User talk:Janizary/Arc2

Old crap, to be ignored. Don't both posting here.

Re: Featured_article_candidates/OpenBSD
I'll think about it... I was planning to do some more work on various computer architecture related articles after my finals are over. I'll put the article on my watch list and might pop in to make some changes. -- uberpenguin 15:22, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for cleaning up my userpage
It may be a little thing, but completely unsolicited help like that is the best kind. Thanks! Snurks T C 04:15, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Template:FSM
Revert the template again and you will be blocked for 24hrs. ALKIVAR &trade; 06:55, 4 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I could care less, your adminship means nothing, nor does your opinion. You obviously lack the most basic of cognitive capabilities, since you cannot manage to understand that the template does not need to be listed amoung the users of the category - since it's not a user and that it already links the category and is in the header of the category.  You're a completely dense twat and you can cram it right up your ass, it may dislodge the pickle you seem to be enjoying so much.  Suck it my friend, you're an idiot.  Janizary 03:32, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, and my comment still applies even if you'd prefer to not think. Janizary 04:00, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Janizary, please be aware of our policy regarding civility, and regarding personal attacks. If you need external help in dealing with your relationship with another user, there are constructive avenues you can take. Please refrain from attacking other users and remember to always assume good faith - we're all ultimately here to build an encyclopedia, even though we may not always agree how to do that the best... (ESkog)(Talk) 07:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * There is a limit to how far I can take civility, it stops at dealing with the dregs of the genetic basin. Alkivar ignoring common sense and then arguments proved him beyond my reach of civil discourse.  That the man believes in blindly reverting from something that plainly makes more sense than his choice and ignoring any argumentative points, presumably because of his administrative position makes for reviled position, not a respected one.  I assumed good faith until he ignored valid arguments, I'm here to make OpenBSD and related articles better, not to make an encyclopedia, what the thicks of the world do does not matter greatly to me, but I'd rather they not screw up things I do.  Janizary 19:50, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

OpenBSD
Take a look at this as an alternative structure. It seems promising so far. I know I've deleted quite a bit (not enough, yet) of content, but that can be merged into, eg, Hackathon and POSSE project later. Let me know what you think. NicM 17:58, 7 January 2006 (UTC).


 * I don't know if I like the shorter history, it seems more shallow and less interesting that way. The breaking off the security section seems alright though.  The splicing back a part of the history into the new documentation section seems okey, though I obviously preferred the unified history bit.  Also, I think that ports discussion should go before the marketing, the marketing should go higher up in the article, or the ports section should be expanded.  It seems out of place how it is right now.  The idea of shunting content into those two makes sense, making sure we get a good lead up to the two articles, since they are of significant importance to the OpenBSD image.  I really like the reduced size of the references, they were starting to look unwieldly.  Janizary 01:12, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * You are right that the history section is too short, but I can't think of anything else to add there, I don't want to split up the "main sections" (Openness, Licensing, Security) again: I think things are better together, so all the licensing talk is in one place, all the documentation stuff in the same place, etc. Perhaps, some talk about criticism should go in there, I think that section is going to be pretty short. Yes, that might work, criticism of Theo in History (leading from the fork again, carefully :-), and criticism of performance/usability in Uses. If you have any good sources for criticism (eg. good misc@ discussions with someone giving a valid criticism and developers rebutting them), I'd be interested to have them.
 * I'm not sure what to do with Ports and packages, I know it is unwieldy but I don't want to add the content I removed back (I don't think the ports tree is that interesting or important feature). I'm thinking of merging it into Distribution and marketing. I'll have to see if I can do that.
 * The biggest problem is perhaps that Licensing is too long, but its not suitable for a seperate article :-/. NicM 10:39, 8 January 2006 (UTC).
 * Okay, I've made more changes and Taxman seems happy, and I'm fairly happy with it as it is, at least as a base for a few more tweaks once it is moved over. Let me know if you have any problems with it, I've also posted on Talk:OpenBSD, and if nobody objects I'll switch it over in a couple of days (hopefully before the FAC ends). NicM 18:18, 8 January 2006 (UTC).

pdf link removal on openbsd article
Why did you remove the link to the Absolute Openbsd pdf in th openbsd article ? It is legal to download this pdf if you own this book. In some countries it is even legal to download this pdf if you don't own this book. Garo 10:41, 15 January 2006 (UTC)


 * In part because that's Absolute BSD, not Absolute OpenBSD, the two books are different - one for FreeBSD and one for OpenBSD. If you own the OpenBSD book that does not allow for the download of the FreeBSD book.  Secondly, I do not see a reason to advertise something that is copyrighted up on anonymous ftp, where people can obtain illegal copies.  Michael Lucas spent the time writing the book, the least people can do is not spit in his face for it.  Janizary 19:36, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Blocked
I have temporarily blocked you for making repeated personal attacks. The comments above at User talk:Janizary are completely inappropriate and you continued, despite being warned. But this comment, calling for the deaths of other Wikipedia editors, is way over the line. If "there is a limit to how far [you] can take civility", then please take a short wikibreak when you've reached that limit, and resume editing when your anger has subsided. This is not the way to resolve disagreements. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 22:46, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * And is a jihad against opinions in personal pages a good thing? I'm right pissed that so many people are blind-set stupid to get rid of all the userboxes that people are using, you can't just remove an opinion, all you're doing by trying is pissing off the people who hold those opinions.  It's highly counter productive to waste so much time and resources trying to remove all these, thus kill all the lawyers, unlike Shakespeare's purpose, mine truly is to defend free thinking individuals.  Perhaps some believe Jimbo Wales to be some kind of divine ruler, perhaps he should be removed entirely from his figurehead position, a good deal of his opinions are very strongly contested by the people actually making content.  Janizary 23:15, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I didn't make any statement regarding opinions on personal pages; regardless of the behavior of others, your comments are not appropriate for Wikipedia. If you disagree with others, please do so with civility and respect. I should note that I tend to be of the belief that if one wants a personal page, one should avail oneself of the many free webhosts around. I think that what many people object to is not the placement of opinions on user pages, but the use of user boxes to do so. I'm not sure if you understand Mr. Wales' position here. He is not in charge because he was a good user that other users elected to serve as their leader; he's in charge because this is his web site. I don't think that there is any mechanism by which he could be removed, nor does it seem logical to me. He rarely interferes in Wikipedia affairs, although there are times when he intercedes. And certainly editors may disagree with or protest his decisions. Of course, if contributors do not approve of the way he is leading or the way Wikipedia is proceeding, they have the Right to fork or the Right to leave. I'm not suggesting that you do either of these, but since Wikipedia articles and Mediawiki are available under the GFDL, if someone finds policies here intolerable, he may fork, creating his own enyclopedia, and use as starting points the articles here (if he so chooses). I hope it does not come to that. Regardless, one of the overriding policies here is the avoidance of personal attacks, and calling for editors' deaths is unacceptable. If this is an area you struggle with, I'll be happy to help you out. Just let me know. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 03:12, 13 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I refer to people's constantly taking the words of Jimbo as policy, the idea of removing any userbox with a political point of view is his point of view. That's at the core of this problem, you did not notice that an admin skipped over the tfd process and speedied something when there is no rule explicitly against having an opinion in a userbox?  Rather, there is Jimbo saying there shouldn't be any.  I completely understand that he started this, but he is not owner of it, a foundation was set up, perhaps you've heard of it - the Wikimedia Foundation.  I didn't say you had that same point of view, I'm saying that I was just telling the people who do to fuck off.  I made no attack on any editor, that you perceive it as such is truly sad, but such is life.  Perhaps with time you will learn the intricacies of the language.  If one does not want personal pages on a site, one should avail oneself to modify the source code in order to remove them from the site rather than complain that they're being used.  People who overstep the proper bound of their position should die, that I have encountered multiple administrators so far doing so does lead to the desire to fuck off, but I'm not done here.  Janizary 06:20, 13 February 2006 (UTC)


 * All right; I can accept that we disagree on some of these issues; and you're right about the Wikimedia Foundation. But you must understand that your manner of discussing some of these issues is not acceptable at Wikipedia. You've been fine with me, but the comments I linked to above are not appropriate. I wouldn't consider telling people to "fuck off" a personal attack, but it is certainly uncivil, and potentially grounds for a block. The personal attacks to which I was referring are as follows: "You obviously lack the most basic of cognitive capabilities...You're a completely dense twat and you can cram it right up your ass, it may dislodge the pickle you seem to be enjoying so much...you're an idiot...it stops at dealing with the dregs of the genetic basin...what the thicks of the world do does not matter greatly to me..." And please refrain from calling for the deaths of other editors; you are certaily welcome to think in this manner, but comments like that have no place here. I am going to have to temporarily block you again. Civility and No personal attacks are policy. You may disagree with other users, but please debate the position; don't attack the editor. If you aren't familiar with those pages, perhaps you could use the time off to peruse them, or to let your anger level decrease to a point where you aren't calling for others' deaths. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 00:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC)


 * While I can almost understand your blocking me for "calling for the deaths of other editors", blocking me for a discussion which is already over, more than a month prior, that seems ridiculous. Alkivar didn't seem to care enough to block me, and he's the administrator that I was pissed off at.  Janizary 00:37, 15 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I apologize for not being clear. This block was for your comment above: "People who overstep the proper bound of their position should die"; not for your earlier statements. Most administrators avoid blocking those they are in conflict with, so if an argument degenerates into attacks, an administrator may feel he is too involved to act in an unbiased fashion. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 01:07, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

fsm
Hello,

I am PISSED OFF that this fuckwad improv has speedy deleted the FSM template. This is a USER novelty to aid the enjoyment of those of us who TIRE long and hard to IMPROVE articles on Wikipedia. The fsm was one of the most refreshing and bold statements made by thinking individuals who wish to display how stupid these backward inbred creationists morons are. I had my fsm templete above one that states I'm a pirate!

Please tell me anything that I can do that will be effective in bringing it BACK.

I also wish to torture this improv person. Is there a safe or legal way to do that without getting into trouble. It's obvious he isn't liked. Please tell me that there's aren't more people like that here or I'm am outa here. And I will torture improv on my way out. MiracleMat 06:38, 22 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, avoid saying that he's a fuckwad, etc., but do put in your vote to protect user templates and to undelete them. You've got to tiptoe around calling someone a douche, you can't go out and say that, "user X eats donkey cock," that's an attack and they'll block you for a day for it.  Rallying people to this issue, drawing attention to people removing something that you care about helps, as long as you are polite and try not to piss people off while doing it, then as long as enough people support it, the template will return.  Janizary 06:42, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

FSM and other templates
I swear, when did everyone go batshit insane about userboxes? Why do people hate 'em so much?

Did a userbox kill Jimbo's father? Rob 14:13, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

MaraDNS runs nicely on Windows
For the record, MaraDNS runs nicely on Windows. Without Cygwin. If you have a Windows machine handy, check out: this native win32 binary. Cygwin is only needed for DNS-over-TCP. As for whether DjbDNS is open-source, I think "partial" is a reasonable compromise. Considering that DjbDNS does not meet the Open Source Definition, saying "Yes, DjbDNS is open-source" comes off as deceptive. 71.128.199.158 21:26, 22 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Alright, the MaraDNS thing I modified because it was listed as needing cygwin (which means it needs emulation to use that platform), so you're good with that one - though partial may be better, with a note pointing out the DNS-over-TCP issue. However, open source is not something that the OSI defines - if the column said OSI-certified, then it would be deceptive to say yes.  The source is open, thus it is open source.  Would you prefer the column to say "source available"?  That was what the ssh client comparison page has chosen to use. Janizary 01:24, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Heh. I've conceded the DjbDNS point because, well, I don't do non-MaraDNS Wikipedia edits any more.  I find it ironic, though, that an OpenBSD advocate is making an edit in support of a license that goes against the OpenBSD copyright policy.


 * However, I am greatly annoyed with the this edit where you state that there is no Win32 binary whatsoever for MaraDNS. I really wish people would check their facts before editing an article; a good edit is one which is backed up by some research.  Like going to The MaraDNS web page and clicking on the download link on the left and seeing the words "Windows binary".  Or going to the Freshmeat profile and observing a file with the name "maradns-1-2-03-2-win32.zip", which, indeed, is the Win32 binary for MaraDNS.  And, oh, did I mention that the offending edit was incorrectly marked as "minor" (minor edits are edits which correct spelling, grammar, and formatting errors--Not edits that change content), and had no edit summary.  Tsk.  Tsk.  Tsk.  Furthermore, you state above that I should list MaraDNS support as being "partial"; however, in my edit that is exactly what I did (and, oh, DNS-over-TCP is somewhat of a simplication.  The native win32 binary for MaraDNS doesn't support DNS-over-TCP, which also means it doesn't support zone transfers, either as a DNS master or slave.  And, to be pedantic, the win32 port can't use /dev/urandom as a good source of random numbers for the secure random number seed, and neither the native Win32 port nor the Cygwin port have support for chroot nor for dropping privileges, since win32 doesn't have chroot, and since you can bind to port 53 as a non-admin user in win32).  Again, please check facts before ranting.


 * Anyway, enough of my rant. Since you're an OpenBSD advocacte, maybe you can help make MaraDNS be more OpenBSD-friendly.  I have reports that MaraDNS has "pthread warnings" when compiled on OpenBSD; there warnings do not exist when MaraDNS is compiled on FreeBSD and any assistance you can provide to fix them would be greatly appreciated (anything from letting me see the warnings to giving me a non-root account on an OpenBSD system).  Anyway, to contact me, go to the The MaraDNS web page and click on the "Contact" link on the left.  207.200.116.9 05:29, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


 * OpenBSD's policy of free software is not the same as what open source is. Open source is a very simple concept, something that's source is open - nothing more, nothing less.  DJB's software doesn't have a licence, that's his thing, but that doesn't effect the availablity of the source, the source is open, so it's open source.  What the OSI calls open source is their own branding of a term that was already present prior to their usage, much like the FSF's usage of Free Software.  The MaraDNS thing was just that it had (cygwin) next to it, so I made the leap in logic that it required the emulation of cygwin to do things right.  As I said, you got me on it.  Janizary 06:08, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I never heard the term "Open source" until the whole OSI thing in the late 1990s, and have always considered it a reasonable English translation for "Software libre". A quick advanced search at Google groups for "Open Sorce" on or before early 1996 shows it being mainly in phrases like "unable to open source file", and for information that is freely available at, say, a library.  Can you find a citation for "open source" 1995 or before where "open source" means "the source code to the software is freely available"?  I couldn't.  Anyway, I could really use your help with MaraDNS development.  Like I say, download MaraDNS, compile it on OpenBSD, and email me the warnings.  Or give me an account on your OpenBSD system so I can weed out all of the pthreads warnings.  This will help make MaraDNS a better package.  One of the things one easily forgets is that it's not about being right in some stupid argument--it's about helping make the world a better place.  Like making the Wikipedia a better encyclopedia.  Or making MaraDNS more OpenBSD-friendly.  207.200.116.9 06:23, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


 * It's sort of a common sense thing that geeks I know generally agree to, that geeks used the term before the existance of OSI probably was part of what sparked their usage of the term, but as I said, they use a distortion of the straight English meaning of the term. The access to an OpenBSD box I can give you, but that would pretty much have to be after the weekend, right now only the pentium and pentium ii are really in working order, but I could get you ssh on a better box maybe around Monday if that sounds good.  Janizary 06:33, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I have seen people on Slashdot refer to "open source" as something besides "OSI compliant"; but I think "OSI compliant" is a reasonable definition of "open source".  Anyway, I try not to waste time with the little things; send me an email around Monday when the box is ready.  I really appreciate your offer to help with MaraDNS; your help will make MaraDNS a much more OpenBSD friendly application.  If I don't hear from you within a week, I'll bug you again.  :)  Now, on to getting the MaraDNS.org web page to work a little better in IE (argh, IE's crappy CSS) 207.200.116.9 07:22, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Heeeeeey
I was just wondering if you're the person who put the make-out picture on the web site..cause that's me.

Im not mad or anything, just wondering if I know you.

E-mail me at xglass_in_the_treesx@yahoo.com

Or IM me at vHandguns4hearts

Thaaaaaanks

- Hannah -

You don't know me, but with regards to adding the image to the site, I am in part responsible for it, I added it to the article, but Emo2121 added it to the site. I put it on the article because it was an unused image and thus would be deleted if it did not get used somewhere. I looked at the make out article and found that there was no image of making out, and thus put it on to save the time and effort of people deleting the image. Janizary 01:30, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Your actions are unacceptable
This is just to let you know that I have reported you to the administrators for your vote-stacking efforts on the FSM template. Just so you know, your actions have virtually assured that it will never see the light of day again. DRV is not a vote. One of the principal problems that has been identified with userbox templates is their capability for vote stacking. Now that you have confirmed this very real danger, you have given much more weight to the deletion side than any of your voting keep astro-turfers could give to the keep side. -- Cyde Weys 02:21, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


 * A template that each of these people was using was deleted, I notified them of it and the vote to get it back. How is that vote stacking?  They probably would not even know the thing is gone for a long time, I'll bet most of these people don't stare at their user pages waiting for one of the userboxes to disappear.  Since noone let them know about a TFD going on for the template, because someone completely jumped the gun and skipped proper procedure, I felt it appropriate to notify them of an attempt to bring it back.  This isn't a ballot stuffing, this is people who used something being told how to get it back.  Perhaps you need to learn to chill the fuck out, I am letting people know that something that was removed from their user pages was removed and that if they want it back, they have to let people know.  Janizary 03:41, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


 * You didn't merely "notify" them; do you want me to get your exact words? You said, and I quote, "I'm calling out a posse", "I'm therefore putting it up for undeletion since people have put a jihad out against opinions in userboxes", and "I'm trying to rally you into the posse."  These kinds of statements go against the policy on vote stacking/campaigning and are highly unacceptable.  By the way, many people would also be offended by your usage of jihad in this context.  And nobody has jumped any guns or skipped procedure here.  The admins were simply using the new CSD T1 criterion on polemical, divisive, and inflammatory userboxes.  Wikipedia is about building an encyclopedia; it's not about your own personal opinions, it's not about bumper stickers you can put on your user pages, and it's certainly not about calling together posses to declare war on other Wikipedians.  I think you have forgotten what the purpose of Wikipedia is.  Please refresh yourself by reading WP:ENC.  -- Cyde Weys  04:17, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Chill, a little
Hi, Janizary. I've been speaking with a couple people regarding the recent post to ANI, and the above exchange between you and Cyde. I worry that your actions and words detract from what you are actually trying to convey. Picture an analogy of me carving "vote for bush" into people's sunbathing backs with a 200mW laser. I'd get my point across, but the vehicle is so detestable that nobody would accept it.

I empathize with your feelings for the current situation, but I'd really like it if you could try to calm down a little. My gut feeling on this is we are getting to a "happier point" in this whole process, from which we can make amicable compromises for most (there will always be a few detractors on either side). But if you continue to provoke them (regardless of whether they provoke you), both sides will escalate. Again.

Does that make sense? ... aa:talk 06:33, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Definately, but I am not a person to mince words, when I say something online, I say it as I would say it in person, profanity, blasphemy and all. If someone's a being a douche, I call them one, and Cyde is definately being paranoid.  What I did with rounding up people who were directly effected by the speedy delete, he calls wrong, when these people should have been given a chance to defend the template at the beginning of the template for deletion process - that entire process was sidestepped because of the delusional beliefs of several administrators who take every word from Jimbo Wales as the gospel.  I feel entirely justified in giving not only myself, but all the people who made use of the template the chance to defend it now.  It really tweaks me wrong to see people act as Cyde has done, he's completely against userboxes and that's fine, he doesn't need to use one, but he's being a complete ass about it.  His behaviour regarding all these templates, and his voting against every one, even those clearly not within the bounds of what administrators are supposed to delete is really showing how thick the tin foil is on him.  Janizary 06:46, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I think Cyde is being oversensitive. For what it's worth, I'm trying to get him to relax a little too. (er, I think Cyde's a he.. it's tough to tell anymore)
 * I really used to think a lot like what you just said. So I won't tell you it's the wrong thing to do. But I will say that people just don't understand that I have a propensity to use words like "fucking" when describing something they've done or should do (e.g., "would you please mow the fucking lawn?!!"). I don't mean anything personal by it, but not everyone gets that. So, I tone down a little, and people seem more willing to work with me. Sigh. Well, I get where you're coming from. It's easier to make progress here, though, if you just tone down a little and meet them with their own vocabulary (or at least their tone, some of them don't seem to understand what the word "polemic" or even "divisive" mean, eh?). Also, ++ on the OpenBSD thing. I've been in love with The Fish since 2.6. :) ... aa:talk 07:04, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Its me agaaaain hahaha
Hey it's me again (the picture on Make Out is of me) and I was just wondering, do you know any way besides this site that I can get in touch with emo2121? Cause its not letting me on the site...and the caption for the picture says personal info about me...and that's kinda weird if neither of you know me...

So is there any way I can contact him?


 * Well, the option "E-mail this user" is for that, but that's only for users who want to be e-mailed. Since they didn't want anyone emailing them, unfortunately  you cannot contact them through any means other than leaving a comment on their discussion page and checking back some time to see if they've responded.  That seems unlikely though, because the only thing they did on Wikipedia was upload your picture.  If you want you can request the image's deletion or remove the names from it.  Janizary 17:19, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Planetes
Hello there. We over at the ACotW put the collaboration on the article page (as opposed to the discussion page) and have done so for all previous collaborations. See here. I'm putting the notice back on the article. If you disagree you can argue it out on the project's discussion page.

- Phorque 17:22, 27 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't care enough to argue with a set of people that are stuck in their ways, but take a look at the way most templates that deal with the workings of wikipedia are used; Echo's are in the talk page, Machintosh's are in the talk page, and featured and peer reviews are in the talk page. In fact, the only templates that deal with wikipedia's workings are really the stub and merge templates.    Janizary 20:17, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Fair use images
Thank you for the notification; I was unaware of the policy (could you maybe point me to it?), so mea culpa. I did look on the talk page, which is where I would have expected a notification to that effect. Instead, I've put it on the template itself. dewet|&trade; 06:13, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

mumbling dumbass
You have too much time on your hands lady. You looked at my history just to change stuff that I changed. That is a little bit childish. By the way, I am on a public computer. I didn't make all those changes. But I will change what I wish. I am a JAP. And it is not an ethnic slur because Jewish isn't a race. Think about it. And U2 has been term as the biggest band in the world by Time and Rolling Stone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.56.132.116 (talk • contribs)


 * I'm sorry you feel that way sonny, because those edits were in-fact all unproductive, thus they had to be reverted. If you would like to start making productive, worth-while edits, they will not be corrected as your previous modifications have been.  Whatever you may wish to believe, there is a race of people known as the Jews, they are an ethnic group, just like there are Arabs and there are Amerindians.  Thus calling someone a slur which brings in their race is calling them a racial slur.  Time and Rolling Stone Magazine can suck my left nut for all I care, calling a band "the biggest" is not good form for an encyclopedia and will this not stand.  I don't care if you were the only person or one of 15 making those edits, if you do enough damage on Wikipedia you will get that IP blocked.  Janizary 19:56, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Inferno
I'm loath to revert you without some sort acknowledgement from you on Talk, but I think the evidence we provide would support it. Dysprosia 00:40, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * It's all good, if someone can back a statement up then I've got no quibble over them doing whatever they please. Janizary 02:22, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

POV tagging
Can you please justify your actions when you place a POV tag on a page on the articles talk page please! I am refering to your edit to Seventh-day Adventist Church. MyNameIsNotBob 09:27, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

WP:BITE
Please be careful when dealing with new contributors, such as User:68.56.132.116, and try not to bite them. He doesn't seem to be a vandal, just someone who is not aware of how Wikipedia works, and could become a valuable contributor if nurtured. Thanks. -- tomf688 {talk} 13:24, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Blueprint barnstar?
I was about to award Sjakkalle the Defender of the Wiki barnstar myself, but I suppose that works too. Award heartily seconded. Rogue 9 16:28, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Are you still willing to help MaraDNS?
In this edit you said that you would be willing to give me a temporary remote OpenBSD account so I can do some MaraDNS testing. I haven't heard from you. Is this something you still want to do? Please contact me. 207.200.116.9 20:24, 10 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Update. Adam M (I think one big problem with Wikiculture is that people don't go by their real names) very kindly provided me with an OpenBSD account, so I have fixed the issues with OpenBSD and MaraDNS. 207.200.116.74 05:51, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

My grammar mistake wss ironical. I did it on purpose, you.

Anita Rau Badami
Hi...please don't add people to Category:Canadian people if they're already in a subcategory of that. Thanks. Bearcat 07:36, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:Mdew.png
The Mountain Dew logo is a copyrighted graphic of the trademarked words and symbol that identifies the Mountain Dew product. Making a derivative is copyright infringement. This is very different from Warhol's Campbells soup can. Warhol maintained the copyright to his image and did not release it to the public domain, giving people the impression they could use the image for any purpose - even commercial. -Nv8200p talk 19:40, 24 March 2006 (UTC)