User talk:Drew88

I do not agree that there isn't a policy that it should. If it should be left there.. it means that I can invent things and place them in articles.

Come on.

Maltesedog 16:52, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Just so you know...
A mediation case has been filled involving you as a party involved... check out the case page here:

Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-06-25 Norman Lowell

Imperium Europa and Viva Malta
[copied]
 * They claim to be libertarian, and a lot of their views are libertarian in nature. Gun rights, civil rights, drug legalization etc. How exactly are they wacko and how exactly aren't they libertarian? Drew88 10:07, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

[end copied]

On the just wacko side:


 * You go to their web site and the splash screen looks more like a bad video game than a political party.
 * Imagining that Malta will transform Europe is pretty wacko.
 * "It is at this point that European-Americans, besieged in their redoubts in the North, will perforce ask to join Canada and form a new nation including Alaska. The new state will form part of Greater Europe."

On both "wacko" and not libertarian:
 * For starters, they are explicitly racialist, definitely not a libertarian position. (Also, it seems, implicitly anti-Semitic -- e.g. " Jews, which of their own admission form a distinct racial group, are prone to some 102 inherited diseases", "…who were those traitors in their vast majority? Well; Chambers, Hiss, the Fuchs, the Rosenbergs, the Cohens, the Sobells…" -- similarly emphatically not a libertarian position.)
 * Similarly on "insulated from the alien billions"
 * "enforced by the The Elite"???

On the whole, they (if there really is a "they", not basically one guy with a web site) seem to me to be sort of dime-store Nietzschean. This may have a point or two in common with libertarianism (mainly a focus on the individual) but it is a very different beast. - Jmabel | Talk 18:30, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

[copied] "You go to their web site and the splash screen looks more like a bad video game than a political party. "

Obviously, you haven't seen websites of other Maltese political parties, such as: Alpha Party Website. Seriously, check that out. And by the way, the real website of the political party is Viva Malta, which also includes a forum. The Imperium Europa website is basically Norman Lowell's website and not really the party's, as you probably noticed, since there is even a section with his own paintings for sale.

"Imagining that Malta will transform Europe is pretty wacko. " That was never said. The party is Maltese so obviously they are concentrating primarily on how to change Malta first.

''""It is at this point that European-Americans, besieged in their redoubts in the North, will perforce ask to join Canada and form a new nation including Alaska. The new state will form part of Greater Europe."''

I don't know what so wacko about this.

"For starters, they are explicitly racialist, definitely not a libertarian position."

The idea is to unite all native Europeans, yes. But in Malta, the political ideology would be primarily libertarian:


 * Civil liberties: freedom of speech, freedom of association, and sexual freedom.
 * Abolition of victimless crimes: prostitution, recreational drug use etc.
 * Free access to IVF.
 * Sanctioning of divorce.
 * Sanctioning of abortion in cases of rape, pedophilia and other extreme cases.
 * Gun rights.

How are the above not libertarian positions? You can't just take one aspect (the Pan-europeanism aspect, and say they're not libertarian simply because they're racialist.

Drew88 09:18, 9 July 2006 (UTC) [end copied]


 * Sure you can. One of the premises of Libertarianism is that all people have equal rights. A racialist party is inherently not libertarian. I am by no means a libertarian, but I do share a common tradition with them in the principles of the Enlightenment. It is very obvious that this party does not.


 * The Alpha Liberal Party site looks perfectly normal except for some slightly unusual wallpaper.


 * As for Malta transforming Europe: the following is verbatim from their site: "Our aim is that Malta, this Sacred Island of Melita, this land of honey, will be the first liberated nation in the whole, White World - liberated from the enemy within and the enemy without. Malta, at the southernmost tip of Europe, could ignite a flame that would set Europe ablaze."


 * Since Norman Lowell's name is all over the Viva Malta site, the other's being his personally would still reflect heavily on the party. And there is nothing on their site that is inconsistent with the Imperium Europa site: just toned down.


 * It is obvious that I am not going to convince you, and you are not going to convince me, so I have no interest in discussing this further. - Jmabel | Talk 16:25, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I will copy this exchange to Talk:List of Libertarian parties, which sparked this in the first place. If you want to continue talking about this, please continue there, not on my user talk page. - Jmabel | Talk 16:25, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Malta related contributions
I see you have contributed to some Malta related articles.. Would you consider visiting the Malta-related topics notice board to help with coordination? Thank you for your contributions. 「ѕʀʟ·✎」 17:02, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks
Please remember our no personal attacks policy, especially when dealing with nincompoops. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 16:31, 2 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Please do not make personal attacks on other people, as you did at User:SandyDancer. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by admins or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. └ VodkaJazz / talk ┐ 19:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Pjazza Regina.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Pjazza Regina.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 12:06, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject South Park
I have thought of creating a WikiProject for South Park since it is now near its' 10th anniversary and has more articles than ever. I feel we could all do the following things through this project: I have seen your South Park fan template and wondered if you were interested in joining. If so reply to my talk page and I'll get back to you as quick as I can. Thanks, Mr. Garrison
 * Cleanup any short/poorly written/unformatted articles
 * Merge/lengthen the many character articles
 * Improve the South Park main page

Norman Lowell - referendum
Your edit summary (when you deleted the reference to Lowell being incorrect when he predicted the referendum on EU entry for Malta) made no sense to me. Can you explain? --SandyDancer 14:38, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

The infamous referendum
Let me explain, since you're not Maltese.

The "yes" votes did in fact surpass the "no" votes slightly, but despite that, less than 50% of the total voting population actually voted "yes." Therefore, the Nationalist party celebrated because the "yes" votes surpassed the "no" votes, and concurrently, the Labour Party celebrated because less than 50% of the population voted "yes." (Can you imagine what it was like? Carcades from both parties, mass meetings...both claiming that "WE WON!"? Seriously...)

Therefore there was complete chaos in Malta for a few weeks because nobody could figure out whether we were actually going to join the EU or not. Finally, the Primeminister was eventually forced to hold an early general election to clear the misunderstandings.

Quotes from the letter:

"The Christian Democrats [Nationalists], now in power, are assured of a coming election victory. They are also in for a resounding defeat in a referendum on Malta's European membership."

"There should be an amalgamation of Election and Referendum. The Nationalists should say; "ok, we are going to have a referendum on Europe; this coming election will serve also as a referendum on Europe"." [ This is what the Nationalist party was forced to do]

Now, obviously, the Nationalists still claim that they won the referendum, while Labour still claim the opposite. But the point is, an early general election was held due to this. In other words (it's hilarious really), the referendum was utterly futile. Our entry in the EU was in fact determined by a general election!

Now that you know what happened, perhaps you could reword that phrase or something...whatever you thing is right...

Drew88 16:10, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Your explanation is interesting. I think, however, the fact is that the referendum produced a YES vote - whether it produced a clear mandate is another question. Anyway, I am going to remove the sentence I put in there anyway as it doesn't really add much. --SandyDancer 12:47, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Blocked for personal attacks
Comments such as "Happy now, you fucking idiot? Why would a website (even if affiliated to Lowell) lie about something like that?" are not tolerated on Wikipedia. You have been blocked for 24 hours. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 15:52, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Change your username
I strongly suggest you change your username per WP:USERNAME which forbids inflammatory usernames. JoshuaZ 07:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Given your topic preferences it seems far more plausible to me that the "88" stands for 88 than for your birth year. That is, it stands for "HH". This is unacceptable for obvious reasons. JoshuaZ 07:41, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * You seem to be acting deliberately obtuse. In Nazi circles, 88 stands for HH which stands for "heil hitler." I'm more convinced than ever that that is what your name stands for because you would have realized what I meant and made a comment to that affect even if you hadn't realized it earlier. Given your area of interest, it is impossible for me to believe that you didn't realize what the number stood for. JoshuaZ 07:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Evidence here E. Sn0 =31337= 07:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

While I don't agree with your interest in far right politics, I must admit that I find the opposition to your username quite ridiculous. The fact that such opposition is downright ridiculous is highlighted by there being only 3 comments so far regarding your "inappropriate" user name - given the fact that Wikipedia is accessed by millions, 3 comments are insifnificant.

Anyways, back to my point - 88 is just a number. It doesn't primarily mean Heil Hitler. I for one had no idea that 88 meant HH, and immediately guessed that it meant you were born in 1988.

What are we going to condemn numbers now? Does 69 mean only oral sex? Does Granny69 mean that granny likes to have oral sex with grandpa, or that granny is 69 years old?

88 is primarily simply a numerical value. Only people interested in neo-nazism would ever dream of associating it with Hitlet. That means that 88 is by no means "unacceptable". JoshuaZ puh-lease don't talk so much nonsense. Oh sugar, sorry, I was being too hostile there - that's gotta be UNACCEPTABLE - let me rephrase that - JoshuaZ, would you mind refraining from not making much sense, please? Pweeeety pweeease.

JoshuaZ's suggestion to change your username is as absurd as suggesting that he changes his because Josh (g'ghoxx) in Maltese means "in a vagina". In fact I find your username very offensive JoshuaZ. How rude. Really. Tut tut. MaxCosta 01:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Max, you are wrong on this. The meaning of the 88 is almost certainly a ref to "HH" in the context of this user. Even if many users wouldn't necessarily be aware of the meaning, is it good that people can adopt a "dog whistle" approach, and speak to other neo-nazis in code on Wikipedia via their username? I have already fallen victim to concerted personal attacks by this user acting with another neo-nazi, who actually came forward and praised him for his name! --SandyDancer 10:52, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Apparently, my birth year is inflammatory!
That's right! Apparently, I'm offending numerous people with my current username! It's all my mother's fault, she should have waited another year before giving birth!


 * Strawman and you know it. TWO is not considered numerous by any stretch of the imagination. Plus there is the possibility both sides are right: 88 could very well be your birth year and you might know what 88 also stands for in what you may consider a 'zomgk3wl' coincidence. It's very easily within the realm of possibility. E. Sn0 =31337= 08:05, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah, 88 apparently stands for HH which in turn stands for Heil Hitler, and supposedly neo-Nazi morons choose to say "88" instead of Heil Hitler. Can you imagine?


 * Yes I can, in order to communicate their status as lowlife racists without tipping off decent folk they may be targeting, or to confuse and evade anti-gang police. E. Sn0 =31337= 08:08, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I think the user would do well to modify his name. Perhaps to Drew1988, if that is the year of his birth? The use of "88" in the way described by the users above seems fairly common and the weight of evidence points to the fact that it is in fact supposed to mean "Heil Hitler" here. Changing it to Drew1988 would end the discussion. --SandyDancer 10:30, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yup. You might be a rarity, Drew -- and there's one other editor here who has the 88 on the end of his name, User:Harald88, who has never shown any indication of any affinity for Nazi-related material. You, on the other hand, are spending almost all your time promoting Norman Lowell and Imperium Europa. I can't imagine why this would make anyone wonder. So if you want to work on fascist/neo-nazi/white supremecist articles, and carry the Heil Hitler identifier, well, that's your problem, but people are going to find it very difficult to assume good faith. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 15:49, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Why have you said that someone "instructed" you to change your username to "Drew1988"? No-one instructed you to do anything - I suggested it, that's all. Your attempt to misrepresent this and the pathetic call to arms on your userpage suggests to me you want to make a big issue of this. And this comment you have made: "Everyone should have the right to express their opinions, no matter what these might be" has convinced me the "88" is indeed a deliberate neo-nazi reference. If it wasn't, and the 88 really was referring to 1988, why would you be talking about "expressing opinions"? Your username is intended to offend, and you are trying to use Wikipedia as a soapbox. Both are against Wikipedia rules. --SandyDancer 20:10, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I also note, by the way, that you've taken it upon yourself to request a user who self identifies as a "White Nationalist" (note - no-one has attempted to censor what is on his user page - if censorship is at work on Wikipedia, why is this the case?) get involved in editing the Norman Lowell article - your agenda seems pretty clear to me. --SandyDancer 20:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Why is everyone stalking me suddenly? I need a break.


 * But first I'll respond to your comments:


 * a) First off, look up the word Instruct


 * b) Secondly, I'm not making a "big issue" out of this, I merely commentated on this ridiculous occurrence.


 * c)Thirdly, I mentioned that everybody should have the right to express one's opinion, because as evidenced by this incident, Wikipedia goes against this idea.


 * d)My username is not intended to offend. If that were the case, I would unashamedly say so. Wikipedians 'unknowingly' offend me all the time (you are a prime example), but they have every right to. Bottomline is: I never intended to offend anyone with my username.


 * e)Wikipedia's Soapbox policy is in relation to its articles, not userpages. I have the right to say whatever I please on my userpage, as long as it's not "inflammatory."


 * f) The White Nationalist user will soon be forced to remove that WN icon, as well as all that "hate speech" he wrote, trust me.


 * g) I asked the user to check out the Norman Lowell article because I thought it'd be of interest to him, since he's a Southern European White Nationalist, just like Norman Lowell.

Cheers. I'm gonna taking a long break from Wikipedia. Drew88 20:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Now that you are back will you consider changing your offensive username? --SandyDancer 00:22, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, a userpage is not for everyone to "say whatever they please". Please see here. Cheers, –-  kungming·  2 | (Talk ·Contact) 05:39, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Norman Lowell
I don't know much about him or Maltese White Nationalism. Anyway, thank you for contacting me. By the way, your username is really cool! Thanks 88 Mitsos 12:50, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hitler fans of the world unite, seems to be the order of the day. Despicable. --SandyDancer 12:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments on Talk:Hrisi Avgi
Did you make this edit to Hrisi Avgi's user page, in the context of discussion involving Mitsos, yourself and me? The post made the comment: There aren't enough lampposts, which I take to be a reference to murder. I note the ISP in question has only been involved in the discussion and made a related edit, but for me the telling things are:


 * (1) you were engaged in discussion - next minute this anon user pops up to seamlessly continue to make your point
 * (2) a reference is made to a quote attributed to a racist politician you support, which was included (by me) in an article about him, which you and I had both been involved in editing (you having been banned for abusive behaviour)

I await your response. I want to assume good faith but this needs to be dealt with (as does your username, which is offensive to all decent people) --SandyDancer 23:52, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Blocked for personal attacks
You have been blocked for one month for this personal attack. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 23:25, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Pjazza Regina.JPG listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Pjazza Regina.JPG, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the 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. Valentinian T / C 11:24, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Imperiumeuropa.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Imperiumeuropa.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently 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. 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 our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 05:40, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Angli: The Movie


The article Angli: The Movie has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Non notable film, appears to fail WP:NFILM as nothing was found in a WP:BEFORE except film database sites, videos, and promo material."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Donaldd23 (talk) 12:56, 11 July 2021 (UTC)