagine what the article on Christianity would look like if we allowed this there. <span style="font-size:large;">[[Zen|☯]]</span> <span style="font-family:impact;"> [[User:Zenwhat|Zenwhat]]</span> ([[User talk:Zenwhat|talk]]) 14:10, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
:Part of the problem is that a certain editor has removed many sources from the rastafari articles, doubtless with the intention of creating articles that appear dubious. I'll see what i can do. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:21, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
::"Part of the problem"?
:If you want to post on my user page do not insult me, I have not read your last post beyond the first sentence but you can refactor it if you want, otherwise go away and don't post here again. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:38, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
::I apologize for being a bit belligerent. I took a look at your contributions and you seem relatively fair. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Haile_Selassie_I_of_Ethiopia&diff=206771087&oldid=206054209] I falsely assumed from your claim above that you were of the same mindset as Til (i.e., everybody's out to get Rasta, everybody on Wikipedia's a racist, etc..). You seem reasonable, though, so I hope I didn't [[poison the well]]! <span style="font-size:large;">[[Zen|☯]]</span> <span style="font-family:impact;"> [[User:Zenwhat|Zenwhat]]</span> ([[User talk:Zenwhat|talk]]) 14:40, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
:::I agree that the whole atmosphere is quite poisonous on the Rasta articles, and I am not really up for that at the moment. I am a religious sceptic ideologically who believes it is important to get these articles neutral and not based on religious convictions of any sort. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:05, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
::::Zenwhat, please do not put words in my mouth, or ascribe to me sentiments that I have never once epressed "(i.e., everybody's out to get Rasta, everybody on Wikipedia's a racist, etc..)". I know it would make arguments much easier if you could do that (it's called a [[strawman]] fallacy), but I do wish you would stop telling people that I am saying something that I don't even think. I can, and do, speak for myself. Thanks. [[User:Til Eulenspiegel|Til Eulenspiegel]] ([[User talk:Til Eulenspiegel|talk]]) 20:02, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
:::::Til is an editor I am long familiar with. The editor I have issues with is Bulbous, whom Til let me know about as an editor a while back and I do not see Til as part of any pro rasta editing of the article, that comes, I believe, from new editors with a rasta POV, just as the anti-rasta POV comes from anti-Rastafarian Christians inspired by [[Christafari]] and others to try to convert Rastas to Christ. They are interested in the Haile Selassie I article because they know that Haile selassie I is loved by Rastas, and they portray him positively but as a man. Whereas I think the Selassie article should deal with him both as a political figure and as the god of the rastafari movement, not because I have any agenda about wheter he is God but because I recognize that he is both a political and a religious figure in 2008 and has been so for a long time. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:57, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
::::::I am beginning to see what you mean... The said editor is now again pursuing his evidently hostile bias at [[Haile Selassie]], by trimming the factual references and mention of the Rastafari movement in the leade to the barest minimum, with the argument that it is "promoting" Rastafari by giving it "too much mention" in the lead. Man, I really hate stuff like that! [[User:Til Eulenspiegel|Til Eulenspiegel]] ([[User talk:Til Eulenspiegel|talk]]) 01:15, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
=== Change ===
One person cannot outweigh the strength of the social clusters, the mobs which collect around articles. And one person or even one mob cannot outweigh the strength of the hive-mind. All I can do, much of the time, is laugh at the futility of it.
ARTICLE I'VE DEALT WITH: SUMMARY OF THE PROBLEM
*[[Fractional-reserve banking]]: Libertarian ideology is Fact. The Federal Reserve is an evil money-printing conspiracy. Only money backed by GOOOOLD is trustworthy!
*[[Austrian economics]]: Austrian economics >= [[Keynesianism]]
*[[Global warming]]: Global warming doesn't exist and even if it does exist, humans aren't responsible.
*[[Rastafari movement]]: Ya, mon, Rasta eez all about da peez n luv, mon
*[[Jetsunma Ahkon Lhamo]]: She has never been involved in any financial or sexual scandals of any kind. She is a very compassionate and wise guru.
*[[Homeopathy]]: Homeopathy is valid science. Mainstream science is what's "pseudoscientific."
*[[Cannabis]]: THC is actually a vitamin. It's good for you. Jesus smoked it. It's all in the Bible, dude
As you can see, I have failed at improving pretty much every article I try to work on, largely because I try to focus on the articles which need the most work (as opposed to flooding Wikipedia with fancruft, which is very easy).
So, yes, it is futile. I don't expect to be able to improve the article on [[Rastafari]]. But I still try anyway, because it's enjoyable and meaningful. It's the same story as the [[Bhagavad Gita]]: Whether I fight or surrender, either way I lose. But I should still keep up with it anyway, for the sake of dharma. <span style="font-size:large;">[[Zen|☯]]</span> <span style="font-family:impact;"> [[User:Zenwhat|Zenwhat]]</span> ([[User talk:Zenwhat|talk]]) 15:26, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
:I cut my teeth on [[Javier Solana]] which had been written from a "perhaps he is the anti-Christ" perspective and after lots of hard work managed to get an article that is a political biography, and that has remained pretty stable. I am certainly aware of the issues on the cannabis article, and while there it is both pro and anti lobbies who create a problem the pro lobby is the stronger, and in the Rastafari article both pro and anti Rasta POV pushing is, IMO, evident. I do like the Rastas for their resilient optimism. Intelligent design is another classic example of POV pushing and I appreciate the problem. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:55, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
==Barry George==
I am not sure why you are so worried about which categories the Barry George article is listed under. The facts are that he has been found guilty in the courts of attempted rape, indecent assault, and impersonating a constable. I am not sure whether any convictions arose from other incidents which have been reported, such as possession of an offensive weapon, not that it matters as far as this point is concerned. As far as I understand it any person who has been convicted by a jury of attempted rape and has been sentenced to a term of imprisonment is, without question, a criminal. The fact that he is not also a murderer, and that he was imprisoned for so long for a crime of which he was innocent, does not mean that he has been cleared of his past convictions.--[[User:Oxonian2006|Oxonian2006]] ([[User talk:Oxonian2006|talk]]) 00:50, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
:The poin t you are missing is that he is not notable based on these crimes to have had a wikipedia biography by any stretch of the imagination. He is only notabole for his wrong conviction. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:18, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
::No, I'm not missing that point at all. It has already occurred to me that if he had not been wrongfully convicted of one crime the general public would probably never have heard of him and the crimes of which he was actually guilty. However, people are not categorised only according to what they are notable for. [[Gordon Brown]] is not notable ''because'' he was born in 1951. He is notable for something else and it is also true that he was born in 1951. [[George W. Bush]] is not notable for being a recipient of the Star of Romania Order, or indeed for his business activities or his English and Dutch ancestry. He is notable for being a politician and he is put in those categories because they also apply to him.
::I just utterly fail to see how anybody, except you, clearly, could imagine that it is inappropriate to put a convicted attempted rapist in the category of "criminal" ''because somebody might think that Wikipedia is accusing him of murder''! The article clearly sets out the reasons for which he is correctly deemed a criminal. Anybody looking at it would be able to say, "Hmm. It says he is a criminal. But he is not guilty of that murder. Aha! He committed attempted rape, indecent assault, impersonating a constable, for all of which he received either a prison sentence, a suspended sentence, or a fine, and it says he was caught with a knife, which ''is'' a crime, though maybe it never resulted in anything. Well, there you have it, he ''is'' a criminal, but not a murderer."--[[User:Oxonian2006|Oxonian2006]] ([[User talk:Oxonian2006|talk]]) 09:29, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
:::You are using sophist arguemnts to justify a BLP violation, and to imply that the overturning is incorrect, a view clearly held by the police etc, and to attack me makes you rather borish, please desist if you wish to post here again. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 13:33, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
::::I'm sorry you think I'm boorish. It's not something I have ever been accused of before. You also think I am attacking you. I'm certainly not making a personal attack. I'm just questioning your judgement, which is something I do all the time. It does not mean that I don't hold in high esteem the people whose judgements I question. You make three allegations, none of which is correct:
::::*'''My arguments are sophistic.''' They are not. I am making a very straightforward, logical argument, which has at the heart of it the fact that the statements I am making contain no logical contradictions, and that my conclusions derive necessarily from premises that even you accept as true.
::::*'''I am trying to justify a violation of the rules concerning biogrpahies of living persons.''' No such violation has taken place. I have merely asserted facts.
::::*'''I am trying to imply that the jury in the first trial reached the correct decision.''' Why on earth would I do that? I don't think the jury in the first trial did reach the right decision. I have always, ever since he became involved in the case, been convinced that he was innocent. I am utterly convinced that he had no involvement at all in the murder of Jill Dando. The courts have shown that he is innocent of that charge.
::::I shall copy this to the Barry George talk page and suggest it is better to continue the discussion there.--[[User:Oxonian2006|Oxonian2006]] ([[User talk:Oxonian2006|talk]]) 14:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
== di Stefano ==
I've tagged the sentence you insist on with a fact tag for now, and added a section on the talk page. I suggest you discuss the matter there rather than go further over 3RR since you are already at 4 reverts. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] ([[User talk:JoshuaZ|talk]]) 04:18, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
: I'm sorry, 5 reverts. [[a fortiori]], please take it to talk. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] ([[User talk:JoshuaZ|talk]]) 04:20, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
::You appear not to have read 3rr either as 2 completely different edits are not considered identical in 3rr. If you have a proposal that does not involve a BLP violation and an NPOV violation I will happily consider it but implying that a living person cannot enter the US on the strength of these ancient refs is not appropriate. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:18, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
::: I strongly suggest you discuss it on the talk page since many editors do not think that either a) there is any implication that he cannot enter or b) do not think that implication is strong enough to matter or c) do not think that there is a BLP problem. Going over 3rr and then refusing to discuss it with other editors is really not a good idea when there are a variety of editors who have a good faith disagreement about what is a BLP issue. I'm not going to go into the issues about your misuse of the term trolling or your mischaracterization of the refs as "ancient" or the irrelevancy of the age of the refs. Also, I suggest you refamiliarize yourself with 3RR. From [[WP:3RR]]: "An editor must not perform more than three reverts, in whole or in part, on a single page within a 24-hour period. A revert means undoing the actions of another editor, whether involving the same or different material each time." The last sentence is the relevant one. You have reverted 3 different editors a total of 5 times. I suggest you comment at the general discussion. In general, you've acted repeatedly like you [[WP:OWN|own this article]]. If you are unwilling to engage in discussion with the other editors, I suggest you may want to back off and work on something else. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] ([[User talk:JoshuaZ|talk]]) 20:01, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
:The cite needed tag is entirely correct. We do need a ref, I am the first to admit. 2 completely different edits are not treated as one Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:38, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
:: I'm glad you agree on the first part. I'm confused by what you mean by the second. Could you expand upon that? [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] ([[User talk:JoshuaZ|talk]]) 17:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
:::Adding a sentence is nott he same as removing a p[aragraph, theya re entirely different edits whose only common theme was the NPOV goal. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
:::: The sentence you added was nearly identical to the sentence which was removed earlier. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] ([[User talk:JoshuaZ|talk]]) 16:02, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
::::Huh? No, what i added was that he has been able ot re-enter teh US, what i removed is the bit about him having allegedly not been able to enter the US in the past, 2 very different things. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:07, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
::::: Maybe I should stop using pronouns and general comments and point to specific difs. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Giovanni_di_Stefano&diff=230094689&oldid=230015976] - I remove the unsourced claim that he has been in the United States. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Giovanni_di_Stefano&diff=230487441&oldid=230150387 You add back the unsourced claim that he has since been allowed into the US] (reversion 1). [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Giovanni_di_Stefano&diff=next&oldid=230488408 you add that claim back in again] (reversion 2). [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Giovanni_di_Stefano&diff=prev&oldid=230692610 you blank the section]. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Giovanni_di_Stefano&diff=next&oldid=230704467 you again blank the section] (reversion 3). [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Giovanni_di_Stefano&diff=next&oldid=230705996 you again blank the section] (reversion 4). [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Giovanni_di_Stefano&diff=next&oldid=230712799 you add in the claim that he has since gone into the United States with an edit summary saying explicitly that you will not discuss the matter on the article talk page] (reversion 5). That's 5, 5 reversions. [[Count von Count]] might be happy but Wikipedia policy sad. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] ([[User talk:JoshuaZ|talk]]) 16:24, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
:Well I stick to my belief that blanking the section and adding to the section were 2 fundamentally different strategies to approaching the same problem and therefore could not be considered as part oft he same 3rrviolation. I do not believe that any article is worht breaking 3rr and possible losing edit privileges temporarily over and therefore do my best to avoid doing that, and certainkly was aware of what I was doing here and did not and do not feel it was a 3rr violation, indeed I was being more creative than your average 3rr reverter by trying to offer 32 different solutions to the problem, one being my addition and the other being to blank the section. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]]
== you comment did not match your edit ==
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Louise_Blouin_MacBain&diff=prev&oldid=232591418 Your comment] did not match your [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Louise_Blouin_MacBain&diff=232591329&oldid=231956885 edit]. [[User:QuackGuru|<span style="border:solid #408 1px;padding:1px"><span style='color:#20A;'>Q</span><span style='color:#069;'>ua</span><span style='color:#096;'>ck</span><span style='color:#690;'>Gu</span><span style='color:#940;'>ru</span></span>]] 03:18, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
:Err, yes they did. He is well known as the founder of wikipedia and your OR claim was simply off the wall, though I recognize it was not malicious trolling, as were Bramlet's edits to the page. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:56, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
::No, they did not. Your comment was in contradiction to your edit.
::You wrote: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Louise_Blouin_MacBain&diff=prev&oldid=232591418 Absolutely. Thanks,]
::Your comment was in response to my comment. I wrote: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Louise_Blouin_MacBain&diff=prev&oldid=232525929 Can someone fix the revisionism and rewriting of history.]
::Your comment gave the misleading impression that you agreed with me but your edit was in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Louise_Blouin_MacBain&diff=232591329&oldid=231956885 disagreement].
::Jimmy Wales cannot be the sole founder of Wikipedia when Larry Sanger is the co-founder. I'm sure you are aware of the Larry Sanger article. Co-founder is clearly stated in the first sentence and it is referenced. We cannot not rewrite history on Wikipedia. BTW, Jimmy Wales was interviewed back in 20001 by The New York Times. There is no dispute over the facts and revisionism is rewriting history. [[User:QuackGuru|<span style="border:solid #408 1px;padding:1px"><span style='color:#20A;'>Q</span><span style='color:#069;'>ua</span><span style='color:#096;'>ck</span><span style='color:#690;'>Gu</span><span style='color:#940;'>ru</span></span>]] 16:00, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
:::Quack, your invoking logic that because (in your opinion) Wales cannot be sole founder (which it doesn't say anyway) because Sanger was supposedly co-founder is a very good example of original research, and remember this article is not about Wales, it is about someone else. I have already asked Bramlet for a source that the co-founder dispute has a direct connection with this lady and none has been forthcoming, so really you add an OR template where it is you and Bramlet who are engaging in the OR. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:14, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
::::How is it original research that Larry Sanger is the co-founder. Rewriting history is revisionism.
::::The article is not about Wales and there is no evidence that Wales has anything to do with that article. Nothing is referenced to Wales. Why is it in the article. Please provide a reference that Wales is somehow connected to the lady or the article or remove Wales and the orginal research from the article. Please provide a source to verify the current text or remove Wales from the article. [[User:QuackGuru|<span style="border:solid #408 1px;padding:1px"><span style='color:#20A;'>Q</span><span style='color:#069;'>ua</span><span style='color:#096;'>ck</span><span style='color:#690;'>Gu</span><span style='color:#940;'>ru</span></span>]] 16:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
:::::Not really a satisfactory solution but I have removed Wales from the article for the time being. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:36, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
::::::I could not find a reference to verify the current text and this was a quick solution until references can be provided. [[User:QuackGuru|<span style="border:solid #408 1px;padding:1px"><span style='color:#20A;'>Q</span><span style='color:#069;'>ua</span><span style='color:#096;'>ck</span><span style='color:#690;'>Gu</span><span style='color:#940;'>ru</span></span>]] 16:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
:::There are anyway questions of notability, a list of speakers at The Global Creative Leadership Summit is hardly content for a biography, IMO, and could be seen as promoting the subject. I suspect I need to look very carefully at the appropriateness of Wales being linked to in all the main space where his article is linked to. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:46, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
::::The question I have is, would an editor add Wales to a biography just to make the biography look better. Was Wales really a speaker at The Global Creative Leadership Summit. Is there any other articles where someone added Wales to the article but Wales has nothing to do with that article. I'm not sure. We [[WP:AGF]] with Wikipedians but at the same time we must verifiy the text. [[User:QuackGuru|<span style="border:solid #408 1px;padding:1px"><span style='color:#20A;'>Q</span><span style='color:#069;'>ua</span><span style='color:#096;'>ck</span><span style='color:#690;'>Gu</span><span style='color:#940;'>ru</span></span>]] 16:54, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
=== your edit did not match your edit summary ===
You edit summary was [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=233336987&oldid=231794365 lets just avoid controversy]. You falsely claimed that Wales founded Wikipedia in 2001. You add controversial text. You edit summary was incorrect. Please read the references. [[User:QuackGuru|<span style="border:solid #408 1px;padding:1px"><span style='color:#20A;'>Q</span><span style='color:#069;'>ua</span><span style='color:#096;'>ck</span><span style='color:#690;'>Gu</span><span style='color:#940;'>ru</span></span>]] 18:10, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
If you don't want controversy in the lead then don't create controversy in the lead.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=233557216&oldid=233370659][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=next&oldid=233557216] Wales co-founded Wikipedia in 2001. I'm sure you have read the references. It is very clear the facts are [[WP:NPOV|accurate]]. [[User:QuackGuru|<span style="border:solid #408 1px;padding:1px"><span style='color:#20A;'>Q</span><span style='color:#069;'>ua</span><span style='color:#096;'>ck</span><span style='color:#690;'>Gu</span><span style='color:#940;'>ru</span></span>]] 19:58, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
:Its anything but clear, its very controversial. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:15, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
::The controversy is revisionism, not co-founder. The text is verified and correct. [[User:QuackGuru|<span style="border:solid #408 1px;padding:1px"><span style='color:#20A;'>Q</span><span style='color:#069;'>ua</span><span style='color:#096;'>ck</span><span style='color:#690;'>Gu</span><span style='color:#940;'>ru</span></span>]] 18:32, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
:::IMO the opposite is true, you have found some refs and are writing history based on these refs but we could equally use other refs to say basically what I am saying, which is anyway less specific, merely because there are refs re co-founder does not make it the unalterable truth, that is revisionism. What i do think is unacceptable is nay mention of Sanger in the opening, it makes him put to be much more important in Wales life than is really the case, and this is simply a distortion of the reality. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:40, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
::::I explained this to you before. We can't rewrite history. There are historical references such as The New York Times that clearly state Jimmy Wales is the co-founder. [[User:QuackGuru|<span style="border:solid #408 1px;padding:1px"><span style='color:#20A;'>Q</span><span style='color:#069;'>ua</span><span style='color:#096;'>ck</span><span style='color:#690;'>Gu</span><span style='color:#940;'>ru</span></span>]] 18:45, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
:::::What do you mean we cant rewrite history? you are trying to write history, IMO, and that is what we should not do. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 08:44, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
::::::Here is evidence of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&oldid=5756794 original history] of the Jimmy Wales article. Wales would have had read at least some of the early articles on Wikipedia. Wales was interviewed during the early years of Wikipedia and press coverage articles described both as [http://www.technologyreview.com/Infotech/12586/?a=f co][http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9800E5D6123BF933A1575AC0A9679C8B63&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fSubjects%2fC%2fComputer%20Software -][http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2003/01/57364 founders]. From 2001 - 2004, Wales never disputed the co-founder issue and even Wikipedia's own press releases described both Wales and Sanger as the founders of Wikipedia.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Press_releases/January_2002][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Press_releases/January_2003][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Press_releases/February_2004] Rewriting the historical facts is revisionism. [[User:QuackGuru|<span style="border:solid #408 1px;padding:1px"><span style='color:#20A;'>Q</span><span style='color:#069;'>ua</span><span style='color:#096;'>ck</span><span style='color:#690;'>Gu</span><span style='color:#940;'>ru</span></span>]] 16:58, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
::::THis is no evidence that he is considered co-founder in 08/08, merely that he was historically considered so and tyhis doesn't need to be in the opening. Do you agree that Sanger is not notable enough to be in the opening of Wales' article? For me this is an important point. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]]00:27, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
:::::It is a commonly known historical fact the Wales co-founded Wikipedia in 2001 and that is what the article says. We write articles according to the [[WP:V|facts]] and not what Wales likes are does not like. If you want to remove Larry Sanger from the lead you would have to rewrite the first part of the sentence because Wales did not create Wikipedia on his own. We would problably have to remove the word created. [[User:QuackGuru|<span style="border:solid #408 1px;padding:1px"><span style='color:#20A;'>Q</span><span style='color:#069;'>ua</span><span style='color:#096;'>ck</span><span style='color:#690;'>Gu</span><span style='color:#940;'>ru</span></span>]] 01:54, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
:::::::That is simply not so Quack. What is commonly known is that Wales founded it with others in 2001, nobody has heard of Sanger and he needs to be removed from the opening, given this I am happy to go for a 3rd solution. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]]14:19, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
::::::::That is simply not so QuackGuru? [http://web.archive.org/web/20030316082912/siliconvalley.internet.com/news/article.php/3531_956641 "Internet entrepreneur Jimmy Wales and philosopher Larry Sanger helped found Wikipedia. Wales has supplied the financial backing and other support for the project, and Sanger, who earned a Ph.D. in Philosophy from Ohio State in 2000, has led the project."]
::::::::Nobody had ever heard of Larry Sanger in 2001? Me thinks ''The New York Times'' heard of both of the founders of Wikipedia in [http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9800E5D6123BF933A1575AC0A9679C8B63&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fSubjects%2fC%2fComputer%20Software 2001].[http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9800E5D6123BF933A1575AC0A9679C8B63&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fSubjects%2fC%2fComputer%20Software "I can start an article that will consist of one paragraph, and then a real expert will come along and add three paragraphs and clean up my one paragraph," said Larry Sanger of Las Vegas, who founded Wikipedia with Mr. Wales. (He also works as the editor in chief of another online encyclopedia, Nupedia, which relies on a more traditional system of peer-review editing to assemble its contents.)]
::::::::Back in 2000 people heard of Larry Sanger. In 2000 Nupedia: [http://archives.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/03/14/nupedia.idg/ Officially opened last week, the Nupedia Web site seeks to become "the world's largest encyclopedia," according to Larry Sanger, editor-in-chief.]
::::::::We already have an [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AJimmy_Wales&diff=196361862&oldid=196361181 3rd solution/opinion] on this matter.
::::::::Here is some more facts for you to read. [http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200609/wikipedia/ Wales and Sanger created the first Nupedia wiki on January 10, 2001. The initial purpose was to get the public to add entries that would then be “fed into the Nupedia process” of authorization. Most of Nupedia’s expert volunteers, however, wanted nothing to do with this, so Sanger decided to launch a separate site called “Wikipedia.” Neither Sanger nor Wales looked on Wikipedia as anything more than a lark. This is evident in Sanger’s flip announcement of Wikipedia to the Nupedia discussion list. “Humor me,” he wrote. “Go there and add a little article. It will take all of five or ten minutes.” And, to Sanger’s surprise, go they did. Within a few days, Wikipedia outstripped Nupedia in terms of quantity, if not quality, and a small community developed. In late January, Sanger created a Wikipedia discussion list (Wikipedia-L) to facilitate discussion of the project.]
::::::::I have answered all of your questions and provided [http://www.economist.com/science/tq/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11484062 reference][http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/andrew-keen-on-new-media-837997.html s] to support the text and there is agreement for the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=233574204&oldid=233557700 current version]. [[User:QuackGuru|<span style="border:solid #408 1px;padding:1px"><span style='color:#20A;'>Q</span><span style='color:#069;'>ua</span><span style='color:#096;'>ck</span><span style='color:#690;'>Gu</span><span style='color:#940;'>ru</span></span>]] 17:17, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
::::::::There is evidence from the people who were there in the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_Wikipedia&oldid=100126172#Those_of_us_who_were_there... very beginning] and I have provided many references to [[WP:V|
verify]] the current text. [[User:QuackGuru|<span style="border:solid #408 1px;padding:1px"><span style='color:#20A;'>Q</span><span style='color:#069;'>ua</span><span style='color:#096;'>ck</span><span style='color:#690;'>Gu</span><span style='color:#940;'>ru</span></span>]] 17:46, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
::How about this compromise? leave any mention of sanger out of the beginning but include something like wales co-founded wikipedia but not who with, that can easily be mentioned lower down and is a reasonable compromise. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:28, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
::::Your [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=234182044&oldid=234171583 edit] did not match your [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASqueakBox&diff=234181582&oldid=234174040 compromise]. You did not mention it lower down in the body of the article. The word [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASqueakBox&diff=234050913&oldid=234036174 created] is original research. It gives the false impression Wales is the sole founder. Maybe if we changed it to ''provided support for'' [Wikipedia] it could fix the [[WP:OR]] and at the same time we are staying faithful to the source. [[User:QuackGuru|<span style="border:solid #408 1px;padding:1px"><span style='color:#20A;'>Q</span><span style='color:#069;'>ua</span><span style='color:#096;'>ck</span><span style='color:#690;'>Gu</span><span style='color:#940;'>ru</span></span>]] 19:50, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
:::::Whoops. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:33, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
::::::Whoops? Please explain what you mean by whoops. Did you make a mistake in your recent edit. [[User:QuackGuru|<span style="border:solid #408 1px;padding:1px"><span style='color:#20A;'>Q</span><span style='color:#069;'>ua</span><span style='color:#096;'>ck</span><span style='color:#690;'>Gu</span><span style='color:#940;'>ru</span></span>]] 21:42, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
::::::Your recent edit did not match the source. It [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=234182044&oldid=234171583 failed verifiaction]. [[User:QuackGuru|<span style="border:solid #408 1px;padding:1px"><span style='color:#20A;'>Q</span><span style='color:#069;'>ua</span><span style='color:#096;'>ck</span><span style='color:#690;'>Gu</span><span style='color:#940;'>ru</span></span>]] 22:00, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
::::::::My mistake was to assume it was in the main body of the text. I will fix it, hopefully when I get home, as I ma very busy right now. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:01, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
:::::::::Your edit [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=234182044&oldid=234171583 failed verification] and I made a suggestion to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASqueakBox&diff=234196326&oldid=234181582 fix it]. We are discussing two things here. The lead has a mistake that [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=234182044&oldid=234171583 failed verfication] and your [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=234182044&oldid=234171583 edit] did not match your [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASqueakBox&diff=234181582&oldid=234174040 compromise]. This may take another year for us to fix this at the pace we are going. No worries. I'm very patient. I look forward to your edit to try and reach a compromise. We can this by working together. Wikipedians are a can do people. Together we can create featured articles. [[User:QuackGuru|<span style="border:solid #408 1px;padding:1px"><span style='color:#20A;'>Q</span><span style='color:#069;'>ua</span><span style='color:#096;'>ck</span><span style='color:#690;'>Gu</span><span style='color:#940;'>ru</span></span>]] 22:22, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
:::::Well it would be great to get Wales to featured status. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:53, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
::::::The first step is [[WP:GA]] status. It took me about a year for [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AGood_articles&diff=195370485&oldid=195368067 Larry Sanger]. It would be nice if both articles were featured articles together. [[User:QuackGuru|<span style="border:solid #408 1px;padding:1px"><span style='color:#20A;'>Q</span><span style='color:#069;'>ua</span><span style='color:#096;'>ck</span><span style='color:#690;'>Gu</span><span style='color:#940;'>ru</span></span>]] 23:02, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
== FARC Page ==
Hi. I am assuming good faith in your edit and I assume it was a mistake. However, please take a look at my edits, after reverting the vandalism last night I brought back your corrections. Then you reverted me and brought back the vandalism [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Revolutionary_Armed_Forces_of_Colombia&diff=234986936&oldid=234942669].
I assume this was a mistake on your part since you seem to know your way around here quite well.
Let me know if there are any questions or if I have made a mistake.
[[User:Colombiano21|Colombiano21]] ([[User talk:Colombiano21|talk]]) 15:55, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
:I think we can assume good faith with each other, its been a nightmare page over the last few days due to general trolling, feel free to remove nay further vandalism. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:10, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
==Harassment by User LAVIDALOCA==
I have removed unsourced quotes on a number of articles under strict BLP and been labelled a snot puppet by this user who is now undoing all my edits. Can you please assist? [[User:NoNameMaddox|NoNameMaddox]] ([[User talk:NoNameMaddox|talk]]) 06:27, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
:The above editor is suspected of being a sock puppet of [[User:ColScott]]. Things are underway to request a checkuser on the account. [[User:LaVidaLoca|LaVidaLoca]] ([[User talk:LaVidaLoca|talk]]) 06:53, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
:: I suspected that this account was a sockpuppet of User: Daniel Brandt and he deleted the caption from his page. Does he get spanked?[[User:NoNameMaddox|NoNameMaddox]] ([[User talk:NoNameMaddox|talk]]) 06:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
:::For me what is important is the quality of the encyclopedia, I have taken a look at one case and will look at others as time allows. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:16, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
:Well sorted out a few glaring problems. LaVidaLoca (como que?) appears to think others shoukld do his work for him as if we were a cult with a hierarchy instead of a bunch of volunteers enjoying a hobby. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]]
::LOL. It speaks for itself. [[User:LaVidaLoca|LaVidaLoca]] ([[User talk:LaVidaLoca|talk]]) 02:21, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
You what? I suspect you have not got a clue what I was talking about and my comment most certainly was not directed at you. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 12:52, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
== New Zealand addition to GDS article ==
There was [[Talk:Giovanni_di_Stefano#RFC_for_New_Zealand_inclusion|this RFC]] on adding the New Zealand to the article where several editors didn't agree with your assesment of it being a BLP and NPOV violation, so please don't make unilateral removals based on your personal opinion, like you did [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Giovanni_Di_Stefano&diff=prev&oldid=236935898 here] <small>(except for Hg2, who made a comment about the fingerprint. I'm not sure if his comment was rendered moot when the fingerprint thing was stripped from the draft)</small>. If you want the addition removed then go to the next step of [[WP:DR|WP:DR dispute resolution]] instead of removing it because you don't like how the RFC went. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 17:23, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
:It is not my personal opinion and a small cabal of editors do not trump either BLP or NPOV, especially given the history of the article. I have little opinion on the Rfc and nor am I interested in initiating dispute resolution. Telling me to wait before removing this material for a dispute resolution case is to fundamentally mis-characterize our BLP policy, the offending material needs to be removed while any further dispute resolution takes place. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:15, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
::Unfortunately, I don't agree that this is a BLP violation, and I want to pursue dispute resolution. I find that the paragraph is well sourced, relevant, and has gathered consensus that the current version is not a BLP vio. Precisely, I opened a RFC so people outside the "small cabal" would give a fresh opinion. Look, I don't want to go all the way to arbcom, would you agree to make a [[Wikipedia:Requests for mediation|formal meditation]] to ask whether this is a BLP vio and abide by the decision of the mediator? I will also abide by the mediator decision if it's against inclusion. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 13:49, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
:::Well I certainly agree that it is very unfortunate you cannot see the BLP violation. I think it is extremely unlikely that the arbcom would agree to take on this case, and if they did they would probably agree with me that this is a completely unacceptable BLP violation, further winding up someone who is already so pissed off they are threatening to sue wikipedia. Why don't we just leave it out and respect di Stefano, we are here to write an encyclopedia and that does not mean adding this type of material completely unnecessarily merely because some rag newspapers have, wuithout verifiabilty, reported it as an allegation14:11, 14 September 2008 (UTC). Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]]
::::I am not willing to agree to any mediation conclusions that violate BLP but if you want to initiate mediation I will give it my full consideration. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:22, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
:::::Well, I'll start a mediation request tomorrow. Too tired today. You can read the mediation request and decide if you want to accept participating on it or not. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 17:02, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
::::::Bueno. Send me the link when you have done it please, I am more than happy to participate but not to abide by any decision that violates our BLP policy. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:51, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:::::::Erm.... well... the mediation would be to see if the addition was really a BLP violation or not. Seeing your answer, <s>I'm not sure if it's going to work, but I'm going to open it anyways. Maybe we can work this out.</s> scratch that, I just checked the "[[Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/Common_reasons_for_rejection|common reasons for rejection]]" before filing the case, and, regretably, it's painfully clear to me that it's either going to be rejected or going to fail miserabily. See "[[Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/Common_reasons_for_rejection#Parties_do_not_agree_to_mediation|mediation is voluntarily initiated by the parties, and relies on the willingness of the parties to abide by the agreement reached]]" and also "[[Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/Common_reasons_for_rejection#Issues_not_appropriate_for_mediation|All parties must come to mediation with the understanding that both sides will have to compromise to reach an agreement (...)]]".
:::::::Seeing this, and seeing that you are not willing to compromise, I'm going to have to ask you that you stop trying to impose your view of BLP and NPOV on the article by removing sourced info that was put throught a RFC in order to remove all BLP issues and make it as neutral as possible, or I'll have to bring the case to Arbcom so that a binding decision is reached. <small>(Additionally, a preemptive warning: notice that, while [[WP:BLP]] says that BLP vios "should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion", which is very correct, this particular edit has already undergone lots of discussion, and many editors have already stated that they don't agree with you that this edit happens to be a BLP vio, so please don't use that argument to remove it again)</small>. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 14:39, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
::::::::::Well I will not reach an agreement that I am not willing to agree to. A sign of good faith would be to remove the offending material while the mediation is undergoing and I will likely make that, not anything else, a requirement of mediation. This stuff is serious. Que le vaya bien, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:13, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
:pues hazlo, o sea actualizice tu amenaza de los arbcom y vamos a ver porq [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASqueakBox&diff=239299288&oldid=239291227 esto] no es de buen fe por actualizar mediación, vos. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:11, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
::I'm not going to open a mediation request unless you explicitely state that are willing to accept its outcome even if it goes against your position. Willingness by all parties to accept the outcome a pre-requisite for the request to be accepted by the mediation cabal, and don't really see the point in opening a request knowing that a)it will be rejected and b)the other party has stated that if it doesn't like the outcome he's just going to not accept it. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 03:04, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
:::It seems to me that we can go for mediation on the basis that if we do reach an agreement we stick to it but that there is a possibility that we will not reach an agreement. If you go to arbcom that is also okay by me, this isn't a personal dispute, its about Di Stefano. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 13:55, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
::::That basis looks good to me. The idea is that, if we can't reach an agreement on mediation, then we should ask Arbcom as a last recourse to decide if BLP allows or not that entry. I'll open the mediation request tomorrow, as today I'm doing some other stuff. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 17:22, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
[[Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/Giovanni_Di_Stefano|mediation request]], please check it and, if you accept it, sign under "Parties' agreement to mediate". --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 03:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
:check the talk page of the mediation, I made my argument there. Please add your arguments too, so the mediator can check them. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 03:52, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
::Please check [[Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_mediation/Giovanni_Di_Stefano#List_of_issues_on_dispute|the list of issues on dispute]] that I made. Excuses on advance if I made some wrong assumption about you, please point out any errors so I can correct them. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 17:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
:::Before signing additional issue 1, I'll wait to see what the mediator says about expanding the mediation to expand the other BLP issues (I suppose that [[User:Wizardman]] will be the mediator). Maybe it will cause the mediation to be too long and complicated, with so many issues that need to be examined, I don't know. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 15:16, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
About [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Giovanni_Di_Stefano&diff=243061408&oldid=242266844 removing] again the same thing, as stated by other editors, you have failed to convince other editors that this is actually a BLP vio. If it's such an obvious vio, then you won't have any problem proving it on the mediation case. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 02:47, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
:If you read the BLP article it fits like a glove, I am confused as to how you can think otherwise. And your claim that I haven't convinced other editors is betrayed by the facts. And most importantly, BLP is not decided by consensus anyway, it is decided by sticking to a strict interpretation of the policy. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:20, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
::Well, you should argue this on the mediation case, now that Wizardman has finally appeared on its talk page --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 11:02, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
::I already have argued this, in my statement at mediation talk. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:33, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
== Sources ==
Regarding reliability of sources, while you are technically correct to write, regarding [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alan_Moore&diff=237839707&oldid=237796370 this edit] that "a forum is not RS," the [[Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published_sources|guidelines]] specifically states that such sources are "<ins>largely</ins>" not acceptable, stressing that exceptions are evident: "[such sources] may, in some circumstances, be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article..." In this case, the writer is [[Rich Johnston]], writing from personal knowledge (gained through interviews with the primary people in question: Moore and Gaiman). I understand that the guidelines do however strongly advise against use of the sources when BLP concerns are evident, particularly when it is "[http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2006-May/046440.html negative information]." This point is not negative against a particular person (although it could arguably paint the DC of the 1980s in a somewhat poor light, albeit one dictated by contract law). I presume that you have no problem with the ''information'', and merely the ''source'', however, so I'll put some effort in to re-sourcing that and everyone will be happy. [[User:Ntnon|ntnon]] ([[User talk:Ntnon|talk]]) 19:20, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
:Finding a better source sounds like a good idea to me. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:49, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
== Please discuss ==
I would like to invite you to participate in the discussion at [[Talk:Chiropractic]], to explain [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chiropractic&diff=239087417&oldid=239078258 your revert]. Note that many of these changes have already been discussed or are under discussion on the talk page. Your edit changes sentences so that they assert, as if it's fact, that chiropractic theories are "antiscientific" and "ethically suspect", as opposed to the previous wording which merely asserted that these things have been said by researchers. See [[WP:NPOV]] which says "'''Assert facts, including facts about opinions—but do not assert the opinions themselves.'''" (emphasis in the original). When reverting good-faith edits, please explain your edit in the edit summary or give a link to related talk page discussion which explains it; otherwise it could be interpreted that you're implying the edit you're reverting was vandalism. <span style="color:Green; font-size:1.5em;">☺</span> [[User:Coppertwig|Coppertwig]] ([[User talk:Coppertwig|talk]]) 20:46, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
:P.S. Those are really cute chipmunk pictures. <span style="color:Blue; font-size:1.5em;">☺</span> [[User:Coppertwig|Coppertwig]] ([[User talk:Coppertwig|talk]]) 20:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
:They are El C's pics. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:57, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
=== Edit to [[Chiropractic]] ===
Re [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chiropractic&curid=7738&diff=239087417&oldid=239078258 this edit]: I agree with the change, but it would be helpful to discuss the change instead of simply making the edit, as some of it is controversial. Could you please join the discussion at [[Talk:Chiropractic #Gallup poll]], [[Talk:Chiropractic #Request for Comment: Excluding treatment reviews]], and [[Talk:Chiropractic #Error in summarizing Canadian surveys]]? Thanks. [[User:Eubulides|Eubulides]] ([[User talk:Eubulides|talk]]) 20:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
:And [[Talk:Chiropractic#NPOV]]. Thanks. <span style="color:Purple; font-size:1.5em;">☺</span> [[User:Coppertwig|Coppertwig]] ([[User talk:Coppertwig|talk]]) 23:05, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
== di Stefano article edit summary ==
Please don't [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=Giovanni_Di_Stefano&diff=239408630&oldid=239298551 leave edit summaries in non-english languages] for controversial information removals etc.
I have reverted as I can't tell for sure why you did it. Please don't do that again. Thanks. [[User:Georgewilliamherbert|Georgewilliamherbert]] ([[User talk:Georgewilliamherbert|talk]]) 01:05, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
:Whoops. As I live in a Spanish speaking country I occasionally get my languages muddled, and the comment was to a Spanish person, but you are certainly right. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 13:42, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
== I know you already know but... ==
..you are close to violating [[WP:3RR|3RR]] on [[Neil Goldschmidt]], and if you continue I will block you. Also note that you can be blocked for [[WP:EDITWAR|edit warring]] without violating 3RR. I ask that you take your concerns to the talk page opposed to warring on the mainpage. Please, think of how damaging it is to the article. Thank you, [[User:Tiptoety|<span style="color:#4E562C;font-weight:bold">Tiptoety</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Tiptoety|<span style="color:#FFDB58">talk</span>]]</sup> 23:44, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
:See [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive758#Need some help with Neil Goldschmidt]], this user appears to be the sock of an already blocked user. I believe RCU has been requested via arbcom (following general arbcom instructions in this PAW area). I am sure you apopreciate that blocked users do not have editing rights on wikipedia. Please see the comment on the 4th item on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3ASqueakBox this list]. My guess is this is the same user. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:57, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
::Hm, maybe there is more here than meets the eye. If in fact you were reverting a banned/previously blocked user than you have my apologies for the warning above. I will attempt to take a closer look and see if there is anything I can do to help. [[User:Tiptoety|<span style="color:#4E562C;font-weight:bold">Tiptoety</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Tiptoety|<span style="color:#FFDB58">talk</span>]]</sup> 23:59, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
:Your point is also well taken that edit warring is bad for the encyclopedia full stop. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:02, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
==Alan Moore==
Please return to entry and help me with the editor who wishes to use gossip site as source.[[User:Allknowingallseeing|Allknowingallseeing]] ([[User talk:Allknowingallseeing|talk]]) 19:08, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Please join me at my talk page. User JasonAQuest is wikistalking and claiming personal attacks when there are none. [[User:Allknowingallseeing|Allknowingallseeing]] ([[User talk:Allknowingallseeing|talk]]) 15:49, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
==Request for mediation accepted==
{| class="messagebox" style="width:90%"
|-
|[[Image:Exquisite-folder5.png|75px]]
|A [[Wikipedia:Requests for mediation|Request for Mediation]] to which you were are a party has been [[Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Guide to accepted cases#Post-acceptance|accepted]].<br/>You can find more information on the case subpage, [[Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Giovanni Di Stefano]].<br/>
::''For the Mediation Committee,'' <span style="font-variant: small-caps">'''[[User:WJBscribe|WJBscribe]] [[User talk:WJBscribe|(talk)]]'''</span> 23:45, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
|}
<div style="text-align:center; font-size:smaller;">This message delivered by [[User:MediationBot1|MediationBot]], an automated bot account [[Wikipedia:Mediation Committee#MediationBot|operated]] by the [[Wikipedia:Mediation Committee|Mediation Committee]] to perform case management.<br/>If you have questions about this bot, please [[Wikipedia talk:Mediation Committee|contact the Mediation Committee directly]].</div>
==hmmmm...==
Fair enough...I'll accept the rebuke. I would appreciate your removal of your final comment (21:44, 26 September 2008 (UTC), and suggest that in the future before you delete my remarks that you contact me first. [[User:Hag2|Hag2]] ([[User talk:Hag2|talk]]) 14:09, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
:Actually you just need to not make such comments in the first place. Do not put it on me to have to justify myself when it is you who has disrupted the mediation process with your bad faith incivility. It is not wanted. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:19, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
== Alton Ellis ==
I still haven't seen a single reliable source stating that Alton has passed away. I think we should wait until we have this before making any changes.--[[User:Michig|Michig]] ([[User talk:Michig|talk]]) 19:51, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
:I agree, reverted myself at Deaths in 2008 once I had read the ref. Good work. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:52, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
== My complaint against Bulbous ==
Have you seen this? I mentioned your name as having experienced his ad hominems and trolling in the past.
[[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Bulbous]]
Cheers, [[User:Til Eulenspiegel|Til Eulenspiegel]] ([[User talk:Til Eulenspiegel|talk]]) 17:51, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
== Stephen Carter ==
I don't agree with moving this to [[Stephen Carter (politician)]]. If there were no other Stephen Carters on Wikipedia then yes I would agree he's better known by this name so it should just be at [[Stephen Carter]]. However, as we need some form of disambiguation, this should be [[Stephen Carter, Baron Carter of Barnes]]. It is ''not'' the same case as Jeffrey Archer, as his name doesn't need disambiguating. Better examples are [[Douglas Hogg, 3rd Viscount Hailsham]] who is ''never'' known as Viscount Hailsham, but needs it for disambiguation; and maybe [[Tony Banks, Baron Stratford]] who was only a lord for a very brief period of time, and was at [[Tony Banks (politician)]] until he was enobled. The consensus is usually that we should avoid using a term in parenthesis for disambiguation if there's another way of doing it.
Anyway, this isn't a question of whether he's known as Stephen Carter or Lord Carter of Barnes; it's a question of whether the titles needs disambiguating, which it does. Even if the peerage version is used as the title, it does still say "Stephen Carter" as part of the title. I'll await your comments before moving it back. '''[[User:JRawle|<span style="color: blue">J</span><span style="color: navy">Rawle</span>]]''' ([[User talk:JRawle|Talk]]) 19:05, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
:This has nothing to do with the dab page, and everything to do with the fact that well known politicians should not be titled by their House of Lords titles. Peter Mandelson is another example. Of course he cannot be called Stephen Carter because that is a dab page, thus following MoS we should call him (politician) as per others. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:04, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
::You completely understand my point. I now notice you have deliberately edited the redirect page with these two edits [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stephen_Carter,_Baron_Carter_of_Barnes&diff=246154941&oldid=246141520] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stephen_Carter,_Baron_Carter_of_Barnes&diff=246154983&oldid=246154941] so as to block any moves back to [[Stephen Carter, Baron Carter of Barnes]]. As you are clearly not interested in discussing this (after all, if I behaved like you, I'd just have moved the article back without leaving you a note) I'm going to take it to requested moves to let other people have a say on it. '''[[User:JRawle|<span style="color: blue">J</span><span style="color: navy">Rawle</span>]]''' ([[User talk:JRawle|Talk]]) 22:23, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
:That is because these Baron names are out of line. Take it to RM but you will not find consensus there for your POV pushing, there is far too much precedent against these titles as part of the article names. This argument has been thrashed out on multiple occasions and you are wasting everyone's time bringing it up again. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:28, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
::Where is all this "consensus" and "precedent" for not having these titles in article names? And why is preferring one convention "POV" while the exact opposite is not? The current guideline is clear. If you don't agree with naming conventions, there are places to discuss that. Unilaterally moving articles '''then deliberately sabotaging the previous page so that the move can't be reversed''' is not the way to behave on a collaborative wiki. And why is it that, despite the fact I took the trouble to contact you and discuss this (after which you immediately made those two edits to block the move back), when I posted the requested move template, you said I hadn't given reason or even said who I was? I'm afraid your actions would appear to be those of someone who operates in a rather underhand way ''to push his own POV''. '''[[User:JRawle|<span style="color: blue">J</span><span style="color: navy">Rawle</span>]]''' ([[User talk:JRawle|Talk]]) 23:02, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
:::In the various articles I gave you, and others, in various talk pages, and in RM archives. Its you who are not agreeing with naming conventions, which entirely explains my actions. Collaborative does not mean you get to dictate your desires. I suggest you give your reasons other than to me, and to accuse me of being underhand in this case is clearly uncivil and compounding your approach as somewhat negative. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:05, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
::::I try my utmost to be civil on Wikipedia at all times. But you replied to me at 20:04, then at 20:05 made an entirely unnecessary edit to the redirect page [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stephen_Carter,_Baron_Carter_of_Barnes&diff=246154941&oldid=246141520] then immediately reverted it [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stephen_Carter,_Baron_Carter_of_Barnes&diff=246154983&oldid=246154941]. Sorry, but I think there's nothing uncivil in saying that you made those edits deliberately to prevent anyone moving that page back. I'll let other editors reading this come to their own conclusions about you. '''[[User:JRawle|<span style="color: blue">J</span><span style="color: navy">Rawle</span>]]''' ([[User talk:JRawle|Talk]]) 23:13, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
:::::Please read NPOV and stop making attacks against me. We are trying to create a neutral encyclopedia and political POV pushing is not helpful in terms of that goal. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:14, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
::::::So for the record, you've taken the two pages I cited as counter-examples and moved them to fit in with your POV, then edited the redirects in a similar manner to those edits linked above to prevent them being moved back. '''[[User:JRawle|<span style="color: blue">J</span><span style="color: navy">Rawle</span>]]''' ([[User talk:JRawle|Talk]]) 23:30, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
:No, I have moved them to fit in with the consensus which demands we use common names in order to avoid POV pushing. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:34, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
::You still fail to explain the following:
::*Why including the peerage title is "POV pushing" while not including is isn't "POV pushing"
::*Why you are editing redirect pages deliberately to prevent page moves over the redirects
::*Why you just so happened to move two pages which I used as examples in a current discussion
::By the way, out of the courtesy I still feel I owe fellow editors even in disputes, I thought I should let you know I've asked for a Third Opinion, with this discussion as the linked reference. '''[[User:JRawle|<span style="color: blue">J</span><span style="color: navy">Rawle</span>]]''' ([[User talk:JRawle|Talk]]) 23:42, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
:He is commonly known as Stephen Carter, and this issue has gone on too long with certain politically driven folks pushing this POV wherever they can and ignoring our standards here. Yes, I did appreciate your pointing out those 2 articles that were clearly badly named, and its a classic. Douglas Hogg is well known as Douglas Hogg, for instance. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:49, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
::Thanks for answering one of my three questions. I'm still interested in hearing your answer to number 2. Moving that article to "Douglas Hogg (politician)" was clearly ridiculous as it's now ambiguous as it could also refer to his grandfather. Perhaps you'd like to fix it somehow. '''[[User:JRawle|<span style="color: blue">J</span><span style="color: navy">Rawle</span>]]''' ([[User talk:JRawle|Talk]]) 23:52, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
See [[Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(names_and_titles)#British_peerage]]:
:2. # '''Life peers''' (ie, people who have peerages awarded exclusively for their lifetime but who neither inherit it nor pass it on to anyone else)¹ use the same standard as for hereditary peers: <u>use the dignity in the title</u>, unless the individual is exclusively referred to by personal name. For example: [[Quintin Hogg, Baron Hailsham of St Marylebone]] (not "Quintin McGarel Hogg"), but [[Margaret Thatcher]] (not "Margaret Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher.") [my underlining]
As the default is to use the dignity, it seems sensible to default to it in this case for disambiguation. You will note that #4 uses Baronet titles for disambiguation, so that reinforces the disambiguation via dignity. '''''[[User:Tyrenius|<span style="color:#880088;">Ty</span>]]''''' 03:01, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
==[[Damien Hirst]]==
I don't understand this edit[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Damien_Hirst&diff=246180109&oldid=246175395]. I put two refs in the lead for two statements and you reverted them with the summary "well you need to put ref in lead and show notability of ref". The refs are from The Sunday Times and The Daily Telegraph. Besides which it's universally acknowledged that the shark is iconic. '''''[[User:Tyrenius|<span style="color:#880088;">Ty</span>]]''''' 23:40, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
== Douglas Hogg ==
Hi. I noticed that you moved the [[Douglas Hogg, 3rd Viscount Hailsham]] article with the following summary:
:''moved [[Douglas Hogg, 3rd Viscount Hailsham]] to [[Douglas Hogg (politician)]]: known as Douglas hogg this is really extreme POV pushing unfortunately''
The problem with the page move is that both [[Douglas Hogg, 1st Viscount Hailsham]] and his grandson the 3rd Viscount Hailsham are notable as being politicians, making the descriptor (politician) extremely confusing. I am also unsure why the article needed to be moved in the first place. Can you please explain the "really extreme POV pushing" as I cannot see where POV enters the equation at all. [[User:Road Wizard|Road Wizard]] ([[User talk:Road Wizard|talk]]) 02:38, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
:it is fine to call the dead Hogg by his title, really ''Douglas Hogg'' should be for the living politician and a dab page created for the 2 of them. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
::There is already a disambiguation page at [[Douglas Hogg]], which lists the two individuals. If you want to, you could place the disambiguation page at [[Douglas Hogg (disambiguation)]] and move the 3rd Viscount to ''Douglas Hogg'' or as there are just two articles, you could dispense with the disambiguation page entirely and just use a hatnote to link the other article.
::However, as both Douglas Hogg articles are about politicians, the current use of [[Douglas Hogg (politician)]] is clearly against naming convention guidelines as the disambiguator is extremely ambiguous.
::I noticed that you have now flagged yourself as being on vacation. If you have not had time to resolve this problem within 24 hours, I will ask that the article be restored to its original name. You can then make arrangements for it to be moved to a title that you prefer but is still within the guidelines on your return. Regards. [[User:Road Wizard|Road Wizard]] ([[User talk:Road Wizard|talk]]) 17:31, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
:Yes, I mean the dab page at Douglas Hogg should be at Douglas Hogg (disambiguation). My being on vacation has nothing to do with this, its because I am not working this week. I suggest you get consensus before trying to make such a controversial move. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:51, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
::Excuse me, but you have moved a page to a name in breach of naming conventions without any reference to a previous consensus. You have also failed to explain how a POV argument impacts on your original page move.
::If your being on vacation is not an issue, then please fix the mess you have created. I have already suggested two methods of resolving the issue that are open to you. Regards. [[User:Road Wizard|Road Wizard]] ([[User talk:Road Wizard|talk]]) 18:02, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
:::Common use demands that we use the common name for well known individuals. Or are you claiming we do not do this. I have not created a mess but done a highly necessary series of moves in order to allow for common usage, and this is clearly why [[Douglas Hogg]] should go to the bio itself. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:28, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
::::Then why have you added (politician) into the mix? That is clearly wrong and you could have avoided all this trouble by moving the article over the current disambiguation page in the first instance.
::::As you seem to be reluctant to resolve this <s>mess</s> awkward tangle of page moves yourself then I will make arrangements to implement the "move to [[Douglas Hogg]] with hatnote" option. Regards. [[User:Road Wizard|Road Wizard]] ([[User talk:Road Wizard|talk]]) 18:38, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
::Adding politician is the solution for these kind of problems, eg [[John Smith (UK politician)]]. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:53, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
:I see the Hogg article has been resolved. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:06, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
== JustCarmen ==
When are back from holiday, can you send me those two articles that you mention at [[Talk:JustCarmen]]? I'll try to see if I can do something about that article. (I think that I already found the text of the Daily Star article [http://www.midnightrock.eu/pages/cd_with_elvis.html here], but I'm not sure if it's the correct text). --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 15:19, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
== Wikipedia's Expert Peer Review process (or lack of such) for Science related articles ==
Hi - I posted the section with the same name on my talk page.
Could you take part in discussion ?
Thanks
ARP
[[User:Apovolot|Apovolot]] ([[User talk:Apovolot|talk]]) 21:59, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
== AfD NAC ==
Hm, I usually do it, must have overlooked it. Thanks for rectifying the situation. <span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS"><b>— [[User:Neurolysis|neuro]]</b><sup><i>[[User talk:Neurolysis|(talk)]]</i></sup></span> 17:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
== Anne Pressly ==
How is this a BLP? She died two days ago. --[[User talk:Elliskev|Elliskev]] 13:22, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
:BLP applies not merely to the bios of living people but also to any article containing or that may contain info about living people. She has been murdered and her murder is being covered internationally so given a living person murdered her and if someone is associated as being the murderer, well blp is acutely involved. Best to tag before this happens so when and if it ddoes happen people will know to be careful. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:05, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
== Civility in Gringo ==
SqueakBox, regarding [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gringo&curid=468905&diff=248111347&oldid=246575229 this edit], I assume you are addressing me, but what attacks are you referring to? My comment was perhaps a trifle sarcastic for a subject that can be heated, but I think you would have a hard time finding any [[WP:NPA|personal attacks]] that I've made, in this article or elsewhere, directed to either the wise or the foolish. In fact, I think most of my comments and edit summaries are downright [[WP:CIVIL|civil]]. Meanwhile, your comment at least borders on [[WP:NPA]] for accusing me of making attacks as well as calling my wisdom into doubt. I'm going to remake my point without the sarcasm. I suggest you similarly alter or remove this comment. Then we can go back to politely disagreeing and maybe even improving the article. [[User:CAVincent|CAVincent]] ([[User talk:CAVincent|talk]]) 03:56, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
:I was referring to your attack on Felipe, telling him to knock himself out though my personal opinion is that those who take offence at being called gringos are ignorantly creatinbg tensions between gringos and latinos that is completely unnecessary, but that is not the point at issue, the point at issue is that you should not make attacks against an editor like Felipe merely because you disagree with him. I see you reframed your comments anyway and I have done the same but do not get all high and mighty as if you were anything other than the disruptor in this case. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:47, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
::Hmmm. Perhaps [[idiom]]atic expressions are best not used in an international forum. Knock yourself out means "you do that" (see [http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=knock%20yourself%20out here] and [http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/knock+yourself+out here]). I wasn't suggesting that Felipe literally render himself unconscious. Unless you misunderstood me, it is hard to see this as an attack of any sort. So excuse me as I rejoin my high and mighty perch of people-who-don't-fully-understand-other-cultures-and-might-ignorantly-take-offense-when-none-was-meant. I count roughly six billion of us. Care to join? [[User:CAVincent|CAVincent]] ([[User talk:CAVincent|talk]]) 19:45, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
:Well I am British and I have never heard that expression before, which I guess does explain things. It sounded to me like telling him to Fxxx off, so to speak but I am more than happy to accept that i was wrong in this. BTW I also live in Latin America and certainly where I am the word gringo is not considered an offensive expression and is used to refer to me innoccuously including by people I am very close to. So you shouldn't take offence any more than a black person would take offence being called "black". Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:04, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
::I believe it's more colonial in nature. [[User:John Nevard|John Nevard]] ([[User talk:John Nevard|talk]]) 06:17, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
::You are British and you've never heard the term "knock yourself out". I dispute your assertation that you've never heard the term, its in common usage. However, the term gringo IS an offensive term --[[Special:Contributions/217.65.158.124|217.65.158.124]] ([[User talk:217.65.158.124|talk]]) 10:33, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
:::Not where I live it isn't, and no I had not heard the term knock yourself out, perhaps because I no longer live in the UK. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:10, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
== AFD ==
Hi... Do you need some help with your AfD nom? I am actually not sure if there are 2 or three priors... I see you tagged both #3 and #4 for delete, which is the right one do you think, or have you changed your mind altogether? LMK here, I'll watch. ++[[User:Lar|Lar]]: [[User_talk:Lar|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Lar|c]] 00:04, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
:Oh yes please Lar, it kind of works but is also a mess, getting wierd results morre than techniocal incompetence and any help would be appreciated, cheers. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:10, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
::Well, was there a 3rd already and the new one should be fourth or ??? LMK. I don't THINK there was a third but I am not quite sure. ++[[User:Lar|Lar]]: [[User_talk:Lar|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Lar|c]] 00:30, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
:::Actually, it looks sorted now... looks like the article now points to 3rd, there are some comments there, and 4th got deleted by [[user:Woody]]... cheers. ++[[User:Lar|Lar]]: [[User_talk:Lar|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Lar|c]] 00:32, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
:Aah good, when I previewed 3rd at ED it was red and I went and edited and saved it, and it directed to an already closed afd. That was the beginning of my problems. Brilliant it is fixed and let us see how the afd goes. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:55, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
== Ben Way ==
Hey could you look at the discussion page of [[Ben Way]] on Net Worth as you have far more experience on these types of issues and you one of the main editors of this page. Also now I am getting my head around the way to present good articles do you think it is worth me taking out the links and replacing them with notes?
--[[User:Up2datenow|Up2datenow]] ([[User talk:Up2datenow|talk]]) 13:22, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
== BLP tag ==
The BLP tag at [[Talk:Osama bin Laden]] is visible. The Banner template includes a field which places the notice firmly at the top, before the other wikiproject banners. Please look again. By moving the Wikiproject Biography banner out of the banner template, you have listed the BLP notice *twice*. I am reverting your edit a second time, since the note is clearly visible right below the talk header. Please '''look''' at the talk page before reverting. If you still think the BLP banner is not visible enough, I would appreciate a detailed reply here, including links to the relevant parts of policy that you are invoking. Thanks, [[User:Silly rabbit|<span style="color: #c00000">siℓℓy rabbit</span>]] ([[User talk:Silly rabbit|<span style="color:#FF823D;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;cursor:help"><span style="color: #c00000">talk</span></span>]]) 20:16, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
:BLP must always be visible and first because it is our most enforceable policy and all newcomers need to be made aware of it as explicit as possible. I suggest posting at the BLP noticeboard if you really want to have a fight over this one but your attitude is not acceptable to a great part of the wikipedia community. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:19, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
::If there is a policy that the BLP notice must appear at the very top of the article, then please cite the policy. If there is a policy that the notice should appear '''twice''' in the talk header, then I suppose I will challenge that policy. But until that, I don't see what the BLP noticeboard would have to say about it. This article has the BLP notice right below the {{tl|talkheader}} template, which is nearly always where it appears as far as I can tell from a random sampling of such articles. So if there is a policy (as you seem to feel), then it is a very poorly enforced one. [[User:Silly rabbit|<span style="color: #c00000">siℓℓy rabbit</span>]] ([[User talk:Silly rabbit|<span style="color:#FF823D;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;cursor:help"><span style="color: #c00000">talk</span></span>]]) 20:23, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
:It happens on all bios of living people, why are you so against blp enforcement, I suggest the blp noticeboard because of your silly and uninformed edit warring, please stop. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:25, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
::Yes, this message does appear on all Bios of living people. The way it '''usually''' appears is because of blp=yes part of the template {{tl|WikiProjectBannerShell}} which places the WP:BLP warning atop all of the other project banners. This also normally places the BLP warning below the {{tl|talkheader}} message. This is how it works on most talk pages I have seen, although it could work differently elsewhere. Now at the [[Talk:Osama bin Laden]] page, I would like you to at least acknowledge that [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Osama_bin_Laden&oldid=252214313 this version] of the [[Talk:Osama bin Laden]] page *does* have the BLP notice prominently displayed *right below* the {{tl|talkheader}} template (just like on *every other* biography of a living person I have seen), and is not collapsed or nested or anything like that *because* the blp=yes parameter in the Banner shell template has been correctly set. Now fast forward to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Osama_bin_Laden&oldid=252215249 your version] where now the same warning appears *twice*: once at the very top of the page, and once just a little further down because of the blp=yes flag in the aforementioned template. Please read what I am saying before jumping to conclusions that I am "against BLP" or whatever nonsense you seem to think from the above post. [[User:Silly rabbit|<span style="color: #c00000">siℓℓy rabbit</span>]] ([[User talk:Silly rabbit|<span style="color:#FF823D;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;cursor:help"><span style="color: #c00000">talk</span></span>]]) 20:35, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
::Also, the nested=yes or nested=no parameter has no effect on the visibility of the template, contrary to what your edit summary suggests. [[User:Silly rabbit|<span style="color: #c00000">siℓℓy rabbit</span>]] ([[User talk:Silly rabbit|<span style="color:#FF823D;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;cursor:help"><span style="color: #c00000">talk</span></span>]]) 20:39, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Please participate in [[Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Template_positioning_kerfuffle|this discussion]] about where and how the BLP notice should appear in the talk page of an article. [[User:Silly rabbit|<span style="color: #c00000">siℓℓy rabbit</span>]] ([[User talk:Silly rabbit|<span style="color:#FF823D;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;cursor:help"><span style="color: #c00000">talk</span></span>]]) 20:50, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
:I am still waiting for you to participate in the discussion that you suggested that I should start. Meanwhile over at [[Talk:Osama bin Laden]], I removed the blp=yes flag from the {{tl|WikiProjectBannerShell}} template, to prevent the BLP warning from being displayed twice. You might want to familiarize yourself with the template documentation, however, which asserts
::Adding |blp=yes will display the "Biography of Living Persons" infobox. This '''must''' be added for articles about living people
:So it would seem that, according to this template documentation, the talkpage had the warning correctly displayed before, unless I am missing something. [[User:Silly rabbit|<span style="color: #c00000">siℓℓy rabbit</span>]] ([[User talk:Silly rabbit|<span style="color:#FF823D;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;cursor:help"><span style="color: #c00000">talk</span></span>]]) 12:45, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
== Me? A vandal? ==
You didn't have to delete the template. I was amusing myself this evening, watching {{User|Godlovestruth}} dig himself a hole. Actually, I might start a pool on when he gets himself blocked. Anyways, thanks. [[User:Orangemarlin|<span style="color:orange;">'''Orange'''</span><span style="color:teal;">'''Marlin'''</span>]] <small><sup>[[User talk:Orangemarlin|Talk•]] [[Special:Contributions/Orangemarlin|Contributions]]</sup></small> 01:18, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
:God does indeed love the truth, and we have our sciences to uncover this. A God who created the universe in 6,000 years rather than 12 billion years is not one I want I want to believe in. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:29, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
::You're missing the fun at [[Macroevolution]]. A sock has now joined the fun. [[User:Orangemarlin|<span style="color:orange;">'''Orange'''</span><span style="color:teal;">'''Marlin'''</span>]] <small><sup>[[User talk:Orangemarlin|Talk•]] [[Special:Contributions/Orangemarlin|Contributions]]</sup></small> 01:32, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
== Your bot ==
Hi. I am not sure how "blp" works. I am just using the [[User:Kingbotk/Plugin|Kingbotk plugin]] of [[WP:AWB]]. Better report any bugs or disagreements in [[User talk:Kingbotk/Plugin]]. Thanks, [[User:Magioladitis|Magioladitis]] ([[User talk:Magioladitis|talk]]) 21:06, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
== [[Boris Johnson]] ==
I see you changed some of the wording of a contribution I made to [[Boris Johnson]]. I see why you did it, and it did look like I was implying he was involved. However your edit accidentally changed the meaning of the text, so that it gave the impression he could not have had any influence, rather than that he was not allowed to wield that influence. I am going to change it to something along the lines of 'is not allowed to be involved'.[[User:Dolive21|Dolive21]] ([[User talk:Dolive21|talk]]) 16:38, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
:See my latest tweak. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:47, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
::Yours looks fine. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:49, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
==AfD discussion of Sandeep Unnikrishnan==
Thank you for the clarification. <span style="">[[User:Salih|<span style="color:#e90;">Salih</span>]] [[User talk:Salih|(<span style="color:#08c;">talk</span>)]]</span> 06:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
== WP: legal ==
That is clearly a breach of WP:LEGAL - there is no force behind it, the foundation said that didn't want to touch it - can you explain to me why legal threats should be allowed on talkpage? --[[User:Cameron Scott|Cameron Scott]] ([[User talk:Cameron Scott|talk]]) 19:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
It was placed at the top of the article by an admin and should not have been lowered, and if you think it is WP:Legal then you need to discuss it elsewhere, like with AlisonW perhaps, not with me. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
:: The legal angle has been tossed on it's arse at AN - the foundation lawyer has said there is no legal issue. --[[User:Cameron Scott|Cameron Scott]] ([[User talk:Cameron Scott|talk]]) 19:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
== Can you cite a single source? ==
Please reply on [[Talk:Virgin Killer]], not here or my talk, to my question. I think your inflammatory comments aren't helpful and are disruptive in general. Even the subject of the photo has no problem with it. [[User:Rootology|<span style="color:#0D670D; font-family:Georgia, Helvetica;">rootology</span>]] ([[Special:Contributions/Rootology|<span style="color:#156917;">C</span>]])([[User talk:Rootology|<span style="color:#156917;">T</span>]]) 00:31, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
:So people who disagree with you are being disruptive are they. Yeah, right. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:34, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
=== Virgin Killer ===
Re: Some of your comments. As far as I know, no photograph can be definitively called child porn in the UK because of the construction of the relevant act. In order for some photograph to be illegal it was depict a child and indecency. Whether or not it depicts a child is generally easy to determine, I'm sure. Whether or not it depicts indecency is an issue for the jury (or magistrate, I suppose). Now the standard here is simply what a reasonable person would find indecent. I think it will be difficult to a jury that will say that a reasonable person would find that image indecent.
I also think it rather odd that you believe this controversy is 'harming' the project. It has brought a tremendous amount of additional traffic to the article in question, as well as a number of other related articles. Further, it has garnered a great deal of press and while there may very well be a number of people opposed to the image, there are a number of people opposed to censorship - and this activity has mobilized the community on both sides. Debate alone is healthy and positive for the project, and to suggest otherwise is a bit silly.
Finally, I just want to say that your comment about the image drawing attention to the genitals implies that a shirt would draw attention to a woman's breasts and that a bathing suit would draw attention to a man's genitals - and somehow create the sexual perception of the observer. Shoes do not create a sexual image for the foot fetishist - the mind of the fetishist does that. To me, the only person that can find a nude image of a person sexual is a person that in some way wants to see sexuality. Particularly so when there is no overt sexual action depicted, but rather a censoring of the genitals. --[[User:Geofferic|Geofferic]] ([[User talk:Geofferic|talk]]) 07:09, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
:I think the fact that the IWF backed down avoids harm,ing the project, which is good, but alll the same it is clearly a provocative image. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 02:14, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
=== Virgin Killer image ===
I'm not sure what your issue with this image is. There are some conceivable issues but I'm not sure which ones you subscribe to. Each of these issues has counterpoints. Possible issues/counterpoints:
*It's child porn/By their inaction in early 2008, the FBI says it's not.
*It's causing or has caused many people to be blocked from parts of Wikipedia/So have a lot of other articles - see political- and religious-article-influenced filtering by China, Turkey, and other countries as well as public and private institutions and possibly even net-nanny software.
*It's indecent/so don't look at it
*Think of the children/the vast majority of Wikipedia users are not children and should not be deprived of useful content
*It's not useful content/That's a decision for the editors of the respective pages, not wikipedia as a whole
*It's existence is wasting time and wearing people out/obviously people care about it if they are discussing it
*It's a copyright violation and does not qualify for fair use/if it's not fair use then neither are most record album covers
I may have left out your particular issue or issues. [[User:davidwr|davidwr]]/<small><small>([[User_talk:davidwr|talk]])/([[Special:Contributions/Davidwr|contribs]])/([[Special:Emailuser/davidwr|e-mail]])</small></small> 16:49, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
:I do not believe it should have ever been released at all given its context as a heavy metal band record cover called Virgin Killer. God knows what The Scorpions were thinking of in allowing it to be published in the first place, and certainly if someone or some group are responsible for producing Child Porn it is the people who published the record cover and the members of the band itself, and I hope the IWF or some UK government agency can decide on its legality; the FBI claiming it isn't Child Porn doesn't interest me personally as I am not American and do not liver in the US. Obviously I ma glad that UK editors now can now freely edit again. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]]
::Even one of the artists agrees that this cover should never have been released. But that's not a good argument one way or the other for keeping it or deleting it. I too would like to see a British judge, preferably an appellate judge, make a ruling on the matter. I'd also like to see Parliament clarify what is and is not legal and direct law enforcement to be consistent in their application of the laws. For example, if the image is illegal, then anyone who owns it should have the cover confiscated, the same as for illegal drugs and the like. If it is deemed legal in Britain, then of course no action should be taken. By the way, the FBI comment is relevant because WP:OFFICE actions, which typically cover illegal material that the community would prefer to keep, are based on US law.
::Back to Wikipedia: Do you think all album covers for albums that are approximately as notable as this album by artists that are approximately as notable as this artist should be removed as "not encyclopedic" or "not notable," or is there something about this image that makes it less encyclopedic, less notable, or otherwise less qualified than other images from similarly-notable albums by similarly-notable bands? I ask because your earlier answer makes it sound like [[Wikipedia:Arguments_to_avoid_in_deletion_discussions#I_don.27t_like_it|WP:IDONTLIKEIT]], and I assume with an experienced editor like yourself that's not the case. [[User:davidwr|davidwr]]/<small><small>([[User_talk:davidwr|talk]])/([[Special:Contributions/Davidwr|contribs]])/([[Special:Emailuser/davidwr|e-mail]])</small></small> 21:27, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
===Thanks===
Thanks for the welcome. I gather you too are opposed to the image? I think this is a highly important issue which has been absorbed by partisan fanatics who don't have even the most basic understanding of art. Take the deletion nomination for the image - half a dozen people responded and it was closed down very quickly, at a time when hundreds of thousands of people were viewing the image. The reason? It was impossible for most users to find the deletion procedure - only regulars and partisans knew how to engage in the process. Thanks again! [[User:DenisHume|DenisHume]] ([[User talk:DenisHume|talk]]) 03:59, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
I hope you understand that I don't paint all 'regular' wikipedians with the same brush. It was poor expression and I hope I didn't offend. Once again, I apologise. [[User:DenisHume|DenisHume]] ([[User talk:DenisHume|talk]]) 04:02, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
:Cheers for your comments, the appropriateness of keeping this image does need discussing, and soon. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:30, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
== CS RFC ==
Hi Squeakbox - thanks for adding your [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Child_sexuality&curid=250971&diff=257554469&oldid=257553543 comment] at the RfC on the CS article. I thought you'd want to know that your signature didn't show up in case you want to add it. Have a good one... --[[User:Jack-A-Roe|Jack-A-Roe]] ([[User talk:Jack-A-Roe|talk]]) 20:04, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
==User:DenisHume==
Please see the talk page. I have been blocked indefinately. [[Special:Contributions/86.45.222.9|86.45.222.9]] ([[User talk:86.45.222.9|talk]]) 13:58, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
=== DenisHume ===
I mentioned you at [[User talk:DenisHume#I have been blocked indefinately]] as someone who might be able to help {{user|DenisHume}} edit productively when and if his block is lifted. [[User:davidwr|davidwr]]/<small><small>([[User_talk:davidwr|talk]])/([[Special:Contributions/Davidwr|contribs]])/([[Special:Emailuser/davidwr|e-mail]])</small></small> 15:06, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
== Giano's 72hr Block ==
Hiya SqueakBox. This isn't the ''first'' time, Giano has left Wikipedia, in a huff; he'll return. [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] ([[User talk:GoodDay|talk]])
:I know that,a nd I do hope so. i voted against him at last year's arbcom in spite of admiring him as an editor and do regret not having voted in favour. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:50, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
::He's just gotta learn to ''control'' his temper. [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] ([[User talk:GoodDay|talk]]) 21:53, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
:::Sure, I agree with that,as does the newbie editor in the thread above this one. I have learnt to switch off and let my own quick but forgiving temper calm down in my own time here. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:55, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
::::Giggle, giggle. I like [[User:RGTraynor|RGTraynor's]] message for editor, who may show up at his door ''peeved''. [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] ([[User talk:GoodDay|talk]]) 15:59, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) Wikipedia needs to have Administrators; anarchy will never do. [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] ([[User talk:GoodDay|talk]]) 18:13, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
== FYI: When you see something that shouldn't be on Wikipedia (i.e. telephone numbers, etc.) ==
Contact oversight. Thanks. '''[[User:Miranda|<span style="font-family: verdana"><span style="color: #007BA7">miranda</span></span>]]''' 17:13, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
==Please Assist ==
User [[User:NaturallyBlind]] is obvious an attack account set up by an experienced user designed to cause trouble. Please assist or help with banning.[[User:Allknowingallseeing|Allknowingallseeing]] ([[User talk:Allknowingallseeing|talk]]) 06:08, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Again I ask for your help. User has violated the 3RR rule repeatedly and should be banned. Please assist[[User:Allknowingallseeing|Allknowingallseeing]] ([[User talk:Allknowingallseeing|talk]]) 04:25, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
:Its gr8 to see you are still volunteering here. I have put [[Kim Bassinger]] and the other relevant articles on my watchlist but there does not seem much more I can do here right now other than watch. You are more than welcome to post here whenever you need help or advice on editing or problems you encounter here. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]]23:05, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
User is not attacking Basinger user is attacking [[While She Was Out]] article- user has issues with Murphy and registered out of the blue just to attack article[[Special:Contributions/63.139.48.116|63.139.48.116]] ([[User talk:63.139.48.116|talk]]) 16:59, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
:Understood. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:02, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
::Send me an email, I'll certainly let you know who and where I am, it would be better to collaborate thus. Felices vacaciones a vos a tu familia. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:18, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
:::You might want to be careful about revealing personal information to this user. If he's [[User:ColScott|who]] he [[Don Murphy|appears to be]], he's been accused of things that would make any rational person more cautious about providing him off-channel ways of being found. [[User:Naturallyblind|Naturallyblind]] ([[User talk:Naturallyblind|talk]]) 05:24, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
::::I fully trust this user. Murphy is a notable US film producer and I certainly cannot imagine how he could possibly damage me for my wikipedia contribs; its the lone nuts that are dangerous, not people like Murphy. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 21:52, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
:::::So youve known who he was all along. I dont judge people based on their film credits; i base it on their actions. To trust Don Murphy you need to turn a blind eye to what he's done right here in front of you, where he's vandalized articles that cite bad reviews of his duds, he's harassed, abused, and threatened people whove done him no harm, and he's repaetedly lied about himself and about others. Hell, he's lied ''to you'', saying i've done things i havent done (but ''he'' has!) and asking you to act as his proxy against me. (Or maybe he wasnt lying... maybe he's delusional. Like that's better.) You dont need to worry that he'll betray you ... because he already has. Maybe he doesnt have any sycophants in Honduras who'll threaten you when he gets pissed at you (a nut with fans ''is'' more dangerous than a lone one), but he's already trashed your credibility here on Wiki by collaborating with a banned user. Be careful. [[User:Naturallyblind|Naturallyblind]] ([[User talk:Naturallyblind|talk]]) 14:23, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
:Err did I say I knew the user was Murphy? No. Nor am I convinced it is still. So do not put such bad faith words into my mouth. You bet I have no fear of wikipedia nuts attacking me in Honduras, that would be an extremely dangerous thing to do given my standard level of protection combined with the state of Honduran prisons. Now just stop your bad faith assumptions about me and your personal attack on my credibility or I'll find an admin to block you. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:21, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
::Whoever he is, the banned user youre collaborating with (you said it, not me) has shown that he is not worthy of your trust. [[User:Naturallyblind|Naturallyblind]] ([[User talk:Naturallyblind|talk]]) 16:59, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
:Err, you what? I know Col Scott is blocked but I am not aware of Allknowingallseeing or anyione else being blocked and to accuse me of knowingly co-operating with a banned suer is a bad faith assumption that is likely to get you blocked. But thanks for your concerns. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:15, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
==[[:Santa Catarina Mita]]==
[[Image:Information_icon.svg|left]]Hello, this is a message from [[User:CSDWarnBot|an automated bot]]. A tag has been placed on [[:Santa Catarina Mita]], by {{#ifeq:{{{nom}}}|1|[[User:{{{nominator}}}|{{{nominator}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{nominator}}}|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/{{{nominator}}}|contribs]]),}} another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be [[Wikipedia:Speedy deletions|speedily deleted]] from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because [[:Santa Catarina Mita]] is a foreign language article that was copied and pasted from another [[Wikimedia]] project, or was [[m:transwiki|transwikied]] out to another project ([[WP:CSD#A2|CSD A2]]).<br/><br/>To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting [[:Santa Catarina Mita]], please affix the template <nowiki>{{hangon}}</nowiki> to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at [[WP:WMD]]. Feel free to contact the [[User:CSDWarnBot|bot operator]] if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page={{urlencode:Santa Catarina Mita}} here]''' [[User:CSDWarnBot|CSDWarnBot]] ([[User talk:CSDWarnBot|talk]]) 19:40, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
:Its al;ready been deleted, within 4 minutes of your message, and because somebody messed it up, just great. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:45, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
::And its been restored to its original, the version i created. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:46, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
==Proposed deletion of Sex sneezing syndrome==
[[Image:Ambox warning yellow.svg|left|48px|]]
A [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed deletion]] template has been added to the article [[Sex sneezing syndrome]], suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process{{#if: Neologism; non-notable|  because of the following concern:|.}}
:<b>Neologism; non-notable</b>
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:Criteria for inclusion|criteria for inclusion]], and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "[[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not|What Wikipedia is not]]" and [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|Wikipedia's deletion policy]]). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the <code>{{tl|dated prod}}</code> notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on [[Talk:Sex sneezing syndrome|its talk page]].
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the [[WP:PROD|proposed deletion process]], the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|speedy deletion criteria]] or it can be sent to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|Articles for Deletion]], where it may be deleted if [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] to delete is reached.<!-- Template:PRODWarning --> —'''''[[User:G716|<span style="color: Purple">G716</span>]]''''' <[[User talk:G716|<sup>T</sup>]]·[[Special:Contributions/G716|<sub>C</sub>]]> 23:45, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
===AfD nomination of Sex sneezing syndrome===
[[Image:Ambox warning pn.svg|48px|left]]I have nominated [[Sex sneezing syndrome]], an article that you created, for [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deletion]]. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sex sneezing syndrome]]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. <!-- Template:AFDWarning --> —'''''[[User:G716|<span style="color: Purple">G716</span>]]''''' <[[User talk:G716|<sup>T</sup>]]·[[Special:Contributions/G716|<sub>C</sub>]]> 03:20, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
:I am very surprised that you fasil to see what an eminently encyclopedic subject this is, far more notable than hundreds of thousands of other articles. The community naturally agrees and i hope you will withdraw the afd. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:34, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
== agenda-IP ==
Would you please take a look at these [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/77.243.225.87 contribs]? The IP is probably dynamic or a Tor/PRoxy, so it would probably be a good idea to also keep an eye on all related articles. Thanks. --[[User:Jack-A-Roe|Jack-A-Roe]] ([[User talk:Jack-A-Roe|talk]]) 18:45, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
== I nominated you to monitor DenisHume should he be unblocked ==
See [[User_talk:DenisHume#3rd_party_request_re:_unblock]]. [[User:davidwr|davidwr]]/<small><small>([[User_talk:davidwr|talk]])/([[Special:Contributions/Davidwr|contribs]])/([[Special:Emailuser/davidwr|e-mail]])</small></small> 04:31, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
== The Latin-American Wikipedia Meeting ==
<div style="background-color: #00BFFF; margin: 0; border: 3px solid #46b; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; -moz-border-radius:12px">
{| border="0" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="5"
| <div style="background:#87CEFA;color:#fff;align:center;border: 2px dark blue; -moz-border-radius:15px;" colspan="2" |
<big style="font-size:120%;"><div style="text-align: center;">'''<span style="color: red">"Latin-American Wikipedians,unite us!"</span>'''</div></big>
|-
|
[[File:Latin America terrain.jpg|thumb|200px|Latin America:one world,one dream!!]]
Hi wikipedian!Today I'm going to talk you about a new proposal that can to advantage you and many other users of [[w:Latin America|Latin America]].
You,that is from Latin America (second your userbox),already shall to have observed the importance of the Wikimedia Frojects in the region.Only Wikipedia represent 40% of the internet access<ref>[[User:Stu/comScore_data_on_Wikimedia|Comscore tracked 26 million out of 63 million (41% reach) viewed Wikipedia sites in Latin America (June 2008)]]</ref>.With every this importance,why don't we make a big meeting?
Of this idea,was borned the '''''proposal for a Latin-American Wikipedian Meeting'''''.Various Wikipedists has Latin-American users and this is a proposal of a culture and ideas interchange,that can be help all projects.Above this,comtemplate to help in the formation of new WMF chapters in Latin America.
The [[meta:Latin-American Meeting|main page]] and the [[meta:Talk:Latin-American Meeting|talk page]] is originally in English,with translations in [[w:Dutch Language|Dutch]],[[w:French language|French]],[[w:Portuguese Language|Portuguese]] and [[w:Spanish language|Spanish]](NOT YET).
|-
|}</div>
[[User:Tosão|Tosão]] ([[User talk:Tosão|talk]]) 19:18, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
:Hi!Thank you for your comment,but add your name in [[meta:Latin-American Wikipedia Meetu´p|in this page]].Thank you,[[User:Tosão|Tosão]] ([[User talk:Tosão|talk]]) 16:14, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
== Greetings from Bali ==
Hey, a side note to let you know that I meant all this lightly. You're making an assumption that the picture is a well-intentioned move by whatever anon. I see it as goofing around with his user page and using a lame photo-job for the lulz. FYI, I'm not Hindu or Muslim, either; the endless ceremonies and complex calendrics are bewildering. Also, we've met before; see my user page and my history page (linked from several icons) and see the time-on-wiki counter at the bottom. I don't really recall just how we interacted before; country infoboxes comes to mind... Anyway, Merry Christmas. Cheers, [[User:Jack Merridew|Jack Merridew]] 16:21, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
:Greetings from Honduras, which is not where I am from but where I have now lived for a number of years. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:03, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
== Merry Xmas ==
[[File:Poinsettia 2.jpg|thumb|[[Euphorbia pulcherrima]] ]]
Merry Xmas! I hope you and yours are all enjoying the season. Have a happy new year, too! [[Special:Contributions/Will_Beback| ·:· ]][[User:Will Beback|Will Beback]] [[User talk:Will Beback|·:·]] 19:26, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
== Merry Christmas ==
[[File:Buccoo1.jpg|thumb|left|200px|Wishing you the very best for the season. [[User:Guettarda|Guettarda]] ([[User talk:Guettarda|talk]]) 23:56, 24 December 2008 (UTC)]]
{{-}}
==Hey up==
No tocás mis palabras, hombre, putchica, eso es el tipo de cosa que se hace bloqueado a uno, ya basta, eh? Feliz navidad a todos en Chile de America Central01:20, 25 December 2008 (UTC). Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]]
:I gave a [[WP:good faith|good faith]] translation of your comments, which was necessary since [[User:Jimbo Wales|Jimbo]] doesn't speak Spanish. I'm sorry if that offended you, but your obscene language is not needed. Merry Christmas to ALL (and yes, to all in Chile too). --[[User:Eustress|Eustress]] ([[User talk:Eustress#top|talk]]) 01:23, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
::Just don't, I know es.wikipedia is difficult but your comments seem more trolling than anything, sorry to muddle you up with the Chilean guy who blocked you. Jimbo is learning Spanish, according to him, ve. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:29, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
== Your note ==
Thanks, and Merry Christmas to you too. [[User:Jayjg|Jayjg ]]<sup>[[User_talk:Jayjg|<small style="color:darkgreen;">(talk)</small>]]</sup> 20:35, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
==Flagged Revs ==
Hi,
I noticed you voted oppose in the flag revs straw pole and would like to ask if you would mind adding [[User:Promethean/No]] to your user or talk page to make your position clear :) - Thanks to Neurolysis for the template [[User:Promethean|<b><span style="color:#FF0000;background:white"> «<span style="color:#736F6E">l<span style="color:#736F6E">|<span style="color:#151B54"> Ψrometheăn ™</span>|</span>l</span>» </span></b>]] [[User_talk:Promethean| (talk)]] 06:35, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
==Responded==
On my page.[[User:Die4Dixie|Die4Dixie]] ([[User talk:Die4Dixie|talk]]) 00:44, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
== Hello, Squeak ==
would you offer an opinion over [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ashley_Callie here] on the RFC? Thanks.__'''[[User:Hag2|Dixie Hag2]] ([[User talk:Hag2|talk]])''' 19:57, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads up. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:12, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
::Thank you. I appreciate your input. I hope that the principal editor rethinks his thinking.--'''[[User:Hag2|Dixie Hag2]] ([[User talk:Hag2|talk]])''' 13:50, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
== thank you ==
{| cellspacing="5" cellpadding="10" valign="top" style="margin: auto; width:60%; vertical-align:top; background:#f5faff;border:1px solid #B6B2B2;"
|-
| width="90%" | My RFA [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rootology|passed today at 150/48/6]]. I wanted to thank you for weighing in on the RFA--I will do everything I can to uphold the policies of this site, and try to make it a better place. All the comments, questions, and in particular the opposes I plan to work on and learn from, so that I can hopefully always do the right thing with the huge trust given to me. [[User:Rootology|<span style="color:#0D670D; font-family:Georgia, Helvetica;">rootology</span>]] ([[Special:Contributions/Rootology|<span style="color:#156917;">C</span>]])([[User talk:Rootology|<span style="color:#156917;">T</span>]]) 08:29, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
| width="10%" | <div style="text-align: center;">[[File:Orange flower with water.jpg|140px]]</div>
|}
:Good luck. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
== RFC ==
Hi Squeakbox - There's another informal RFC [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Child_sexuality#Discussion here] on the CS page - your input to the discussion is invited. Have a good one --[[User:Jack-A-Roe|Jack-A-Roe]] ([[User talk:Jack-A-Roe|talk]]) 18:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
== Co-founder issue ==
Hi
I noticed you undid sethfinkelstiens edit, I have asked him on his cha page to explain to me what he meant by his comment on that edit. It seemed a little strange him claiming "by the power vested in me " type of thing
Should this be taken up with ppl or was he just joking ?
thanks--[[User:Chaosdruid|Chaosdruid]] ([[User talk:Chaosdruid|talk]]) 23:15, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Seth has explained and I retract - thanks --[[User:Chaosdruid|Chaosdruid]] ([[User talk:Chaosdruid|talk]]) 03:10, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
:As I explained, it was intended as jocular phrasing. My sense of humor got the better of me there (argh, I should know by now, never make jokes on Wikipedia :-(). Sorry for any confusion. It was a jargonistic way of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=269200063 saying] "Because I as a [http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/sethfinkelstein columnist for <em>The Guardian</em>] have the power to write material which qualifies according to Wikipedia guidelines as [[WP:RS|reliable sources]], and I have therein [http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/sep/25/wikipedia.internet cited Jimbo as <em>co-founder</em>] in September 2008, I refute you thusly". Anyway, here's a [http://www.pcworld.com/article/158914/wikipedias_woes.html 2009 cite] not by me for good measure. - [[User:Seth Finkelstein|Seth Finkelstein]] ([[User talk:Seth Finkelstein|talk]]) 00:40, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
:This is precisely why we have a conflict of interest policy and I would suggest you refrain from editing articles on subjects you write about, of which wikipedia is certainly one; and I say this as someone who enjoys reading your columns in The Guardian. I see someone else reverted you and IMO the long is POV but if this continues I will go to the talk page. I also see The Sunday Times caling Wales co-founder this very morning [http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article5682896.ece here]. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 06:29, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
::Well, I don't think the conflict of interest policy was intended to be a kind of [[exclusionary rule]] against expertise, though of course that difficulty is well-known. When I saw your now "nobody cites him as co-" edit justification, my initial thought was along the lines of "What am I, chopped liver?" (that's an expression, meaning "I am a nobody???"). Obviously, I know my own articles best, and believed that the conflict of interest policy did not preclude my using them as a refutation since it is a simple point of fact. I put a lot of research into the columns, and due to <em>Guardian</em> and UK libel standards they are stringently fact-checked, so I truly do believe they are excellent citations. In retrospect, I should not have used a humorous tone in the summary, I regret it, and have dealt with the repercussions. But as you note, the overall point hardly relies on my articles alone. Indeed, it is a contentious matter, all the more reason to value quality sources. -- [[User:Seth Finkelstein|Seth Finkelstein]] ([[User talk:Seth Finkelstein|talk]]) 10:22, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
:::You will be better off leaving a note on the talk page disclosing your COI ("hey, I wrote that article!"), pointing out the problem politely, and suggesting a possible solution. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 13:21, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
::::While that's true as written, note I've found that suggestions on talk pages tend to be ignored, and again, I DIDN'T NEED TO CITE MY OWN ARTICLE HERE. I thought this was such an obvious factual point that I never considered I'd get enmeshed in a COI issue over it. Let's recap. SqueakBox claims "nobody cites ...". I prove this untrue, as <em>I</em> cite. Rather than conceding the point, I'm then subjected to a tedious wikilawyering exchange about <em>COI</em> policies - as in, SqueakBox denied the applicability with a justification of COI. Do you see the absurdity here? It is a draconian view of a policy to an extreme approaching logical paradox. -- [[User:Seth Finkelstein|Seth Finkelstein]] ([[User talk:Seth Finkelstein|talk]]) 15:42, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
:This is certainly a contentious issue, I think my comment was a bit like your original comment in that it was somewhat humorous (and as somebody who is most definitely not a lawyer or in a related field I dislike wikilawyering and policy quoting generally, so do I see the absurdity here? Yes I do. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 00:20, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::In other words, bussiness as usual in Wikipedia XD. Well, jokes apart, does [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=next&oldid=269258492 this] change make the sentence correct?
:::::(and it's true that comments on talk pages ''tend'' to be ignored, but that depends on the page and on the topic addressed by the comment, I always try to address most of them) --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 01:16, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
::::::[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=next&oldid=269258492 This] change makes the sentence correct but failed verification. I agree that Wales is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASqueakBox&diff=234036174&oldid=233957606 historically been known as co-founder]. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 02:47, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
== Piped link ==
Could you perhaps explain your reasoning for removing the piped link yet again? Your comment about the title of the EIIR article seems irrelevant; though it has been discussed numerous times, each has always ended with reference to a WP naming policy that apparantly overrides WP:NPOV and WP:BIAS. However, it was never established that links to that article cannot be piped. Why, then, the unpiped link at [[Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh]]? Especially when most editors in discussion on the talk page agreed that "Elizabeth II" was sufficient. --[[User:Miesianiacal|Miesianiacal]] ([[User talk:Miesianiacal|talk]]) 18:51, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
See [[Henrik, Prince Consort of Denmark]]'s Infobox. It has his wife's name ''pipelinked''. I just wish to see ''all'' these Royal bios Infoboxes 'in sync'. [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] ([[User talk:GoodDay|talk]]) 19:04, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
PS: SqueakBox, ya should restore the pipelink at [[Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh]]. It looks out-of-sync, compared to the Infoboxes of Elizabeth II's children. [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] ([[User talk:GoodDay|talk]]) 19:11, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Nevermind, I've restored the ''pipelink''. It don't look right, to have inconsistancy. [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] ([[User talk:GoodDay|talk]]) 19:45, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
:There are no policies that override NPOV, certainly not naming policies. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 01:23, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
::What's that mean? [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] ([[User talk:GoodDay|talk]]) 18:17, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
:::You cannot have naming policies that violate NPOV, Miesianiacal seems to think one can. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:56, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
::::It is not I who thinks naming policies can override NPOV, but a number of others who run various royalty WP projects. The discussions about the bias in the title of [[Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom]], and the explanation for why that bias is tolerated, are all still at [[Talk:Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom]] and its archives. If you read them, I think you will find that I was one of those on the side that disagrees with the way that article is titled. --[[User:Miesianiacal|Miesianiacal]] ([[User talk:Miesianiacal|talk]]) 23:30, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::I realise your take on this issue. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:33, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
::::::I prefer the article title, the way it is. [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] ([[User talk:GoodDay|talk]]) 23:55, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::::Oh I agree, I prefer the title as it is and think it is NPOV02:48, 14 February 2009 (UTC). Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]]
== Picture ==
Why did you change your user picture? I much preferred the old one and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Esquealboxito.jpg this one too]! I came across a hilarious argument you had three years ago on [[Ashia Hansen]], quality stuff. I really enjoy the fact that the guy you were arguing against is now an administrator while you have the prominent "Not Admin" box. Sweet serendipity, hohoho. Also, if you're a native English speaker then why does it look all messy-Mediterrean outside your house? [[User:Sillyfolkboy|Sillyfolkboy]] ([[User talk:Sillyfolkboy|talk]]) 04:17, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
:I don't believe there are mountains like that in the Mediterranean, yes the pic is pretty crap but i like to have a recent pic and the other one was over 6 months old. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 14:16, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
::Ah well, country wise I was thinking more specifically of Greece, which does have mountains like that. Still, looks nice! Happy editing! [[User:Sillyfolkboy|Sillyfolkboy]] ([[User talk:Sillyfolkboy|talk]]) 22:06, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
:::The electric cables indicate one is not in Europe and I couldn't live somewhere where I couldn't speak the local language. We are at sea level and those mountains go over 2000m. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:24, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
== Apartheid ==
Hi, I have reverted your change to the [[Apartheid]] redirect, which you made in good faith. There has been a lot of back and forth about this redirect in the past, which I'd like to explain. As I see it, the word "apartheid" effectively has two uses - one, the name of the system of apartheid which operated in South Africa from 1948 to 1994, and two, various other systems of discrimination which are sometimes called apartheid by way of analogy with the South African system. The first (because it was the original use and was the "official" term for the system) is in many senses more significant than the second. Originally, there was an article called Apartheid which was all about the system in South Africa, but it was a frequent victim of very exhausting edit warring over whether or not the situation in Israel was also apartheid. Eventually, the name was changed to make the scope of the article clear. The compromise was to redirect [[Apartheid]] to [[South Africa under apartheid]], and to include a prominent disambiguation link at the top of the article. Thankfully, that removed the edit warring over Israel away from the main article about apartheid. Regards, [[User:Zaian|Zaian]] ([[User talk:Zaian|talk]]) 20:40, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
:Okay. I was inspired by [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article5809800.ece this article] and suspect on looking that the whole subject of apartheid outside south Africa deserves better coverage. Anyway thankyou for taking the time to explain your revert. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:05, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
== Apology ==
I'd like to apologize for my rudeness to you. Although I think that Silly rabbit was justified in his or her actions, I also appreciate that I should not have defended these actions so aggressively. We are, after all, allowed to disagree. My final remark about possible personal copyright liability issues was totally out of line, and you were correct to remove it, and to put the note on my talk page. Thanks, and happy editing, [[Special:Contributions/72.95.229.48|72.95.229.48]] ([[User talk:72.95.229.48|talk]]) 23:47, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
:Hey, thanks for that, appreciated. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 23:50, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
==PLEASE HELP==
Bad people are calling me names and then deleting my correct changes- please help! [[User:Actismel|Actismel]] ([[User talk:Actismel|talk]]) 03:12, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
== [[Infinity]] and other trouble ==
Hi SqueakBox - I happened to notice the arguments going on at [[infinity]] (a while ago). I also noticed Silly rabbit's retirement and his messages on your talk page (that you removed). I agree with your removal of the second message, but I thought that the first message was polite (and not rude). I am not really sure what was going on at [[infinity]], but would you mind justifying your reverts of Silly rabbit's additions? In my view, Silly rabbit's insults were not appropriate (impolite), but then again your first revertion was also impolite ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Infinity&diff=273580562&oldid=273579616]). The point is that silly rabbit is an outstanding contributor on WP (I'm sure that you are too!) and a silly argument like this (silly on both sides!) shouldn't cause him to retire. Please just consider this as a friendly comment with good intentions - I just want to ensure peace on both sides. Thanks! --[[User:Point-set topologist|<span style="color: #000000">PS</span>]][[User talk:Point-set topologist|<span style="color: #000000">T</span>]] 09:33, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
:My take is that we should not lose an important article by slapping a copyvio on it based on 2 sentences that a user was claiming broke a copyright that he or she held over those 2 sentences, however one deals with such a situation destroying the article is not helpful. I agree it has been sorted but still remain unhappy at InfinitySnake claiming as a user that it was his own copyright material allegedly being violated as this creates a [[WP:COI|conflict of interest]]. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVI (February 2009) ==
The '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Outreach/Newsletter February 2009|February 2009 issue]]''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 23:49, 3 March 2009 (UTC)</small>
== Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election ==
The [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators|Military history WikiProject coordinator]] selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/March 2009|here]] by 23:59 (UTC) on 13 March!<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 20:22, 8 March 2009 (UTC)</small>
==AfD nomination of Troyster87==
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">[[File:Ambox warning pn.svg|42px]]</div>An article that you have been involved in editing, [[Troyster87]], has been listed for [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deletion]]. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Troyster87]]. Thank you.{{-}}Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.<!-- Template:Adw --> [[User:Troyster87|Troyster87]] ([[User talk:Troyster87|talk]]) 04:48, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
==AfD nomination of J Stalin==
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">[[File:Ambox warning pn.svg|42px]]</div>An article that you have been involved in editing, [[J Stalin]], has been listed for [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deletion]]. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/J Stalin]]. Thank you.{{-}}Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.<!-- Template:Adw --> [[User:Troyster87|Troyster87]] ([[User talk:Troyster87|talk]]) 04:49, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
==[[pro-pedophile activism|PPA]] reverts==
You did it again. You don't just remove a fact tag when there is clearly no source which says this. No explanation even. I am awaiting talk page discussion either on the article, on the mentorship page, or personally, when you have the time. Another editor besides Emiliana and myself raised concerns with this first sentence, making unsourced assertions as justification for a reversion is not acceptable. [[User:Tyciol|Tyciol]] ([[User talk:Tyciol|talk]]) 02:58, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
:Well I await your source that thre are PPAs who are not activists, so far you have failed to provide any and if this continues it is likely you will continue to be reverted. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 03:00, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
::I will apologize for 'did it again', I got you confused with Jack. Please explain your statement "PPAs who are not activists." Considering PPA are a form of ACTIVIST there are absolutely no activsts who are not activsts. Do you mean PPAs who are not pedophiles? By default we assume people are not pedophiles until there is proof that they are, therefore the burden of proof is on you. Please restore my fact tag, I'll need to mention this too otherwise. How limited is the scope of this article exactly? Do you have an exhaustive list of every activist or any logical justification on which to make this conclusion? I have explained and given an analogy on the talk page to examples of other pro-x activism of which whose activsts are obviously not limited to 'x'. Why would this be uniquely exclusionist? If you and Jack want to make this article solely about pedophiles advocating these goals and not non-pedophiles then I suggest the 'pro' be removed, especially since that was just redirected to PPA by Jac anyway so you could at least have the shorter title. [[User:Tyciol|Tyciol]] ([[User talk:Tyciol|talk]]) 03:28, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
::By definition somebody who fights for pro-pedophile activism is a pedophile. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:01, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
== Military history WikiProject coordinator election ==
The [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators|Military history WikiProject coordinator]] election has started. We will be selecting coordinators from a pool of eighteen to serve for the next six months. Please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/March 2009|vote here]] by 23:59 (UTC) on Saturday, 28 March! Thank you.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 07:05, 21 March 2009 (UTC)</small>
==Hi SqueakBox==
How are you? My husband Patrick and I are enormous fans of yours dating back to your work protecting articles from pedophiles. We feel your pain and wonder often why the community seems to support the people who want to take advantage of our most innocent. We started editing here last week but something seems to have gone wrong but now we are back and very excited. We hope you can help us as we start this exciting adventure. [[User:23498h23p495|23498h23p495]] ([[User talk:23498h23p495|talk]]) 15:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
== RE : My message deletion ==
Replied via email. - ''Best regards'', [[User:Mailer diablo|Mailer Diablo]] 03:58, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVII (March 2009) ==
The '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Newsletter March 2009|March 2009 issue]]''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 03:45, 3 April 2009 (UTC)</small>
== Wales and NPOV tag ==
I've removed your NPOV tag -- let's discuss this specifically in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jimmy_Wales#Two_final_sources_on_the_co-founding_issue.2C_which_are_definitive this section] of the talk page. If the Wikimedia Foundation itself, which owns Wikipedia, considers Jimbo Wales "co-founder", how is there an NPOV issue in calling him co-founder? [[User:Rootology|<span style="color:#0D670D; font-family:Georgia, Helvetica;">rootology</span>]] ([[Special:Contributions/Rootology|<span style="color:#156917;">C</span>]])([[User talk:Rootology|<span style="color:#156917;">T</span>]]) 15:30, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
=== Serious, honest question ===
And if possible I'd like to understand your [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AJimmy_Wales&diff=284716189&oldid=284687605 reasoning in this comment].
Jimmy's position that Larry was never a co-founder is by our standards [[WP:OR|original research]]. If you look at what I cited [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AJimmy_Wales&diff=284757208&oldid=284756106 here], specifically [http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_press_releases/500,000_Wikipedia_articles&oldid=473206 this] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Press_releases/January_2003&oldid=93032067 this], they are [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] that are [[WP:V|verifiable]] for purposes of calling Jimmy co-founder. Any BLP subject trying to do what Jimmy has in the past done on this would be made to defer to the RS and V.
Do you not consider the '''Wikimedia Foundation''' the definitive source on who is co-founder? If not, why? I'm--and others--are trying to understand why you are defending Jimmy's personal point of view here to the point it trumps RS and V issues. Would you mind answering in detail on how your actions align with policy, so we can move forward? [[User:Rootology|<span style="color:#0D670D; font-family:Georgia, Helvetica;">rootology</span>]] ([[Special:Contributions/Rootology|<span style="color:#156917;">C</span>]])([[User talk:Rootology|<span style="color:#156917;">T</span>]]) 05:55, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
:I don't deny there was a historical moment in which Sanger was labelled by some co-founder but that doesn't make him a co-founder everywhere for all time nor does it justify labelling Wales co-founder in the opening to his bio. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 20:59, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
::So... history can be rewritten from what historical public records say, and the WMF is not accurate in it's own press releases that Jimmy Wales himself signed off on? [[User:Rootology|<span style="color:#0D670D; font-family:Georgia, Helvetica;">rootology</span>]] ([[Special:Contributions/Rootology|<span style="color:#156917;">C</span>]])([[User talk:Rootology|<span style="color:#156917;">T</span>]]) 05:40, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
:::This is all POV, and remember our duty is to include all mainstream POVs in making up an article. It is not objective truth nor is it the only POV, hence co- should not be slapped into the opening sentence. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:00, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
::::Except... by excluding the "co-" tag we give dominance to Jimbo's own POV, which is the minority POV based on history and sourcing. [[User:Rootology|<span style="color:#0D670D; font-family:Georgia, Helvetica;">rootology</span>]] ([[Special:Contributions/Rootology|<span style="color:#156917;">C</span>]])([[User talk:Rootology|<span style="color:#156917;">T</span>]]) 23:51, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
:::::No, we would only buy intop Jimbo's POV if we were to call him the sole founder...founder is the middle way which buys into neither POV and could equally imply sole or co-. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:44, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
== Family info ==
Hey Squeakbox, good to see you around again. I think it's probably a good call to remove the family info from Rafa Benítez's article. Sometimes I feel that articles get a bit too gossipy, drawing all these sources together to provide all sorts of private information. People can sometimes forget just how high profile Wikipedia is, and how hard-to-find information can be brought right to the fore in our articles. Fair play on the edits as Rafa's private life is hardly splashed everywhere. Take care! [[User:Sillyfolkboy|Sillyfolkboy]] ([[User talk:Sillyfolkboy|talk]]) 22:39, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
:Rubbish, it's just more censorship.--[[User:Whimsical biblical|Whimsical biblical]] ([[User talk:Whimsical biblical|talk]]) 16:14, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
::Censorship, what utter rubbish. How does this private info help make a better article? How does its lack of inclusion make for a worse article? Your comment shows a lack of appreciation for what censorship actually is. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 22:02, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
== Internet TV ==
Why did you remove the reference, and what makes you think I am promoting anything ? Isn't Wikipedia here to inform people unbiased ? And no, I am not "CE-HTML", but yes: I am someone with a good knowledge on the subject, that is not wrong. And I am not promoting any product or company (as you can see the article is written in a neutral way) - I am adding a reference for clarity purposes - you can check all the references on the CE-HTML page yourself. [[User:Thrill59|Thrill59]] ([[User talk:Thrill59|talk]]) 04:11, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
:yes, well you need to take it to talk. Its a tenuous connection to internet television and you would need to prove that people who type in internet tv may be looking for the CE-HTML article. BTW what I removed was not a reference, you removed a reference. For the record I am someone with a good knowledge of internet tv and your removal of the iPlayer material is baffling. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 04:21, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Erm... I checked the diff, and saw the iplayer thing, that was *not* my intention !! So, sorry for that. Anyway, I leave it at this, people will just have to search better than. [[User:Thrill59|Thrill59]] ([[User talk:Thrill59|talk]]) 11:57, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVIII (April 2009) ==
The '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Newsletter April 2009|April 2009 issue]]''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 00:18, 6 May 2009 (UTC)</small>
== Jimmy Wales and "co-founder" again ==
Umm, <em>why</em> are you making all the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jimmy_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=292373944 edits noted here]? I just don't understand your reasoning. Surely you know it'll lead to an extensive revert war, at the very least. Did I miss something? It seems such an ill-conceived action, given the evidence overwhelmingly proves [http://www.larrysanger.org/roleinwp.html "co-founder"]. -- [[User:Seth Finkelstein|Seth Finkelstein]] ([[User talk:Seth Finkelstein|talk]]) 05:18, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
:Revisionism across numerous articles is rewriting history.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hot_Press&curid=1231227&diff=292371900&oldid=292369868][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Poduniversal&diff=292371984&oldid=292370021][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=June_1%2C_2005&diff=292372064&oldid=292370239][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Diplopedia&diff=292372094&oldid=292370091][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=PR-e-Sense&curid=18509180&diff=292372110&oldid=292369952][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Criticism_of_Microsoft&curid=709683&diff=292372145&oldid=292369754][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Society_for_Technical_Communication&diff=292372152&oldid=292369674][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=American_School_in_Japan&curid=1795094&diff=292372252&oldid=292370493][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Wait_Wait..._Don%27t_Tell_Me!_guests_(2006)&curid=22284127&diff=292372409&oldid=292320956][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kelley_School_of_Business&diff=prev&oldid=292372434][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Birla_Institute_of_Technology_and_Science&diff=prev&oldid=292372458][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dopplr&diff=prev&oldid=292372483][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1966&diff=prev&oldid=292372516][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Huntsville,_Alabama&diff=prev&oldid=292372748][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Auburn_University_people&diff=prev&oldid=292372854] [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 05:25, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
::: I just want to clarify that my edit to [[American School in Japan]] ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=American_School_in_Japan&diff=prev&oldid=292370493]) was only to clarify that Mr. Wales was involved with Wikipedia, not the alumna in question. I appear to have exacerbated something off, unintentionally.—[[User:C45207|C45207]] | [[User talk:C45207|Talk]] 05:52, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Squeakbox, you're editing against established consensus. Please stop. [[User:Jennavecia|<span style="font-family:Lucida Handwriting;color:#9B30FF">'''ل'''enna</span>]][[User talk:Jennavecia|<span style="font-family:Lucida Handwriting;color:#63B8FF">vecia</span>]] 13:01, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
::Putting the co-founder dispute into articles which have nothing to do with the co-founder dispute is a terrible thing to do, we have to draw a line somewhere. Jenna's consensus argument is simply untrue, please don't claim consensus where none exists. As for the revisionist claim, wikipe3dia does not give you the right to attack people just because you feel aggrieved, this is beyond the pale and one of the worst PAs I have seen on wikipedia. Why do you folk hate Jimbo so much? You are behaving like rebels without a cause. And what gives you the right to manifest that hatred? If you kleep att5acking me with your revisionist straw argument I will have to take action, QG. Just go put your bitterness elsewhere, this is an encyclopedia and it does not need bitter zealots making vicious and unfounded claims. I have to go to work now but will consider taking QG to arbcom and they can ban him from this set of articles and punish him from his blatant trolling of Jimbo's user page themselves. He showe3d his true colours that day. Revisionism indeed. I ma sure the silly statements made by Jenna (I have the consensus even on issues we have never discussed) would likely also be of interest to them as would her vague threats as if she could use her admin bit on this set of articles in order to impose her POV and censor those opposed to it. That is not how things work here and by doing so she clearly has failed to keep to the standards we demand of our admins. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 14:29, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
:::SqueakBox, it's a little beyond my comprehension that you continue to ignore the existence of a consensus that put you alone on your side. It's also a little beyond my comprehension that you believe it's appropriate to label all of us as hating Jimbo because we're pushing the truth. So, yes, Squeak, please do take it to ArbCom. I want ArbCom to review this situation, because I'm sick and tired of going through this same debate over and over and over again because of your inability to accept the consensus, wanting instead to ignore the facts and bend to Jimbo's wishes. Also, string out the diffs to back up all of your claims you've just made about me there. String out all the diffs where I've claimed consensus on something that's never been discussed, where I've threatened to use my administrative privileges in this dispute, or where I've otherwise failed to uphold administrative standards. This should be interesting. [[User:Jennavecia|<span style="font-family:Lucida Handwriting;color:#9B30FF">'''ل'''enna</span>]][[User talk:Jennavecia|<span style="font-family:Lucida Handwriting;color:#63B8FF">vecia</span>]] 17:00, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
== Good Evening==
I have been called names by User: Wildhartlivie and had erroneous reverts made against me. Any help you can offer is appreciated. [[User:ThePizzaMakingCaveman|ThePizzaMakingCaveman]] ([[User talk:ThePizzaMakingCaveman|talk]]) 03:39, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
:[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMoon-sunrise&diff=294316712&oldid=294164457 this] doeslook likle a [[WP:NLT|legal threat]] to me. How unpleasant. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 05:28, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XXXIX (May 2009) ==
The '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Newsletter May 2009|May 2009 issue]]''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 04:03, 5 June 2009 (UTC)</small>
==[[:File:20030410-11 d041003-515h.jpg]]==
Just to let you know that I recently copied the above image that you uploaded to Wikipedia over to [[:Commons:WelcomeCommons|WikiMedia Commons]], the Wikimedia central media repository for all [[free content|free]] media. The image was either individually tagged or was in a category tagged with the {{tl|Copy to Wikimedia Commons}} template. Your image is now available to all Wikimedia projects at the following ___location: [[:Commons:File:Bush explains history of White House desk.jpg]]. During the move I changed the name of the image to better reflect [[WP:NAME|Naming Conventions]] policy, duplicate file name and/or Commons naming restrictions. Any links to the image has been updated to reflect the new name as it exists now on Commons. The original version of the image uploaded to Wikipedia has been tagged with [[WP:CSD#F8]]. Cheers! --[[User:Captain-tucker|Captain-tucker]] ([[User talk:Captain-tucker|talk]]) 00:48, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
== WikiProject invite ==
{{WPCannabisInvite}} —[[User:Whig|Whig]] ('''[[User talk:Whig|talk]]''') 20:33, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Welcome to WikiProject Cannabis! Be sure to read the project's main page, as well as the corresponding talk page, to learn more about our goal. Looking forward to your contributions, and feel free to let us know if you have any questions, comments, or concerns. --[[User:Another Believer|<span style="color:navy;">Another Believer</span>]] <sub>([[User talk:Another Believer|<span style="color:#cc6600;">Talk</span>]])</sub> 21:49, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
== Spiritual use of cannabis -> Religious and spiritual use of cannabis? ==
Any opinion on renaming [[Talk:Spiritual_use_of_cannabis#Requested_move|Spiritual use of cannabis]]? —[[User:Whig|Whig]] ('''[[User talk:Whig|talk]]''') 18:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
== Image:Squeak.JPG listed for deletion ==
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, [[:Image:Squeak.JPG]], has been listed at [[Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion]]. Please see the [[Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2007 May 29#Image:Squeak.JPG|discussion]] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. [[User:Sherool|Sherool]] <span style="font-size:75%">[[User talk:Sherool|(talk)]]</span> 22:25, 29 May 2007 (UTC) <!-- Template:Idw -->
==Proposed deletion of Dante Gabriel Ramírez Erazo==
[[Image:Ambox warning yellow.svg|left|48px|]]
A [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed deletion]] template has been added to the article [[Dante Gabriel Ramírez Erazo]], suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process  because of the following concern:
:<b>No notability</b>
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:Criteria for inclusion|criteria for inclusion]], and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "[[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not|What Wikipedia is not]]" and [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|Wikipedia's deletion policy]]). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the <code>{{tl|dated prod}}</code> notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on [[Talk:Dante Gabriel Ramírez Erazo|its talk page]].
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the [[WP:PROD|proposed deletion process]], the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|speedy deletion criteria]] or it can be sent to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|Articles for Deletion]], where it may be deleted if [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] to delete is reached.<!-- Template:PRODWarning --> [[User talk:Scott MacDonald|Scott Mac (Doc)]] 20:57, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
== Good call re: Honduras ==
Thanks for changing the title of [[2009 Honduran constitutional crisis]] back to something more NPOV. Whether or not what transpired is a coup is a legal question, and the legal scholarship necessary to resolve it hasn't been done. The last time I checked, neither the NYT nor the Washington Post were reliable sources of legal scholarship.
[[User:Bkalafut|Bkalafut]] ([[User talk:Bkalafut|talk]]) 22:12, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
== Thanks for the genuine welcome, and the helpful hints. ==
I am presuming, perhaps incorrectly, the existence of two pet companions named Squeak and Box. I have two Shi-Tzus named Zoe and Cade but prefer a long-standing moniker in VaChiliman for which I am frequently known on-line, though mostly I engage in Sports conversation (equally volatile as politics, but less important (with a few notable exceptions, few wars are tied to sports). But, I digress.
As I have asserted elsewhere (in discussion/talk), I am not a new user of Wikipedia, but I am new in the sense of registering an ID (rather than logging random IP addresses), and comparatively new at even joining in discussion about pages. I would not presume "editorship", but as a frequent user, I am deeply concerned about the usefulness of Wikipedia when it becomes a propoganda tool. The lastest crisis in Honduras, and my recent engagement on one topic's discussion, have been an interesting learning process. It remains to be seen whether I can sustain interest long enough to grow as a contributor, or just go back to being a picky end-user.
Anyway, I appreciate your reaching out to be of help.
Yes, I do make Chili, and I reside in Virginia full-time, travel to Honduras once or twice each year. My Chili recipe isn't hot, has been attacked on-line by some Teaxan who claims Chili with beans is not chili at all, but I think it is somewhat cool that it has spread among family and friends in five states, and is served on ocassion at a resort in Saint Marten.[[User:VaChiliman|VaChiliman]] ([[User talk:VaChiliman|talk]]) 14:47, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
== 2009 Honduran constitutional crisi ==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|25px]] You currently appear to be engaged in an [[Wikipedia:Edit war|edit war]]{{#if:Manuel Zelaya|  according to the reverts you have made on [[:Manuel Zelaya]]}}. Note that the [[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule|three-revert rule]] prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the [[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule|three-revert rule]]. If you continue, '''you may be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing'''. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] among editors. If necessary, pursue [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]]. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> [[User:Mfield|Mfield]] ([[User_talk:Mfield|Oi!]]) 19:17, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
:I dont know why you asre sending me a template as if I did not know the rule, if you had bothered to look you would see the 3rd time I was changing the text. Removing large amounts of ref'd material without initially even bothering to explain why is not acceptable and should be treated as vandalism. Please don't template experienced in future and do bother to look at these case by case. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 19:43, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
::This article has been the subject of a lot of edit warring over the past few days amid very little dialog and it really doesn't need experienced editors continuing it. Edit summary comments like "your silly deletion" don't point towards constructive dialog. The fact that you changed the text slightly on the third revision doesn't magically make the rest of the reverts go away. The point of 3RR is to stop continued editing and disruption by a string of reverts and ensure discussion takes place FIRST. The fact that the information was cited doesn't make it any less of a content dispute given that reasons were given for both removing and re-adding it. Sorry if the template was faster than composing an individual message but it didn't appear that either of you would have stopped without your attention being grabbed and at the time the small talkpage discussion was heading in the direction of sarcasm faster than it was heading towards productive discussion. It was nothing more than a heads up, I templated the other user too and as an admin they should certainly know better than to end up at the brink of 3RR with another experienced editor. [[User:Mfield|Mfield]] ([[User_talk:Mfield|Oi!]]) 20:01, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
:::Be assured i would not have reverted again; having been blocked in the past but not for 18 months is something I dont intend to change; if I hadn't been rushed I would have attempted to change the text further and was planning on doing so in a tranquil way when the other editor reverted me again. He has some meritorious points and hence the genuine attempt to change the text and answer his points; it was not an attempt to avoid 3rr. I am both neutral and very stressed about the real life events occurring right now in Honduras. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 20:10, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
== Re: Your bot ==
It was a script that runs regularly to make sure {{tl|moveheader}} is removed after a move discussion ends. It was only supposed to remove a single template and nothing else. Nothing about my regex or what was on the talk page could account for that. Regardless, I added some things to the code which may or may not fix things. I also manually removed the template so that that particular script has no reason to visit the page again (unless you add the moveheader template back on). —[[User:harej|harej]] ([[User talk:harej|talk]]) ([[Wikipedia:Coordination|cool!]]) 05:05, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
==Child Pornography==
Forgive me, but, like, why did you remove the freaking deletion tag, and before at least notifying me? It is hard for one to sympthathize with those who support the existence of such articles so fiercely, for their reasons are their own. [[User:Sparaca12|Sparaca12]] ([[User talk:Sparaca12|talk]]) 19:28, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
:Err, you haven't read the tag. I disagree with your deletion as it is valid as a subject; to claim that those who support having an informative article are supporting child pornography is a dangerous path to go down; I strongly suggest you don't. And of course people need to read the article and not your rant. You can always afd the article, see where that gets you. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 20:40, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
::I have blocked this obvious single purpose account for the extremely out of line accusations made. [[User talk:Chillum|<span style="color:green;">'''Chillum'''</span>]] 20:57, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XL (June 2009) ==
The '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Newsletter June 2009|June 2009 issue]]''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 00:06, 14 July 2009 (UTC)</small>
==Request for mediation not accepted==
{| class="messagebox" style="width:90%"
|-
|[[Image:Exquisite-folder4.png|75px]]
|A [[Wikipedia:Requests for mediation|Request for Mediation]] to which you were are a party was [[Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Common reasons for rejection|not accepted]] and has been delisted.<br/>You can find more information on the case subpage, [[Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/2009 Honduran coup]].<br/>
::''For the Mediation Committee,'' [[User:Daniel|Daniel]] ([[User talk:Daniel|talk]]) 18:15, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
|}
<div style="text-align:center; font-size:smaller;">This message delivered by [[User:MediationBot1|MediationBot]], an automated bot account [[Wikipedia:Mediation Committee#MediationBot|operated]] by the [[Wikipedia:Mediation Committee|Mediation Committee]] to perform case management.<br/>If you have questions about this bot, please [[Wikipedia talk:Mediation Committee|contact the Mediation Committee directly]].</div>
:Its been resolved, to my satisfaction at least. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 19:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
==File copyright problem with File:Infinitely mirroring computer.jpg==
[[Image:Copyright-problem.svg|64px|left|File Copyright problem]]
Thank you for uploading [[:File:Infinitely mirroring computer.jpg]]. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes [[Wikipedia:Copyrights|copyright]] very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the '''license''' and the '''source''' of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a '''[[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags|copyright tag]]''' to the [[Help:Image page|image description page]].
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=upload&user=SqueakBox this link].
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|media copyright questions page]]. Thanks again for your cooperation.<!-- Template:Di-no license-notice --> [[User:Polly|<b style="color:green;">Polly</b>]] ([[User talk:Polly|<b style="color:red;">Parrot</b>]]) 20:38, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
:Whoops that was my computer giving me troubles, I have now fixed the licence and removed your tag but thanks a lot for telling me as I had not noticed. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 21:43, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
== Mediation Request ==
Hi there. Someone has mentioned your name as in a dispute at [[Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2009-07-08/2009 Honduran coup d'état|this page]] and I have volunteered to mediate the case as part of the [[WP:MEDCAB|Mediation Cabal]]. Please read the "mediator notes" section of the case page for further instructions. Thank you, [[User:GrooveDog|GrooveDog]] <small>([[User talk:GrooveDog|talk]]) ([[Wikipedia:Editor review/GrooveDog|Review]])</small> 02:29, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
== Marc Emery ==
Hello, I am a random guy with no account who lives in BC and I was interested in one of your arguments. On the Marc Emery article you spoke about how if prohibition ended the argument everyone would grow their own doesn't hold weight with you. I do not grow coffee or brew my own beer but the reasons for this are different from the reasons why I would or would not cultivate marijhuana if it was legal. I personaly would grow marijhuana for several reasons which are different for why I do not grow coffee or brew beer. First marijhuana is extremely expensive and the quality is not always steller (unlike commerical coffee which is way better than anything I could hope to grow myself). So we have quality and price issues, quality of mine would be comparible to the market and the price would be much less unlike coffee and beer. Coffee and beer are regulated industries unlike marijhuana. Therefore, I would question "well does me brewing this beer save that much cash? and how does my beer compare to commercial beer?". The other issue is moral. I do not like giving money to organized crime whereas I do not mind giving money to coffee corporations (although I'm sure I should). Anyways these were just my rantings but I hope you try to chew this idea over and I strongly suggest checking out the documentary called The Union (there is an article on wiki about it) if your interested in the 7 Billions dollar a year marijhuana industry in BC Canada.
:Paying $100 for an ounce of a herb that should only cost $1 is crazy. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 02:32, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
::True, but what about paying $100 for a couple eighths? That's how bad it is now. —[[User:Whig|Whig]] ('''[[User talk:Whig|talk]]''') 05:24, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
:::I wouldnt know about that, or indeed where you are, or what kind of quality you get for that price, what I do know is that its much cheaper in many third world countries, even in the cities, more like a couple of dollars for an eighth of average green where I am, but this is still overpriced compared to say the price of parsley. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 15:34, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
== Talkback ==
{{talkback|Griffinofwales}}
[[User:Griffinofwales|Griffinofwales]] ([[User talk:Griffinofwales|talk]]) 22:45, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
==Honduras==
Manuel Zelaya is obviously not the president of Honduras, he is not in charge of the country and does not have any power. it's been 1 month now since the presidential succession in Honduras and obviously this situation is not going to change, so Roberto Micheletti is the Interim President of Honduras. [[Special:Contributions/190.53.244.15|190.53.244.15]] ([[User talk:190.53.244.15|talk]]) 02:14, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
:He is the de facto President; we need to not take sides but remain neutral when dealing with this dispute on wikipedia; you are better focussing on addding content to support your argument in the relevant articles rather than edit warring over the Honduras info box. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 02:28, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
::i live in tegucigalpa, honduras and i saw everything that happened before june 28 directly, the honduran people know way better than everyone else how a liar and criminal manuel zelaya is. [[Special:Contributions/190.53.244.15|190.53.244.15]] ([[User talk:190.53.244.15|talk]]) 05:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
:Well I dont live in Teguc but I have lived half a dozen years in Honduras and I know that many Hondurans are outraged by what has happened to Mel; whatever wrongs he did do not justify his removal from power in his pyjamas. IMO the Honduran people need to understand the country is not in a bubble and what the international community thinks matters; Mel and Micheletti need to sit down and talk. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 15:44, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
== User 190.53.244.15 ==
Just FYI, I have reported this user on the 3RR notice board after warning them. [[User:Rsheptak|Rsheptak]] ([[User talk:Rsheptak|talk]]) 07:00, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
:That ip's temp blocked now. --[[User:CJLL Wright|cjllw]]<span style="color: #DAA520"> <span title="Pronunciation in IPA" class="IPA">ʘ</span> </span><small>''[[User talk:CJLL Wright|TALK]]''</small> 07:14, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLI (July 2009) ==
The '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Newsletter July 2009|July 2009 issue]]''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 21:07, 9 August 2009 (UTC)</small>
== Neutral Question ==
My first statement would be to not immediately react to my words without reading them carefully. Thank you.
Hello, Squeakbox. I am just somewhat curious, as to why you, um, deleted the tag for child pornography. You do know that even Wikipedia has a template for controversial topics, do you, indicating it acknowledges that some topics, though perhaps doubtless of use to certain people, are indeed debated heavily. I am a bit curious, at to why you and the sysop acted so quickly to block the user in question and remove the tag. Please, do not take any offense, but I am indeed shaken by Wikipedia's willingness to accept such articles, censored or not. It might as well straight out invite pedophiles here. It's...I really don't know; I'm sorry, and I know you're pissed at me, but why? Do you seriously think I'm doing something "wrong" by saying this to you? Please, Squeakbox, I don't mean anything at all and I mean you no offense, but such pages are indeed questionable. I'm sorry, but...Please reply on my talk, if you wish. [[User:ArnoldHash|ArnoldHash]] ([[User talk:ArnoldHash|talk]]) 16:02, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
:FYI, this has been brought up on [[User talk:Jimbo Wales]] as well. [[User:Tony Fox|Tony Fox]] <small>[[User_talk:Tony Fox|(arf!)]]</small> 18:32, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
::The user was specifically blocked for implying those who disagreed with his prod might have an unhealthy interest in the subject. A prod should be used when there are genuine reasons for deleting an article (such as the subject matter being unnotable) and the prod should concisely state the reasons for doing so. Remembering that wikipedia is not censored I hope you are not seriously suggesting we should delete the article; on that basis we should also delete the article on the holocaust. And this user was using the prod in order to rant about the subject. Our readers when they go to that article, want to read encyclopedic information, they do not want to read someone ranting about the subject, such material is rightly treated as vandalism and using the prod does not make it any less so. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 19:20, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
== Thanks ==
Fair enough [[User:LessHeard vanU|LessHeard vanU]] ([[User talk:LessHeard vanU|talk]]) 20:26, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
== {{tl|Recent death}} ==
Please see [[Template talk:Recent death#Optional link to a Wikinews obituary|this discussion]] which is related to a proposed change to {{tl|Recent death}}. An example of how this change would appear is on [[User:Brian McNeil/Ted Kennedy|this userpage]]. --''[[Wikinews:User:Brian McNeil|Brian McNeil]] /<sup>[[Wikinews:User talk:Brian McNeil|talk]]</sup>'' 00:34, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
== Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election ==
The [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators|Military history WikiProject coordinator]] selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/September 2009|here]] by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September!<br/> Many thanks, [[User:Roger Davies|<span style="color:maroon; font-variant:small-caps">'''Roger Davies'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Roger Davies|'''talk''']]</sup> 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLII (August 2009) ==
The '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Newsletter August 2009|August 2009 issue]]''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 21:16, 13 September 2009 (UTC)</small>
== Military history coordinator elections: voting has started! ==
Voting in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators|Military history WikiProject coordinator]] election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/September 2009|here]] by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September!<br/> For the coordinators, [[User:Roger Davies|<span style="color:maroon; font-variant:small-caps">'''Roger Davies'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Roger Davies|'''talk''']]</sup> 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
== NowCommons: File:Pico Bonito.JPG ==
[[:File:Pico Bonito.JPG]] is now available on [[Wikimedia Commons]] as [[:Commons:File:Pico Bonito, La Ceiba.jpg]]. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: <nowiki>[[File:Pico Bonito, La Ceiba.jpg]]</nowiki>. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --[[User:Erwin85Bot|Erwin85Bot]] ([[User talk:Erwin85Bot|talk]]) 20:45, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
<!-- ncnotifier -->
== [[2009 Honduran constitutional crisis]] ==
Thanks for the warning, but I was just being consistent with the reference '''{{cite web|url=http://www.laprensa.hn/Ediciones/2009/06/30/Noticias/Violencia-contra-LA-PRENSA|title= UViolencia contra LA PRENSA|date=2009-06-30|publisher=La Prensa|accessdate=2009-06-30}}''' with is from the same source, and also tagged with {{tl|Verify credibility}}. Would you considere a {{tl|weasel}}, {{tl|weasel-inline}} or {{tl|peacock}} warning to be more consistent? My worry is specifically the charged expression "terrorizing the population"...
[[User:ZackTheJack|ZackTheJack]] ([[User talk:ZackTheJack|talk]]) 20:13, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
== Bob Marley GAR notification ==
[[Bob Marley]] has been nominated for a [[Wikipedia:Good article reassessment|good article reassessment]]. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to [[Wikipedia:What is a good article?|good article quality]]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are [[Talk:Bob Marley{{#if:1|/GA1}}|here]].--[[User:TonyTheTiger|TonyTheTiger]] <small>([[User talk:TonyTheTiger|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/TonyTheTiger|c]]/[[User:TonyTheTiger/Antonio Vernon|bio]]/[[WP:CHICAGO]]/[[WP:LOTM]]) </small> 07:08, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
== Cheers ==
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">[[Image:Smiley.svg|left|62px]]
'''Hello SqueakBox''', [[Special:Contributions/74.98.43.217|74.98.43.217]] ([[User talk:74.98.43.217|talk]]) 22:52, 29 September 2009 (UTC) has smiled at you! Smiles promote [[Wikipedia:WikiLove|WikiLove]] and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the [[Wikipedia:WikiLove|WikiLove]] by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! <br /> <small>''Smile at others by adding {{tls|Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.''</small>
</div><!-- Template:smile -->
== [[José Ángel Saavedra]] ==
Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced [[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons|biography of a living person]]: '''[[José Ángel Saavedra]]'''. Our [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiability policy]] requires that all content be [[Wikipedia:Citing sources|cited]] to a [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable source]]. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --[[User:LaraBot|LaraBot]] ([[User talk:LaraBot|talk]]) 00:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
:Done. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 14:37, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
== Pinochet ==
Wondered if you would voice an an opinion on the intro and use of dictator?--[[User:Die4Dixie|Die4Dixie]] ([[User talk:Die4Dixie|talk]]) 00:21, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
== [[Felicito Ávila]] ==
Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced [[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons|biography of a living person]]: '''[[Felicito Ávila]]'''. Our [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiability policy]] requires that all content be [[Wikipedia:Citing sources|cited]] to a [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable source]]. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --[[User:LaraBot|LaraBot]] ([[User talk:LaraBot|talk]]) 00:12, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
:Done. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 14:09, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIII (September 2009) ==
The '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Newsletter September 2009|September 2009 issue]]''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 02:51, 3 October 2009 (UTC)</small>
== Hope you are ==
staying safe during the unfortuante unrest. --[[User:Die4Dixie|Die4Dixie]] ([[User talk:Die4Dixie|talk]]) 00:47, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
:Indeed I am. Defied the day curfew once but it was early in the morning and way outside Tegucigalpa and others were doing so as well; to get my laptop to work from home that day; I had forgotten it in the panic of having to close the office and get home within half an hour the previous afternoon, and cycling home that afternoon was an eery experience. But otherwise everything is fine, still living and working as normal, internet always working etc. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 01:49, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
===Dnkrumah===
Yes I have apologized to him. That was completely inadvertant the product of too much multitasking.
Da'oud Nkrumah 03:56, 5 October 2009 (UTC) <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Dnkrumah|Dnkrumah]] ([[User talk:Dnkrumah|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dnkrumah|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
== El Frente ==
Please see [[Talk:El_Frente_Nacional_de_la_Resistencia]]. It's very likely that you know a lot more about the topic than i do, but you do need to provide references. Thanks. [[User:Boud|Boud]] ([[User talk:Boud|talk]]) 20:23, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
== Pete Townshend ==
Comments? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Pete_Townshend#RFC:_Child_Pornography_access] [[User:Sumbuddi|Sumbuddi]] ([[User talk:Sumbuddi|talk]]) 12:18, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
== Unofficial request for comment about co-founder/sole founder dispute ==
;Co-founder/sole founder dispute ''rumbles'' Wikipedia
*04:51, 26 May 2009 (hist | diff) List of Auburn University people (→Alumni: nothing to do with co founder dispute which it was removed last year)
*04:50, 26 May 2009 (hist | diff) Huntsville, Alabama (→Notable residents and famous natives: nothing to do with the dispute)
*04:48, 26 May 2009 (hist | diff) 1966 (Undid revision 292265427 by QuackGuru (talk))
*04:48, 26 May 2009 (hist | diff) Dopplr (Undid revision 292265970 by QuackGuru (talk))
*04:48, 26 May 2009 (hist | diff) Birla Institute of Technology and Science (Undid revision 292266526 by QuackGuru (talk))
*04:48, 26 May 2009 (hist | diff) Kelley School of Business (Undid revision 292272282 by QuackGuru (talk))
*04:48, 26 May 2009 (hist | diff) List of Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me! episodes (2006) (Undid revision 292320956 by QuackGuru (talk))
*04:47, 26 May 2009 (hist | diff) American School in Japan (→Misc. Info: article has no relation to co-founder dispute)
*04:46, 26 May 2009 (hist | diff) Society for Technical Communication (Undid revision 292369674 by QuackGuru (talk))
*04:46, 26 May 2009 (hist | diff) Criticism of Microsoft (Undid revision 292369754 by QuackGuru (talk))
*04:46, 26 May 2009 (hist | diff) PR-e-Sense (Undid revision 292369952 by QuackGuru (talk))
*04:46, 26 May 2009 (hist | diff) Diplopedia (Undid revision 292370091 by QuackGuru (talk))
*04:45, 26 May 2009 (hist | diff) June 1, 2005 (Undid revision 292370239 by QuackGuru (talk))
*04:45, 26 May 2009 (hist | diff) Poduniversal (Undid revision 292370021 by QuackGuru (talk))
*04:44, 26 May 2009 (hist | diff) Hot Press (nothing to do with the co-founder dispute come on QG you know better Undid revision 292369868 by QuackGuru (talk))
*05:13, 4 June 2009 (hist | [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hot_Press&diff=prev&oldid=294322441 diff]) Hot Press (making false statements isnt helpful)
*05:13, 4 June 2009 (hist | [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Poduniversal&diff=prev&oldid=294322409 diff]) Poduniversal (making false statements isnt helpful)
*05:13, 4 June 2009 (hist | [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=June_1,_2005&diff=prev&oldid=294322370 diff]) June 1, 2005 (making false statements isnt helpful) (top)
*05:12, 4 June 2009 (hist | [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Society_for_Technical_Communication&diff=prev&oldid=294322315 diff]) Society for Technical Communication (making false statements isnt helpful)
*05:12, 4 June 2009 (hist | [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Criticism_of_Microsoft&diff=prev&oldid=294322299 diff]) Criticism of Microsoft (making false statements isnt helpful)
*05:09, 4 June 2009 (hist | [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=American_School_in_Japan&diff=prev&oldid=294322021 diff]) American School in Japan (making false statements isnt helpful)
*05:08, 4 June 2009 (hist | [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Auburn_University_people&diff=prev&oldid=294321879 diff]) List of Auburn University people (making false statements isnt helpful)
*05:08, 4 June 2009 (hist | [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dopplr&diff=prev&oldid=294321832 diff]) Dopplr (making false statements isnt helpful)
*05:08, 4 June 2009 (hist | [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1966&diff=prev&oldid=294321826 diff]) 1966 (making false statements isnt helpful)
*05:07, 4 June 2009 (hist | [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Wait_Wait..._Don%27t_Tell_Me!_episodes_(2006)&diff=prev&oldid=294321774 diff]) List of Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me! episodes (2006) (making false statements isnt helpful)
*05:07, 4 June 2009 (hist | [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Birla_Institute_of_Technology_and_Science&diff=prev&oldid=294321745 diff]) Birla Institute of Technology and Science (making false statements isnt helpful)
*05:06, 4 June 2009 (hist | [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kelley_School_of_Business&diff=prev&oldid=294321690 diff]) Kelley School of Business (making false statements isnt helpful)
After the content dispute was over an editor went back to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&offset=20090605005306&limit=500&target=SqueakBox several articles] and rewrote history (revisionism). The editor previously acknowledged [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASqueakBox&action=historysubmit&diff=234036174&oldid=233957606 Jimmy Wales is historically cosidered the co-founder of Wikipedia].
We propose you change back [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Wait_Wait..._Don%27t_Tell_Me!_episodes_(2006)&diff=prev&oldid=294321774 founder] to co-founder per consensus and that Wales is historically cited as co-founder. We can't rewrite history. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 19:33, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
::The only revisionism being done is being done so by the supporters of Sanger. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 20:48, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
:::SqueakBox, you admitted [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASqueakBox&action=historysubmit&diff=234036174&oldid=233957606 Jimmy Wales is historically considered the co-founder of Wikipedia]. Anything else is revisionism or rewriting history. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 21:13, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
::::There was a time when hewas considered a co-founder but that is no longer the case. Developing events change history of living people; you want to condemn Jimbo as co-founder for ever merely because he was for a time. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 23:21, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::On the contrary, sources that specifically discuss the co-founder/sole founder issue say Jimmy Wales is the co-founder.
:::::{{cite news
|first=Brian
|last=Bergstein
|title=Sanger says he co-started Wikipedia
|url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17798723/
|work=[[MSNBC]]
|publisher=[[Associated Press]]
|date=March 25, 2007
|accessdate=2007-03-25
|quote=<small>The nascent Web encyclopedia Citizendium springs from Larry Sanger, a philosophy Ph.D. who counts himself as a co-founder of Wikipedia, the site he now hopes to usurp. The claim doesn't seem particularly controversial — Sanger has long been cited as a co-founder. Yet the other founder, Jimmy Wales, isn't happy about it. Sanger has assembled many links at his [http://larrysanger.org/roleinwp.html Web site] that appear to put the matter to rest. Among the citations are early news stories and press releases that say Wikipedia was founded by Wales and Sanger. </small>}}
:::::[[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 08:12, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::This is all old history; nowadays Wales is known as the founder and Sanger isnt known at all; and Sanger clearly has an investment in being remembered as co-founder as his claim to fame. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 13:01, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::::What did Wales do in the early years at Wikipedia to allege he is the sole founder? [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 17:30, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::::Well I guess he financed it, making him Sanger's bossand presumably directed Sanger, though I have no idea how closely he supervised Sanger as opposed to giving him creative freedom. I have never said we should do what Wales wanted which is to call him the sole founder; my argument has always been that founder could imply either co or sole or neither sole or co; its a more generic term and therefore highly suitable for wikipedia where our duty as editors is neutrality (and I feel I have plenty of experience at dealing with the challeneges of writing articles in a neutral way). Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 18:35, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::On the contrary, there were two other partners at Bomis who also invested time and money. Using a generic term such as "founder" which means singular founder is misleading. "Co-" is a designation that means more than one founder. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 18:50, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::Here is a quote from [http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/oct/17/communications-decade-democracy-google-rusbridger an article in The Guardian] "From Wikipedia – the half-baked, crazy idea of Jimmy Wales (and others) launched in January 2001" I think the point is to try and move away from this focus on the F word. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 20:22, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::You were not trying to move away from the F word. You added "founder" to numerous articles and you claim co-founder is a false statement according to your edit summary. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 20:26, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::I am suggesting that this is a way to move forward right now. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 20:46, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::::I don't see any reason to remove "co-founder" from numeruos articles but I do see a reason to change founder to co-founder. Founder is original reasearch because it is rewritng old history. When no serious disagreement exists among reliable sources we assert co-founder, not remove it. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 20:52, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::::Well its hard to see a solution when you and certain others such as Lara won't make any compromise but insist on putting Sanger's view as the truth and Wales' doesn't get a look-in. Clearly a violation of POV and simply wouldnt happen in any other bio (we know, I think, why it happens here. As for your claim that reliable sources assert Sanger's viewpoint, the simple answer is, no they don't. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 22:12, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::On the contrary, sources that specifically discuss the co-founder/sole founder issue say Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales as co-founder.
:::::::::::::::{{cite news
|first=Brian
|last=Bergstein
|title=Sanger says he co-started Wikipedia
|url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17798723/
|work=[[MSNBC]]
|publisher=[[Associated Press]]
|date=March 25, 2007
|accessdate=2007-03-25
|quote=<small>The nascent Web encyclopedia Citizendium springs from Larry Sanger, a philosophy Ph.D. who counts himself as a co-founder of Wikipedia, the site he now hopes to usurp. The claim doesn't seem particularly controversial — Sanger has long been cited as a co-founder. Yet the other founder, Jimmy Wales, isn't happy about it. Sanger has assembled many links at his [http://larrysanger.org/roleinwp.html Web site] that appear to put the matter to rest. Among the citations are early news stories and press releases that say Wikipedia was founded by Wales and Sanger. </small>}}
:::::::::::::::This is supported by primary sources, secondary sources, and historical references. No specific reason has been given to compromise. Anyhow, removing "co-founder" from numerous articles is not a compromise. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 01:46, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::::::What do you mean no reason has been given for not having co-founder? How can you say this? Many reasons have been given over many years! We compromise for 2 reasons; one is that not all wikipedia editors are happy with co-founder; two is that co-founder is Sanger's POV and this needs to be balanced with Wales's POV; as ever what I see is you (and others such as Lara) refusing to make any compromise and making ridiculous and offensive accusations of revisionism in order to prmote a particular POV that simply would not stand in any other article and seems to have only one end; the promotion of Larry Sanger. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 13:42, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Wales did not dispute the fact that he is the [http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/xodp/message/1720 co-founder] when Sanger was part of the project. Wales would have had to seen the [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2002-January/001057.html Wikipedia press releases], early versions of Wikipedia articles, and several media coverage articles, all describing Wales and Sanger as the co-founders. He never publicly objected to being called the co-founder until at least late 2004 or early 2005. For example, the WF page clearly states that Wales is the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Foundation&offset=20030912134106&limit=500&action=history co-founder of Wikipedia]. It was not disputed until an IP changed it in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Foundation&diff=prev&oldid=14799378 2005] after Sanger left the project. The same IP made an edit to the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=5971532 Jimmy Wales page]. Then a minute later Jimmy Wales edited the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=next&oldid=5971532 Jimmy Wales page] but did not revert the change the IP made to his birthdate. Another editor reverted the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=next&oldid=5973148 change]. But then Jimmy Wales reverted back to the edit made by the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&diff=next&oldid=5973400 IP]. Wales had previously used the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Gay_Nigger_Association_of_America&diff=next&oldid=6273557 IP]. Sanger became critical of Wikipedia after he left the project. That's when Wales began to claim that he is the "sole founder" of Wikipedia. According to Jimmy Wales the owner/entrepreneur was the founder. That means according to Jimmy Wales he was not the founder because Wales had two partners who were owners/entrepreneurs. When Wales claims the owner/entrepreneur should be a founder then the other two partners are the co-founders of Wikipedia. Wales did not dispute the co-foundership of Wikipedia until Sanger left the project. What did Wales actually do at Wikipedia in the early years. He was busy with Bomis. He hired Sanger because he needed someone to run Nupedia. When Wikipedia got started, Wales (along with two other patners) mainly paid the bills while Sanger was doing a lot of the work building and promoting Wikipedia. Wales provided the "[http://web.archive.org/web/20030316082912/siliconvalley.internet.com/news/article.php/3531_956641 financial backing]" while Sanger "[http://web.archive.org/web/20030316082912/siliconvalley.internet.com/news/article.php/3531_956641 led the project]". Jimmy Wales had a <small>minor</small> role in the ''early development'' of Wikipedia in terms of building the project. Sanger [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17798723/ named the project], thought of using [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2001-October/000671.html wiki software], [http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200609/wikipedia/ conceived of Wikipedia], was an [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17798723/ early community leader], and established Wikipedia's [http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/07/31/060731fa_fact most basic policies] including [[WP:IAR|Ignore all rules]] and [[WP:NPOV|NPOV]].
You have never given a reason to compromise. When some editors are not happy about the wording it is not a reason to compromise. It is not Sanger's POV. It is the reliable sources including primary, secondary, and historical references that say co-founder. When no reason has been given to compromise there is no point to compromising. We write text according to the reliable sources, not how editors feel. After we assert both as co-founders (when no serious disagreement exists among reliable sources we assert it per ASF) then we can explain both sides of the story in the body of the article such as Wales disputes it. If a person disputes it, it does not make any different. A person is not a reliable source. We don't change the facts because Wales is not happy about it. It has to be disputed among reliable sources that specifically discuss the co-founder issue. See [[WP:ASF]]. It is not an accusation of revisionism, it is clearly revisionism. Of course Larry Sanger is a co-founder of Wikipedia, this fact was trumpeted during the early years of Wikipedia. No amount of whitewashing or revisionism is going to change that. It is startling to me to see the rewriting of history when it is a well known fact that Larry Sanger has [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17798723/ long been cited as Wikipedia's co-founder]. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 16:54, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
:I have given a reason to compromise; Wales' POV. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 17:01, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
::Substituting Wales' POV as fact is a violation of [[WP:ASF]] especially when no serious disagreement exists among reliable sources that cover the co-founder topic. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 17:14, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
:::I never said we should make Wales' the only POV, nor do I think so; NPOV demands all main viewpoints are incorporated in a neutral manner; how is promoting Sangers' viewpoint this? We all know Sanger wants to be seen as co-founder of the "great" wikipedia because it'll raise his profile; if the sources that discuss the issue of co-founder can, as you claim, be generally considered to support Sanger's viewpoint we can incorporate that into the text of the relevant section of the Wales article; but to say in the opening of his article let alone in articles that have nothing to do with the co-founder dispute is not within policy, is not a good use of reliable sources and seems to have but one end in purpose; the promotion of the profile of Larry Sanger; calling Wales founder neither negates Sanger's profile but nor does it promote his profile. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 19:34, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
::::Writing text according to the source is NPOV. The sources say co-founder. Wales' POV is quoting him about disputing the co- designation. Wales' POV should not change the "co-founder" in numerous articles because there is no serious disagreement among reliable sources per ASF. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 19:45, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::No serious disagreement exists among reliable sources. So why are you disputing "co-founder" in violation of [[WP:ASF]]. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 19:54, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::I am not suggesting we dont use reliable sources in the correct place which is in a paragraph half way down Wales' article; this whole issue is so unnotable to not be worthy of mention in the opening of the Wales article (founder will do or some other expression that doesn't use the word founder) and most certainly not worthy of inclusion in other articles. There may be reliable sources for your assertion but what has this to do with [[Huntsville, Alabama]] or [[Hot Press]]. Unless you can find a reliable source that relates the co-founder issue to say [[Criticism of Microsoft]] it simply should have no place in the Criticism of Microsoft article. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 21:02, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::::Founder will not do. Co-founder is okay. You added founder too many articles without a reliable source. According to you there should be assertion on various articles if a reliable source is produced specific to those articles but for most of those articles there was no reliable source and you added founder when you know Wales is historically cited as co-founder and you have never given an explanation why old history should be written. It is not a reason to rewrite history because Wales disputes it. In accordance with ASF when no serious disagreement exists among reliable sources we assert it without weasel wording or unneceassry attribution. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 17:02, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::::Co-founder is completely unacceptable except when dealing with the dispute; the proof of the pointiness of this has been sticking refs about the co-founder dispute into other articles; this is spamming the co-founder argument anywhere it can be spammed and is completely unacceptable and I am amazed you should defend it; I am not in favour of reffing co-founder anywhere except where we deal specifically with the issue which is relevant to articles on Sanger, Wales and wikipedia, maybe Citizendium and Bomis etc but absolutely not in articles about Alabama, Microsoft etc. If as a reader I go to find out about criticisms of Microsoft I am going to wonder why I have been given a ref that Sanger co-founded wikiipedia; as I say this is spamming a viewpoint and is worse than merely violating POV on the relevant articles. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 20:39, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::If a ref is not available to a specific article it is unacceptable to claim Jimmy Wales is the founder. The refs for an article must be specific to that article. We agree on that point. I don't think we should have one article saying co-founder and then another article saying something that contradicts another article. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 21:46, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::We must think of our readers; and when they are reading articles not directly related to Sanger, Wales or Wikipedia we can assume they are not interested in the founder dispute; refs are simply inappropriate and if this means we cannot call wales founder in these articles then so be it. We cannot use co-founder in these articles either so we need a neutral alternative that does not require reffing. i view any attempts to spam-promote Sanger in Wikipedia very dimly. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 14:11, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::I assume editors previously wanted to remove co-founder from the lead of the Jimmy Wales because they could not get founder in the article and the references were against asserted Wales as founder. You added "founder" to numerous articles but not a neutral alternative. I suggested a compromise but it was rejected by you and other editors. Do you have another suggestion. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 21:34, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::Not right now but I will work on creating one, it is an important issue. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 23:51, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::There is not really a need to compromise when no serious dispute exists. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 00:59, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
:Not so; not only is there clearly a dispute, the one we are discussing, but there are also clearly BLP issues due to Wales own stated views on the subject on the Wales talk page; you cannot just sweep these views under the carpet. Hey I just tried a compromise on a new article, [[David Shankbone]], this is a good example of where the co-founder dispute has no place; someone notable for his work on the wikimedia and where there are no refs relating Shankbone to the co-founder dispute. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 01:14, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
::Yes so; there is no evidence a serious disagreement exists among reliable sources. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 02:55, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
:::Stating that this is your belief does not give you the right to say I am right and nobody can disagree with me, that is not the wikipedia way; I don't agree. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 14:01, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
::::We don't change the facts or rewrite history because you disagree with reliable sources, including primary, secondary, and historical references. You have been given many chances to provide evidence of a serious disagreement among reliable sources. You have not. I am given every right to say it especially when the only thing you have done is state your opinion while I have provided evidence when the co-founder issue is discussed in detail by reliable sources they say Jimmy Wales as co-founder. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 17:23, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::Yes and that is absolutely fine; in the relevant sections of the Wikipedia, Sanger and Wales articles; but extend it any further and you are spamming wikipedia with Sanger's viewpoint, and that is way unacceptable; also do remember that reliable sources do not trump NPOV, nothing does, its the basis of our approach, and one you would do well to remember in this context. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 17:33, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::We edit according to reliable sources which is NPOV. Rewriting history is not NPOV. You have never given a reason why we should compromise or say Wales is the "founder" against Wikipedia's [[WP:ASF]]. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 17:39, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::::But nobody is rewriting history, indeed I advise you to stop making rash accusations that anybody is rewriting history, its plain uncivil as well as being complete rubbish. I have not only given reasons for compromise but made plain that spamming this conflict into any part5 of the encyclopedia where it isn't relevant is trying to promote Sanger at the expense of the encyclopedia. Your argument that all the refs agree with you is unproven, and that thus our duty is to only put Sanger's and ignore Wales viewpoint is pure wishful thinking from someone who has tried to spam this viewpoint into Jimbo Wales userpage. If you wish to pursue this argument on Wikipedia just stop telling people they are guilty of revisionism and rewriting history; it just makes you seem like a crank. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 18:03, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::::According to this reference you are indeed rewriting history (revisionism.) It is very civil and polite to cite references and explain the facts. {{cite news
|first=Brian
|last=Bergstein
|title=Sanger says he co-started Wikipedia
|url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17798723/
|work=[[MSNBC]]
|publisher=[[Associated Press]]
|date=March 25, 2007
|accessdate=2007-03-25
|quote=<small>The nascent Web encyclopedia Citizendium springs from Larry Sanger, a philosophy Ph.D. who counts himself as a co-founder of Wikipedia, the site he now hopes to usurp. The claim doesn't seem particularly controversial — Sanger has long been cited as a co-founder. Yet the other founder, Jimmy Wales, isn't happy about it. Sanger has assembled many links at his [http://larrysanger.org/roleinwp.html Web site] that appear to put the matter to rest. Among the citations are early news stories and press releases that say Wikipedia was founded by Wales and Sanger. </small>}}
::::::::A content dispute does not equal a serious dispute among reliable sources. Wales' position does not equal a serious dispute among reliable sources. Wales' view does not override Wikipedia's core policies including [[WP:ASF]] and [[WP:NPOV]]. I provided references that confirm co-founder while you continue to ignore the references presented.
::::::::You have '''no argument''' when you are unable to given even a single reason why we should change co-founder to founder or remove co-founder based on Wikipedia policy. Revisionism is original research and against Wikipedia's core policies. [[WP:IDONTLIKEIT]] is not an argument. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 19:14, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-10-26/In the news|This is what happens when we dont get an orthodox line]]. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 03:11, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
:That is a different issue because it is not in mainspace. For articles in mainspace have you reverted the changes or would you like me to fix the entries. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 18:41, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
::But I have put across the very clear arguments as to why this must hold in the mainspace too; I guess I'll have to clean up the articles where the Sanger issue has been spammed one more time and if you revert me perhaps we should go to arbcom; though unfortunately for you they wont look favourably on your attempt to bring the dispute to Wales user page. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 20:44, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
:::Given the [[Talk:Jimmy_Wales/Archive_12#Democracy_in_action|very clear consensus]] and that the historical record is unequivocal as to "co-founder" being correct, I would be hesistant in conjecturing about Arbcom favorability. - [[User:Seth Finkelstein|Seth Finkelstein]] ([[User talk:Seth Finkelstein|talk]]) 01:20, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
::::To the contrary the alleged consensus let alone the accusations of historical revisionism would all go into an arbcom case along with admins threatening to throw their weight around "oh I'll block you if you don't shut up", some consensus that, would likely be given full consideration by an arbcom committee that is unlikely to support the Quack-Seth line; Quack having made deliberately false edit summaries while spamming the conflict into various irrelevant articles again does not help the case that this is a genuine attempt to stop the rewriting of history or whatever arguments you guys have; indeed the only thing stopping me right now is lack of time to prepare a case. I reckon its an 8 hour job and hard to see when I'll have the time to do that as I would rather spend my wikipedia time on internet tv and Honduras related issues. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]]14:05, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
:::::If you don't think there is consensus for co-founder then what do you think there is consensus for. See [[Talk:Jimmy Wales/Archive 12#JW co-founder]]. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 19:24, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
::::::I think there is no consensus and hasn't been since ages ago, this is why its such a knotty issue...and clearly one people feel passionate about19:29, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
:::::::Of course there is no consensus for the founder. Co-founder without any attribution is in the lead of [[Jimmy Wales]]. What do you think is the current consensus? [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 19:38, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
::::::::It doesnt say co-founder because of any consensus, it says co-founder due to intransigent edit warring20:23, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::So what is the consensus without edit warring. From the link it looks like co-founder is the consensus. See [[Talk:Jimmy Wales/Archive 12#JW co-founder]]. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 20:34, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::There is no consensus full stop and the current version has only been achieved by edit warring. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 20:41, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::There is no consensus for what and what do you think there is consensus for. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 20:43, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::There is consensus that nits okay to discuss the issue in the main bulk of the Sanger/Wales and wikiepdia articles. I think as he is little known I am less concerned about co-founder in the opening of Sanger's article but I see no consensus to have Sanger classed as co in the opening of the wikipedia article let alone in the opening of the Wales article where it is very unwelcome20:59, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::::The lead says "Jimmy Donal "Jimbo" Wales (pronounced /ˈdoʊnəl weɪlz/; born August 7, 1966)[2] is an American Internet entrepreneur and a co-founder and promoter of Wikipedia.[3][4][5]". Co-founder is in the first sentence in accordance with NPOV. See [[Talk:Jimmy Wales/Archive 12#JW co-founder]]. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 21:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::::You are not saying anything new here. When there are 2 points of view on this issue how exactly is our NPOV policy in accordance solely with your POV (we have the same problem on the Honduras crisis issues, there people want a POV that I agree with to be the only one; and in spite of my own bleiefs I stand up for the real POV policy, which is including all notable POVs; here we have a similar situation, 2 POVs and people, based on their own beliefs, want to plant one of the two as the only reality, hence all this talk of revisionism; but POV actually demands we incorporate both POVs as both are significant; and if Walles has revised the truth that is not something we should make a moral judgement on or do anything other than retain a cool indifference and allow all significant POVs their place. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 21:30, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::Alleged "founder" cannot handle the [[WP:WEIGHT]] of [[WP:FRINGE]]. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 01:23, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::::::Alleged? You cant claim he isn't founder of wikipedia; and while I appreciate that you deal with real fringe on chiropractic articles there are no fringe views here; the view that Wales has about himself cannot be considered fringe any more than anyone's views on themselves (other than deluded criminals) can be considered fringe. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 13:42, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::::I have provided references to support co-founder including references that cover the co-founder issue. Wales opinion does not trump Wikipedia policy. Chiropractors on Wikipedia can't help being a chiropractor. For example, the sentence is properly sourced but a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AChiropractic_controversy_and_criticism&action=historysubmit&diff=325504284&oldid=306127231 chiropactor] is misusing the talk page to delete the first sentence. The AFD was to keep the article so that did not work. The next step is to destroy the article and eventually try to redirect it. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 23:59, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::::::::Wikipedia does not have a {{tl|founder}}. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 21:29, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::::::Well, it depends on what is your [[WP:OWN|defintion]] of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:SqueakBox&curid=16597760&diff=333140439&oldid=330247303 founder]. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 22:54, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::::::::::It appears to have [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Founder five founders], I wonder if any are [[Roberto Micheletti|pretenders]] to the throne. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 22:55, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::::::::When there is more than one founder it is co-founder by definition. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 22:58, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::::::::"After a moment Cugel asked: "Many times I have known a father with four sons, but never before a son with four fathers. ..." ([[Jack Vance]], "Tales of the dying Earth") -- [[User:Seth Finkelstein|Seth Finkelstein]] ([[User talk:Seth Finkelstein|talk]]) 02:51, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
== National Resistance Front renaming proposal ==
hi SqueakBox, please see [[Talk:El_Frente_Nacional_de_la_Resistencia]], and the article itself. i've cleaned up the referencing regarding the name, internally to the article, but the wikipedia naming conventions seem to suggest a different name to either of those that you and i had chosen. i've proposed two names. Please say if you prefer one or the other, or have no objections to either, or if something is wrong with my analysis on the talk page. [[User:Boud|Boud]] ([[User talk:Boud|talk]]) 20:41, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
== Word of notice ==
Hi, SqueakBox. A comment of yours [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nudity&diff=320656538&oldid=320655100 here] has been changed and copied to an ongoing discussion [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Burning_Man_228_(241613953)_crop.jpg here]. Your comment of support has been changed to a vote of deletion by another editor. You probably won't mind, but I thought it appropriate that you should be notified anyway. Best regards, [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 21:40, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
:Cheers, cant see any problems here myself. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] 23:49, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
== [[List of television articles by nation]] ==
Consider "List of television articles by '''country'''"... "nation" is a loaded word in some places. [[User:Seb az86556|Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556]] 18:28, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|AfD]] nomination of [[Jeff V. Merkey]] ==
[[File:Ambox warning pn.svg|left|48px|]]An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for [[Wikipedia:Deletion process|deletion]]. The nominated article is [[Jeff V. Merkey]]. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also [[Wikipedia:Notability]] and "[[WP:NOT|What Wikipedia is not]]").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff V. Merkey]]. Please be sure to [[WP:SIG|sign your comments]] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the [[WP:AfD|articles for deletion]] template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
'''Please note:''' This is an automatic notification by a [[WP:BOT|bot]]. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --[[User:Erwin85Bot|Erwin85Bot]] ([[User talk:Erwin85Bot|talk]]) 01:15, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
==Test your [[World War I]] knowledge with the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/World War I task force/Contest|Henry Allingham International Contest]]!==
[[Image:Henry Allingham in 1916.jpg|right|75px]]
As a member of the [[WP:MILHIST|Military history WikiProject]] or [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/World War I task force|World War I task force]], you may be interested in competing in the [[Henry Allingham]] International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/World War I task force/Operation Great War Centennial|Operation ''Great War Centennial'']], the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.
If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/World_War_I_task_force/Contest/Submissions#Sign_ups|here]], read up on the rules [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/World_War_I_task_force/Contest#Contest_rules|here]], and discuss the contest [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/World War I task force/Contest|here]]!<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 20:35, 8 November 2009 (UTC)</small>
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIV (October 2009) ==
The '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Newsletter October 2009|October 2009 issue]]''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 20:35, 8 November 2009 (UTC)</small>
== Not a dup ==
You blanked out [[2009 Honduran coup d'état]] with a redirect to [[2009 Honduran constitutional crisis]] and an edit comment that it was a dup and subject to AfD. I believe this is wrong for several reasons:
*Although it started out as a duplicate, it is clearly evolving as a sub-article. The coup article has expanded and the parent article has contracted, through the action of several editors, since the split. Thus both articles, in their post-split state, are in better coherence with wikipedia standards on article length than in the pre-split state. There is also a navbox which clearly shows the sub/parent relationship between the articles.
*You did not make any comment or warning on the talk page.
*Perhaps part of your reasoning is the naming dispute. However, this is a separate issue, and should not be a motive for deleting a sub-article when the parent article had clearly grown too big.
Cheers, [[User:Homunq|Homunq]] ([[User talk:Homunq|talk]]) 21:07, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
:I have afd'd it so the community can decide. Its clearly been copied and pasted and then forked out, and why? because people dont want to accept the consensus that the title should be constitutional crisis. i certainly believe it was a coup but as an editor my opinions don't count. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 21:12, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
::Please assume good faith and read the talk page. The idea of splitting the article was first raised by Xavexgoem and it is, IMO, clearly necessary as a sub-article split, independent of the names of the resulting articles. You can criticize my copy-paste modality, but I intended it as an invitation to participate in the rewriting; I didn't want to airdrop a whole article of my own summarizing text onto the parent article, which is the result of a lot of back-and-forth. [[User:Homunq|Homunq]] ([[User talk:Homunq|talk]]) 21:58, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
:::Looks like a fork to me; and they are essentially 2 versions of the same article running in a parallel manner; this is clearly inappropriate and using coup is clearly problematic from a pov viewpoint as it reflects one pov and negates another, the pov that this wasn't a coup but a legitimate succession according to the constitution of Honduras. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 22:26, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
::::Independent, but not parallel. The parent article is being trimmed / reduced, the child one is being developed. Of course, both are also being cleaned up, and that is somewhat parallel.
::::As to the POV issue of the name - of course, the issue has been debated to death, and we all know the arguments on both sides. My reading is that the "coup" name is supported by RS, those who oppose that name (while they've made useful contributions to the article) have based more of their naming arguments on OR rather than RS. But I think that the split is healthy for the article(s) and MORE important than the names so I'm ready to compromise. What name would you propose as non-POV for the June 28 (that is, 26-30) sub-article? [[User:Homunq|Homunq]] ([[User talk:Homunq|talk]]) 00:05, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
:::::The problem with the word coup in the title is that while there are RSs for coup there are equally RSs that it wasn't a coup; neutrality means not taking sides and by making one side in the dispute as if it were the truth is taking sides and that is what we cannot do. I have consistently argued this and never used OR arguemnts. As the new article was mostly a copy and paste job forked out I was not and am not sure exactly what the new article is about, why it is a sub-article of the constitution article, etc; if I had a clearer idea of what exactly the coup article is about I could help in trying to rename it; and certainly if it survives its afd it will need the name changing. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 13:39, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
::::Humor me: what are the RS's that it's not a coup? (Statements by involved actors, editorials, and legal analyses that avoid the nonlegal term "coup" don't count. And articles specifically about the debate on what to call it which present both sides count for half. I doubt that you can get more than 2 sources under these rules, while I'm sure, without even doing it, that at least three of the top 5 hits in Google News for "Honduras" will include the word "coup".)
::::I understand that, living in Honduras, you are barraged with propaganda that it wasn't a coup. I remember when I lived in the US, and (for instance) considered modern Israeli aggressions of "self defense" more justifiable because of a similar skewed media environment (this was over 10 years ago BTW - I suspect the skew has lightened somewhat since then). It's not easy to realize how insane the conventional wisdom which surrounds you is, even when you disagree with it. But if you do, as you claim, think it's a coup, why are you fighting so hard against using the term? [[User:Homunq|Homunq]] ([[User talk:Homunq|talk]]) 14:23, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
:::::Actually almost all my media comes through the Internet so I see much less "propaganda" than I might were local sources all I had access to. I get my best info about the coup from El Pais (apart from twitter). The atmosphere in my work is very much that Micheletti is an upstart golpista which certainly influences me; most people interested in politics in Honduras passionately either love or hate Micheletti and I am in the latter camp. But none of that hits the point which is that even if you discount credible reliable sources such as la prensa (may not agree with them but they are as credible here as the Times in London and the article is about Honduras) there are many sources that say that many people think it wasn't a coup, indeed almost all media sources have expressed that this is a viewpoint held by a significant section of Honduran society including a significant section of those within ruling circles (the establishment of Honduras) and wikipedia simply cannot negate this point of view or pretend it doesnt exist or sidestep the issue by talking about reliable sources (which basically reflect the dispute and often dont take sides); the crisis has 2 POVs and one is that the sun shines out of Micheletti and as wikipedia editors we must put our beliefs to one side and approach the issue neutrally; and I say this as a very experienced wikipedia editor. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 20:41, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
== RfC regarding Honduras - international reaction article ==
As someone interested in the [[2009 Honduran constitutional crisis]] and related articles, I would appreciate your comment the above RfC:
[[Talk:International_reaction_to_the_2009_Honduran_military_coup#RfC:_Is_the_content_in_the_following_edit_worthy_of_inclusion_in_the_International_reaction_to_the_2009_Honduran_military_coup_article]]
and/or at its sister RfC on the same talk page:
[[Talk:International_reaction_to_the_2009_Honduran_military_coup#RfC:_Which_is_the_better_condensed_version]]
Thanks! [[User:Moogwrench|Moogwrench]] ([[User talk:Moogwrench|talk]]) 15:01, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads up; interesting to read your user page. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 14:11, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
::Thank you. I am actually planning on moving down to Comayagua in probably about five years to start up a business (and perhaps teach English) so I understand your comments on your user page about capital and moving Honduras along towards prosperity. When you do have a chance, do comment on the [[Talk:International_reaction_to_the_2009_Honduran_military_coup#RfC:_Which_is_the_better_condensed_version|RfC]]; I'd appreciate your input, however you feel about the edit. I know things get prickly sometimes over at [[2009 Honduran constitutional crisis]] but I am trying to be a better editor and follow consensus, and I know that things like the RfC are part of that process. Thanks again! [[User:Moogwrench|Moogwrench]] ([[User talk:Moogwrench|talk]]) 00:21, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
== Apology ==
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">[[Image:Olive branch.svg|100px|left]]
I'm sorry I wrote that you were a rogue, in so many words. [[User:RicoCorinth|<span style="text-decoration:none">Rico</span>]] 20:21, 11 November 2009 (UTC) has extended an [[olive branch]] of peace. <br />
----
</div><!-- Template:Olive Branch-->
== Supernatural ==
Can you please revert your actions on Supernatural? The others are mini-series, not "series", and are insignificant compared to the main series. If you would still like to move it, please make a proposal and discuss it. Thank you. [[User:Ophois|<span style="color:#AC2828">'''Ω'''</span>]][[User talk:Ophois|<span style="color:black">'''pho'''</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Ophois|<span style="color:#AC2828">'''is'''</span>]] 22:09, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
:I agree that, because of the length of the respective shows, the US series is the most-likely-target for [[Supernatural (TV series)]], so I've reverted the move. If you feel a move is appropriate, please go through the instructions for [[WP:RM|requesting a move]]. Thank you. —'''[[User:C.Fred|C.Fred]]''' ([[User_talk:C.Fred|talk]]) 00:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
::I i the move because I was confused; and I came as a Brit looking for what tv show has that name, I cant say the US series interested me less because I don't believe it is not shown in the UK, just made in the USA I do appreciate that disputed moves, as this one is, should go via RM but I am somewhat baffled by the opposition all the same. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]]01:16, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
==Troubles Arbitration Case: Amendment for discretionary sanctions==
As a party in ''[[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/The Troubles|The Troubles]]'' arbitration case I am notifying you that an amendment request has been posted '''[[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment#Amendment_1:_New_remedy:_Discretionary_Sanctions|here]]'''.
''For the Arbitration Committee''
'''[[User:Seddon|Seddon]]''' <sup>[[User talk:Seddon|talk]]</sup>|<sup>[[wmuk:Main_Page|WikimediaUK]]</sup> 16:39, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
:Yes I became aware my old sparring partner Vintagekits was banned very recently; always a shame when we cannot avoid indef blocking our good quality good faith editors for handling disputes badly, sigh! Thanks for the heads up here too. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 17:20, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
== Help?!?!? ==
I have no idea what I'm doing, and don't really need to learn. I was just looking at the article on Romero and noticed a couple of typos(??) and corrected them (and it took me a long time to figure out how to do this-- if the note would be better addressed to someone else, would you, please?). It looks like you are a major contributor to the article and I have a suggestion for an addition. I believe that it would be appropriate to mention, in relation to the assassination, his monumental homily given the day before, which ends in something like "I implore you, I beg you, I order you: Stop the repression." I see a direct link between this homily and his murder. [[User:Lisapaloma|Lisapaloma]] ([[User talk:Lisapaloma|talk]]) 13:15, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Well, it seems to have worked (the note). But I don't know how I got the dogs!?! (No matter, I love dogs.)[[User:Lisapaloma|Lisapaloma]] ([[User talk:Lisapaloma|talk]]) 13:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
:Hi Lisa, that sounds great, and of course I remain interested in the article. If you can find a reference it would be even better because yes we should be adding that kind of material to the article, the speech given the day before his death is bound to be notable per se. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 13:19, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
== Another Honduras-related move/name request ==
at [[Talk:Chronology_of_events_of_the_2009_Honduran_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat#Requested_move]], which was recently relisted in lieu of closing. I would appreciate your comment, in trying to reach consensus on this, as I know that you have opinions on these issues. Thanks! [[User:Moogwrench|Moogwrench]] ([[User talk:Moogwrench|talk]]) 07:11, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
== Sugababes ==
Hi SqueakBox, ever since you moved the image in the Sugababes' article, IPs have been removing it for no reason at all. I started a discussion [[Talk:Sugababes#Current image|here]] about the unexplained removals. Best. [[User:Acalamari|Acalamari]] 18:42, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
== RfC at [[2009 Honduran coup d'état]] regarding mention of the constitutional crisis in the lede ==
Hey Squeakbox, I'd like your opinion, and that of other editors that have been interested in the Honduran articles, at [[Talk:2009_Honduran_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat#RfC:_Do_the_sources_support_the_mention_of_coup_as_part_of_the_constitutional_crisis_in_the_lede_of_this_article.3F]]. Thanks! [[User:Moogwrench|Moogwrench]] ([[User talk:Moogwrench|talk]]) 21:29, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
== Honduran crisis ==
Hi SqueakBox, you might be interested in contributing to problems such as
* Whether "[[Public opinion on the 2009 Honduran coup d'état]]" should be changed to more descriptive form "[[Public opinion on the 2009 Honduran constitutional crisis]]"? Or perhaps "Public opinion on the 2009 Honduran crisis"?
* Whether [[2009 Honduran constitutional crisis]] should include sources that do mention the crisis at all? Am I correct that things such as "nutritional requirements" and "independence of judiciary" should be linked to the crisis by sources, not by editors? (otherwise a lot of things can linked to the crisis)
* Whether [[Manuel Zelaya]] article should have a sentence about [[Los Horcones massacre]].
[[User:Alb28|Alb28]] ([[User talk:Alb28|talk]]) 02:04, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XIV (November 2009) ==
The '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Newsletter November 2009|November 2009 issue]]''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 19:51, 21 December 2009 (UTC)</small>
== Defamation vs. Pedophilia ==
SqueakBox, please notice that the info on [[defamation]] you removed twice from the article [[pedophilia]] was not the same. Take a look at the Talk Page and realize it was expanded and splitted into 4 parts. The part you removed first (because in your view it was “opinionated”) was not added the second time. And nobody there is presenting a good reason to remove the other parts (Parts 1, 2 and 3 listed in the Talk Page). All the sources of these three parts are reliable and meet Wikipedia's requirements, like those of [[WP:SOURCES]] and [[WP:NONENG]].[[User:FranMo23|FranMo23]] ([[User talk:FranMo23|talk]]) 23:57, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
If nobody presents a good reason until next week, I'm gonna put this information again (only parts 1, 2 and 3), ''without'' that part you removed first (listed as “Part 4” in the Talk Page). Please tell me if you're gonna remove it, because if this is the case I won't add it again now, and I'll look for another solution instead of entering an edit war.[[User:FranMo23|FranMo23]] ([[User talk:FranMo23|talk]]) 23:57, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
==[[:The Fireman (disambiguation)]]==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|left|40px]]
This is an automated message from [[User:CorenSearchBot|CorenSearchBot]]. I have performed a web search with the contents of [[:The Fireman (disambiguation)]], and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: [[:The Fireman]]. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally moving or duplicating content, please be sure you have followed the procedure at [[Wikipedia:Splitting]] by acknowledging the duplication of material in [[Help:edit summary|edit summary]] to preserve attribution history.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on [[User talk:Coren|the maintainer's talk page]]. [[User:CorenSearchBot|CorenSearchBot]] ([[User talk:CorenSearchBot|talk]]) 19:38, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
:Stop being a complete asshole and let me finish, which i know have. Either abandon your lousy bot or put a time limit on it. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 19:41, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVI (December 2009) ==
The '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Newsletter December 2009|December 2009 issue]]''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 04:35, 3 January 2010 (UTC)</small>
== Thanks ==
I never thanked for your condolence note last year, but I appreciate it more than I can possibly express. All the best, in friendship. [[User:Guettarda|Guettarda]] ([[User talk:Guettarda|talk]]) 16:24, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
:Our paths have not crossed in a while, but I hope all is well with you. [[User:Guettarda|Guettarda]] ([[User talk:Guettarda|talk]]) 16:24, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
== Sade ==
It's at [[Sade ( English band)]]. [[User:NawlinWiki|NawlinWiki]] ([[User talk:NawlinWiki|talk]]) 17:15, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
== Look to [[Sade ( English band)]] ==
PING! [[User:HalfShadow|<span style="color: gray">'''Half'''</span>]][[User talk:HalfShadow|<span style="color: black">'''Shadow'''</span>]] 17:15, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
==Unreferenced BLPs==
[[File:Information.svg|30px]] Hello SqueakBox! Thank you for your contributions. I am a [[WP:BOT|bot]] alerting you that '''4''' of the articles that you created are tagged as[[Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Sources| Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons]]. The [[WP:BLP|biographies of living persons]] policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure [[WP:VERRIFY|verifiability]], all biographies should be based on [[WP:RELIABLE|reliable sources]]. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current ''[[:Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs|{{PAGESINCATEGORY:All_unreferenced_BLPs}}]]'' article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{tl|unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:
# [[Jaime Rosenthal]] - <small>{{findsources|Jaime Rosenthal}}</small>
# [[Arturo Armando Molina]] - <small>{{findsources|Arturo Armando Molina}}</small>
# [[Roberto Suazo Córdova]] - <small>{{findsources|Roberto Suazo Córdova}}</small>
# [[Sergio Balanzino]] - <small>{{findsources|Sergio Balanzino}}</small>
Thanks!--[[User:DASHBot|DASHBot]] ([[User talk:DASHBot|talk]]) 15:17, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
== WebCite ==
Hi, seeing you [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jaime_Rosenthal&diff=prev&oldid=340055381 add a reference] I thought I'd point out [[WebCite]], since weblinks to Spanish language newspapers have a particular tendency to disappear. Just put in the reference details at http://www.webcitation.org/archive and you'll get an archive link to add in case the original disappears. [[User:Rd232|Rd232]] <sup>[[user talk:rd232|talk]]</sup> 14:31, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
:Okay I'll have a go; I certainly am aware that links to Spanish news stories in Honduras do go 404 but also how useful in Google is searching using say site:tiempo.hn as a normal Google search fails to produce the refs needed in our drive to ref all blps. So thanks. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 15:16, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
==[[Elton John]]==
Hi. I'm contacting you as a significant contributor to [[Elton John]]. I am concerned that such a high profile article on a living person is so poorly sourced. It is a matter of priority that statements are sourced. See [[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons]]. Quotations from Elton John or any other person must be closely cited, as per [[Wikipedia:Quotations]]. If reliable sources cannot be found then all contentious material should be removed - [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2006-May/046440.html]. It is better for us to have no material at all than to have incorrect, misleading or potentially libelous material. Will you help to source the article? <span style="border: 1px #F10; background-color:cream;">'''[[User:SilkTork|<span style="font-family:Script MT; color:#1111AA; font-size:small;">SilkTork</span>]]''' *[[User talk:SilkTork|<sup>YES!</sup>]]</span> 11:00, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
== Your note ==
With regard to your note, I'm sorry to say that it makes no sense whatsoever. You claimed that my edit summary was not appropriate, but in fact it clearly stated:<blockquote>''"rm. Britain; by convention, we don't put this in the lead (only the host network/first broadcast)"''</blockquote>The text I removed was:<blockquote>''" and [[Channel 4]] in the [[United Kingdom]]"''</blockquote>I fail to see the error here. If you'd care to restate yourself, perhaps we can work out what your problem is - but what you wrote doesn't seem to connect at all to the actual event. Thanks in advance. --'''[[User:Ckatz|Ckatz]]'''''<small>[[User_talk:Ckatz|<sup style="color:green;">chat</sup>]][[Special:Contributions/Ckatz|<sub style="color:red;">spy</sub>]]</small>'' 17:32, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
:Well if you cant see your error after it was clearly pointed out to you I was obviously wasting my time writing to you. Sigh. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 01:59, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
::No, you just need to say what the supposed problem was, as what you described does not match with the actual edit. I'm only asking because you seem perturbed, but I can't help you if you don't explain yourself. --'''[[User:Ckatz|Ckatz]]'''''<small>[[User_talk:Ckatz|<sup style="color:green;">chat</sup>]][[Special:Contributions/Ckatz|<sub style="color:red;">spy</sub>]]</small>'' 03:37, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010) ==
The '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Newsletter January 2010|January 2010 issue]]''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 04:47, 5 February 2010 (UTC)</small>
== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|AfD]] nomination of [[List of films portraying paedophilia or sexual abuse of minors]] ==
[[File:Ambox warning pn.svg|left|48px|]]An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for [[Wikipedia:Deletion process|deletion]]. The nominated article is [[List of films portraying paedophilia or sexual abuse of minors]]. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also [[Wikipedia:Notability]] and "[[WP:NOT|What Wikipedia is not]]").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of films portraying paedophilia or sexual abuse of minors]]. Please be sure to [[WP:SIG|sign your comments]] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the [[WP:AfD|articles for deletion]] template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
'''Please note:''' This is an automatic notification by a [[WP:BOT|bot]]. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --[[User:Erwin85Bot|Erwin85Bot]] ([[User talk:Erwin85Bot|talk]]) 01:12, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
== Barnstar ==
I should give you one for humorous typos [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Albanian_pederasty_%282nd_nomination%29&curid=26052747&diff=342325598&oldid=342319959], but there isn't one. [[User:Pohta ce-am pohtit|Pcap]] [[User_talk:Pohta ce-am pohtit|<small>ping</small>]] 18:15, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|AfD]] nomination of [[List of songs portraying paedophilia or sexual abuse of minors]] ==
[[File:Ambox warning pn.svg|left|48px|]]An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for [[Wikipedia:Deletion process|deletion]]. The nominated article is [[List of songs portraying paedophilia or sexual abuse of minors]]. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also [[Wikipedia:Notability]] and "[[WP:NOT|What Wikipedia is not]]").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs portraying paedophilia or sexual abuse of minors (3rd nomination)]]. Please be sure to [[WP:SIG|sign your comments]] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the [[WP:AfD|articles for deletion]] template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
'''Please note:''' This is an automatic notification by a [[WP:BOT|bot]]. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --[[User:Erwin85Bot|Erwin85Bot]] ([[User talk:Erwin85Bot|talk]]) 01:15, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
== Please check this edit ==
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Roberto_Weiss&action=historysubmit&diff=343140670&oldid=343049564]. In particular, I seriously doubt your change of 'Mitford' to 'Midford' - see [[:Mitford family]]. I nearly reverted you for vandalism .. 12:38, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Typo? Yes. Vandalism? No way. I was fixing the issue as you wrote. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 12:42, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
:The word was correct before your edit, and wrong afterwards. The only reason an issue existed was that you created it. It's not as though you'd added a whole phrase with one typo in it, is it? Difficult to assume good faith in this case, especially when coupled with the T.E. -> T.H mess-up (which you have also now corrected). The only thing that negatives assumption of bad faith is your previous history of good edits. Please couild you read [[:WP:COMPETENCE]]? Thanks. [[User:Philip Trueman|Philip Trueman]] ([[User talk:Philip Trueman|talk]]) 12:49, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
::Oh shut up, I made a mistake. If you go around assuming bad faith and being aggressive to users like me with pots of experience you will end up being blocked by somebody. Just chill out, stay away from me and assume good faith in future. As for the TH if you had bothered to check the diffs you would see that that was done by somebody else. Basically your bad faith assumptions came about entirely through your own laziness or sloppineess. I would suggest it is you who are not competent to go around telling other people they are incompetent. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 13:02, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|AfD]] nomination of [[Krumme 13]] ==
[[File:Ambox warning pn.svg|left|48px|]]An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for [[Wikipedia:Deletion process|deletion]]. The nominated article is [[Krumme 13]]. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also [[Wikipedia:Notability]] and "[[WP:NOT|What Wikipedia is not]]").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Krumme 13]]. Please be sure to [[WP:SIG|sign your comments]] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the [[WP:AfD|articles for deletion]] template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
'''Please note:''' This is an automatic notification by a [[WP:BOT|bot]]. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --[[User:Erwin85Bot|Erwin85Bot]] ([[User talk:Erwin85Bot|talk]]) 01:09, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|AfD]] nomination of [[Greg Lloyd Smith]] ==
[[File:Ambox warning pn.svg|left|48px|]]An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for [[Wikipedia:Deletion process|deletion]]. The nominated article is [[Greg Lloyd Smith]]. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also [[Wikipedia:Notability]] and "[[WP:NOT|What Wikipedia is not]]").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Lloyd Smith (2nd nomination)]]. Please be sure to [[WP:SIG|sign your comments]] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the [[WP:AfD|articles for deletion]] template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
'''Please note:''' This is an automatic notification by a [[WP:BOT|bot]]. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --[[User:Erwin85Bot|Erwin85Bot]] ([[User talk:Erwin85Bot|talk]]) 01:13, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
==[[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|Speedy deletion]] nomination of [[:La Trinidad, Comayagua]]==
[[Image:Ambox warning_pn.svg|48px|left]] A tag has been placed on [[:La Trinidad, Comayagua]], requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under [[WP:CSD#A2|section A2 of the criteria for speedy deletion]], because the article appears to be a foreign language article that was copied and pasted from another [[Wikimedia]] project, or was [[m:transwiki|transwikied]] out to another project. Please see [[Wikipedia:Translation]] to learn about requests for, and coordination of, translations from [[m:List of Wikipedias|foreign-language Wikipedias]] into English.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding <code>{{tl|hangon}}</code> to '''the top of [[:La Trinidad, Comayagua|the page that has been nominated for deletion]]''' (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on '''[[Talk:La Trinidad, Comayagua|the talk page]]''' explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for ''speedy'' deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact [[:Category:Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles|one of these admins]] to request that they [[Wikipedia:Userfication#Userfication_of_deleted_content|userfy]] the page or have a copy emailed to you. <!-- Template:Db-foreign-notice --> <!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> [[User:Belovedfreak|<span style="color:#4682B4; font-family: trebuchet">Beloved</span>]][[User talk:Belovedfreak|<span style="color:#008B8B; font-family: trebuchet">Freak</span>]] 22:42, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
:Hello, sorry for the above notice; you can disregard it. Apparently an anonymous editor had translated the article into Spanish a few weeks back for some reason. --[[User:Belovedfreak|<span style="color:#4682B4; font-family: trebuchet">Beloved</span>]][[User talk:Belovedfreak|<span style="color:#008B8B; font-family: trebuchet">Freak</span>]] 22:48, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
== Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open! ==
The [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators|Military history WikiProject coordinator]] selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/March 2010|here]] by 23:59 (UTC) on 8 March 2010! More information on coordinatorship may be found on the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Academy/Being a coordinator|coordinator academy course]] and in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Coordinators#Responsibilities|responsibilities section]] on the coordinator page.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 22:25, 1 March 2010 (UTC)</small>
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010) ==
The '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Newsletter February 2010|February 2010 issue]]''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 23:18, 4 March 2010 (UTC)</small>
==CfD nomination of [[:Category:Rastafari]]==
I have nominated {{lc|Rastafari}} for renaming to {{lc|Rastafari movement}}. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at [[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 March 5#Category:Rastafari|the discussion page]]. Thank you. —[[User:Koavf|Justin (koavf)]]❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯ 04:21, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
== Colombia Collaboration Invitation ==
{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|#9999ff}}}; background-color: {{{color|#FCD116}}};"
| rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:middle;" | [[File:59 - Carthagène - Décembre 2008.JPG|110px]]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''[[WP:Colombia|WikiProject Colombia]]'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | You have been [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Colombia|invited]] to participate in '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Colombia/COTM|Collaboration of the Month]]''' to improve and standardize the [[List of Presidents of Colombia]] in hopes of raising it to [[WP:Featured list|featured list]] status.
|}
[[User:Mijotoba|mijotoba]] ([[User talk:Mijotoba|talk]]) 23:55, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
==Orphaned non-free image File:TvgeniusLogo.png==
<span style="font-size:32px; line-height:1em">'''[[Image:Ambox warning blue.svg|35px|left|⚠]]'''</span> Thanks for uploading '''[[:File:TvgeniusLogo.png]]'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a [[WP:FU|claim of fair use]]. However, the image is currently [[Wikipedia:Orphan|orphaned]], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. [[WP:BOLD|You may add it back]] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see [[Wikipedia:Non-free content#Policy|our policy for non-free media]]).
'''PLEASE NOTE:'''
* I am a [[WP:BOT|bot]], and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.
* I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.
* If you recieved this notice ''after'' the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Example&editintro=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Intro&preloadtitle={{urlencode:File:TvgeniusLogo.png}}§ion=new&title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Current_requests&create=Request here] to file an un-delete request.
* To opt out of these bot messages, add <code><nowiki>{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}</nowiki></code> to somewhere on your talk page.
Thank you. <!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> [[User:DASHBot|DASHBot]] ([[User talk:DASHBot|talk]]) 08:24, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
==Orphaned non-free image File:Tvglogo.png==
<span style="font-size:32px; line-height:1em">'''[[Image:Ambox warning blue.svg|35px|left|⚠]]'''</span> Thanks for uploading '''[[:File:Tvglogo.png]]'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a [[WP:FU|claim of fair use]]. However, the image is currently [[Wikipedia:Orphan|orphaned]], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. [[WP:BOLD|You may add it back]] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see [[Wikipedia:Non-free content#Policy|our policy for non-free media]]).
'''PLEASE NOTE:'''
* I am a [[WP:BOT|bot]], and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.
* I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.
* If you received this notice ''after'' the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Example&editintro=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Intro&preloadtitle={{urlencode:File:Tvglogo.png}}§ion=new&title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Current_requests&create=Request here] to file an un-delete request.
* To opt out of these bot messages, add <code><nowiki>{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}</nowiki></code> to somewhere on your talk page.
Thank you. <!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> [[User:DASHBot|DASHBot]] ([[User talk:DASHBot|talk]]) 05:52, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
== Coordinator elections have opened! ==
Voting for the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators|Military history WikiProject coordinator]] elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 22:21, 18 March 2010 (UTC)</small>
== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|AfD]] nomination of [[Elizabeth Kucinich]] ==
[[File:Ambox warning pn.svg|left|48px|]]An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for [[Wikipedia:Deletion process|deletion]]. The nominated article is [[Elizabeth Kucinich]]. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also [[Wikipedia:Notability]] and "[[WP:NOT|What Wikipedia is not]]").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elizabeth Kucinich (3rd nomination)]]. Please be sure to [[WP:SIG|sign your comments]] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the [[WP:AfD|articles for deletion]] template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
'''Please note:''' This is an automatic notification by a [[WP:BOT|bot]]. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --[[User:Erwin85Bot|Erwin85Bot]] ([[User talk:Erwin85Bot|talk]]) 01:07, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
== Paid editing? ==
Hi SqueakBox. I don't recall ever having any interactions with you on here but it appears that you are a veteran editor so I'd like to talk this over with you personally before going to any deletion discussions, noticeboards, etc. I see that an account on freelancer dot com has identified with your account on Wikipedia and it has been bidding on Wikipedia-related paid editing jobs. For example I see [http://www.freelancer.com/projects/Publishing-Articles/Wikipedia-article-for-artist-need.html this job] about an Italian painter was awarded to an account that stated "I would use my wikipedia account SqueakBox with 50,000+ edits. You would need to agree to a non-disclosure agreement. This job sounds straightforward. I know how to create a good wikipedia article that won't be deleted. I am willing to negotiate on price if I have more information; on wikipedia the most important thing is third party sources, without these if the artist is living it won't have any chance of surviving". Shortly after the bid was won you created [[Mario Zampedroni]], an Italian painter. There are several other cases where the freelancer account has bid on Wikipedia-related projects.
To me this all seems very disingenuous. Because you are receiving funds to edit, you need to abide by our [[WP:COI|conflict of interest guidelines]] and surely you know better than to encourage the use of Wikipedia as a [[WP:PROMOTION|means of promotion]]. There are also very strong feelings about the ethical implications of paid editing and many editors feel that it should be banned altogether or done with open transparency. Would you be kind enough to list all of the articles you have been paid to write so that they can be scrutinized for NPOV, notability, verifiability, and other COI-related problems? Also, could I have your word that you won't use this account or any sockpuppet accounts to write paid articles without stating that they were paid-for? This would be much appreciated, in the spirit of open transparency and neutral editing. '''[[User:Themfromspace|<span style="color:blue;">Them</span>]][[User talk:Themfromspace|<span style="color:red;">From</span>]][[Special:Contributions/themfromspace|<span style="color:black;">Space</span>]]''' 06:05, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
:I only took the job because I firmly believed and believe that the artists is notable enough for WP:N, I rejected any other bids. if I weren't transparent I would have done this from another account. IMO this does not affect the notability of the article. As you point out, this is not bannable behavior now, the fact that some people want it to be is fair enough but until it is... I am happy to say I wont use this or other accounts to do work for payment now or in the future without being transparent about what I am doing. I will also say that any money received on this one paid task (the only one) has not gone into my own pocket; I have a reasonably well paid job and personal gain was never the motivation. I would finally say you can check all my contributions inc this article for NPOV etc, I won't lower my standards on wikipedia for anyone. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 12:40, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
::I see your freelancer account has bid on some other projects as well, although you assured me that the above article was the only one you would write for profit. This includes [[Roozz]], which I see you just moved to your userspace. The current consensus is that Roozz is not notable and any reintroduction of the page is likely to be deleted, either as G4 or through a second AfD. Can I have your assurance that you are not working on this or any other article because of any external editing requests that would run afowl of our conflict of interest guidelines, neutrality policy, or WP:NOT? '''[[User:Themfromspace|<span style="color:blue;">Them</span>]][[User talk:Themfromspace|<span style="color:red;">From</span>]][[Special:Contributions/themfromspace|<span style="color:black;">Space</span>]]''' 22:41, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
::Err, I said it was the only one I had written for "profit". I also said I would ensure that only notable ref'd articles make it into wikipedia on my beat. Believe me we are much better off having somebody like me who will always insist on wikipedia standards dealing with these people rather than them being badly advised by people who are only interested in money. I also said I have not made any personal income from this and this definitely would remain so even were I to receive money from somebody else. Obviously I am aware that Roozz cannot be "slipped into wikipedia" and am only interested in the challenge, clearly set in the afd, to see if this article could be raised to an acceptable standard. I am not into introducing sub-standard material into wikipedia, you can see that in ALL my edits. I am happy to inform you if there are any genuine COI conflicts going on but in the meantime as I say wikipedia is far better off having me trying to deal with these people, and alongside your own work in this area we could actually work well together. If I wanted to hide my activity from you I would already have done so and it seems you are challenging me because you see the work I do and this is exactly the kind of transparency you asked for in the 1st place. But myour comments are anyway welcome here. I will finally add that as I am unhappy with freelancers.com for other reasons I will not and am not doing any work under their auspices, though as you probably know there are other companies like elance and odesk where a search for wikipedia will produce people wanting tasks done. I have spoken to the guy in charge of Roozz and told him that unless he can satisfy wikipedia citing standards he cannot have an article on either his company or software on wikipedia. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 23:00, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
== Thanks for the welcome message ==
Hello
Thank you for the welcome and the new user tips - I really need them!
Looking forward to becoming more and more active with contributing.
best regards, NCSS
[[User:NCSS|NCSS]] ([[User talk:NCSS|talk]]) 00:34, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
==Child Watch Phuket==
Hello, Im trying to save an article from deletion. Its on [[Child Watch Phuket]]. I would appreciate your involvement in editing the article and possibly helping to find some further references. Being in Thailand makes it very difficult to find information in English. thankyou,[[User:Susanbryce|Susanbryce]] ([[User talk:Susanbryce|talk]]) 13:51, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Thankyou for your help.[[User:Susanbryce|Susanbryce]] ([[User talk:Susanbryce|talk]]) 05:03, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
:No problem, it wasn't even marginal. Thanks, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 22:34, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010) ==
The '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Newsletter March 2010|March 2010 issue]]''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 22:39, 7 April 2010 (UTC)</small>
==otheruses4 -> about==
Please do not use {{tl|otheruses4}}. It redirects to {{tl|about}}.[[Special:Contributions/174.3.123.220|174.3.123.220]] ([[User talk:174.3.123.220|talk]]) 20:14, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
== AN/I ==
:It might be wise for you to comment there explaining your reasoning so that nothing goes down one sided. [[User:Ktr101|Kevin Rutherford]] ([[User_talk:Ktr101|talk]]) 04:18, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
::That is a very bad faith comment. Did you revert me because you were resentful about a past dispute? I hope not but I am baffled as to why you did what you did. There are nearly 1500 redirects to marijuana & I intend to get rid of them all, there may be cases where redirects should not be fixed (though I have never seen one) but this case most assuredly isn't one of them. TarcThanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 13:43, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
:::Before you get rid of all the redirects to marijuana, please take a look at this: [[WP:NOTBROKEN]]. Thank you. --[[Special:Contributions/Ibbn|Ibn]] ([[User talk:Ibbn|talk]]) 13:57, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
::::I am aware of that. If I was a policy maker I would campaign to change it as failing to understand wiki tools but I am just a simple editor whose only interest is editing articles. There are 2 reasons why some redirects should be fixed, the what links here page which we offer to our clients & the url problem. I actively try to not disambiguate redirects, probably far more than my critics. If the issue is with marijuana I am happy to use this word in the text though. And certainly if I consider this worth doing you can be sure there is sound reasoning behind it, your link pretty much says in some cases it may not be correct to do this; it is not a blanket rule. If people edited more in the article space they would understand how wikipedia really works better than they do. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 14:04, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Please stop making pointless edits such as [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Blow_(film)&diff=prev&oldid=357201662 this]. See the discussion referrenced above, please. [[User:Jonathunder|Jonathunder]] ([[User talk:Jonathunder|talk]]) 20:49, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
:If you think fixing redirects is pointless go & think it somewhere else & leave me in peace to get in with editing. You are not qualified nor is Tarc to advise me on how to edit wikipedia as I know how to do this. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 21:28, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
::Put it this way then: if you continue to make this change ''en masse'', you run the risk of being blocked for disruptive editing. Would suggest you seek consensus for these changes before continuing. –[[user:xeno on an iPhone|<span style="font-family:verdana; color:black;">'''xeno'''</span>]][[user talk:xeno|<sup style="color:black;">talk</sup>]] 00:05, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
:::Threatening to block someone for fixing a problem on wikipedia. Not likely. On the other hand I plan to disambiguate marijuana, as there are 2 articles it might go to, and that will fix the problem. Especially since medical marijuana became such an issue the page has needed disambiguating. Its always best to find solutions and not make unnecessary comments about blocking. Crikey! Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 01:55, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
::::You could have saved everyone a lot of trouble if you'd informed us of your master plan instead of keeping us in the dark and proclaiming that you were right.--[[User:Chaser|Chaser]] ([[User talk:Chaser|talk]]) 02:15, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
:::::I don't have a master plan though I have linked to the what links here for marijuana page on my user page for months so no its no secret that I had these redirects in my mind; I decided to disambig marijuana a few mins back & believe this will have consensus as a sensible thing based partly on years of experience with this issue on wikipedia (it was me who separated cannabis as a drug from cannabis); I don't get involved very much with the community any more & was amazed when my activities yesterday caused such a reaction. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 02:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
::::I felt the caution about blocking <small>''(note it was not a threat to block as such; I would not have blocked myself here, but sought one at ANI)''</small> was required after your dismissive statement of 21:28 above that lead me to believe you might continue making these changes ''en masse'' without stopping to discuss whether it is a good idea. I [[WP:AGF|have no doubt]] that you ''think'' you are improving the encyclopedia by bypassing these redirects; but the argument that changing <code><nowiki>[[marijuana]]</nowiki></code> to <code><nowiki>[[cannabis (drug)|cannabis]]</nowiki></code> is an improvement ultimately [[begs the question]]. On the contrary, I (and others) feel that in most cases it is actually detrimental to do so; as it subtracts appropriate disambiguated meaning that was probably there for a reason. From [[WP:ENGVAR|this side of the pond]], it is akin to changing all links from "[[beer]]" to "[[alcohol]]". I think that the best solution would be to create a separate page on marijuana (aka herbal cannabis) so that editors can deliberately link to such a page when desired, and link to [[cannabis (drug)]] in other instances. In any case, this really should be discussed somewhere; so despite your statement that you don't get involved with the community much, perhaps this is a time to make an exception. –[[user:xeno|<span style="font-family:verdana; color:black;">'''xeno'''</span>]][[user talk:xeno|<sup style="color:black;">talk</sup>]] 12:36, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
::Well there clearly was zero appetite for this when the case was on AN/I. IMO deliberately inserting redirects is nothing less than wrecking the project but there you go, for many people its the drama & not any interest in article writing that attracts them to wikipedia. Threatening to block someone 24 hrs after 2 reverts is clearly inappropriate & you shouldn't have done it, are you an admin open to recall? perchance. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 13:41, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
:::Perhaps that is where your confusion lies: there is nothing inherently wrong with redirects and they are, in fact, beneficial in many cases. Again, I didn't threaten to block you, but I cautioned that continued [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&offset=20100420030049&limit=15&target=SqueakBox mass edits of this nature] without consensus may result in a block. This should not be considered an administrative act, but a caution from a fellow editor with whom you are involved in a dispute. If you still feel this is an abuse of administrative tools, please seek [[WP:dispute resolution|dispute resolution]]. –[[user:xeno|<span style="font-family:verdana; color:black;">'''xeno'''</span>]][[user talk:xeno|<sup style="color:black;">talk</sup>]] 13:48, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
:I disagree. Why? Because it disables the ''what links here'' & because the urls are a mess, you get a [wiki/Marijuana] url for Cannabis (drug) which is to many of our users plain annoying. If you are "involved in a dispute with me" that makes your block threat worse, you do not threaten fellow editors with whom you are in dispute to block them just because yopu chose to become an admin, you only do that as an uninvolved admin, which you admit you aren't. Nobody has tried to explain why redirects are okay; it shows an inability to understand wikipedia technology. Its a disgrace, IMO, & wikipedia simply wont survive much longer unless it gets a grip, which would be a shame but 2010 is not 2007. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 13:55, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
::''"disables what links here"''? It does no such thing. What links here still functions perfectly fine, and even separates those that are linked through the redirect page. The URL thing is part-and-parcel of the way redirects are handled, perhaps you would like to seek consensus and file a bugzilla to use proper HTML redirects rather than the in-engine way it is done now.
::Once again, please re-read what I have written above [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SqueakBox&diff=357308911&oldid=357282996] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SqueakBox&diff=357396590&oldid=357395772] and understand that at no point did I have actually intend or threaten to place a block here. I respect [[WP:UNINVOLVED]]. With respect to this dispute over marijuana vs. cannabis (drug), please consider me a fellow editor at this point.
::As for why redirects are okay: this is explained at [[WP:REDIRECT]]. Redirects have been in use for a long, long time and their benefits far outweigh the very minor complaints you raise above. However, I do invite you to seek further clarification at [[WT:REDIRECT]]. –[[user:xeno|<span style="font-family:verdana; color:black;">'''xeno'''</span>]][[user talk:xeno|<sup style="color:black;">talk</sup>]] 14:11, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
:::Well you expressed yourself badly then, as IMO it was a threat, you can deny it as much as you like but really we are flogging a dead horse here as it was also, I have to say, a pretty empty & entirely unnecessary threat; if you have views on marijuana/cannabis (drug) the cannabis drug talk page is the place to go, I have started a thread there & am more than happy to work with you as a fellow editor. I work with the long term view in mind & this issue remains unresolved, I suspect each of the 1500 marijuana redirects needs at the very least checking as they perhaps should not all need to point to cannabis drug, most of them will have been inserted by inexperienced users not even aware that marijuana is a redirect. My timing anyway was impeccable. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 14:26, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
::::Thanks for starting a thread, I will take a look and comment there. For future reference if someone says ''"you run the risk of being blocked for disruptive editing"'' it is likely they are talking about someone else blocking you; whereas if they say ''"I will block you for disruptive editing"'', you can consider that a statement of intent. If you have any suggestions on how I could have better phrased it, please let me know. I did clarify in my next comment, but you apparently missed it or continued to misinterpret. Water under the bridge, I hope. –[[user:xeno|<span style="font-family:verdana; color:black;">'''xeno'''</span>]][[user talk:xeno|<sup style="color:black;">talk</sup>]] 14:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
::::Are you talking about [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cannabis_%28drug%29&diff=357404377&oldid=357267605 this?] You didn't really give much to go on there. –[[user:xeno|<span style="font-family:verdana; color:black;">'''xeno'''</span>]][[user talk:xeno|<sup style="color:black;">talk</sup>]] 15:00, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
:::::I thought I'd just open the idea up, I will try & improve on it tonight when I have more time (working). Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 15:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
::::::You should also initiate a discussion somewhere on whether bypassing marijuana to cannabis (drug) ''en masse'' is a good idea (unless you plan to abandon that task). –[[user:xeno|<span style="font-family:verdana; color:black;">'''xeno'''</span>]][[user talk:xeno|<sup style="color:black;">talk</sup>]] 15:13, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
:::::::I am going to see what happens with marijuana 1st as if there is consensus to disambiguate the links will have to be dabbed 1 by 1 anyway (a task I would take it). At best this is medium priority on my to do list so hurry is not an issue. I agree that if marijuana remains where it is a further proposal re the redirects would be suitable & specifically targeting the editors with an interest in cannabis related subjects. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 16:03, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
=== Marijuana ===
Your recent edits to [[Marijuana]] and [[Marijuana (disambiguation)]] were troubling for two reasons. First, you did a [[WP:MOVE|cut-and-paste move]] of the old disambiguation page to the new title; second, you [[WP:USURPTITLE|usurped]] an existing redirect that complied with the guidelines for a [[WP:PRIMARYTOPIC|primary topic]]. I have had to revert your edits because the cut-and-paste move clearly violates copyright requirements by splitting the page history. If you still believe the disambiguation should be ''moved'' to the main title [[Marijuana]], please make a request following the procedures at [[WP:RM]], and allow other users to discuss your proposal before making potentially disruptive changes. Thank you. --[[User:R'n'B|R'n'B]] ([[User talk:R'n'B|call me]] Russ) 10:06, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
::I have had to isn't exactly a good description, disruptive is plain not true and [[WP:Bold]] still exists. What a poor call. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 19:41, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
==Don Murphy==
Please help Mr Murphy. Some fools have started to edit his page for the first time in years. They have placed a photograph that is copyrighted on the page. He has promised not to restart the war if the photo is down in 48 hours. Thank you.[[User:SharkJumper|SharkJumper]] ([[User talk:SharkJumper|talk]]) 15:36, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
:SharkJumper made a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Erik&curid=16335130&diff=357841294&oldid=357826382 legal threat] on my talk page, so I have [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=357848020#Legal_threat_regarding_image reported] the editor. In addition, the derivative work and the original image are freely licensed: [[:File:Don Murphy (cropped).jpg]] and [[:File:Don Murphy.jpg]]. [[User:Erik|Erik]] ([[User talk:Erik|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Erik|contribs]]) 16:25, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
::[http://www.flickr.com/photos/23627273@N04/2253226756/ This] is where the pic came from; it doesn't make it clear who is Mr Murphy & I can well believe he doesn't want this pic on wikipedia; while I obviously don't endorse legal threats nor do I think this pic is appropriate for this article, see talk. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 16:38, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
:::The photo has now been removed. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 23:57, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
::::[[User talk:HalfShadow#Blocked for one week]] shows to me that while some use wikipedia as an excuse to provoke others take this kind of behaviour seriously. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 22:16, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
The user who started the commotion has thankfully retired from the project, making it safe for serious editors. Before they left, they re edited the Murphy article specifically to remove his personal site, don murphy.net. If you look in to the article archives you will see that it was determined well over a year ago that the personal site of a "notable" person is itself notable. I believe that the entire article should be reverted to where it was a few days ago before this attack began. Thoughts? Further it lists a birthdate with no verification. [[User:BassandAle|BassandAle]] ([[User talk:BassandAle|talk]]) 23:53, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
:Hi Gaston. I saw your comments over at AN/I. Your points here sound reasonable and I certainly will address them over the coming working week. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 21:22, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi maybe you could help me bring this up to the right people since Don thinks highly of you. User ChrisO has been outed on Don's message board because of him attacking Don repeatedly in the past. Yesterday several users said that Erik should not be editing Don because of obvious non neutrality. So today Chris O edited Susan Montford, Don's wife, and put false information in, apparently to show that he doesn't care what Don thinks. I think ChrisO should be forbidden from these articles. Please advise. [[User:BassandAle|BassandAle]] ([[User talk:BassandAle|talk]]) 14:30, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
:It was a trivial mistake - my fault entirely, I misread the source. BassandAle has edited the article but also appears to have made an error; at any rate, it now correctly reflects the source. -- [[User:ChrisO|ChrisO]] ([[User talk:ChrisO|talk]]) 14:42, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
::Of course. The difference between DAUGHTER and second cousin is a trivial mistake. Anyway, SB, user should NOT be editing these articles because he is in a personal conflict with Don. PLease tell me where to post this complaint. [[User:BassandAle|BassandAle]] ([[User talk:BassandAle|talk]]) 14:51, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
:::[[Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard]]. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 15:34, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
::::I am, of course, not in any kind of conflict with DM - I simply clicked through to [[Susan Montford]], found that article hadn't been updated since Jan 2009, and so updated it. There's no need to infer conspiracies where none exist. -- [[User:ChrisO|ChrisO]] ([[User talk:ChrisO|talk]]) 15:47, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
== Sanaa ==
There is already a disambiguation page covering "Sanaa" at [[Sana (disambiguation)]]. Please add new entries there instead of creating confusion with overlapping disambig pages. Thanks. --[[User:R'n'B|R'n'B]] ([[User talk:R'n'B|call me]] Russ) 16:27, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
:Sanaa & sana are not the same word, far from creating confusion pretending that they are the same word is confusing. There is simply no reason to redirect to the obscure [[Sana'a]], your actions are baffling. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 16:47, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
:: I don't think [[Sana'a]] is all that obscure; but of course "obscure" is an entirely subjective term. I could be wrong, so feel free to [[Template:Split|propose a split]] and see what others think. But, please note that there are over 100 existing [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Sanaa|links to "Sanaa"]] from other articles that will need to be fixed if the redirect is changed. --[[User:R'n'B|R'n'B]] ([[User talk:R'n'B|call me]] Russ) 20:51, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
:::Sounds like a good reason to do it, esp given that Sanaa is a 1st name; I would like to get the Honduras water company article together 1st & will then take a look at a split. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 14:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010) ==
The '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Newsletter April 2010|April 2010 issue]]''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 20:03, 5 May 2010 (UTC)</small>
== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|AfD]] nomination of [[Larry Sanger]] ==
[[File:Ambox warning pn.svg|left|48px|]]An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for [[Wikipedia:Deletion process|deletion]]. The nominated article is [[Larry Sanger]]. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also [[Wikipedia:Notability]] and "[[WP:NOT|What Wikipedia is not]]").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry Sanger]]. Please be sure to [[WP:SIG|sign your comments]] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the [[WP:AfD|articles for deletion]] template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
'''Please note:''' This is an automatic notification by a [[WP:BOT|bot]]. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --[[User:Erwin85Bot|Erwin85Bot]] ([[User talk:Erwin85Bot|talk]]) 01:13, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
== Illegal drug trade ==
Hi SqueakBox, I have recently begun the slow process of cleaning up the [[Illegal drug trade]] article, and I noticed that you have also made a number of improvements to it and commented on its talk page. I would like to invite you to directly collaborate on improving the article, if you are up to it. If we split the workload and decide what improvements we should focus on, it should go a lot faster. Regards, <span style="background:#FFFFC0">'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|<span style="font-family: Verdana"><span style="color: #900000">Giftiger</span><span style="color: #FF0000">Wunsch</span></span>]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|<span style="font-family: Tahoma; color:#0060A0">[TALK]</span>]]</span> 16:57, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
==Sub==
[[Image:Information.svg|25px]] Thank you for [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|your contributions]] to Wikipedia. When using certain templates on talk pages, as you did to [[:Cranston, Rhode Island]], don't forget to [[Wikipedia:Template substitution|substitute with text]] by adding '''subst:''' to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:uw-test1}} instead of {{uw-test1}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-subst -->
==Prostitution in Cambodia==
I wanted to change the name of this article to Human Trafficking in Cambodia which would be more suitable and give greater scope to the article. I was unsure of exactly how to do this and was hoping you might be able to help me on this, kind regards.[[User:Susanbryce|Susanbryce]] ([[User talk:Susanbryce|talk]]) 07:39, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
:Done. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 17:46, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Thankyou so much for your help [[User:Susanbryce|Susanbryce]] ([[User talk:Susanbryce|talk]]) 09:04, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
== Conflict of interest ==
Please try to avoid edits regarding TV Genius, since you have disclosed that you work for this company. You recently name-dropped it in a promotional manner at the [[Itv.com]] article and you wrote the entire [[TV Genius]] article from scratch. This is against our [[WP:COI|conflict of interest guidelines]] and our policy that [[WP:PROMOTION|Wikipedia is not to be used for promotion]]. I've also seen your accounts bidding on some more paid-editing jobs on elance. You said you would stop that so I'm asking you again to do so. If you continue to edit with a promotional bent I'll have to escalate the dispute resolution process. '''[[User:Themfromspace|<span style="color:blue;">Them</span>]][[User talk:Themfromspace|<span style="color:red;">From</span>]][[Special:Contributions/themfromspace|<span style="color:black;">Space</span>]]''' 08:23, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
:Err, I said I would be transparent re work done on elance, I never said I would stop bidding so please don't misquote me. I actually said we are better off having someone like me dealing with people wanting to pay to get work done on wikipedia rather than leaving it to people with no scruples do so, as you seem to be suggesting we do. I also said I would not use freelancer.com but that is for entirely different reasons. I think the itv.com edit was a perfectly legitimate ref'd entry of interest to our readers and improving the itv.com entry. Using relevant internal links to established articles is encouraged on wikipedia and TV Genius is a company with strong ties to itv.com. I am also not aware of saying I work or even worked for TV Genius; I do have a connection with the company but please be careful about making specific statements that may not be correct; I am not located in the UK and manage a company on the other side of the Atlantic so saying or implying I am on TV Genius payroll is stretching the imagination a bit. Wpuld a Google shareholder have a COI editing about google? I have no idea. I do know, though, that I stick to wikipedia guidelines & policies in the work I do at wikipedia, producing material that is relevant to our readers. You are welcome to go to dispute resolution if you feel you and I have anything to resolve; if I had anything to hide I would be using alternative accounts that you would have no idea about, the fact that I am being honest and transparent seems to find ill favor with you though and if you do engage me in dispute resolution you will essentially be encouraging other users to not be transparent. Dispute resolution is about a dispute between 2 people and you seem overly keen on making inaccurate statements about me (such as that I edit with a promotional bent) in public so I certainly would not refuse dispute resolution with you. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 14:33, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
::Well, all I'm asking is that you don't edit against our guidelines, which includes introducing nonnotable articles because you were paid to do so and placing name-drops to the company you are affiliated with. If you feel the company is worthy of mention please use the <nowiki>{{request edit}}</nowiki> template on the article's talkpage. This is, of course, how Wikipedia perfers edits such as these to be made. I see the freelance work you are doing as an abuse of an open and transparent editing environment so if I see another elance or freelancer bid fulfilled which involves editing against our guidelines I will bring the situation up for review. Again, please refrain from doing this. '''[[User:Themfromspace|<span style="color:blue;">Them</span>]][[User talk:Themfromspace|<span style="color:red;">From</span>]][[Special:Contributions/themfromspace|<span style="color:black;">Space</span>]]''' 21:15, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
:::I'll avoid editing TV Genius or connected articles. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 13:17, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
==DYK for TV Brasil Internacional==
{{tmbox
|tyle = notice
|small =
|image = [[Image:Updated DYK query.svg|15px|Updated DYK query]]
|text = On [[Wikipedia:Recent_additions#June 3 2010|June 3, 2010]], '''[[:Template:Did you know|Did you know?]]''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''[[TV Brasil Internacional]]''''', which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page <small>([[User:Rjanag/Pageview stats|here's how]], [http://stats.grok.se/en/201006/TV_Brasil_Internacional quick check] )</small> and add it to [[WP:DYKSTATS|DYKSTATS]] if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the [[:Template talk:Did you know|Did you know? talk page]].
}} [[User:Materialscientist|Materialscientist]] ([[User talk:Materialscientist|talk]]) 18:03, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010) ==
The '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Newsletter May 2010|May 2010 issue]]''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 21:42, 5 June 2010 (UTC)</small>
==File copyright problem with File:Blekinge.png==
[[File:Copyright-problem.svg|64px|left]]
Thank you for uploading [[:File:Blekinge.png]]. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes [[Wikipedia:Copyrights|copyright]] very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the '''license''' and the '''source''' of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a '''[[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags|copyright tag]]''' to the [[Help:Image page|image description page]].
'''Because you used a fair use rationale with your upload, the recommended copyright tag is {{tl|non-free logo}}.''' Please add this to the image and remove the speedy delete template ({{tl|di-no license}}).
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [{{fullurl:Special:Log|type=upload&user=SqueakBox}} your upload log].
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|media copyright questions page]]. Thanks again for your cooperation. [[User:Image Screening Bot|Image Screening Bot]] ([[User talk:Image Screening Bot|talk]]) 20:22, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
==Fox News==
I came here to tell you about the article. I cannot think it is about you, given your long-term sterling record of hostility to such stuff. Maybe a b-chat user has joined b-chat using your moniker. Don't waste your money suing them. Best wishes and good luck. [[User:Kittybrewster|Kittybrewster ]] [[User_talk:Kittybrewster|<span style="color: #0000FF">☎</span>]] 16:36, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
:I saw your page pop up on my watch list. I thought claim about you in the FoxNews article sounded odd. I'm glad to hear it is not true. Best wishes. --[[User:B|B]] ([[User talk:B|talk]]) 22:18, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
"I will be suing Fox News for damage to my reputation and character." I recommend that you spend most of your time talking to the press and/or promoting a defence fund of some sort; with the idea that since it will be difficult to prove damages based on a nick-name, probably fighting fire with fire is your best bet. Good luck. All that know you find the accusation to be mindless (which again highlights the difficulty of establishing damages. Sue for one dollar??) --- [[User:WAS 4.250|WAS 4.250]] ([[User talk:WAS 4.250|talk]]) 04:26, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
:Hi SqueakBox, the "Signpost" is covering the Fox article in the [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2010-06-28/In the news|"In the news" section of this week's issue]]. Among documenting other issues with the article, [[User:Forty two |Forty two ]] (who has been writing the story) thought about mentioning your reaction too. Would you be comfortable with being cited by (user)name there? We are going to publish this issue soon, probably in just a few hours; if we don't hear back from you before that, your name won't be mentioned. Regards, [[User:HaeB|HaeB]] ([[User talk:HaeB|talk]]) 22:40, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
::Looks too late, I imagine, only just opened wikipedia. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 12:42, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
:::[[WP:POST|Actually not]], the issue didn't get published yesterday, and we are still working on finishing that story, so you can still speak your mind. The mention would essentially consist of quoting one or two sentences from your user page. Regards, [[User:HaeB|HaeB]] ([[User talk:HaeB|talk]]) 12:58, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
::::Fine by me. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 22:19, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010) ==
{{WPMILHIST Newsletter header|LII|June 2010| }}
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em; width: 50%;" |
; <big><span style="color: steelblue">Project news</span></big>
''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/News/June_2010/Project_news|Catch up with our project's activities over the last month, including the new Recruitment working group and Strategy think tank]]''
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
; <big><span style="color: steelblue">Articles</span></big>
''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/News/June_2010/Articles|Milhist's newest featured and A-Class content]]''
|-
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em; width: 50%;" |
; <big><span style="color: steelblue">Members</span></big>
''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/News/June_2010/Members|June's contest results plus the latest awards to our members]]''
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
; <big><span style="color: steelblue">Editorial</span></big>
''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/News/June_2010/Editorials|LeonidasSpartan shares his thoughts on how, as individual editors, we can deal with frustration and disappointment in our group endeavour]]''
|-
| valign="top" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: center; font-size: 85%; " |
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Options|here]].
|}
<small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 19:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)</small>
==Have you seen this?==
[http://www.freelancer.com/projects/WIKI/Wikipedia.html]. It is mentioned at AN/I [[Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Concern:_Request_for_fake_third-party_websites |here]] [[User:Anthonyhcole|Anthony]] ([[User talk:Anthonyhcole|talk]]) 13:32, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
*As I said on the noticeboard, I hope that your immediate reaction upon learning that you were being asked to create fake articles was to withdraw your bid. I don't know how long it takes for widthdrawals to be processed, but I hope that you've already withdrawn. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] ([[User talk:Uncle G|talk]]) 17:34, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
:Err I wouldn't dream of ever creating false articles; if a bid like that is accepted my job then would be to persuade the person to do something more productive; I may not have read the job advert very well as I pasted the same text into 4 or so ads. I am working and haven't had time to go to the freelancer site but be sure I would never break wikipedia policies knowingly for any reason. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 20:22, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
::I clearly hadn't read the advert properly, and have now withdrawn my bid, I will take more care in future. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 20:25, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
== Edit summary ==
Apologies if it caused annoyance - I started off as a straight revert (marque isn't that unusual a term) then thought of an alternative while I was doing it. Cheers. [[User:4u1e|4u1e]] ([[User talk:4u1e|talk]]) 04:38, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
== Links ==
When you changed the redirect target of {{noredirect|DFB}} from [[German Football Association]] to [[DFB (disambiguation)]], you seem to have overlooked the fact that over 150 other Wikipedia articles contain [[Special:Whatlinkshere/DFB|links to "DFB"]]. All of those links now need to be reviewed and fixed to take readers to the correct article, and your assistance in completing this task would be appreciated. As suggested at [[WP:USURPTITLE]], when you change the target of existing links, "it is strongly recommended that you modify all pages that link to the old title so they will link to the new title". --[[User:R'n'B|R'n'B]] ([[User talk:R'n'B|call me]] Russ) 10:21, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
=== [[DFB]] ===
Hi SqueakBox, I see you've changed [[DFB]] to point to a disambig. Per [[WP:FIXDABLINKS]], could you clean up [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AWhatLinksHere&target=DFB&namespace=0 these links that now point to a disambig]? Thanks, --[[User:JaGa|<b><span style="color: #990000">Ja</span><span style="color: #000099">Ga</span></b>]][[User_talk:JaGa|<span style="color: #000000; font-size:small"><sup>talk</sup></span>]] 10:21, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
:I had though bots do this automatically. I have made a start and these will get done. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 13:40, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
::Thanks much. The auto-bot fix misconception is pretty common, so I'm trying to get the word out. --[[User:JaGa|<b><span style="color: #990000">Ja</span><span style="color: #000099">Ga</span></b>]][[User_talk:JaGa|<span style="color: #000000; font-size:small"><sup>talk</sup></span>]] 13:45, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
:::I was muddling this with double redirects. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 13:51, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
::::Thanks much for the quick cleanup!!! :D --[[User:JaGa|<b><span style="color: #990000">Ja</span><span style="color: #000099">Ga</span></b>]][[User_talk:JaGa|<span style="color: #000000; font-size:small"><sup>talk</sup></span>]] 10:34, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIII (July 2010) ==
{{WPMILHIST Newsletter header|LIII|July 2010| }}
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em; width: 50%;" |
; <big><span style="color: steelblue">Project news</span></big>
[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/July 2010/Project news|''New parameter for military conflict infobox introduced;<br/>Preliminary information on the September coordinator elections'']]
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
; <big><span style="color: steelblue">Articles</span></big>
[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/July 2010/Articles|''Milhist's newest featured and A-Class content'']]
|-
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em; width: 50%;" |
; <big><span style="color: steelblue">Members</span></big>
[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/July 2010/Members|''July's contest results, the latest awards to our members, plus an interview with Parsecboy'']]
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
; <big><span style="color: steelblue">Editorial</span></big>
[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/July 2010/Editorials|''Opportunities for new military history articles'']]
|-
| valign="top" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: center; font-size: 85%; " |
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Options|here]].
|}
<small>This has been an automated delivery by [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 22:00, 18 August 2010 (UTC)</small>
== [[Bruce_Harris]] ==
Without providing sources, THIS is WAY pov. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bruce_Harris&action=historysubmit&diff=379796286&oldid=379653494]. [[Special:Contributions/Active_Banana|''<span style="color:black;">Active</span>'']] [[User:Active Banana|<span style="color:gold;">'''Banana'''</span>]] <span style="color:gold;"> ''' ('''</span> [[User talk:Active Banana|<span style="color:gold;">''bananaphone''</span>]] 15:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
:Source provided. yes I should have looked for the source before not straight after editing but the source says he admitted the allegations. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 16:00, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
== Citation internal format in [[Bruce Harris]] ==
Discuss at [[Talk:Bruce Harris]], please. --[[User:Lexein|Lexein]] ([[User talk:Lexein|talk]]) 05:02, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIV (August 2010) ==
{{WPMILHIST Newsletter header|LIV|August 2010| }}
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em; width: 50%;" |
; <big><span style="color: steelblue">Project news</span></big>
''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/August 2010/Project news|The return of reviewer awards, task force discussions, and more information on the upcoming coordinator election]]''
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
; <big><span style="color: steelblue">Articles</span></big>
''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/August 2010/Articles|A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles, including a new featured sound]]''
|-
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em; width: 50%;" |
; <big><span style="color: steelblue">Members</span></big>
''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/August 2010/Members|Our newest A-class medal recipients and this August's top contestants]]''
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
; <big><span style="color: steelblue">Editorial</span></big>
''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/August 2010/Editorials|In the first of a two-part series, Moonriddengirl discusses the problems caused by copyright violations]]''
|-
| valign="top" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: center; font-size: 85%; " |
To change your delivery options for this newsletter please list yourself in the appropriate section [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Options|here]]. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Strategy think tank/News and editorials division|newsroom]]. [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 23:49, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
|}
== Article becoming redirect ==
Hi. When [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Spanish_language_television_channels&diff=319635513&oldid=314092177 you convert an article] into a redirect, please, merge the contain into the targeted article. I have [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Television_in_Latin_America&action=historysubmit&diff=384040622&oldid=380271065 recovered] some useful info from the history. Thanks. [[User:Emijrp|emijrp]] ([[User talk:Emijrp|talk]]) 16:06, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
:I had already extracted the content I thought pertinent from the page, that is why I redirected it to [[Television in Latin America]], an article I started and to which I had already transferred content. So your comment is unfounded, you should check the history. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 17:23, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
::No. You should check the history. You [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Spanish_language_television_channels&diff=319635513&oldid=314092177 removed] all that contain, and you left empty sections [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Television_in_Latin_America&oldid=346713482 here] for Bolivia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, El Salvador, Peru, and Puerto Rico. And I have [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Television_in_Latin_America&action=historysubmit&diff=384040622&oldid=380271065 recovered that contain here]. Regards. [[User:Emijrp|emijrp]] ([[User talk:Emijrp|talk]]) 18:39, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
:I am not saying I transferred all material but I certainly transferred all pertinent material, IMO. You are of course free to recover more material or not but accusing me of burying material is simply unjust, this is simply an editorial dispute and not anything beyond that. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 20:04, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
==The Milhist election has started!==
The [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators|Military history WikiProject coordinator]] election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/September 2010|vote here]] no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.
With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team, [[User:Roger Davies|<span style="color:maroon; font-variant:small-caps">'''Roger Davies'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Roger Davies|'''talk''']]</sup> 19:40, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
==Muder Music redirect==
As I believe I've already said elsewhere, if you where to familiarize yourself with [[Wikipedia:Redirect]] there would be no issue. [[User:Hyacinth|Hyacinth]] ([[User talk:Hyacinth|talk]]) 08:36, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
:If you had familiarized yourself with [[Wikipedia:What vandalism is not]] you wouldn't have made silly and knowingly false accusations just cos you are angry, but I guess from your attitude that you have no shame just a lot of rage. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 15:08, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
==would love your collaboration==
http://www.afropedea.com<br/>
http://www.afropedea.org <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/216.186.48.62|216.186.48.62]] ([[User talk:216.186.48.62|talk]]) 03:26, 13 October 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Cheers for the heads up. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 15:06, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
== Speedy tag ==
==[[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|Speedy deletion]] nomination of [[:Global Listings]]==
[[Image:Ambox warning pn.svg|left|48px|]]<!-- use [[Image:Ambox warning yellow.svg|left|48px|]] for YELLOW flag -->
{{#ifeq:{{{wizard}}}|0||{{Quote box
| quote = You may want to consider using the [[Wikipedia:Article wizard|Article Wizard]] to help you create articles.
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read [[WP:Your first article|the guide to writing your first article]].
| width = 20%
| align = right
}}}}
A tag has been placed on [[:Global Listings]] requesting that it be [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|speedily deleted]] from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the [[WP:CSD#Articles|criteria for speedy deletion]], articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the [[Wikipedia:Notability|guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable]].
If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding <code>{{tl|hang on}}</code> at the top of the article, immediately below the speedy deletion (<code><nowiki>{{db-...}}</nowiki></code>) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate), and providing your reasons for contesting on '''[[Talk:Global Listings|the article's talk page]]''', but be aware that once tagged for ''speedy'' deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.
You may want to read the guidelines for specific types of articles: [[Wikipedia:Notability (people)|biographies]], [[WP:WEB|websites]], [[WP:BAND|bands]], or [[WP:CORP|companies]].<!-- Template:Nn-warn --> [[User:Travelbird|Travelbird]] ([[User talk:Travelbird|talk]]) 16:06, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
== Press release ==
[[PR Newswire]] is a press release regurgitation service. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Global_Listings&curid=29247606&diff=391532503&oldid=391532233]. Please remove the self promotion crap. [[Special:Contributions/Active_Banana|''Active'']] [[User:Active Banana|<span style="color:orange;">'''Banana'''</span>]] [[User talk:Active Banana|<span style="color:orange;">(<sup>''bananaphone''</sup></span>]] 23:11, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
:Well its been deleted now but please take on board my comments about participating in the talk page. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 15:25, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LV (September 2010) ==
{{WPMILHIST Newsletter header|LV|September 2010| }}
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em; width: 50%;" |
; <big><span style="color: steelblue">Project news</span></big>
''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/September 2010/Project news|The results of September's coordinator elections, plus ongoing project discussions and proposals]]''
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
; <big><span style="color: steelblue">Articles</span></big>
''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/September 2010/Articles|A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles]]''
|-
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em; width: 50%;" |
; <big><span style="color: steelblue">Members</span></big>
''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/September 2010/Members|Our newest A-class medal recipients, this September's top contestants, plus the reviewers' Roll of Honour (Apr-Sep 2010)]]''
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
; <big><span style="color: steelblue">Editorial</span></big>
''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/September 2010/Editorials|In the final part of our series on copyright, Moonriddengirl describes how to deal with copyright infringements on Wikipedia]]''
|-
| valign="top" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: center; font-size: 85%; " |
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Options|here]]. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Strategy think tank/News and editorials division|newsroom]]. [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 20:31, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
|}
== Re Isabel Allende ==
Huh? I don't understand this. What "famous translations" do you mean? If you mean that her books are well-known in translation, then the same would go for many other authors (García Márquez, Tolstoy, Coelho, Mann...). If you are suggesting that she herself is a translator, then this is news to me. My only assumption is that people might know that the first language of most Chileans is Spanish. Where one might want to signal the language is in cases where people write in languages other than that of the majority of their fellow-citizens, or in a language that is not their birth language: Conrad and Nabokov would be obvious examples. But to put "Spanish-language" in this case opens up a minefield. --[[User:Jbmurray|jbmurray]] ([[User talk:Jbmurray|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jbmurray|contribs]]) 18:29, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Moreover, two sentences later we have the quotation that calls her "the world’s most widely read Spanish-language author." Really, your revision was completely superfluous as well as unhelpful. --[[User:Jbmurray|jbmurray]] ([[User talk:Jbmurray|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jbmurray|contribs]]) 18:33, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
:The mention 2 sentences down was a quote and didnt link to the Spanish language page, I made the decision to thus not link in the quote but to add a link in the opening, I am still baffled as to what your opposition to this is based upon. People may figure that Chilean people speak Spanish (though we should assume our readers are generally ignorant on any subject) and the fact that she lives in an English speaking country (which counters your argument that people will assume that cos she is from Chile she only writes in Spanish, that'd be like assuming Stalin used Georgian) and is known by most English speakers as the author of ''House of Spirits'' makes this case confusing; believe me I would not have edited if it wasnt confusing, all you have do in reverting is to leave the confusion in place; well done for that, as for your ramble about translations, this is confusing and I dont know what youa re talking about. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]]18:01, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LVI, October 2010 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; ">'''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|<span style="color: darkslategray">Your Military history Newsletter</span>]]'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project News: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/October 2010/Project news|Editors for the newsletter, GAN backlog reduction drive]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/October 2010/Articles|The month's featured and A-class Milhist content]]''
* Members: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/October 2010/Members|Contest results, A-class medal recipients]]''
* Editorial: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/October 2010/Editorials|EyeSerene sums up our "Five years of military history"]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<span style="font-size: 85%;">
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Options|here]]. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Strategy think tank/News and editorials|newsroom]]. [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 23:01, 22 November 2010 (UTC)</span>
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LVII, November 2010 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; ">'''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|<span style="color: darkslategray">Your Military History Newsletter</span>]]'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project News: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/November 2010/Project news|From the editors, "Military Historian of the Year", New Incubator, Black Project Report]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/November 2010/Articles|The month's featured and A-class Milhist content]]''
* Members: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/November 2010/Members|Contest results, A-class medal recipients]]''
* Editorial: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/November 2010/Editorials|bahamut guides us through "Nominating military biographies for deletion"]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<span style="font-size: 85%;">
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Options|here]]. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Strategy think tank/News and editorials|newsroom]]. [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 23:22, 8 December 2010 (UTC)</span>
== [[Beber Silverstein Group]] ==
I proposed that this article be merged into [[Joyce Beber]] since I don't believe the group has notability apart from its founder, and also due to its illicit creation. '''[[User:Themfromspace|<span style="color:blue;">Them</span>]][[User talk:Themfromspace|<span style="color:red;">From</span>]][[Special:Contributions/themfromspace|<span style="color:black;">Space</span>]]''' 15:02, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
:What do you mean illicit creation? Stop talking rubbish. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 05:51, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
::[[Talk:Beber Silverstein Group#Paid editing project|This]] is what I mean. The company's Senior Vice President paid you to write the article! '''[[User:Themfromspace|<span style="color:blue;">Them</span>]][[User talk:Themfromspace|<span style="color:red;">From</span>]][[Special:Contributions/themfromspace|<span style="color:black;">Space</span>]]''' 10:19, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
:that is complete rubbish and I advise you to withdraw your rash lie. I havent received a penny for doing that article or any edits in connection with this subject. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 17:29, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
::Then how do you explain this situation? [http://www.freelancer.com/projects/WIKI/Need-Wikipedia-savvy-pro.html There is a page on freelancer.com] where the buyer (an account named MikeLamonica -- who is likely the [http://www.linkedin.com/in/mikelamonca senior VP of the company] writes "A friend is looking to get a Wiki entry up. There is a proper way to do it and a way to blow it. She needs someone who knows how to do it. She does not know precisely how much to budget, but this is not a huge one. Probally in the small range. Of course she would like to see prior success at this. Questions are welcome." The winning bid went to a user who states "Hi, This looks just the kind of job I specialize in. On wikipedia I ma User:SqueakBox and with over 50,000 edits to my name http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/SqueakBox I have a thorough understanding of wikipedia rules, guidelines and policies as well as being well known on the project and with success at doing these kind of jobs". The account bid $250 for the project. Now perhaps I could believe some troll going around freelancer stating that he is you for shits and giggles but not when the bids synch up to your article creations. If you have an alternative interpretation of these facts I would be glad to hear it. '''[[User:Themfromspace|<span style="color:blue;">Them</span>]][[User talk:Themfromspace|<span style="color:red;">From</span>]][[Special:Contributions/themfromspace|<span style="color:black;">Space</span>]]''' 19:28, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
There also seems to be [http://www.freelancer.com/projects/Publishing-Articles/Wikipedia-article-for-artist-need.html this gem], which you bid on and then created [[Mario Zampedroni]] on the same day. If you are editing for pay (which it would seem that you are), please at least admit it and follow COI guidelines. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">[[User:The Wordsmith|'''The Wordsmith''']]</span><sup>[[User talk:The Wordsmith|Communicate]]</sup> 18:23, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
* We appear to be here again ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive627#Concern:_Request_for_fake_third-party_websites]). I have redirected this article, since it asserts no notability outside that person and the sources are either primary or poor quality. Since you previously said "''I am happy to say I wont use this or other accounts to do work for payment now or in the future without being transparent about what I am doing.''" ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SqueakBox&oldid=352040516#Paid_editing.3F here]) and you've denied creating this article for pay when the evidence is very clear that you have, I would be interested to see what your comments on this situation are; I will be posting the situation at [[WP:ANI]]. Please take this as notification of such. [[User_talk:Black Kite|Black Kite (t)]] [[Special:Contributions/Black_Kite|(c)]] 18:59, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
**See [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:SqueakBox_and_paid_editing_.28again.29]]. --[[User:BrownHairedGirl|<span style="color:#996600; cursor: not-allowed;">Brown</span>HairedGirl]] <small>[[User_talk:BrownHairedGirl|(talk)]] • ([[Special:Contributions/BrownHairedGirl|contribs]])</small> 01:07, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
***I am not one of the people inalterably opposed to paid editing, but I think you have exceeding reasonable limits. I am so convinced you have exceeded the limits of tolerance that I would have already blocked you, except that you or anyone should have in fairness an opportunity to respond. What is wanted is a commitment that you will not write articles about subjects you know to be non-encyclopedic, or make use of sources you know to be false, and that you will declare all further paid editing. '''[[User:DGG| DGG]]''' ([[User talk:DGG| talk ]]) 05:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
***I am waiting to comment on this matter until SqueakBox responds. I hope that will be soon. <b>[[User:Will Beback|<span style="color:#595454;">Will Beback</span>]] [[User talk:Will Beback|<span style="color:#C0C0C0;">talk</span>]] </b> 01:45, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
::Well I have never received a penny from Beber Silverstein and if they claim I have they are lying, and I havent been following this thread at all as I am very busy in real life right now. I wont be editing the Beber Silverstein article again or ever accept a paid contract re wikipedia again, all I want is to edit my tv and other articles. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 06:41, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
===Blocked===
As you have failed to respond here or at the above linked ANI discussion, and there is clearly an issue here which the community is deeply concerned about, I have blocked you until such time as you indicate you are willing to enter into a dialogue about the issue. Any unblock request should reflect this.
<div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> [[Image:Stop x nuvola.svg|40px|left|alt=|link=]] You have been '''[[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]]''' '''indefinitely''' from editing for [[Wikipedia:Disruptive editing|abuse of editing privileges]]. If you would like to be unblocked, you may [[Wikipedia:Appealing a block|appeal this block]] by adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx" argument. -->{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=''Your reason here ~~~~''}} below this notice, but you should read the [[Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks|guide to appealing blocks]] first. [[User_talk:Black Kite|Black Kite (t)]] [[Special:Contributions/Black_Kite|(c)]] 23:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC)</div><!-- Template:uw-block --><!-- Template:uw-blockindef -->
:I had no idea there was an issue at all, it seems a bit excessive given that I have received no payment from Beber Silverstein. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 06:33, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
== Sorry to hear about your recet troubles ==
:i am realy sorry to hear about your recent troubles regarding your editing work. if it makes you fel any better i was your stoughtiest advocate during the [[WP:ANI]] and i opposed the idea of you being permanently baned from Wikipedia. i hooepe you choose to return to this project soon because your work is very extensvive and useful, but I can understand if you are too upset to return. i have nothing but respect for the work that you have done so far and while you have made some minor errors i feel that they are outweighed by the bread of the work you have done so far and the weightiness of the contributations that you have made to Wikipedia. Whatever you decide to do, just know that there are people out there who respect what you have done and hope to that you will choose to return and engage with the community once again as a respected and admired editor of exceptronic skill. [[User:Smith Jones]] 03:56, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
== OmniPeace ==
:Hey, man, would you mind giving me a hand regarding the [[OmniPeace]] article? It seems like an important article but I can only find a small accounting of sources on GoogleNews. I know you have some sort of connection with certain research firms and I was hoping you could help me dig up some good sources for this article. [[User:DeeRD|DeeRD]] ([[User talk:DeeRD|talk]]) 03:41, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
{{unblock reviewed | 1=Seems a bit excessive to block me permanently, I didnt even know there was an issue and just want to get on with my tv editing. I have never received a penny from Beber Silverstein, that is for certain sure. I wont be editing the Beber Silverstein article again or ever accept a paid contract re wikipedia again, all I want is to edit my tv and other articles. I dont believe I have harmed the project in any way. Thanks, ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 06:36, 31 December 2010 (UTC) | decline=No consensus on [[WP:ANI]] to unblock at this time. [[User:Nakon|<span style="color: #C50">'''Nakon'''</span>]] 00:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)}}
:I should note that this isn't a permanent block: it's an indefinite one; that is, one which lasts "until such time as you indicate you are willing to enter into a dialogue about the issue", and presumably that the community is satisfied that their concerns are resolved. I have a few questions which you're not obliged to answer: were you aware of the discussion on ANI? If you were aware, why didn't you participate? [[User:Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry|Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry]] ([[User talk:Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry|talk]]) 12:19, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
::I wasnt aware of the discussion on ANI, no, I was aware people had left messages but didnt check on the messages even though I was editing a tiny bit; I am working very hard away from home right now and am extremely busy and stressed in real life which is why I chose not to read the messages. I knew there had been a conversation re Beber but had no idea it had got this serious. I am happy to engage in a dialogue, I am also happy to promise that a repeat wont occur. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 13:13, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
:::You were informed {{diff2|404381720|here}}. [[User:Heymid|<span style="color:green;">Hey</span>]][[User_talk:Heymid|<span style="color:red;">'''''Mid'''''</span>]] ([[Special:Contributions/Heymid|contribs]]) 13:29, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
::::he doesnt deny being informed, he just said that he didnt hear the messages because he didnt review them. [[User:Smith Jones]] 18:36, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
:::::Indeed, I received the messages but had not read them. So how exactly do I go about getting unblocked, or is too late and I am blockedm indef for 1 mistake after 5-6 yrs of regular good quality contributions. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 05:40, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
==Please unblock me now==
{{unblock reviewed | 1=I have stated my willingness to not re-commit any infraction and state here my clear willingness to dialogue re this issue as Black Kite requested. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 05:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC) | decline=As regards procedure, an unblock request must address the reason for the block in sufficient detail to be able to be evaluated on its own, which this one does not. <p>On the merits, at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/User:SqueakBox and paid editing (again)]] there is no consensus to unblock you at this time. Several editors have expressed the opinion that your answers to Martijn Hoekstra's questions were unsatisfactory. Any subsequent unblock request should convincingly (but succinctly) address all concerns raised by other editors. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sandstein|<span style="color:white;background:blue;font-family:sans-serif;">''' Sandstein '''</span>]]</span></small> 21:09, 5 January 2011 (UTC)</p>}}
So no second chance then. That is a shame after 5 yrs working here daily. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 12:35, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Let me ask the question, then - if unblocked, would you consent to declare any conflict of interest you may have when editing? As you can imagine, I'm referring specifically to being paid to write articles, since that payment creates a COI (or, at least, consensus seems to indicate that it does). I think we agree that more discussion on paid editing is needed, and I think you have something to contribute to that discussion, but the concerns noted at ANI are valid ones. [[User:Ultraexactzz|UltraExactZZ]] <sup> [[User_talk:Ultraexactzz|Said]] </sup>~<small> [[Special:Contributions/Ultraexactzz|Did]] </small> 14:45, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
:Before I would support an unblock, I do have some questions. It are a lot of questions, and I'm sorry if it comes across as an interrogation, but you haven't really have been forthcoming with explaining the situation. 1, Could you explain what happened? 2, Did you, or did you not place the add? 3, Do you believe you had a conflict of interest with your edits, and if so, why didn't you declare it? 4, What happened here on your talkpage? Why did you tell ThemFromSpace to 'retract is rash lie' (paraphrased)? 5, do you believe you did anything wrong in this instance? If so, what? 6, if you would go back to editing, and would consider paid editing again (which I don't really object to if done right), will you pledge to declare it on [[WP:COIN]], making sure no borderline cases would escape? 7. Have you edited with a conflict of interest before, that haven't come to light yet? If so, where? (again, including borderline cases would instill more trust in me, then having them turn up later). The more clear and elaborate the answers, the more faith it would instill in me. Given satisfying answers to these questions, I would support an unblock. [[User:Martijn Hoekstra|Martijn Hoekstra]] ([[User talk:Martijn Hoekstra|talk]]) 21:47, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
::Ultraexactzz, if unblocked I would declare any conflict of interest, indeed I would og further and ensure I did nopt edit with any possibler conflict of interest in the future. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 06:04, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
:::Martijn Hoekstra, I did not believe I had a conflict of interest in editing because I believed that the company were notable and had no idea that they planned to publicize their wikipedia article in the way that they did. The rash lie I referred to was the lie of the Beber person claiming they had paid me, I wasn't saying that ThemFromSpace was lying, he wasn't but he was stating a lie form this person at Beber who falsely claimed they have paid me. Its utter rubbish, I have never received a penny from Beber Silverstein. I can assure you that if unblocked I would never take on a paid editing contract again. This is partly due to this experience but also cos my life circumstances have changed greatly since I wrote that article and I wouldn't be in a position to take on any paid work outside my job anyway. As far as I am aware there are no other COIs you dont know about, my contribs are publicly available and speak for themselves. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 06:10, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
::::I think we should [[WP:AGF]] here. [[User:Kittybrewster|Kittybrewster ]] [[User_talk:Kittybrewster|<span style="color: #0000FF">☎</span>]] 10:49, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
:::::See the discussion at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/User:SqueakBox and paid editing (again)]], particularly [[Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents/User:SqueakBox_and_paid_editing_(again)#Could_someone_find_a_consensus_here_please.3F|the most recent part of it]]. --[[User:BrownHairedGirl|<span style="color:#996600; cursor: not-allowed;">Brown</span>HairedGirl]] <small>[[User_talk:BrownHairedGirl|(talk)]] • ([[Special:Contributions/BrownHairedGirl|contribs]])</small> 01:24, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
:::::::I cant participate in that discussion. I do genuinely believe Beber Silverstein were notable and also accept if the community thinks differently, I never tried to save the article. I have received no money from them nor will I ever do so. I am happy to agree parole terms or see this case taken to arbcom but I do believe that given that I have such a long editing history and given that I am 100% willing to never engage in paid work or COI for wikipedia again, and I am willing to admit that I did wrong I do believe I fulfill conditions for being unblocked. If not please let me know how to meet said conditions. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 08:47, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
==My block==
I see the discussion on unblocking me closed without resolution which is a shame as I had hoped they would unblock me, at least to mlet me explain my side of things. I have made clear my commitment to not editing in a COI way in the future, to never take on paid editing again and to agree to other conditions. I am willing to explain tot he best of my ability what happened. With Beber they simply asked me to create an article. I looked and decided it was within our notability policy and created the article. At no time did I break any rules that I am aware of in doing so. When ThemFromSpace challenged me on the article I made no effort to preserve it, my comments about not having received any payment from Beber remain so. I would like to engage in dialogue about this issue but nobody seems to want to. How can this be resolved other than through me being blocked forever for a mistake that wont be repeated. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 11:54, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
:[[WP:Standard offer]]? [[User:Kittybrewster|Kittybrewster ]] [[User_talk:Kittybrewster|<span style="color: #0000FF">☎</span>]] 12:50, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
::Well I would certainly hope not to have to wait out 6 months esp as I sense there is a willingness to see me unblocked. The reality is I have been sent for 3 months to India to work mid December inc over Christmas and what with the trauma of that I was in no fit state to respond to the point of even reading my messages over Xmas. For that I apologize but dont believe it is a reason in itself to see me blocked indef. I know at some point I can request to be unblocked again but after the close of the discussion in which I was pinning my hopes I am trying to test the waters and see if any admin is willing to dialogue with me here. I realize I did wrong and just want to make amends and to continue my constructive editing to the project. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 13:45, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
:::Consensus at the ANI listing was that an unblock request could be considered with "a clear explanation and acknowledgement of what has happened". You say, "With Beber they simply asked me to create an article." Beber didn't ask ''you'' to create an article; their [https://www.linkedin.com/reg/join-pprofile?key=24768266&authToken=Ns5q&authType=name&lnk=vw_pprofile&trk=ndir_viewmore senior VP] advertised for a contracted employee: [http://www.freelancer.com/projects/WIKI/Need-Wikipedia-savvy-pro.html]. You responded to that ad, as one of three people who put in a bid for the job. You asked for $250, with a "$25 milestone." When your bid was accepted, you entered a contract to "work for payment" in spite of your pledge [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SqueakBox&oldid=352040516#Paid_editing.3F here] that you would not do so again, under this or any account, "without being transparent about what I am doing." At no point did you indicate that you were under contract for the creation of that article. Whether or not you ever ''received'' that payment, which we cannot know, the ''contract'' is a matter of public record. Explanations that seem engineered to minimize that are not helpful. I would urge you to consider stepping back and evaluating how your explanation may appear, particularly in light of your first response to having that contract pointed out: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SqueakBox&diff=next&oldid=403514113]. (Your explaining by this that you meant Beber's "rash lie" was rightly discounted at ANI. Since Beber was not leaving a note at your talk page, the pronoun usage in "your rash lie" is pretty clear. Too, there is nothing at the link provided indicating that payment was completed.) Essentially, the community has lost faith at this point that you will work with Wikipedia's best interests, because you seem to be pursuing a separate agenda. I believe that your best bets for negotiating an unblock will begin with an ''unambiguous explanation'', which will go a long way towards making any assertions you make to avoid undisclosed conflicts in the future more credible, particularly in light of clear evidence that your prior pledge to avoid undisclosed conflict was not fulfilled. --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 14:19, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
::::I am certainly not trying to minimize that I did wrong in not being clear about coi and about my initial response to ThemFromSpace and for that am willing to accept a fixed block which has some possibility of remission in the future. At that point I didnt commit to not taking on any paid work ever again whereas now I am willing to do so. The reality is once I knew I was being sent to India I didnt try to claim any payment on the article as I perhaps would have done were I only motivated by money. Any full explanation of mine can only really say the same thing which is that yes I was wrong to have not declared a COI on Beber or on the [[Diamond Ranch Academy]] (an article currently under afd for which I again accepted a contract for which I have not sort or recieved payment). My position now is that paid work on wikipedia does not work so I will never accept it again anyway. I essentially did what this chap from Beber asked which was to create an article, using the New York Times article and the iconic pic, which he sent me. IMO the most useful thing I did was to link Beber and [[Joyce Beber]] in the opening of [[Leona Helmsley]], a more viewed article but the Beber chap did write to me recently saying I had made him look like a jerk. I did though recieve payment for improving [[Blekinge Institute of Technology]] and hope that was within wikipedia guidelines. I know what i did was a big disaster and there could and would be no repeats were I to be given another chance. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 17:01, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
=== Why should we trust you? ===
Squeakbox, an ANI discussion was kept open for three weeks to allow you to respond, and it's very rare for such matters to be held open for so long. You didn't retract your false accusation that the evidence was "lies", and you repeatedly offered only evasive and weaselly explanations of the situation, and even though you could read the ANI discussion and were at all times free to post on your talk page, you didn't move beyond the studied evasiveness. You had previously promised to declare a COI, but you didn't declare it, and you kept up the denials in the face of clear evidence.
When the discussion finally closes, you pop up again with yet another weaselly evasion, this time letting out a weensy bit more of the truth ... and it was only when that was challenged by Moonridden girl that you decided to come clean.
Even with the evidence laid out in front of you, everything had to be dragged out of you, and even that didn't work until the second attempt ''after'' the door had been held open so long that the hinges nearly rusted off . Given that this is how you behaved when caught red-handed on a second offence, why do you think that anyone should trust any assurances you give about declaring a COI in future? --[[User:BrownHairedGirl|<span style="color:#996600; cursor: not-allowed;">Brown</span>HairedGirl]] <small>[[User_talk:BrownHairedGirl|(talk)]] • ([[Special:Contributions/BrownHairedGirl|contribs]])</small> 04:42, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
:So how does this get resolved then? The fact of having endured an indef block has certainly affected me in this matter and I certainly wouldn't expect another chance if I were to blow one but almost all my edits were not COI and I feel I still have something to contribute. Given it seems a number of people including yourself have expressed reluctance to see me blocked indef I would like a way to work this out even if it was say a month block or something along those lines as punishment. I reiterate my days of receiving payment re work at wikipedia were over anyway before ThemFromSpace wrote to me. During the 3 weeks the ANI case was open I travelled half way round the world without my family and was adjusting to a gruelling new environment so wikipedia was simply not a priority at the time. It certainly isnt true that I have received payment for any work done on the Beber article or from Beber. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 09:28, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
::The easiest and most effective way for you to get unblocked, I think, is to follow the [[Wikipedia:Standard offer|standard offer]]. [[User:Heymid|<span style="color:green;">Hey</span>]][[User talk:Heymid|<span style="color:red;">'''''Mid'''''</span>]] ([[Special:Contributions/Heymid|contribs]]) 18:04, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
:::Sigh! I'll request an unblock when I return to Honduras mid March, perhaps work on es wikipedia meantime. While I do genuinely regret any harm caused re paid editing I dont regret failing to respond to discussions at the end of December as I was not in a space to be able to respond at that time. I think its a shame the great bulk of my work counts for so little here, and I would welcome a chance to be unblocked in the meantime. People say they dont trust me but don't give me any opportunity to prove them wrong. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 02:56, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
[[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]], I know we usually haven't seen eye-to-eye on various matters, but please take my following comment in good will and stemming from nothing but compassion and concern. Perhaps, if this hobby takes so much from you, yet returns so little, and embroils you in such disputes - then maybe, just possibly, it is not a good hobby to have. I am well aware that people don't always do things optimally for their life. I have certainly done much little-reward, yet stressful, volunteer work. So I am not preaching. But there are times when one might want to re-evaluate the personal toll taken by participation in a cause. I would suggest to you that this is such an occasion. -- [[User:Seth Finkelstein|Seth Finkelstein]] ([[User talk:Seth Finkelstein|talk]]) 03:14, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
:It would help if I didnt find it such an invaluable source of info that I use all day long. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 06:14, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
::I see Black Kite has now retired, shame as I was going to ask him to unblock me as I would like to be given a second chance, as everyone else on the project apart from me has always been given. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 15:28, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LVIII, December 2010 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" align="center" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
|-
| <div style="text-align: center;">[[File:The Bugle.png|350px|center|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News]]</div><br/>
----
<div style="font-size: 15pt; font-family: Times New Roman; text-align: center; ">[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|<span style="color: darkslategray">Your military history newsletter – Volume LVIII, December 2010</span>]]</div>
----<br />
<div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Times New Roman; text-align: center; ">[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/December 2010/Project news|From the editors • "Military Historian of the Year" • Discussions]] • [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/December 2010/Members|The month's new featured and A-class content • Review awards]]<p>[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/December 2010/Articles|Contest results • A-class medal recipients]] • [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/December 2010/Editorials|bahamut teaches us proper usage of "Jargon and acronyms"]]</p>
</div>
|-
| valign="top" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; font-family: Times New Roman; text-align: center; font-size: 85%; " |
To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Strategy think tank/News and editorials|newsroom]]. Past editions may be viewed [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Archives|here]]. [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 21:44, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
|}
|}
==File permission problem with File:Shitcat.jpg==
[[File:Copyright-problem.svg|64px|left|alt=|link=]]
Thanks for uploading '''[[:File:Shitcat.jpg]]'''. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
* make a note permitting reuse under the [[WP:CC-BY-SA|CC-BY-SA]] or another acceptable free license (see [[Wikipedia:File copyright tags/Free licenses|this list]]) '''at the site of the original publication'''; or
* Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to '''{{NoSpamEmail|permissions-en|wikimedia.org}}''', stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter [[WP:CONSENT|here]]. If you take this step, add {{tl|OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to '''{{NoSpamEmail|permissions-en|wikimedia.org}}'''.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at [[Wikipedia:Non-free content]], use a tag such as {{tlp|non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at [[Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use]], and add a [[Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline|rationale]] justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See [[Wikipedia:File copyright tags]] for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [{{fullurl:Special:Log|type=upload&user=SqueakBox}} your upload log]. '''Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged''', as described on [[wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Files|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|Media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no permission-notice --><!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> [[User:Kelly|<span style="color:#060;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;cursor:help">'''Kelly'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Kelly|hi!]]</sup> 02:40, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
== ''The Bugle'': Volume LVIX, January 2011 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; ">'''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|<span style="color: darkslategray">Your Military history Newsletter</span>]]'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project News: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/January 2011/Project news|From the editors]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/January 2011/Articles|The month's featured and A-class Milhist content]]''
* Members: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/January 2011/Members|Contest results, A-class medal recipients]]''
* Editorial: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/January 2011/Editorials|EyeSerene discusses "Writing neutrally for Wikipedia"]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<span style="font-size: 85%;">
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Options|here]]. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Strategy think tank/News and editorials|newsroom]]. [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 16:46, 21 February 2011 (UTC)</span>
== HMS Titanic listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] ==
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect [[HMS Titanic]]. Since you had some involvement with the ''HMS Titanic'' redirect, you might want to participate in [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 March 11#HMS Titanic|the redirect discussion]] (if you have not already done so). <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> As you are blocked, please place any comment here and I will transfer it to the discussion page for you. [[User:Mjroots|Mjroots]] ([[User talk:Mjroots|talk]]) 07:57, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LX, February 2011 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; ">'''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|<span style="color: darkslategray">Your Military History Newsletter</span>]]'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project News: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/February 2011/Project news|From the editors]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/February 2011/Articles|The month's featured and A-class Milhist content]]''
* Members: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/February 2011/Members|Contest results, A-class medal recipients]]''
* Editorial: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/February 2011/Editorials|Ed talks about real-world collaborations and how you can help]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<span style="font-size: 85%;">
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Options|here]]. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Strategy think tank/News and editorials|newsroom]]. [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 22:47, 17 March 2011 (UTC)</span>
==[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kate Middleton]]==
LMAO that you once tried to delete an article about the future Queen of England!!♦ [[User talk:Dr. Blofeld|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#000">Dr. Blofeld</span>]] 12:35, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
:She wasn't notable at the time, if I remember correctly. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 15:08, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXI, March 2011 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; ">'''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|<span style="color: darkslategray">Your Military History Newsletter</span>]]'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project News: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/March 2011/Project news|From the editors]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/March 2011/Articles|The month's featured and A-class Milhist content]]''
* Members: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/March 2011/Members|Contest results, A-class medal recipients]]''
* Editorial: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/March 2011/Editorials|Dank helps you see what article writers want from reviewers]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<span style="font-size: 85%;">
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Options|here]]. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Strategy think tank/News and editorials|newsroom]]. [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 04:47, 1 May 2011 (UTC)</span>
== Atlanticism ==
Can u give a reason why do u think that saying: In WWII Germany attacked many Central and Eastern European countries and all the security alliences and guarantees between them countries and Britain and France were forgotten. is a "historical revisionism"? I would like to see a historical and based on facts reason for saying its a revisionism cos as u maybe dont know Poland had a security pacts and alliances signed with Britain and France which contained a phrase about immediate help if any of that countries were attacked..in fact when Poland was attacked by Germany on 1 sept 1939 that countries didnt even move their finger to help the Poles, if they did WWII could be over maybe the same year it started (read about number of soldiers of each front in 1939 and possobilities it could gave to anti german allies). What they did was clearly an act of felony and betrayal of and ally. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/78.152.250.218|78.152.250.218]] ([[User talk:78.152.250.218|talk]]) 21:25, 5 May 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXII, April 2011 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; ">'''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|<span style="color: darkslategray">Your Military History Newsletter</span>]]'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project News: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/April 2011/Project news|From the editors]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/April 2011/Articles|The month's featured and A-class Milhist content]]''
* Members: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/April 2011/Members|Contest results, A-class medal recipients]]''
* Editorial: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/April 2011/Editorials|Buggie111 discusses neutral point of view]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<span style="font-size: 85%;">
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Options|here]]. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Strategy think tank/News and editorials|newsroom]]. [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 23:44, 17 May 2011 (UTC)</span>
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXIII, May 2011 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; ">'''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|<span style="color: darkslategray">Your Military History Newsletter</span>]]'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project News: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/May 2011/Project news|From the editors – Contest results, A-class medal recipients]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/May 2011/Articles|The month's featured and A-class Milhist content]]''
* Editorial: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/May 2011/Editorials|Hawkeye's thoughts on the article writing process]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<span style="font-size: 85%;">
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Options|here]]. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Strategy think tank/News and editorials|newsroom]]. [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 23:33, 4 June 2011 (UTC)</span>
== Nomination of [[Christian and Nick Candy]] for deletion ==
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">[[File:Ambox warning orange.svg|42px|alt=|link=]]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article '''[[Christian and Nick Candy]]''' is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to [[Wikipedia:List of policies and guidelines|Wikipedia's policies and guidelines]] or whether it should be [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deleted]].
The article will be discussed at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christian and Nick Candy]] until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. [[User:Off2riorob|Off2riorob]] ([[User talk:Off2riorob|talk]]) 18:20, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
{{you've got mail}} [[User:UOJComm|UOJComm]] ([[User talk:UOJComm|talk]]) 01:22, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
==Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Rastafari==
'''[[:Category:Rastafari]]''', which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at '''[[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 July 5#Category:Rastafari|the category's entry]]''' on the [[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion|Categories for discussion]] page.<!-- Template:Cfd-notify--> Thank you. —[[User:Koavf|Justin (koavf)]]❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯ 02:57, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
== File:PictureSB 038.jpg listed for deletion ==
A file that you uploaded or altered, [[:File:PictureSB 038.jpg]], has been listed at [[Wikipedia:Files for deletion]]. Please see the [[Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 July 7#File:PictureSB 038.jpg|'''discussion''']] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}} <!-- Template:Fdw --> [[User:Sven Manguard|<span style="color:#207004;">'''<big>S</big>ven <big>M</big>anguard'''</span>]] [[User talk:Sven Manguard|<small><span style="color:#F0A804;">'''Wha?'''</span></small>]] 06:03, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
:Thanks for the shout-out, pic saved. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 16:35, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXIV, June 2011 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; ">'''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|<span style="color: darkslategray">Your Military History Newsletter</span>]]'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/June 2011/Project news|From the editors; medal recipients; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/June 2011/Articles|The month's featured and A-class Milhist content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/June 2011/Book reviews|Nick-D looks at Finland and Spitfires]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/June 2011/Op-ed|Fifelfoo and hunting for plagiarism]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<span style="font-size: 85%;">
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Strategy/News and editorials/Delivery options#Non-members who want delivery|here]]. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Options|this page]]. [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 00:02, 17 July 2011 (UTC)</span>
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXV, July 2011 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; ">'''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|<span style="color: darkslategray">Your Military History Newsletter</span>]]'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/July 2011/Project news|From the editors; medal recipients; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/July 2011/Articles|The month's featured and A-class Milhist content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/July 2011/Book reviews|Nick-D looks at Zeebrugee and Afghanistan]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/July 2011/Op-ed|WereSpielChequers examines RfA]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<span style="font-size: 85%;">
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Strategy/News and editorials/Delivery options#Non-members who want delivery|here]]. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Options|this page]]. [[User:BrownBot|BrownBot]] ([[User talk:BrownBot|talk]]) 23:10, 14 August 2011 (UTC)</span>
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXVI, August 2011 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; ">'''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|<span style="color: darkslategray">Your Military History Newsletter</span>]]'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/August 2011/Project news|From the editors; medal recipients; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/August 2011/Articles|The month's featured and A-class Milhist content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/August 2011/Book reviews|Nick-D looks at Carthage and Australia in Palestine]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/August 2011/Op-ed|Remembering 9/11]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Strategy/News and editorials/Delivery options#Non-members who want delivery|here]]. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Options|this page]]. [[User:EdwardsBot|EdwardsBot]] ([[User talk:EdwardsBot|talk]]) 18:44, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0171 -->
== Where you live ==
Hey, I'm not sure if you're still around, but I've been adding descriptions to images and moving them to more descriptive names, and I came across [[:File:IMG 5581.JPG]]. You say it's "Where I live"... but where is that? Thanks, – [[User:Quadell|Quadell]] <sup>([[User_talk:Quadell|talk]])</sup> 12:56, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
:Its in La Ceiba, Honduras. I am still around, it would be nicve to be unblocked after this long, long block. Sigh. . Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 13:16, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
== Unblock request ==
{{unblock reviewed | 1=Please can I have my block reviewed and lifted. I invoke the [[Wikipedia:Standard offer]]. This definitely would include no writing either for profit or representing any third parties. Happy to abide by coinditions. I have been editing at Spanish wikipedia so have continued volunteering in the project as a whole ([http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Especial:Contribuciones/SqueakBox Contribs in Spanish]) and am simply asking to be given another chance. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 17:48, 20 October 2011 (UTC) | decline=Since this is basically a block that was upheld by community discussion, I believe it would not be appropriate for a single admin to unblock on their own authority. Another discussion will b e needed. Until we get the "clear explanation and acknowledgement of what has happened" that has been requested of you multiple times I see no reason to even open that discussion. Other than that you do seem to qualify for the standard offer, although as I'm sure you realize it is not binding. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 19:23, 20 October 2011 (UTC)}}
I would like to support his unblocking on English wp. He has been a wikipedian at least 7 years, even longer than I have, and is a well qualified veteran who has been in the cold here long enough I think! Give him another chance! Thanks, [[User:Til Eulenspiegel|Til Eulenspiegel]] ([[User talk:Til Eulenspiegel|talk]]) 18:07, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
*Administrative note: this user was blocked following an ANI discussion [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents/User:SqueakBox_and_paid_editing_%28again%29 here]. That discussion was closed (in January) as "There is no consensus to unblock Squeakbox. There is a consensus to consider an unblock request from Squeakbox if it is accompanied by a clear explanation and acknowledgement of what has happened". Squeakbox, would you consider offering an explanation of what you understand your mistakes to have been in the past, so that we know you'll be able to avoid them in the future, and guaranteeing that you will disclose any COI you have on articles you edit, whether that involves pay or third parties or not? [[User:Fluffernutter|A fluffernutter is a sandwich!]] ([[User talk:Fluffernutter|talk]]) 18:21, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
:Yes. I was wrong to take on work using elance/odesk style online work web sites for clients who were looking, for whatever reason, to have a wikipedia article page either enhanced or created, and wronmg as well to not openly declare my COI in these cases. I was getting these jobs by searching "wikipedia" on these websites and thus finding the clients. This of course immediately created COI issues for me while editing, and I was not forthcoming about these COI issues even after I had already been warned once about this. I continued to seek these jobs and even though I had agreed to in future admit any possible COI issues I then completely failed to do so, which is why I was blocked. If unblocked I would certainly agree to admitting any COI issues on articles I edited, whether that COI involved payment or not, but I would also absolutely not work for payment in the future, and indeed my intention would be to avoid editing articles where I could be considered to have a COI. I have actually read a policy proposal here that says that a site-widfe block should be imposed for accepting payment in this way so I understand wikipedia is taking this issue very seriosuly and that what I did was harming the project, both in the accepting of payment and the COI issues and will certainly ensure that I do not repeat if you are kind enough to unblock me. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 19:30, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
:Well, I'd say that's a promising start, I will copy this over to ANI and initiate an unblock discussion. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 19:32, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
:Thanks. I am around. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 19:37, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
::Conversation started [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=456564855&oldid=456563325]. If you would like to add anything during the course of it, post here and it will be copied over. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 19:43, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
== Welcome back! ==
Welcome back, SqueakBox! I was happy when I had the chance to work with you before the block, I am glad to see your explanation and the subsequent unblock, and I look forward to seeing your contributions around here again... [[User:Moogwrench|Moogwrench]] ([[User talk:Moogwrench|talk]]) 20:41, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
:Unfortunately I still have an ip address block till 01:16am tomorrow but its my ip tnat is targetted (because I edited my user talk page while blocked apparently) so still have a few hours to wait till I am unblocked but am really pleased and thanks to those who have supported the unblocking, SqueakBox is indeed unblocked. I certainly intend to live up to my good intentions in just not going anywhere near paid work for wikipedia articles ever again, and cautiously declaring COIs. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 21:39, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
:Email your IP to the unblock list and I'll look into unblocking it.--v/r - [[User:TParis|T]][[User_talk:TParis|P]] 22:02, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
::I looked up and disabled one autoblock associated with this account; pretty common oversight, unfortunately. – <small>[[User:Luna Santin|<span style="color: #28f">Luna Santin</span>]] ([[User talk:Luna Santin|talk]])</small> 22:24, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
:::Well actually he shouldn't have been autoblocked at all. The new software package has been doing all sorts of insane stuff to old blocks. Anyway, welcome back, clearly the community is ready to let you back in with open arms. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 04:19, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
::::Welcome back, Squeakbox. You have much to contribute. [[User:Kittybrewster|Kittybrewster ]] [[User_talk:Kittybrewster|<span style="color: #0000FF">☎</span>]] 09:53, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
:::::Hello and welcome back, SqueakBox. I stumbled upon your user page a few months back and learned that you had been blocked which came as a surprise to me since you appeared to be an active contributor to Wikipedia. I then learned about your ordeal and found a lot of reading material on the events that led to your suspension. Well, I'm glad for you that was sorted out and you're back. I wanted to ask you if you'd be willing to translate the [[Tegucigalpa]] English article into Spanish to use for the [[:es:Tegucigalpa|Tegucigalpa]] Spanish article since the latter is currently in very bad shape and it would be neat to revamp it using its English version, images included. Let me know, thank you.--[[User:Usfirstgov|Usfirstgov]] ([[User talk:Usfirstgov|talk]]) 12:01, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
== Moving [[Talk:Burma|Burma to Myanmar]] - ongoing poll ==
This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move [[Talk:Burma|Burma to Myanmar]].
This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past.
It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. [[User:Fyunck(click)|Fyunck(click)]] ([[User talk:Fyunck(click)|talk]]) 21:38, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXVII, September 2011 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; ">'''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|<span style="color: darkslategray">Your Military History Newsletter</span>]]'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/September 2011/Project news|From the editors; medal recipients; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/September 2011/Articles|The month's featured and A-class Milhist content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/September 2011/Book reviews|Nick-D and Ian Rose look at Australian air power]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/September 2011/Op-ed|Buggie111 ruminates about WikiLife and WikiDeath]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Strategy/News and editorials/Delivery options#Non-members who want delivery|here]]. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Options|this page]]. [[User:EdwardsBot|EdwardsBot]] ([[User talk:EdwardsBot|talk]]) 02:49, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0190 -->
== Image name change ==
Hi there. While cleaning out [[:User:Chzz/Pict0611|this list]] of images, I came across your image. I wanted to let you know have moved the picture to a more descriptive name. The page "File:PictureSB 023.jpg" has been moved to "[[:File:SqueakBox user photo.jpg]]". This should not effect you in any way, though. Cheers, [[User:Sven Manguard|<span style="color:#207004;">'''<big>S</big>ven <big>M</big>anguard'''</span>]] [[User talk:Sven Manguard|<small><span style="color:#F0A804;">'''Wha?'''</span></small>]] 12:59, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXVIII, October 2011 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; ">'''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|<span style="color: darkslategray">Your Military History Newsletter</span>]]'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/October 2011/Project news|From the editors; medal recipients; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/October 2011/Articles|The month's Featured and A-class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/October 2011/Book reviews|Nick-D analyzes three books from Osprey Publishing]]''
* Review essay: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/October 2011/Op-ed|Nick-D reviews the new Bundeswehr Military History Museum]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]]. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. [[User:EdwardsBot|EdwardsBot]] ([[User talk:EdwardsBot|talk]]) 08:48, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0203 -->
== A kitten for you! ==
[[File:Young cats.jpg|left|150px]]
Apropos of nothing in particular, hope you are doing well.
[[User:Herostratus|Herostratus]] ([[User talk:Herostratus|talk]]) 04:32, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
<br style="clear: both"/>
== A bowl of strawberries for you! ==
{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | [[File:Erdbeerteller01.jpg|120px]]
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Oh dear.. you have been blocked more times than me.. [[User:Sistemx|My Sistemx]] ([[User talk:Sistemx|talk]]) 17:49, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
|}
==MfD nomination of [[Talk:Ralph Underwager]]==
[[Talk:Ralph Underwager]], a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for [[WP:MfD|deletion]]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Ralph Underwager ]] and please be sure to [[WP:SIG|sign your comments]] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). You are free to edit the content of [[Talk:Ralph Underwager]] during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.<!-- Template:MFDWarning --> [[User:Sturunner|Sturunner]] ([[User talk:Sturunner|talk]]) 04:13, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXIX, November 2011 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/November 2011/Project news|From the editors – MHotY coming; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/November 2011/Articles|The month's Featured and A-class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/November 2011/Book reviews|Nick-D looks at the Congolese Wars]]''
* Review essay: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/November 2011/Review essay|Ian Rose goes to El Alamein]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/November 2011/Op-ed|DCI's call to revitalize WikiProject History]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) and [[User:The ed17|Ed]] <sup>[[User talk:The ed17|[talk]]] [[WP:OMT|[majestic titan]]]</sup> 21:10, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0212 -->
== Military Historian of the Year ==
Nominations for the "[[WP:MHAWARDS#"Military historian of the Year"|Military Historian of the Year]]" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so '''[[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Nominations for military historian of the year for 2011 now open!|here]]'''. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the [[WP:MHCOORD|coordinators]], [[User:Nick-D|Nick-D]] ([[User talk:Nick-D|talk]]) and [[User:The ed17|Ed]] <sup>[[User talk:The ed17|[talk]]] [[WP:OMT|[majestic titan]]]</sup> 00:31, 16 January 2012 (UTC) <small>You were sent this message because you are a listed as a [[WP:MHMEMBERS|member]] of the [[WP:MILHIST|Military history WikiProject]].</small>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0221 -->
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXX, January 2012 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/January 2012/Project news|From the editors; award recipients; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/January 2012/Articles|The month's Featured and A-class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/January 2012/Book reviews|Nick-D Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books]]''
* Review essay: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/January 2012/Interview|Kirill Lokshin, the first coordinator]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/January 2012/Op-ed|Hchc's English Castles]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) and [[User:The ed17|Ed]] <sup>[[User talk:The ed17|[talk]]] [[WP:OMT|[majestic titan]]]</sup> 00:44, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0223 -->
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXI, February 2012 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/February 2012/Project news|From the editors; award recipients; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/February 2012/Articles|The month's Featured and A-class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/February 2012/Book reviews|Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books]]''
<!--* Review essay: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/February 2012/Interview|Kirill Lokshin, the first coordinator]]-->
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/February 2012/Op-ed|Ian Rose discusses article assessments]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) and [[User:The ed17|Ed]] <sup>[[User talk:The ed17|[talk]]] [[WP:OMT|[majestic titan]]]</sup> 10:31, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0233 -->
== File:P002.jpg listed for deletion ==
A file that you uploaded or altered, [[:File:P002.jpg]], has been listed at [[Wikipedia:Files for deletion]]. Please see the [[Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 March 22#File:P002.jpg|'''discussion''']] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw --> [[User:Skier Dude|<span style="color:ForestGreen">Skier Dude</span>]] ([[User_talk:Skier Dude|<span style="color:SaddleBrown">talk</span>]]) 02:05, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXII, March 2012 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/March 2012/Project news|From the editors; award recipients; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/March 2012/Articles|The month's Featured and A-class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/March 2012/Book reviews|Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/March 2012/Op-ed|Hawkeye on Wikipedia collaborating with the AWM]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) and [[User:The ed17|Ed]] <sup>[[User talk:The ed17|[talk]]] [[WP:OMT|[majestic titan]]]</sup> 02:41, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0250 -->
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXIII, April 2012 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/April 2012/Project news|From the editors; award recipients; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/April 2012/Articles|The month's Featured and A-class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/April 2012/Book reviews|Bomzibar on Subhas Chandra Bose; Hawkeye on corps commanders; Nick-D on American special forces]]''
<!--* Review essay: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/February 2012/Interview|Kirill Lokshin, the first coordinator]]-->
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/April 2012/Op-ed|The Land on commemorating World War I]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) and [[User:The ed17|Ed]] <sup>[[User talk:The ed17|[talk]]] [[WP:OMT|[majestic titan]]]</sup> 00:45, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0264 -->
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXVI, July 2012 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/May 2012/Project news|From the editors: Wikimania 2012; special projects note]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/May 2012/Articles|The month's Featured and A-class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/May 2012/Book reviews|Nick-D on the Australian 25th Battalion]]''
* Interview: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/May 2012/Interview|Article writers discuss buildings and fortifications]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/May 2012/Op-ed|Hawkeye7 reports on a weekend workshop]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) and [[User:The ed17|Ed]] <sup>[[User talk:The ed17|[talk]]] [[WP:OMT|[majestic titan]]]</sup> 09:50, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0313 -->
== Moving [[Talk:Burma|Burma to Myanmar]] - ongoing poll ==
This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Burma Burma to Myanmar]. I know this happened just recently but no administrator would close these frequent rm's down, so here we go again. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. [[User:Fyunck(click)|Fyunck(click)]] ([[User talk:Fyunck(click)|talk]]) 00:18, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXVII, August 2012 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/August 2012/Project news|From the editors; award recipients; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/August 2012/Articles|The month's Featured and A-class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/August 2012/Book reviews|Nick-D on the legacy of World War II]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/August 2012/Op-ed|Bomzibar on German military history]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) and [[User:The ed17|Ed]] <sup>[[User talk:The ed17|[talk]]] [[WP:OMT|[majestic titan]]]</sup> 01:14, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0340 -->
==[[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|Speedy deletion]] nomination of [[:Ramón Amaya Amador]]==
[[Image:Information icon4.svg|48px|left|alt=|link=]]
{{Quote box|quote=<p>If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read [[WP:Your first article|the guide to writing your first article]].</p><p>You may want to consider using the [[Wikipedia:Article wizard|Article Wizard]] to help you create articles.</p>|width=20%|align=right}}
A tag has been placed on [[:Ramón Amaya Amador]], requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under [[WP:CSD#A2|section A2 of the criteria for speedy deletion]], because the article appears to be a foreign language article that was copied and pasted from another [[Wikimedia]] project, or was [[m:transwiki|transwikied]] out to another project. Please see [[Wikipedia:Translation]] to learn about requests for, and coordination of, translations from [[m:List of Wikipedias|foreign-language Wikipedias]] into English.
If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit '''[[Talk:Ramón Amaya Amador|the page's talk page directly]]''' to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with [[Wikipedia:List of policies|Wikipedia's policies and guidelines]]. If the page is deleted, you can contact [[:Category:Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles|one of these administrators]] to request that the administrator [[Wikipedia:Userfication#Userfication of deleted content|userfy]] the page or email a copy to you. <!-- Template:Db-foreign-notice --> <!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> [[User:Fox2k11|Fox2k11]] ([[User talk:Fox2k11|talk]]) 22:17, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
:Speed tagging this was one of the worst decisions I have ever seen on wikipeida; if you had checked the history you would have discovered the article3 was vandalised; to speedy an article cos its ben vandalised is unacceptable, please take care in future. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 00:00, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history]] coordinator election ==
The Military history WikiProject has started its [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/September 2012|'''2012 project coordinator election process''']], where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators|current coordinators]] on their talk page. <small>This message was delivered here because you are a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|member]] of the Military history WikiProject.</small> – '''Military history coordinators''' ([[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|about the project]] • [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators#What do the coordinators do?|what coordinators do]]) 09:55, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
<!-- EdwardsBot 0349 -->
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXVIII, September 2012 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/September 2012/Project news|From the editors; award recipients; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/September 2012/Articles|The month's Featured and A-class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/September 2012/Book reviews|AustralianRupert on artillery in South Australia, and Nick-D on Venice's empire]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/September 2012/Op-ed|Nick-D on the "Kokoda: Beyond the Legend" conference]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] and/or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Nick-D|Nick-D]] ([[User talk:Nick-D|talk]]) and [[User:The ed17|Ed]] <sup>[[User talk:The ed17|[talk]]] [[WP:OMT|[majestic titan]]]</sup> 21:01, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0377 -->
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXIX, October 2012 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/October 2012/Project news|From the editors; milestone for the Fortifications task force; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/October 2012/Articles|The month's new Featured and A-class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/October 2012/Hawkeye7 on mission command]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/October 2012/Op-ed|The ed17 on how The Bugle could be improved]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Nick-D|Nick-D]] ([[User talk:Nick-D|talk]]) and [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) 03:03, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0390 -->
== Your welcome message ==
Hi, did you know hat someone blanked your welcome message back in April of this year? I just found it and reverted. Good luck in the Americas. <span style="color: green; font-size:small; font-family: Impact">~ [[User:RTG|R]].[[User_Talk:RTG|T]].[[Special:Contributions/RTG|G]]</span> 11:23, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
== [[Supernatural (U.S. TV series)]] ==
As a previous "mover" of this article, there is a discussion in regards to the renaming at [[Talk:Supernatural_(U.S._TV_series)#Requested move (November 2012)]] you are invited to join. [[User:Betty Logan|Betty Logan]] ([[User talk:Betty Logan|talk]]) 06:58, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads up. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 15:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXX, November 2012 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/November 2012/Project news|From the editors; awards and honours; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/November 2012/Articles|The month's new Featured and A-Class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/November 2012/Book reviews|Sturmvogel_66, AustralianRupert, and Nick-D look at ships, soldiers, and railways]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/November 2012/Op-ed|Nick-D on navigating the FA and A-Class review processes]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) and [[User:Nick-D|Nick-D]] ([[User talk:Nick-D|talk]]) 01:27, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0407 -->
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXXI, December 2012 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/December 2012/Project news|From the editors; awards and honours; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/December 2012/Articles|The month's new Featured and A-Class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/December 2012/Book reviews|Simon Harley on British battleships and Nick-D on the French Resistance]]''
* Interview: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/December 2012/Interview|Five editors discuss some less-represented areas of military history]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/December 2012/Op-ed|Ian Rose looks back on 2012]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) and [[User:Nick-D|Nick-D]] ([[User talk:Nick-D|talk]]) 09:07, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0423 -->
== A cup of tea for you! ==
{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | [[File:Meissen-teacup pinkrose01.jpg|120px]]
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Hope things are going OK for you. It's krikey cold up here. [[User:Herostratus|Herostratus]] ([[User talk:Herostratus|talk]]) 04:38, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
|}
:Don't actually drink tea any more, lol. Here it's nice and warm (still where I was). Cheers anyway. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 15:47, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXXII, January 2013 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/January 2013/Project news|From the editors; awards and honours; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/January 2013/Articles|The month's new Featured and A-Class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/January 2013/Book reviews|Nick-D looks at Mongol naval power]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/January 2013/Op-ed|Crisco 1492 on war films]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) and [[User:Nick-D|Nick-D]] ([[User talk:Nick-D|talk]]) 13:03, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0445 -->
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXXIII, February 2013 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/February 2013/Project news|From the editors; awards and honours; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/February 2013/Articles|Last month's new Featured and A-Class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/February 2013/Book reviews|Nick-D looks at US Army leadership since World War II]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) and [[User:Nick-D|Nick-D]] ([[User talk:Nick-D|talk]]) 07:18, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0469 -->
==copyedit Tipitapa==
As owner of the article, I want you to know that a lot of cleanup has occured to the composition. Please read it over to insure its integrity. Thanks Jerome Sindaco 17:15, 9 March 2013 (UTC) <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Jeromesindaco|Jeromesindaco]] ([[User talk:Jeromesindaco|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jeromesindaco|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:I am not the owner, we dont own articles on wikipedia, but ti is looking good now. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 16:26, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXXIV, March 2013 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/March 2013/Project news|From the editors; awards and honours; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/March 2013/Articles|Last month's new Featured and A-Class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/March 2013/Book reviews|Nick-D looks at refugees during the Battle of France]]''
* Interview: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/March 2013/Interview|Editors discuss writing articles about the former Yugoslavia]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/March 2013/Op-ed|Prioryman on German V-weapon sites and the historian's responsibility]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) and [[User:Nick-D|Nick-D]] ([[User talk:Nick-D|talk]]) 03:49, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0485 -->
==You've got mail!==
{{you've got mail|subject=|ts=14:08, 31 March 2013 (UTC)}}
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXXV, April 2013 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/April 2013/Project news|From the editors; awards and honours; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/April 2013/Articles|Last month's new Featured and A-Class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/April 2013/Book reviews|Sturmvogel 66 and Hawkeye7 look at aspects of the Pacific War]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/April 2013/Op-ed|ErrantX considers the rabbit hole of research]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) and [[User:Nick-D|Nick-D]] ([[User talk:Nick-D|talk]]) 15:14, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0504 -->
==Do not delete dead links (and the text they support) merely because the links are dead==
From your recent edits of [[LGBT rights in Jamaica]], you apparently believe that dead links (and the text they support) must be deleted merely because the links are dead. That is not the case. Refer to [[WP:LR]], in particular this language:
<blockquote>'''Do not''' delete cited information ''solely'' because the URL to the source does not work any longer. ''[[WP:Verifiability]] does not require that all information be supported by a working link, nor does it require the source to be published online.''
<br/><br/>
Except for URLs in the [[External links]] section that have '''not''' been used to support any article content, '''do not''' delete a URL ''solely'' because the URL does not work any longer. Recovery and repair options and tools are available. (emphasis in the original)</blockquote>
[[User:AfricaTanz|AfricaTanz]] ([[User talk:AfricaTanz|talk]]) 12:47, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
:This is not a recipe for violating BLP; not all material needs to be sourced anyway, merely all controversial material and if material is controversial and refs are unable to back it up said material needs removing. We cannot be quoting living artists with allegedly homophobic lyrics unless the ref supports this, as it becomes a BLP violation. You are of course free to use recovery and repair tools in order to ref these allegations properly and thus ensure the article sticks to BLP. So basically I was not deleting these refs solely because they don't work but because I believe that BLP rules were being broken except in my very last edit where I believed a ref wasn't necessary as the material was not in dispute, certainly not by me but you are welcome to revert my last edit (not the others) if you so require and if you can fix the cite error which was the motivation behind that deletion. Why are you asking me here and not on the talk page for the article?. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 15:30, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
::I put the note here because your unique editing behavior, in apparent disregard of [[WP:LR]], is causing serious problems. It is perfectly fine for a dead link to support controversial material concerning an individual. The mere fact that the link is dead does not necessitate: (1) the deletion of the link; or (2) the deletion of the material. The only time the link (and the material it supports) should be deleted is when the link, when it was "alive", did not in fact support the controversial material. Your explanation for deleting the links and material is not based on the latter reason. Rather, your explanation simply says that the links are dead. That is not good enough. Some of your edits are likely to be reverted accordingly. Regards. [[User:AfricaTanz|AfricaTanz]] ([[User talk:AfricaTanz|talk]]) 19:48, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Unique editing behaviour? What are you talking about. And since when did defending BLP cause problems? It is not okay for dead links to support potential BLP vios, have you read [[WP:BLP]]? We will not accept alleged homophobic accusations without solid sources. The allegations which are not sourced must be removed according to BLP, you cannot trump this policy by quoting another policy at me and claiming that defending BLP is unique editing behaviour and causing serious problems wont help your case either. If you re-add this material I will revert and then report you to the BLP noticeboard as we cannot have this material unsupported by refs, and 404s are not refs. Please rad and get to understand BLP, however controversial these dancehall artists may be they are fully needing our support as editors when it comes to BLP, one of the most important policies on wikipedia. If you want to include lyric interpretation illustrating alleged homophobic behaviour either choose dead artists or find some new sources, neither should be too difficult. You still havent explained why this conversation isnt taking place on the LGBT Jamaica where others can join in, this is becoming more necessary given your threat to deliberately violate our BLP policy. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 21:41, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
:Getting live links was the correct way to go, we can only have verifiable links when it comes to possible BLP vios. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 01:14, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
==Disambiguation link notification for May 11==
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited [[Green Party of England and Wales]], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page [[Outrage!]] ([[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Green_Party_of_England_and_Wales|check to confirm]] | [[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Green_Party_of_England_and_Wales|fix with Dab solver]]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the [[User:DPL bot/Dablink notification FAQ|FAQ]]{{*}} Join us at the [[Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links|DPL WikiProject]].</small>
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these [[User:DPL bot|opt-out instructions]]. Thanks, [[User:DPL bot|DPL bot]] ([[User talk:DPL bot|talk]]) 19:32, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
:Whoops, this does indeed sound like a mistake on my part, an unusual one as I normally check these things but thanks for the heads up anyway. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 23:53, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXXVI, May 2013 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/May 2013/Project news|From the editors; awards and honours; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/May 2013/Articles|Last month's new Featured and A-Class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/May 2013/Book reviews|Dumelow on the French Foreign Legion and Nick-D on New Zealand military history]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/May 2013/Op-ed|Nick-D on military history tourism]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) and [[User:Nick-D|Nick-D]] ([[User talk:Nick-D|talk]]) 13:07, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0524 -->
==Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library!==
{|style="background:#CEE3F6; border:1px solid #cee3f6; margin:0.5em; padding:0.5em;border-radius: 8px;"
|-
!colspan=2 style="font-size:150%;"|[[World Digital Library]] Wikipedia Partnership - We need ''you!''
|-
|[[File:WorldDigitalLibraryLogo2.png|right|90px]]
|Hi! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the [[World Digital Library]], a project of the [[Library of Congress]] and [[UNESCO]]. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Please sign up to participate [[Wikipedia:GLAM/WDL/Participants|here]]. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! [[User:SarahStierch|SarahStierch]] ([[User talk:SarahStierch|talk]]) 19:43, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
|}
:Thanks for letting me know. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 23:53, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
==Disambiguation link notification for June 20==
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited [[Marley (film)]], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page [[Lee Perry]] ([[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Marley_%28film%29|check to confirm]] | [[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Marley_%28film%29|fix with Dab solver]]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the [[User:DPL bot/Dablink notification FAQ|FAQ]]{{*}} Join us at the [[Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links|DPL WikiProject]].</small>
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these [[User:DPL bot|opt-out instructions]]. Thanks, [[User:DPL bot|DPL bot]] ([[User talk:DPL bot|talk]]) 11:23, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads up, Mr Bot, youw ere right and these messages are appreciated, now fixed. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 17:01, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
== [[TV Everywhere]] ==
I'll have to do some further research on this, but I think "TV Everywhere" is more than just a verification system. The additional definitions I've found may be justifications for expanding the article beyond the one basic definition. I was thinking about making "TV Everywhere" a section of [[Multichannel video programming distributor]], and that's still possible, meaning your article would be a redirect. Your definition and the additional information would be the basis for that section, followed by the other definitions I've found.— [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color: Green">Vchimpanzee</span>]] '''·''' [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color: orange"> talk</span>]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color: purple">contributions</span>]] '''·''' 18:01, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
:OK, fine. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 18:18, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXXVII, June 2013 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/June 2013/Project news|From the editors; awards and honours; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/June 2013/Articles|Last month's new Featured and A-Class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/June 2013/Book reviews|Works on the RNZAF, World War I in the Baltic, and British battleship construction]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/June 2013/Op-ed|Anchors Aweigh for the Majestic Titans]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) and [[User:Nick-D|Nick-D]] ([[User talk:Nick-D|talk]]) 08:43, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0554 -->
== Nomination of [[Mehdi Kazemi]] for deletion ==
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">[[File:Ambox warning orange.svg|48px|alt=|link=]]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article '''[[Mehdi Kazemi]]''' is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to [[Wikipedia:List of policies and guidelines|Wikipedia's policies and guidelines]] or whether it should be [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deleted]].
The article will be discussed at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mehdi Kazemi ]] until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.<!-- Template:afd-notice --> [[User:Farhikht|Farhikht]] ([[User talk:Farhikht|talk]]) 17:36, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
== Your recent edits ==
In my edit summary for [[Grace Jones (supercentenarian)]] I have directed you to the talk page where I explained why the citation you placed was inappropriate. That talk notes the discussion at [[Misa Okawa]] which I assume you must have read as you then made a similar edit to that article. As per [[[Talk:Misao Okawa|that discussion]] I have replaced the GRG citations with <nowiki>{{cn}}</nowiki> tags where necessary. The tags at Grace Jones have been there since 30 May so reverting them is hardly trolling (misuse of that term could be considered to violate [[WP:CIVIL]]). As another revert will violate 3RR I will not do so now. I will however revert tomorrow. If you revert again I will take this to [[WP:ANI]]. <span style="background-color:orange;color:blue;">DerbyCountyinNZ</span> <sup> ([[User talk:DerbyCountyinNZ|Talk]] [[Special:Contributions/DerbyCountyinNZ|Contribs]])</sup> 00:22, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
:It is already at ANI, you havent explaiend anything and here is not the place to do so either. Given you vandalism tagged my page I do not want you here on my talk page anymore unless it is to inform me of ANI, arbcom, whatever but tagging good faith ediotors as vandals for adding refs is trolling and not covered by WP:Civil. Still baffled by your claim I am defying you as if you are editor and admin all rolled into one, so go and harrass someebody else please, I dont want to be your victim today or ever. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 01:10, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXXVIII, July 2013 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/July 2013/Project news|From the editors; awards and honours; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/July 2013/Articles|Last month's new Featured and A-Class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/July 2013/Book reviews|Nick-D looks at Australia's frontier wars]]''
* Interview: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/July 2013/Interview|What Wikimedia chapters can offer military history editors]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) and [[User:Nick-D|Nick-D]] ([[User talk:Nick-D|talk]]) 15:19, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0581 -->
==prince George reverting==
The page has changed again and the for now part is not there anymore and I like it better without it but I was editing it too put first child and I put biological grandchild so there is more specific info I am trying to merge our ideas because I do not think your wrong I'm just trying to add a little bit of my info. and I'm sorry if you u found it offensive that I reverted I'm new to editing on Wikipedia and didn't know how to change part of a revert without reverting and the second part of my facts, the biological grand kid part I am working on finding a source for it right now and will put it in once I find itMisspea213 00:43, 28 July 2013 (UTC)Misspea213Misspea213 00:43, 28 July 2013 (UTC) <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Misspea213|Misspea213]] ([[User talk:Misspea213|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Misspea213|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
===thanks for the crystal ball info===
I did not know about that rule thanks I will keep that in mindMisspea213 01:08, 28 July 2013 (UTC)Misspea213Misspea213 01:08, 28 July 2013 (UTC) <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Misspea213|Misspea213]] ([[User talk:Misspea213|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Misspea213|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:You are welcome. Please do remember to sign on all talk pages and keep editing, I know you werent editing in a bad faith way. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 20:36, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
== July 2013 ==
[[File:Information.svg|25px|alt=|link=]] Hello, I'm [[User:BracketBot|BracketBot]]. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=566328663 your edit] to [[Latin American literature]] may have broken the [[syntax]] by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just [{{fullurl:Latin American literature|action=edit&minor=minor&summary=Fixing+typo+raised+by+%5B%5BUser%3ABracketBot%7CBracketBot%5D%5D}} edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20{{subst</noinclude>:REVISIONUSER}}§ion=new my operator's talk page].
:List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
*<nowiki>is often associated solely with this style, with the literature known as [[Latin American Boom]]</nowiki>{{red|''']'''}}<nowiki> (and its most famous exponent, [[Gabriel García Márquez]]). Latin American literature has a rich</nowiki>
Thanks, <!-- (0, -1, 0, 0) --><!-- User:BracketBot/inform -->[[User:BracketBot|BracketBot]] ([[User talk:BracketBot|talk]]) 20:05, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
:Good call, and fixed. Keep up the good work. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 21:58, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
== August 2013 ==
[[File:Information.svg|25px|alt=|link=]] Hello, I'm [[User:BracketBot|BracketBot]]. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=567054727 your edit] to [[Roberto Weiss]] may have broken the [[syntax]] by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just [{{fullurl:Roberto Weiss|action=edit&minor=minor&summary=Fixing+typo+raised+by+%5B%5BUser%3ABracketBot%7CBracketBot%5D%5D}} edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20{{subst</noinclude>:REVISIONUSER}}§ion=new my operator's talk page].
:List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
*<nowiki>*''Humanism in England during the Fifteenth Century'' </nowiki>{{red|'''('''}}<nowiki>1941; 2nd ed. 1957, 3rd ed. 1967</nowiki>
Thanks, <!-- (1, 0, 0, 0) --><!-- User:BracketBot/inform -->[[User:BracketBot|BracketBot]] ([[User talk:BracketBot|talk]]) 01:18, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
[[File:Information.svg|25px|alt=|link=]] Hello, I'm [[User:BracketBot|BracketBot]]. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=568420691 your edit] to [[Falklands War]] may have broken the [[syntax]] by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just [{{fullurl:Falklands War|action=edit&minor=minor&summary=Fixing+typo+raised+by+%5B%5BUser%3ABracketBot%7CBracketBot%5D%5D}} edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20{{subst</noinclude>:REVISIONUSER}}§ion=new my operator's talk page].
{{{!}} class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left; border: 1px solid silver; margin-top: 0.2em;" {{!}}-
! style="background-color: #FAA;" {{!}} <div style="font-size:112%;">List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page<span style="font-size:88%;margin-left:3em;">(Click show <span style="font-size:130%;">⇨</span>)</span></div>
{{!}}-
{{!}} style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white; " {{!}} <div style="font-size:112%;">
*<nowiki>... He returned to Argentina, making no attempt to conceal his contempt for all things British.}}</nowiki>{{red|''')'''}}<nowiki></ref><ref>{{Cite book | last = Middlebrook| first = Martin| title = Argentine Fight for the</nowiki>
*<nowiki>({{coord|48|30|S|53|45|W|scale:10000000}}), about {{convert|45|mi|km}} north of [[Falkland Sound]]</nowiki>{{red|''')'''}}<nowiki>. Ultimately, the British stationed four ships ([[HMS Hydra (A144)|HMS ''Hydra'']],</nowiki>
*<nowiki>Argentina, from the immediate postwar period to the present. The then elderly Argentinian writer [</nowiki>{{red|'''{'''}}<nowiki>Jorge Luis Borges]</nowiki>{{red|''']'''}}<nowiki> described the war as "a fight between two bald men over a comb".<ref>[http://www.theguardian.com/</nowiki>
*<nowiki>com/commentisfree/2010/feb/19/falkland-islands-editorial Falkland Islands: Imperial pride]</ref> </nowiki>{{red|'''[['''}}<nowiki>The words ''[[yomp]]'' and ''[[Exocet]]'' entered the British vernacular as a result of the war.</nowiki>
</div>
{{!}}}
Thanks, <!-- (0, 1, 1, 0) --><!-- User:BracketBot/inform -->[[User:BracketBot|BracketBot]] ([[User talk:BracketBot|talk]]) 22:20, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
== NAME DELETION ==
SquakBox, I am only asking for now that you AT LEAST allow the stage-name to be deleted from the article. That is an unnecessary addition to the article that has nothing to do with me as a previous author and is a name that is subject to change. It is also not part of my identity when I was indeed a public figure. 18:07, 4 August 2013 (UTC) Rabanes I have tried to make this change & another contributor as violated the three revert rule. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Rabanes|Rabanes]] ([[User talk:Rabanes|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Rabanes|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:If you believe another user has violated the 3RR rule then please report them. I would be more open to this request once the afd has finished, please be patient. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 18:10, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
::Someone else has now deleted the stage name, I am sure it wont be replaced and if it is will consider deleting again, and will keep an eye on the article. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 00:53, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
==Disambiguation link notification for August 15==
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited [[Raymond Chandler]], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page [[Double Indemnity]] ([[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Raymond_Chandler|check to confirm]] | [[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Raymond_Chandler|fix with Dab solver]]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the [[User:DPL bot/Dablink notification FAQ|FAQ]]{{*}} Join us at the [[Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links|DPL WikiProject]].</small>
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these [[User:DPL bot|opt-out instructions]]. Thanks, [[User:DPL bot|DPL bot]] ([[User talk:DPL bot|talk]]) 11:12, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
== By the way... ==
...it's good to see you back and around, old comrade. [[User:Herostratus|Herostratus]] ([[User talk:Herostratus|talk]]) 03:01, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
:Cheers. Thanks, ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 17:43, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXXIX, August 2013 ==
{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| [[File:The Bugle.png|250px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News|alt=Full front page of The Bugle]]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/August 2013/Project news|From the editors; awards and honours; contest results]]''
* Articles: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/August 2013/Articles|Last month's new Featured and A-Class content]]''
* Book reviews: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/August 2013/Book reviews|Nick-D looks at the death of Osama bin Laden]]''
* Op-ed: ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/August 2013/Op-ed|Sturmvogel_66 presents his secrets of prolific contribution]]''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history|Military history WikiProject]]. To receive it on your talk page, please [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members|join the project]] or sign up [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3#Non-members who want delivery|here]].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from [[User:The ed17/Sandbox3|this page]]. Your editors, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) and [[User:Nick-D|Nick-D]] ([[User talk:Nick-D|talk]]) 23:54, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0600 -->
==Disambiguation link notification for August 22==
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited [[Coca]], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page [[Depression]] ([[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Coca|check to confirm]] | [[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Coca|fix with Dab solver]]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the [[User:DPL bot/Dablink notification FAQ|FAQ]]{{*}} Join us at the [[Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links|DPL WikiProject]].</small>
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these [[User:DPL bot|opt-out instructions]]. Thanks, [[User:DPL bot|DPL bot]] ([[User talk:DPL bot|talk]]) 11:18, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
== Warning ==
You are hereby warned that as [[Talk:Chelsea Manning gender identity media coverage]] is under [[WP:DS|discretionary sanctions]] for the duration of the active [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning_naming_dispute|arbitration case]], this notice will serve as warning that your behavior on that talk page (as well as the other 2 pages under DS via the same injunction) from now on can be sanctioned.
Posted in my capacity as Clerk to the Arbitration Committee, <br/>- [[User:Penwhale|Penwhale]] | <sup>[[User_talk:Penwhale|dance in the air]] and [[Special:Contributions/Penwhale|follow his steps]]</sup> 06:34, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
:And if I am harassed again by Two Porks? What should I do. I have the right to vote in RMs without him telling me to shut up, I do know that and would appreciate some advice on how to deal with him if his poor behaviour continues. This was a clear case of provocation from someone trying to shut me up in order to try to get his/her way in the RM♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 15:24, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
::My read into the exchange? TKoP's reply to your initial comment is appropriate. Your comment '' ... to move this article to Bradley would be a further BLP and NPOV violation ... '' is not 100% on point and has been debated in depth at the Manning RM, and TKoP pointed that out. Your response to TKoP rehashes the Manning RM debate, and you claimed that he attacked you when in fact he did not. ''How on earth are we supposed to clarify our positions with you spouting rubbish like this'' does not lead to collaboration. Be civil to each other; if you think TKoP's harassing you (and I don't believe this is the case), you should back that accusation with solid proof. I consider you to be the more hostile one when compared to TKoP during this exchange. - [[User:Penwhale|Penwhale]] | <sup>[[User_talk:Penwhale|dance in the air]] and [[Special:Contributions/Penwhale|follow his steps]]</sup> 21:21, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
:::So basically you are supporting the harassment, just charming but hardly surprising, sigh. I couldnt care less whether you think my comment re BLP or NPOV re Bradley is 100% or 0% right, its my opinion, as the arbcom clerk your opinion on this matter has no weight whatsoever and by expressing it you show your involvement in the Manning issues, which makes your warning inappropriate, IMO, hence my removing it from my talk page. ♫ [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] [[User talk:SqueakBox|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/SqueakBox|contribs]] 22:20, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
==References==
<references/>
| |||