User talk:ExplicitImplicity/Archive

Replying to your message - they keep deleting cited material. I will let them keep theirs, I expect them to leave mine. Stick to the Facts 21:10, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

sock/meat puppetry
You have been reported for suspected sock/meat puppetry. Stick to the Facts 05:29, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

WTF ?--ExplicitImplicity 18:29, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Recriting others to post for you also qualifies. I believe that is what is called a meat puppet. Read the guidelines more closely. The evidence has been presented. Stick to the Facts 18:42, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

The evidence againt you all is presented here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Poison_sf#Poison_sf Stick to the Facts 18:56, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

LOL. You call that evidence ?--ExplicitImplicity 19:21, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

If it isn't convincing, what are you worried about? People will make up their own minds after reviewing the evidence. Stick to the Facts 20:08, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I am not worried at all. But thanks for the patronizing.--ExplicitImplicity 20:33, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Posted on the Stormfront RfC for Poison sf et al in rebuttal to your last message:

I meant that your first edit of a wikipedia article was to Stormfront's article. That you state that you created this account on September 11, 2006 and have been using wikipedia for four years appears to be an outright admission that you are a sockpuppet of SOMEBODY. Please refer to wikipedia policy on sock puppetry. This violates the one editor one account rule. Let it be so noted. Stick to the Facts 20:55, 19 September 2006 (UTC) Stick to the Facts 20:58, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Tell it to the judge. Stick to the Facts 14:44, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Why are you so concerned about an account you just opened a few days ago? o.O Stick to the Facts 15:13, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

The bit about assuming good faith does not attribute to flagrant violations where the evidence is plain on its face. Look at the link to the Stormfront forum. Don't deny there was a 'conspiracy', it is a given. The next question is - which of the recent editors were involved? I think you might just be hostile because you're afraid of losing both this account and poison sf. Stick to the Facts 15:32, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

You said:


 * "Hi Stick_to_the_facts. UberCyrix didn't say hi to me, as we don't know each other. But you won't believe me. But in case you haven't noticed: Your checkuser was accepted and answered: UNRELATED. Does that change your belief about us sockpuppeteering in any way or form? Am in now "innocent" and "have nothing to lose" in your eyes? I would be pleasantly surprised. Greetings.--  ExpImp talk  con 00:03, 22 September 2006 (UTC)"

Hmmm, so if you don't know him, and he didn't say hi to you, then how exactly did you know that I asked him to say hi in the first place unless you are the same person? LOL BUSTED!!! The RfCU is being reexamined and I'll be sure to share this anecdote as proof. LOLZ!!!! Stick to the Facts 02:07, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I just don't get it - if you were only replying to an RfC then why are you still so interested? Don't you have other more interesting things you could be doing? Stick to the Facts 14:10, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I just think it is strange that someone who was just responding to an RfC would get so caught up in it and keep posting - it is clear why I'm still here, I created an account for the first time just to combat the injustice of this article. What's your reason? Stick to the Facts 21:49, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Mind body problem
Thanks for the support RE: reference censorship. But don't think that will make me overlook your evil, materialist, Daniel-Dennett-loving tendencies. The mind-body problem is no real problem??!? You've stolen my soul!!!! LOL :) --Alecmconroy 00:59, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 13:26, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Swastika
Ich hab versucht, den Absatz zu übersetzen, kannst ja beizeiten mal drüberlesen. Subversive element 23:17, 10 October 2006 (UTC) -- Toller user name, übrigens.

Hex RfA
Was anderes: Hier ist der RfA von user:Hex, selbst nominiert. Ich hab mich spontan entschieden, ihn zu unterstützen, weil ich seine Einstellung angenehm entspannt und vernünftig finde. Vielleicht hast du ja auch Lust, ihm deine Stimme zu geben. Sub versive  05:08, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Flickr images
Hi, if you take images from Flickr please upload them to Wikimedia Commons and make a page for the person then all Wiki projects can use them- Thx Arniep 19:36, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

List of idioms in the English language
List of idioms in the English language -

 A sub-article component of this article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy.

Please share your thoughts on the matter at the sub-article's entry on the Articles for deletion page.

Feel free to edit the article, but the article must not be blanked, and this notice must not be removed, until the discussion is closed. For more information, particularly on merging or moving the article during the discussion, read the guide to deletion.

''Steps to list an article for deletion

I just thought you may wish to contribute to the debate. WLD 14:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Johnny_depp_ecb29.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Johnny_depp_ecb29.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 10:35, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Coop_norden_logo.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Coop_norden_logo.png. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently 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. 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. MECU ≈ talk 22:28, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Bryant and May
If you don't like the article why not do something constructive and change it to your liking. I consider it somewhat top heavy; but my solution would be to expand it, so that the article is in balance.Pyrotec 18:36, 6 February 2007 (UTC)