User talk:KnowledgeOfSelf/Archive13

'''DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.'''

This archive page covers approximately the dates between July 29 and August 26th.

Kosmix
Hi. Are you the person to talk to about the Kosmix entry? I have a non-kosmix.com entry that can't be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Onslo88 (talk • contribs)


 * Hello, no I am not, I did delete that article on March 10, 2006, but I am no longer an admin so I can not even view what text is on the page, it appears that I deleted it because it was reposted content from an article that was previously deleted. I'd suggest you take the article to Deletion Review, and read all of it's subsequent policies and guidelines. K O  S |  talk  06:10, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Sigh
Why on Earth am I always the last one to find out about stuff? :P Either way, it's good to see you back again. Tito xd (?!?) 06:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Eh, I couldn't say, bad luck maybe, or perhaps a lack of perception? :P Good to be back thanks Tito! K O  S |  talk  06:53, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!
Wow - approving you was a no brainer (you skipped the dozen other people :) Welcome note follows: Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, KnowledgeOfSelf! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. - Gl e n 11:58, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Great thanks! Now if I can just figure out how to use it and what I am doing, it would be perfect. :P K O  S |  talk  21:35, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey!
Wow, you're back? Rock on. =) --Fang Aili talk 15:28, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * How about getting on IRC? --Fang Aili talk 15:39, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry I missed you yesterday. Life and stuff. See ya soon though. I'm glad you're back. --Fang Aili talk 15:40, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert
of my Klan paragraphs on the Stamford page. I'm shocked that anyone would take them out, but I can imagine why. Anyway, much appreciated.Noroton 21:43, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Indeed. You are welcome. :) K O  S |  talk  21:52, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

User page
Wow, that was fast. You sure you're not a bot? ;) --Mr. L e fty Talk to me! 22:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Beeps, whirls, toots, beeeps, whistles* ;) K O  S |  talk  22:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

hey you mistakenly reverted my edit...
I just revert 89.55.32.13 's version to older version(http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Partij_voor_Naastenliefde%2C_Vrijheid_en_Diversiteit&oldid=67024976) ... this random user has no right to call for deletion of a topic...and you reverted it back to his "vandalised" version... can you give me a reason for that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.6.56 (talk • contribs)
 * Yes I can, I saw that you removed an AfD notice but after further examination of the article I realized I was wrong and reverted myself back to the version you refer too. Sorry about that. K O  S |  talk  12:05, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Skype
Tis silent... --  Bane s  17:46, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * LOL K O  S |  talk  17:59, 1 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Yet again... --  Bane s  21:15, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Why'd you depart? Sorry I was unable to answer...come back. :P --  Bane s  09:48, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm already on IRC, sorry Daniel, but you can always join me there. :) K O  S |  talk  09:51, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Please explain
You said that I replaced the Winnipeg, Manitoba article with a blank page. I have no idea what you are referring to as I just edited a section of that article as a new sub article has been created due to the article becoming to lengthy. Would you mind explaining? Thanks. --207.161.43.149 20:59, 1 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Sure: according to this diff your edit removed a considerable amount of content off the page. That is considered page blanking, so I therefore reverted it. K O  S |  talk

21:02, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

If you look you will see that the old content has been placed into the Winnipeg Geography and Climate article, and both articles have been substantially improved. I did not remove content per se, just moved it. The Winnipeg article is now too lengthy. Please do not revert the material again. Thanks. --207.161.43.149 21:06, 1 August 2006 (UTC)


 * To avoid this sort of confusion I'd like to suggest that you take advantage of using an edit summary, it will help those of us that are on the watch for vandals and page blankers, know that you are not one. K O  S |  talk  21:09, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

It is best to conduct a careful investigation before reverting any material. There is now a new article entitled Winnipeg Geography and Climate which contains all of the previous information plus much more. You have no idea how much additional effort I have had to expend. And now someone else is reverting the article back because they are not bothering to check!--207.161.43.149 21:13, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Trust me it would be much easier if you mentioned that you removed the text in an edit summary something like "removed section that is in a new sub article, sub article was created due to the article becoming to lengthy" something like that. Really an edit summary would be helpful. K O  S |  talk  21:20, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Today's number is

 * 29865 29900 - as of this edit :) --Alf melmac 12:54, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

My beloved Steve
 Dear Steve, I have no words to tell you how much the beautiful gift you've given me has moved me. I really can't, no matter how much I try. I look back and remember all we went through, from the first message you sent me when I was a clueless newcomer (the Mariposa War, remember? :) and your wonderful advices... and my first award ever, which I proudly display! :) and our talk when I got nominated for the UPA, hah :) and how sad I went when after my wikibreak I saw you had departed, and what we talked by email... it is great when life shows us it has a funny way of helping us out when we think everything's gone wrong :) You are in many senses, like my older wiki-brother, and know that when I found out you were back, my heart began to beat like crazy. Bright people and beautiful spirits like yours are hard to find in this sometimes too hard world, Steve. No matter what people may tell you, don't ever let them bring you down again. I, for once, promise you you'll always have a shoulder to lean on and a hand to help you, and two sympathetic ears to hear you any time you need. I wish I could hug you for real. Take good care, my dear Stevie - I promise we'll talk much, much more in the days to come :) Hugs,  Sharon   ♥  The Wiki Soundtrack! ♪  - 14:05, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes I remember discussing the Mariposa War with you, I was rather gratified that someone else showed an interest in the article. I appreciate all the kinds words Sharon, they just solidify the fact that you are one of the sweetest people on Wikipedia. K O  S |  talk  15:04, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Edit of the Day
''Hey Owen, been a long time! I've added an other edit of the day, I think you'll like this newest one! K O S |  talk  18:42, 2 August 2006 (UTC)''
 * Cool edit, I love it! Owen&times; &#9742;  18:46, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Welcome back!
Hey KoS,

The Wikipedia has missed you. WB! Computerjoe 's talk 18:49, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I missed the Wiki too, at least I realized how much I missed it after I came back. K O  S |  talk  18:55, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Shame you left in the first place... Computerjoe 's talk 21:04, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Monobook (Rollback script etc)
I've changed your monobook to mean the rollback script is now 'included' from another page, so it doesn't need updating every time something is fixed. Everything should still work, if it doesn't, get back to me. — FireFox  ( talk ) 10:38, 03 August '06
 * Thanks, everything still appears to work. K O  S |  talk  11:51, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Have a cigar
For having just passed another milestone, I think you deserve to relax for a bit, with this Nicaraguan cigar! --Alf melmac 13:41, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I'll take that with much pleasure! Thanks Alf! K O  S |  talk  13:44, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Kirk Hinrich
I really like it. It reads well &mdash; it has a nice flow. It's fully sourced and comprehensive, and I can tell that you have put a lot of hard work into it. Very Good job, and I'm not just saying that. I'll offer any help that I can. I'm still gonna wait for that joke :D Oran e  ( talk  &bull;  cont. ) 02:53, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Christina Aguilera
This article is weird and has a cabal of socks editing back in refs to registers there is no written proof of her actually having. Your rv was rv'd by another btw--I&#39;ll bring the food 15:55, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Re:IRC
Indeed, however I'm headed out in about half an hour, and am on skype at the moment, so... :P --  Bane s  12:39, 5 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Pity. Rotten luck. Oh well, things are active on skype, not silent, I ain't leaving it for half an hour. I guess I'll talk to you another day. :) --  Bane s  12:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes.

unblocked and scolded newbie DickCryer
Hi, I am a long-standing (though quiet) sysop, mostly creating new content and copyediting. This new user, personally known to me in meatspace tried to create a username and make some contributions. He phoned me to ask why he could not make edits, so I (foolishly) logged in as him with his permission and got "tagged" (blocked). So I unblocked him and scolded him by phone. Until I have a chance to sit down with him and show him the ropes, he will not make any edits. Thanks. Caltrop 13:11, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
 * That is fine, just please make sure his next username is appropriate. :) K O  S |  talk  13:22, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Oops, now I am not sure what you mean. This user set up an account using his real name "Dick Cryer", by any chance was this what you mean by inappropriate? I was under the impression that he typed an article name "Longacre Square" into the account creation box by mistake. What did you really have in mind? Caltrop 18:21, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Now I'm slightly confused, I blocked the username Dick Cryer based on the word Dick, I have never heard the surname of "Cryer" so I did not associate the two together as someone's name. I also blocked the account DickCryer based on the exact same criteria. Looking at the logs for the username Longacre Square show that that particular account has not even been made. If your friend would like to use his account "Dick Cryer", or "DickCryer" that will be fine and will not bring any objections from me now that I know it not meant to be an offensive username. I do ask however, that you please ask him to clarify on his userpage that his chosen username is good faith, so that other admins or user‘s will not be inclined to block once they see him editing. Please let me know if you are still confused. K O  S |  talk  22:01, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. After I posted it did cross my mind that his first name might be the problem :) Ignore my muddying the waters with the Longacre Square statement, this was based on the way his error message was read to me over the phone. It is a rather odd combination of names I agree, but he is a researcher, publisher, editor and writer with works physically extant in the Library of Congress collection. But he still will not get to post until he reads and understands and agrees to our Wikipedia rules, guidelines and ethics. He has researched and contributed to several of my articles over the years, but now wishes to write under his real name. Thanks for keeping WP safe for the good people. Sincerely, Caltrop 00:06, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Why are you reverting edits on my talk page
That seems a bit rude. It looks as though you don't like user 100110100 and I am inclined to agree that renaming articles in the way that this user has is not the right way to do things however reverting edits by that user on my talk page seems a gross overreaction. Lumberjack Steve 13:16, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
 * My apologies, the revert was the result of a mass reverting of the user's contributions. Even if you agree with his renaming of the articles, they were out of process and wrong. Again sorry about the revert on your user talk page, but is normal practice to revert a blocked user's contributions. K O  S |  talk  13:19, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Futurama GA nom
Just a question, why did you add "LONG" to the nomination... as you said in your edit summary, it's only 24.4 kB. Isn't 32 the cutoff for "LONG" status? -- light darkness (talk) 14:32, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Oops, I'm still thinking of the articles back when 20kbs was part of the "long" list. My mistake, I'll change it if you haven't already. K O  S |  talk  15:28, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
 * No worries :) Was just confused that I mis-read something.  Thanks. -- light  darkness (talk) 15:39, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Help! I'm autoblocked.
Hi. I'm currently in a major overhaul of my userpage and have been autoblocked. The user that is responsible for the original block is not online. I have asked others to for help, but I am asking multiple people incase on does not see my post quickly. Could you please unblock me so I don't loose my works. The IP is 205.188.116.5. Thanks- JCarriker 05:44, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I've unblocked that IP, try and see if you can edit. K O  S |  talk  05:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Bahnstah

 * Thank you very much. K O  S |  talk  11:20, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Whatever
Why dont you just mind your own business? Go away and leve me alone. --Joshuarooney2006 18:40, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Stop vandalizing and making personal attacks and there will not be a problem. K O  S |  talk  18:43, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

GHe's RfA


Esperanza, Kindness Campaign
Hey there, KnowledgeOfSelf, I hope you are enjoying your time back on Wikipedia. It's rather fantastic that you are contributing once again. I know/believe you're no longer currently a member of Esperanza (whether it be by choice or not), but I have an Esperanza related question/request for you. By the way, you should consider rejoining, it would be lovely to have you back. :) Anyway, the topic of Esperanza collaborating with the Kindness Campaign has been brought up again, and since you came up with the original idea for this, I thought it might be helpful if you could explain a bit more what you had in mind, or flesh out some details.  If you don't want to, I understand, but your knowledge (no pun intended!) would certainly be welcome.  It's only been brought up briefly (see Wikipedia_talk:Esperanza), but any thoughts you have would be great, there or on the proposals page.  Many thanks, and I do hope to see you back at Esperanza, -- Nataly a  02:21, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey, thanks Natalya, I've been enjoying myself immensely thus far, and it is fantastic to be back. :) It is true I am no longer a member of Esperanza, and I do not have a desire to rejoin that area of the Wikipedia community. I will however, expand on my original idea minimally here, so feel free to link this section to the discussion page, or just dump the relevant section of this reply wherever it should go, your choice. In my view Esperanza and the Kindness Campaign had one real coequal commonality: to make editors feel appreciated for their efforts towards building an encyclopedia. Now, of course both groups have their separate ideals and different measures that they take within the Wikipedia community, but my hope was to bring the groups together to achieve that one common goal. Not a merge of the two groups, and not even a new group. Just a collaborative effort between the two groups to help, achieve that common goal of making the real editors to the encyclopedia feel appreciated. The more eyes that are out there to help show that appreciation the better. You see someone add a few reliable refs to an article say thanks and good work, see someone complete a complicated merge, give them a barnstar. Those are actions that a lot of people already do, but the more there are the better. Hope that helps. K O  S |  talk  03:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for your reply, KoS, your insight is great to have! It will surely be helpful, and I appreciate you expanding on the idea even though you don't wish to be a part of Esperanza.  Keep enjoying yourself!  -- Nataly a  21:18, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

20th Century Fox Home Entertainment
The content I removed was a copyright violation. That is all. 69.165.40.102 03:44, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Can't sleep, General Willy Tojo's DNA is on Wheels!
AOL, naturally causing its own share of collateral damage--205.188.117.12 03:51, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I've unblocked the IP, should be alright now. K O  S |  talk  03:53, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Skype.
/me is bored. :P --  Bane s  16:55, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Speedy-deletions
Good evening. I wanted to let you know that I've just restored two pages that you'd speedy-deleted. I do not believe that they met the deliberately narrow criteria necessary for speedy-deletion. 2002 GayVN Awards was merged into another page. Because the contents were moved, we have an obligation to preserve the contribution history. It's a requirement of GFDL. While it is technically possible to preserve attribution history without preserving the original page, the techniques are time-consuming and error-prone. And they don't appear to have been carried out in this case. 4th GayVN Awards also had history, though only as the destination page before a pagemove. In that case, the reason to keep the page as a redirect instead of deleting it is to direct the original author(s) and readers to the destination page so they can join in making the correct page as good as it can be.

By the way, if these were discussed and decided in an RFD discussion, my apologies. I checked but found no evidence that they'd been discussed. Rossami (talk) 05:44, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * No worry, you are correct in the matter. Thanks for the message. K O  S |  talk  07:57, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Tots TV vandal
This is mostly an FYI. The anon you blocked this morning was not just some random vandal. It was the Tots TV vandal. This vandal is a long-term (over 6 months now) subtle misinformation vandal. He is on a dynamic IP, so his IP shifts every few days. He can be easily identified, because he makes the same edits to certain pages every time. The boy/girl change to the Tots TV page is his signature change. Warning this vandal is useless. (Not a criticism, as you had no way of knowing.) Protecting or semi-protecting his targets is also mostly useless, as he'll just move on to other targets, and return to his favorites when they are eventually un-protected. I generally revert every edit he makes and block his current IP for a week, which is effectively a block until he next shifts on his dynamic IP. Given that he's a subtle misinformation vandal, I consider even the edits that are not obviously vandalism to be suspect. If you want to help watch for him in general, mark a few of the pages he targets for watching, and you'll soon see the patterns to his edits. Anyway, this was mostly an FYI to let you know who it was that you were dealing with today. - TexasAndroid 13:18, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Sheesh, I've been saying it since I got back, you miss four months and you know nothing. :P Thanks for the heads up. K O  S |  talk  13:51, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * This one is not that big of a deal. The Tots TV vandal is not a particularly prominent vandal, just a very persistant one.  I've deliberately not gone an made a tracking page or anything like that with him.  Why aggrandize him any more than I have to?  I mostly just revert and block him as I see him on my watch-list.  And inform other admins of who he is.  Extra pairs of eyes watching out for him does not hurt.  Especially since, lately, he's been striking in the middle of the night, CDT, when I'm sound asleep.  So there's not much reason for you to have heard of him, as he tends to strike 1-2 dozen different lesser-known British TV pages, and that's about it. - TexasAndroid 14:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey
Thanks for blocking that Joshua guy for his attacks on me. It was really kind of getting repetitive.

But did you really intend to block for 1000 hours? Don't blocks normally "escalate" in a set fashion?

Eh, whatever: You are the admin, you do what you want. Logical2u 14:02, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * You are welcome, yes they normally tend to, and after reflection I reduced his block to 384 hours which is 16 days. K O  S |  talk  14:17, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Bill O'Reilly
I'd just like to note that I have been anonymously using wiki for a few years now, and have made several useful edits. I suppose I was just feeling mischievious when I edited the article on Mr. O'Reilly. That you were able to revert the change and chastise my ass for it in a span of about a minute is impressive. Wikipedia is more efficient than I thought. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.170.20.244 (talk • contribs)
 * I think this is the only thing I can say to that :P. K O  S |  talk  04:28, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Meese
I think if you are truly to know yourself you will appreciate the value of Meese in society. ~ LD

Pericles
I donot remove content! I tried to create an archive, which I did for the previous FAC nomination, in order to renominate the article. I donot know what I did wrong, but instead of accusing me of vandalism, please give me some suggestions to do it right!--Yannismarou 11:44, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Nice work
Wow, you and BseballBaby were fast, thanks for that. I wonder what I did to garner that friendly message.  Big Nate 37 (T) 20:24, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem, and anytime. K O  S |  talk  20:41, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

This is a minor heading
I saw you reverted on Dublin, but Polocook also said the climate wasn't necessary at the bottom of Talk:Dublin. Should I revert the talk page? —$ΡЯΙNGεrαgђ (-¢| ε  |Ŀ|T|♪-) 00:26, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't revert, but it would be a good idea to post a comment to tell him why he could not remove that section without a proper and full discussion. Which is what I'll do now, thanks for the message. K O  S |  talk  01:22, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Plato
Thanks! I added it to my list. :) Owen&times; &#9742;  17:00, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

New userpage
I won't to the copy+paste like I did on [the rest of] my friends' talk pages (see User talk:Phaedriel for an example), but check out my re-designed user page, done today! —$ΡЯΙNGεrαgђ (-¢| ε  |Ŀ|T|♪-) 03:33, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks good. :) K O  S |  talk  10:49, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

wow blocking
Seems you overlooked, part of the Willy creation spree of the last half hour. Thanks for spotting the others. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:23, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Tangotango had already blocked that account, and one or two others. I blocked the rest. Thanks for the message. K O  S |  talk  11:25, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, must have misread the block log. I thought that one had slipped through. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:34, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Thank you very much. K O  S |  talk  20:32, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Glad you like it! --TheM62Manchester 20:33, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Welcome template
Could you please create my user page? Just a. or - something to allow me to expand it myself?--172.130.227.58 16:43, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * That's not what I mean, could you just click on User:172.130.227.58 and start the page for me? I'm not really interested in a user name--172.130.227.58 16:46, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

64.*******
The 64 range is currently range blocked, you don't really need to give each one a 15 minute block, since they're already blocked--152.163.100.66 21:31, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Yup, but since I do not mess with range blocks I had to wait until some other admin put the range into effect. K O  S |  talk  21:32, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Apols
Sorry but we're supposed be a team and I'm just real frustrated that we're not. --Alf melmac 23:52, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Surrealism
It is not me who is removing content. I am adding content and arguing for the inclusion of the Chicago Surrealist Group in the Post Breton Surrealism section as a group in the post-surrealist situationist current. Other editers are pushing POV in removing the link. The reference is fully sourced and verified and the article for CSG and other links will confirm that. 62.25.106.209 14:21, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
 * this edit shows that you removed a significant amount of content from the article, including categories and links to other wikis. That is the reason why I reverted your edit. K O  S |  talk  14:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh no! that was an error - I was adding a reference. i do apologise and thank you for pointing that out! I will revert that now! 195.92.40.49 15:22, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks...
...for the birthday wish. My day went great. My friends took me out to dinner. A couple of the girls baked me a cake (with a lot of alcohol inside) and I spent the night camping in one of my friend's backyard, and we all got wasted and smoked pot. It was freaking awesome. (Kids if you're reading this, don't smoke.) Oran e  ( talk  &bull;  cont. ) 17:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

KowledgeOfSelf
I've been trying to comtact you about the Kosmix entry, which it appears you had something to do with deleting. I have a legitimate entry for 'Kosmix'. "The Kosmix" is a comic strip that has nothing to do with the search engine. Check out the site: www.kosmixbook.com. I'm new to posting on Wikipedia. Please help out if you can. Thanks
 * Hello, unfortunately as stated on the Kosmix wikipedia page This page has been deleted, and should not be re-created without a good reason, and I feel there is no reason to allow the page to be un-deleted. I'll explain why: I've done a google search for Kosmixbook which reveals only two hits. Likewise, a google search for Kosmix comics only reveals one positive looking resource for "Kosmix as a comic". Do you have any other references besides "www.kosmixbook.com"? On a side note the version of Kosmix that I deleted was an article based on a search engine, that was deleted through, AfD, and was protected because of user's re-posting the content. Sorry I can not be of much more help. Enjoy Wikipedia! K O  S |  talk  11:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Libellous Content on Wikipedia?
I just edited the Benny Hinn Wikipedia page to remove libellous and scandalous material. Wikipedia rules state that such material must be removed. Are you above the Wikipedia rules?

You cannot rely on libellous material e.g. http://www.trinityfi.org/press/heretic.html to form the information in Wikipedia. Note he does not explain where he has got that information from. Somebody needs to get sued offer such misinformation.

How do you propose to edit the Article to include only non-libellous material. Who should we sue? Wikipedia or the authors of the articles?


 * No you removed material that had reference's, and you used a vauge edit summary. That is the reason why I reverted your edit. K O  S |  talk  17:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Removing one false or wrong statement is one thing, but deleting the entire section is an other. K O  S |  talk  18:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Dave Henderson (footballer)
Thanks for reverting the page delete some one placed on that page. Was it pure vandalism or something else?Dodge 20:33, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * You are welcome. It is just pure vandalism. K O  S |  talk  21:31, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

User talk:EddieSegoura..
Could you please protect this so this sockpuppet will stop trolling there.. Thanks! — Moe Epsilon  00:23 August 25 '06
 * Sure thing, are you back Moe? K O  S |  talk  00:30, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * No, sadly.. just popping in and out waiting for a user to e-mail me about something and I just discovered my name linking to this users talk page.. — Moe Epsilon  00:33 August 25 '06

A Bad Joke (or other deleted Nonsense)
This is the 51st heading! Btter archive! :P —$ΡЯΙNGεrαgђ (-¢|  ε  |Ŀ|T|♪-) 01:31, 25 August 2006 (UTC)