User talk:MONGO/Archive02

Chinese Wall pic in the Bob
MONGO: I would encourage you to go ahead and post your Chinese Wall photo, even if it is lo-res. After all, in en, we just use 200-250 px thumbs anyway: many photos look good at that resolution. And, the pic that I used in Bob Marshall Wilderness was just taken off a random page in the Flathead National Forest web site -- I don't think it shows the Bob that well, anyway. So, feel free to dump the USFS pic for your Chinese Wall pic, if you think it's better. -- hike395 July 5, 2005 01:20 (UTC)


 * Although, I did just find http://www.fs.fed.us/r1/flathead/wilderness/Wilderness.htm, which has some pretty cool pics. I may use them for the NF article, anyway. You be the judge: I don't know what your Chinese Wall pic looks like. --- hike395


 * That's an awesome photo! If you have something that looks like that, I would say ditch the USFS photos and use yours, unless yours is really lo-res and obviously blurry. -- hike395 July 5, 2005 07:20 (UTC)

Brodo
I have moved an article of yours to User:MONGO/sockpuppet Brodo. -- RHaworth 2005 July 9 07:24 (UTC)

This is no way to react when you lose a minor debate. For the record, you simp, my first name is Brodie. I live in Seattle. Don't do sockpuppets, never have. Don't see any point. Lots of people use "bro"... similar to "dude" for suburban whites. You're a paranoid schmuck with a vendetta and I'll never take anything you do or say on Wikipedia seriously again. Brodo 01:50, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I didn't Rfc the info. You and bro are one and the same. The only contributions you make are personal attacks...you are not fooling anyone...I don't care if you take me seriously. I never took you seriously to begin with.--MONGO 02:19, July 12, 2005 (UTC)


 * oh snap! --kizzle 02:47, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ooo OOo, can I play? I would find it extremely entertaining for you to point out just 1 personal attack by me.  I certainly can do so for you if you wish. -bro 172.165.157.184 03:29, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Why would I need to do that if you can do it for me? Personally, if the evidence is so unfounded, why would you be taking offense? If you read the evidence, I never accused you of wrong doing, only accused Brodo of having a sockpuppet account (you/him/both) and there's no rule against that so long as you follow the rules governing it. It's not impossible I am wrong, but the evidence supports events which are awfully hard refute...and so far, you haven't refuted anything.--MONGO 03:37, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Where have I taken offense? I find it rather entertaining, almost as much as your floundering on the 3RR page.  But hey, funny is funny. As for refuting, whats there to refute?  Your evidence is '1.look 2 users who haven't posted at the exact same time, but of course I don't know all the dynamic IP's bro has had so of course this is ridiculous on its face. 2. OMG they edited the same article. 3. They both have 'bro' in their name!!11one11!! 4. bro mentioned election fraud in washingon when discussing election fraud, and the brodo says he lives in washington!'  Your 'evidence' needs no refuting, as it doesn't even qualify as evidence. -bro 172.165.157.184 04:02, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Why did you ask me to post evidence that you have made a personal attack, when my response was to Brodo? Interesting that a graphic Brodo has that only links to 3 pages in 600,000 plus namespaces one of which you posted details on discussing washington state election controversies which is where you and your alter ego are from. No one from virginia as YOU claim to be from could give a darn about the election irregularities in washington after nine months...only someone who lives there would be pushing that argument...why not push Ohio, Wisconsin, Florida...everyone there made it clear it was a presidential discussion, but you kept pushing it....your ruse isn't working. Why didn't you get mad yesterday when you "noticed it"...why are you mad at all?--MONGO 04:22, July 12, 2005 (UTC)


 * I think you could benefit from reading what you type "You and bro are one and the same. The only contributions you make are personal attacks...you are not fooling anyone." And, uh, it might surprise you to know that some people are quite involved, and informed about many different things, not to mention that the recent trial regarding the fraud in that election came to a close only a few weeks ago.  Ohio et al were already included in the article, once again, you swing and miss.  Pity that you only have knowledge about things that occur where you live. -bro 172.165.157.184 04:31, 12 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Wow. --kizzle 05:21, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

172-bro-Brodo, I am sorry if my post made you so mad...that wasn't my intention. However, the most common pattern of guilt denial is being set in textbook example by you. A cup of warm milk might help you.--MONGO 06:57, July 12, 2005 (UTC)


 * Again, where have I taken offense, or gotten mad? Amusing as your delusions are, I can't help but whack you with a cluebat when you present such a large target.  Mistaking destruction of your arguments for anger or offense shouldn't be all that surprising given your record.  Oh, and I'm partial to chocolate milk, thanks. -bro 172.165.157.184 07:23, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Then warm chocolate milk for yourselfs.--MONGO 07:25, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

Anybody still reading this has to be amazed that a Republican like yourself smokes this much weed. Seriously, explain to me how an AOL dialup account in West Virginia proves that... uh... whatever you are feverishly "proving" here. I live in Seattle, so OF COURSE I'm the same person as some dude in W. Virginia who enjoys winding your sorry ass up. IT ALL MAKES SENSE. Just like supply-side economics!

Actually, let it be known: there is no Brodo, no MONGO, and no guy in WV who likes to post without registering. We're all kizzle


 * Do they give barnstars for being a douchebag? --kizzle 07:52, July 21, 2005 (UTC)


 * Hey Thanks...I like that picture on your user page...wonder what happened here to you: []...were you so upset for your split personality "-bro" that you looked up Calton to see if the awful slander I said about you had been removed? I see you decide to track his edits and make one right after he did. I still don't understand why you're so upset about all this...if you want to have a sock puppet that's fine...but the only thing you do by adorning your user page with my beautiful picture is make it, well, more beautiful!--MONGO 06:59, July 21, 2005 (UTC)


 * By the way, its Virginia, not West Virginia, I can take just about any insult but that one...-bro 172.137.190.250 23:44, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Then stop insulting yourself! Do you have anything, I mean anything at all to contribute to Wikipedia that might make it better? You sign in and come directly to my user talk...what a tormented fellow you must be.--MONGO 00:31, July 22, 2005 (UTC)


 * Uh, A) I watch all the pages that I leave comments on/edit. B) Your inability to stalk my edits seems to bother you something fierce. C) Stop insulting yourself? Is that the equivalent to 'Stop hitting yourself'?  Surely you can do better.  D) Considering your obsession with this sockpuppetry fantasy, you should really bring it up to David Gerard.  You can even point this comment out to him that I say he can/should do his thing.  I would enjoy it greatly. -bro 172.137.190.250 10:14, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Like a bad cold, you just won't go away. You really should read this: Internet troll.--MONGO 11:07, July 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, As you say, David Gerard can check all the IP's to a user, but he cannot check to see if you and Brodo are one and the same with the code in place. Reason: you're logging in from two different places. AOL accounts always show up with a Virginia origin because that is where most of their equipment is. I am not going to continue this tit for tat with you because you are wasting my time. Nothing in any of your contributions history as Brodo or "bro" indicates you have any interest in creating encyclopedic articles and kizzle and company over in the 2004 elections discussion page were hardly in any agreement with you on anything...all it appears you wish to do is be a pest...why don't you go write an encyclopedia or something?--MONGO 11:48, July 22, 2005 (UTC)


 * Ah, more bluster, no substance. Since when is 'agreeing with me' neccessary for anything on a talk page?  I suppose I'll allow you to keep digging your hole then.  Perhaps you should peruse Flaming.  Complaining about someone responding to an accusation is bordering on delusional.  And no, not all AOL ip's originate from NoVa, but I expected as much.  Oh, how about an RFC then? -bro 172.153.124.92 21:03, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

ann coulter
poll you might want to check out

Please sign notes
Hi MONGO: I noticed you've left a couple of "please sign your post" notes on newbies' talk pages, and it occurred to me that you might also want to let them know that they can sign using the four tildes (~). Good work! -- Essjay ·  Talk 17:54, July 12, 2005 (UTC)


 * I know what you mean about the Bush page; between the vandalism and the POV pushing, nobody can keep up! -- Essjay ·  Talk 18:03, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

montana?
where you from in montana (if you don't mind saying)? i loved a girl from there once. oh well. but i did get to see a hell of a lot of the state. beautiful. Derex 02:29, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Born in Helena but grew up in Missoula...I am very fortunate...but in actuality, I like a lot of Wyoming better...remember that 2/3 of Montana is like one big wheat field whereby Wyoming is mountains and high altitude desert for the most part...for me, the fewer the people, the bigger the party. Bad part is, I am not living in Montana these days, but hope I can change that some time soon. Thanks for asking.--MONGO 02:41, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * my girl was from Bozeman. but we mostly hung out in a cabin on the Madison River.  i sure did catch a lot of shrubs & rocks & grass before i caught my first trout.  i might be heading that general direction to work for a year soon, to laramie.  pleasure to meet you, mongo. Derex 05:25, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I exist
Here I am: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pioneer-12

- Pioneer-12

Precision in conversion
Further to our discussion on unit conversions, I thought I would make a comment about precision. I see that you converted 3.4 million acres ->13,759 km&sup2;

Significant figures. The source value has 2 significant figures. Putting 2 significant figures in the result gives 3.4 million acres -> 14,000 km&sup2;

Implied range. If the source figure is precise to 0.1 million acres, then it is +/- 50,000 acres (200 km&sup2;). Thus 3.4 million acres -> 13,800 km&sup2;.

Judgement. Converting units to the correct format is only part science. The rest is an art. It is matter of your own personal judgement. I usually just match significant figures. I may add one significant figure when converting small units into large units. I sometimes look through the rest of the article to see the precision used elsewhere. Sometimes I just do what looks right. That may include writing all the integers as in '13,759 km&sup2;'.

It does not really matter. The main thing is that the conversion is put there in some form to help metric readers.

Thanks for taking an interest in units. It does a lot for making Wikipedia an international resource. I hope that you experiment a bit with Google converter, it can do a lot, just click on the More about calculator link that appears after a conversion.

Incidentally, there is a live discussion going on about when the Manual of Style should forbid metric units. Feel free to join in the discussion Bobblewik (talk) 14:34, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda &rarr; Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda conspiracy theory - name change vote
Hello, there is a vote to rename Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda to Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda conspiracy theory. The voting is here: Talk:Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda. I would appreciate it if you could vote. Thanks. ObsidianOrder 05:18, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Saddam Hussein/Al-Qaeda vote.
Got your message, no worries. We were likely editing that Talk page at the same time, causing one version to "stomp" out the other mid-publishing. A real common thing, I didn't think anything of it. :) Shem(talk) 09:27, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Re:Protection
Replied at talk page. Redwolf24 (Talk) 04:51, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Magdoff
If you have a moment could you look in at Votes for deletion/Conspiracy allegations about Harry Magdoff. Thanks nobs 14:59, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for looking. Let me know if I can be of help. nobs 20:22, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Ted Kennedy Page
Can you help with the discussion on the Ted Kennedy page? Thanks 24.147.97.230

Kennedy Poll
Please give your vote on the talk page.Voice of All(MTG) 03:01, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Edit summary
Hello. Please remember to always provide an edit summary. Thanks and happy edits. Alphax &tau;&epsilon;&chi; 14:45, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * See . Also, don't forget to use the preview button - and if you're having problems with timeouts, try saving your edits offline. Alphax &tau;&epsilon;&chi; 23:15, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * See and  - try marking this sort of thing as minor in future. When I saw these edits appear on Recent Changes, I had no idea what had been changed (as far as I knew, you were a vandal) - fortunately your user page informed me that this was your interest area, so I didn't bother to investigate any further. Having an all-caps username doesn't help. Anyway, good luck and happy editing. Thanks, Alphax &tau;&epsilon;&chi; 01:24, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

double U
Blair had a swing of 7% against him. Everyone standing on an explicitely anti-war platform did well. George galloway even managed to turn a 90,000 majority for a pro-War blair favourite into a 90,000 loss (this is an extremely large swing given the numbers participating in a single constituency in the UK). How "actually the UK re-elected Blair so really they were pro-War" can be said to be an npov description of the facts is beyond me. ( ! | ? | * ) 19:57, 11 August 2005 (UTC)


 * How is the election of Galloway not a surprise, turning a totally safe labour seat into a non-labour seat is a very large change. A swing of 7% is huge in british politics. If it hadn't been for the huge landslide victory in 1997, a swing of 4% would have unseated labour. 7% is huge. All the UK newspapers reported it as a defeat for Tony Blair, despite labour winning. Indeed, Tony Blair himself went on record afterward as noting that the election result expressed quite strong that the country was angry about the war, and that he would "listen" [whether or not he actually listened is a different matter].     ( ! | ? | * ) 20:21, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Bush poll
MONGO, although the vote was tied, certainly not consensus, I think the sentiment (from those not trying to put their anti-Bush spin in like Kizzle or Robert) was to delete the entire passage including the poll issue as not directly releted to Bush himself. That was my understanding of the poll since removing only one side leaves it unbalanced. --Noitall 12:20, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Your accusation of spin would make a lot more sense if I didn't try to rationally explain my viewpoint and seek dialogue on the matter. Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I'm trying to "spin" anything. --kizzle 18:10, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Kizzle, you should be proud of your spin. You have stated your POV and are quite passionate about it, unlike others who hide from it.  You have stated your views many times.  We accept it.  --Noitall 21:32, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Hold the phone. I stated my views many times?  I didn't realize that was forbidden on Wikipedia.  Like I said before, whatever you may think of my perspective, at least I invite discussion on my views.  And if you noticed, in the updated poll section on GWB, I included the part about most other countries saying the Iraq war was justified despite not finding WMDs, which I should have left out if I was really trying to spin the issue.  You, on the other hand, have several unanswered questions in various posts of mine towards you which you are afraid to answer, so you might want to think about answering those before accusing other people of spin.  I'll leave you to your trite retort as I don't want to clutter up Mongo's page, as while I have significantly different viewpoints then Mongo's, I have an enormous respect for his ability to rationalize and not simply play partisan games (unlike you) and I enjoy debating with him. --kizzle 21:42, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

Ted Kennedy vandals
Please add Ted Kennedy to your watchlist. There are several sockpuppet anti-Kennedy POV trolls down there. Thank you.Voice of All(MTG) 01:47, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Bookmarked along with about 200 other articles...the Bush vandalism tkes up most of my energy but thanks.--MONGO 04:34, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

edit summary
Writing "rvv" kind of makes me look like a vandal when it was a legitimate edit 69.142.21.24 04:28, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I did try to change it to "rv" but it locked me out. Besides, I tend to (for good reasons usually) view anon IP posts as vandalism...see Accountability as I am strong advocate of that viewpoint.--MONGO 04:33, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

Request for Help
Votes for deletion/WikiProject Wikipedians for Decency needs your input. Agriculture 07:11, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Re: Thanks?
Sorry, I fixed the spelling in your talk archive because it was in the wrong namespace (the articles). I now moved it to the User namespace. Regards, Sam Hocevar 08:16, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Sorry!!!!
See User talk:Redwolf24. And my comment is sincere. Redwolf24 08:37, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/WikiProject Wikipedians for Decency
I just wanted to point out that I (and I believe many or all of the other people voting delete at Votes for deletion/WikiProject Wikipedians for Decency) have no interest in "censoring" people who think that Wikipedia should adhere to some baseline of decency. What we object to is the creation of a WikiProject to asouse that point of view. If the project had been one to determine what the law meant to Wikipedia, then I would vote for it, but the text of the page makes it VERY clear that that is a secondary goal. If the goal had been to consider where the line between information and purient interest is, I *might* consider that NPOV, but again that's not the goal.

Please consider that you could always vote to userify and now or after the vote is over you and other memebers of the group could put up user pages with the exact same goals. -Harmil 13:53, 17 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, I think that the arguments pushed by the actual creator of the project have more do to with the interpretation of the laws than he may have argued. I'm not in favor of tagging pictures with a decency violation tag. Just as a background, I am not a big fan of anon editing in heavily vandalized articles either and voted for semi-protection of those types of articles in which only registered users could edit them. I strongly advocate Accountability. I may propose some form of restructuring but waiting to see how things unfold.--MONGO 14:09, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice
First off thank you Mongo, for the advice about discussions. I will take it to heart. It is too bad about agriculture but if he wants to just abandon his thing then I guess, so be it. I wont grovel anymore. As a newbie, I am already developing a slightly thicker skin because of that decency debate, I try not to let it bother me, but sometimes I feel really peeved about being insulted. Anyway I'll see you around. Au revoir! Banes 14:16, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Re: Vfd
Coins tossed. Strong keep. -- tomf688  14:43, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

My vote
You wrote, "You voted exactly as I thought you would!" Congratulations on your prediction, but... which vote of mine are you describing here? JamesMLane 09:37, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Oh, I see, you must mean the VfD. I had voted on it before getting back to the GWB talk page and seeing your link to it, so I didn't make the connection. (It's probably better to put notices like that on user talk pages instead of unrelated article talk pages, but thanks for calling the VfD rumble to my attention.) JamesMLane 09:47, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

As for the follow-up questions you ask, sorry, but I'm clueless. I've never worked in the areas of consent from photo models or the liability of an internet site. My impression is that it's an evolving area of the law, so that, if Wikipedia decided to spend roughly its current annual budget on legal fees to get a thorough analysis, there still might not be a definitive answer. My answer may be worthless but at least it's cheap. :) JamesMLane 11:01, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

On the question of an attempt to take down Wikipedia, by offended religious rightists or anyone else: It might or might not work, but even if it did, the attacker would have little to gain. All the content is out there, at dozens of mirror sites. It would be too big a job to take down all of them. The software is freely available, too. If the Wikimedia Foundation were somehow to be bankrupted by a lawsuit, it wouldn't take long before somebody else scraped up some money, bought a few servers, imported the most recent content snapshot available, and spread the word that Replacementopedia was up and running, please come and edit. The attacker has gained almost nothing -- some editors don't hear about the new project, or are too lazy to make the transition, but on the other hand the publicity attendant upon the whole ruckus attracts some new editors who otherwise might not have participated. The bottom line is that the attacker has expended a lot of time and effort and accomplished virtually nothing. I'm more worried about a concerted content attack. A religious right group that was both savvy and unprincipled wouldn't bring some idiotic anti-indecency lawsuit, but instead would dispatch its drones to try to insert the group's POV wherever possible. We could deal with some of them, but not all. There's also a serious danger that some big corporation or trade association will try this. JamesMLane 00:19, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Wiki Point
Hi there Mongo. Enjoying the war on project decency? I noticed you warning users on the project page about violating wiki point. Can a user be banned for joining the project with the intent to disrupt it? Thanks for your time. Banes 12:42, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I just noticed that a couple of users are doing exactly that. Banes 07:55, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, whatever the result of the Vfd, I think the project should be changed/reformed to something else. Please do keep me posted, as I am still interested in the project's future. (If there is indeed a future.) I am still keen on the concept of Project Decency. Banes 11:25, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikipedians for Decency
I have noticed the VfD vote on your project. I have made my opinion clear: if some users disapprove of some of the images on Wikipedia, and want to organize themselves, it's their own freaking business.

I volunteer to host your page in my user space if it gets deleted (which is not unlikely at the moment); not because I agree with you, but to protest against this frivolous VfD. (This is not to say that I don't believe you have a point.)

Hell, and I have "Wikipedia is democracy" written on my user page. Looks like I'll have to change it to "Wikipedia is a dictatorship of the majority".

Sincerely, Mike Rosoft 09:10, 19 August 2005 (UTC)


 * WP:NOT a democracy. Rama 09:28, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Hello MONGO


You deserve it. Really. Redwolf24 00:34, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

How to read another person's mind
I'm not going to revert it again unless you can't find reliable sources that back all these claims up in the next few days. If the knowledge is so common, it shouldn't be so hard to find sources. What is completely nonsense is this "Every person from the Clinton and Bush Administrations believed at the time etc": you cannot read minds, can you? Don't confuse "common knowledge" and "common opinion" because it is uncommon that people have access to other people's minds, at least where I live. I'm wasting words right now anyhow: with your constant access to my mind, why should I explain my thoughts twice?;-) NightBeAsT 01:58, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Interested in leaving a comment for the Wikipedia Signpost?
I'm looking for people interested in commenting about WikiProject Wikipedians for Decency and the ensuing VfD. If you want to be quoted, see User:Ral315/Signpost. (Only post in your own section, and please do not make direct comments to others' quotes.  ral  315  06:35, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

Re:Revert of civility addition
If you think that should be added to the VfD process, the best way to work it out would be to post a message on the talk page for WP:GVFD and see what others think. However, since it could mean depositing literally hundreds of messages on talk pages for some controversial articles I doubt it will gather wide support. I'm not sure that there would much effect to only informing the original author since many articles are widely edited and in any case, being the original author confers no special privilege or ownership of the article. Also, many pages are taken to VfD directly from Special:Newpages and are made by anons. To drop an anon a message after they've finished editing their article would be much the same as not giving them a message at all; most of them don't return under the same IP and wouldn't know what their old one was to look for it. I do not think it uncivil to say that you think a page should be deleted; it's the nature of Wikipedia, and there's a warning at the bottom of the screen warning about "merciless editing". Still, if you think it definitely should be added, strike up a discussion on the talk page or at the Village Pump and see what others think. -Splash 07:32, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Project Members
Once the VFD ends I hope you will delete all of the bad faith members from the project. Erwin Walsh

Responding to POV
From 2003 invasion of Iraq:
 * 18:53, 21 August 2005 MONGO (rv, antiwar foreigners pushing their POV)

Do you really mean what this sounds like? Daniel Collins 22:41, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Goodbye
I'm packing up for good now, and this will be my last edit. I just wanted to say sorry if I dragged you into something or made a situation worse for you, you're a good guy and you don't deserve it. I applaud your courage to stay, and wish you luck. By the looks of WfD, the trolls have already taken up roost and started to push pov. Couple this with the trollish admins like RedWolf, and you have your work cut out for you. Anyway, goodbye, good luck, it has been good knowing you. I just wish the circumstances had been better. Agriculture 06:50, 22 August 2005 (UTC)


 * MONGO, that is why I put I'm pretty sure you don't like me on your barnstar. Anyways night. Redwolf24 07:03, 22 August 2005 (UTC)


 * One other thing. You may want to change your email on your user page to mongomontanaATyahooDOTcom. The reason for this I have recently learned is because bots pick up email addresses and spam them. Or so says half the Wikipedia IRC channel. Have a good one. Redwolf24 07:07, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Bad faith
How dare you accuse me of bad faith. I have at all times acted towards your WikiProject with honesty, and you have absolutely no grounds for believing I have any intent to disrupt Wikipedia. I expect an immediate apology for your groundless personal attack. --Ngb 11:16, 22 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Seconded. Hipocrite 15:01, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
 * If both you explain how you abide by the original document and agree with it's original focus, then you'll get an apology. Locking the page on the wrong version, including disruptive editors as "members" who may or may not include either of you, without requesting a third party, outside the reverting aspect of the pages is a violation of admin powers and you know it. This is absolutely a bad faith effort. Period.--MONGO 20:35, August 22, 2005 (UTC)


 * I do not agree with the original focus of the Project, as it is clearly in violation of WP:NPOV. I stated this clearly and honestly up-front when I joined the project 'as an observer'; and I have engaged in polite and healthy debate with members of the project without resorting to accusations of bad faith and personal attacks. (I also voted keep on the VfD, since I believe that censoring the project would be as bad a thing as what the project itself was originally set up to do.)
 * My protection of the page was not a violation of administrative powers as I was not involved in the edit conflict. There is no 'right' or 'wrong' version until consensus has been achieved on the talk page. If you enter into a discussion there with the users you are edit warring with, I will cheerfully unprotect the page. --Ngb 20:45, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Your behavior is obstructionist. If you disagree with the project and believes it violates NPOV, then you should have voted to "delete" and lef tit at that. That you have signed on as a "member" in disagreement with the projects original aims, have protected the page while and have been directly involved in the reversion of the page without requesting a third party to do so is not in keeping with your admin rights. Lastly, that you saved the page with both a serious transformation of the project while it is in Vfd and included in the protected version people who outright state their opposition to the page is just plain wrong.--MONGO 20:54, August 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * What right do you have to tell me how I should and shouldn't vote? I believe the Project's original aims to be in contradiction of Wikipedia's principles, but I don't believe a reconstituted Project can't achieve anything useful. This is in no way obstructionist.
 * Finally, the version of the page that I protected is essentially equivalent to the version before the edit war started, i.e. not 'a major change'. I will ask again for you to withdraw your baseless accusations. --Ngb 21:03, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Not going to happen. I have stated the case: you are not interested in the project as it was originally written, you signed on as "member" in opposition to the original arguments presented by the project, you locked the page with a bolded anon (troll) vote as well as several other users whose obvious intent is to disrupt and you should have asked a neutral third party to lock the page as I did on the 17th...since you were involved in the arguments you have exceeded your admin powers and this is inexcusable. That is where I stand and until you can prove to me that I am wrong (which you can't) then no apology is forthcoming.--MONGO 00:58, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

Deletions
I will delete them from the Wikiproject, if they let me. Their behavior may be brought up in in an Rfc as well...it is absolutely juvenile. Thanks for the imput.--MONGO 18:46, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * I reverted the project to your last edit. But... I have an idea as to how to resolve the dispute.  Add a clause to the project to give certain individuals (such as yourself) the right to turn down members if they are deemed to be bad faith or trolling.  Erwin Walsh
 * I already did that and they reverted it. One of the "members" they keep reinstating is a troll (anon in bold)...that hardly constitutes a good faith edit on their part. I've reached the point I don't care about it anyway, it wasn't something I was ever up to...but there reverts make the page look nothing like the original Vfd nominated page. I had the page locked for about an hour on the 17th, but that too was overturned. They are just being silly.--MONGO 11:52, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Featured picture - comments requested
Hiya Mongo. I'm nominating one of my photos for 'featured picture'. Voting isn't for two days, but I'd appreciate your comments if you feel to add them. -- RyanFreisling @ 16:01, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Your gorgeous landscape photos
Are astonishing. They really make those articles come to life. The 'Cirque' image is so extraordinary - the mountainscapes are so sharp I thought it was CGI at first! That you live near such beauty fills me with low-grade nature envy. :)

And thanks for the nice feedback about my Antinous image - I have a few other really special ones that I took, for less notable figures in ancient Greek and Roman history, but I need to match 'em up with the relevant articles, or write new articles for them. I've already created/inserted a few photos - they're reachable from my User page. Be well, and thanks again! -- RyanFreisling @ 02:28, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Re: alumni
Hope you had an easier time choosing a major than I'm having. ;) Thanks for the kind words though. -- tomf688  06:01, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link; I'll look into it if times get rough. ;) -- tomf688  14:20, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Nice.
'' Whats with this character? User:Erwin Walsh At first I didn't check his edit history and didn't think anything about him. He asked me to purge a few of the members in the encyclopedic merit (decency) afterburner project and I said I would, but they all calmed down and now he's doing it himself...--MONGO 11:16, August 24, 2005 (UTC) ''


 * I'm going to say one thing, and then I'm leaving for the day. That (^) was totally out of line, not to mention a lie.  Having put my reputation on the line for your project, consequenting in a 24 hour block, it is piss poor treatment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ?????????????? (talk • contribs) 14:19, 24 August 2005

MONGO hates vandals...
Some one with a similar user name to my own vandalized your page this morning, and I fixed the problem, but then RAMA changed it, thinking it was me vandalizing, then Rama changed it back. Confused? Me too. Please note the vandal used a period at the end of their name. Thought an explanation might be in order. See you 'round! Hamster Sandwich 16:40, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikipedians for encyclopedic merit
I suggest you refrain from removing other people's names from the list of members. Zoe 05:06, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

If you remove my name from the list one more time you will be blocked from editing. Zoe 06:38, August 25, 2005 (UTC) Radiant_ &gt;|&lt; 08:52, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * I was about to suggest the same. People can decide for themselves whether or not they consider themselves members. Radiant_ &gt;|&lt; 08:15, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Repeatedly removing other people's edits after being asked not to is grounds for blocking. You should assume good WP:FAITH on Zoe, and note that unilaterally removing people from a Wikiproject is not very civil, and has very little effect other than aggravating people. Radiant_ &gt;|&lt; 08:29, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, I see three possibilities here. 1) Zoe wants to contribute to the project but hasn't gotten aroudn to it yet; 2) Zoe wants to keep an eye on the project because she disagrees with part of it; or 3) Zoe is being silly and possibly breaking WP:POINT. In cases 1 and 2, you have no business removing her name. In case 3, she would be goading you and the mature response would be to ignore it. So any way you turn it, removing her name is not a good idea. So don't. Radiant_ &gt;|&lt; 08:52, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

I am with you on this one MONGO. This Zoe character is way out of line, banning users left, right and center for "disruption and trolling". Her original member listing on the Project, "I would like to see a standard which requires an obscene image on every page" was facetious nonsense, given the originally stated aims of the Project, and thus clearly against WP:POINT. It was definitely disruptive trolling, no question. BTW, 'being silly' is the term used when 'admins' disrupt WP by trolling, other users get blasted out of WikiSpace by the good Zoe. Good luck. --81.76.68.40 10:10, 26 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Will keep an eye on things, 'admin style' ;-). Abuse of admin power is a serious problem here on WP. Give someone a 'block button' and there is a definite power trip that can ensue.  I have found most admins to be responsible, but there is a hardcore of power trippers who promote their POV through abuse, no doubt about it. --81.76.68.40 11:21, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Re: brenneman (t) (c)

 * Mongo, don't cite me out of context. Changing a section header to clarify what the section actually is about is entirely different from unilaterally removing somebody's name from a membership list. Radiant_ &gt;|&lt; 08:54, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * He didn't revert your signed and commenced conversation for no reason. Zoe didn't violate a project page with a disruptive edit. Your perspective isn't fair. And if many people disagree with you, you should at least consider the possibility that you may in fact be wrong. I have better things to do than argue amount semantics; I suspect that you are smart enough to know precisely what is going on here. Now please go do something constructive. Radiant_ &gt;|&lt; 09:10, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Mongo, It appears that you have misunderstood some basic wiki concepts. No one "owns" the discussion on a talk page. (See recent changes.) brenneman (t) (c)  09:56, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

(Copied from other talk page)
 * Basic wiki concepts...nothing wrong with being bold...are you insinuating that you can teach me some new tricks...I'm looking for some article creation on your part...your edit summary suggests that you are more interested in janitorial work, not that this is a bad thing, er somewhat lacking in creativity. I think your edit was more than bold...it was rude...I inserted it along with my timestamped entry...you then post that the title of the subject heading can't be changed...by whose authority? My edit to User:Radiant!'s talk page was right on.--MONGO 10:07, August 25, 2005 (UTC)


 * The facts are thus:
 * I changed a subsection title. Any argument that suggests this action was inapropriate needs a review of the basics.
 * You reverted without an edit summary. I asked you to please use the discussion page before reverting again.
 * It was uncivil of me to change the header of this talk page, and I apologise.
 * brenneman (t) (c) 12:51, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Orders
You seem to enjoy giving people orders. Here is the apology for altering my subject heading from the person who changed it...gives me ample right to remove the warning and shows you have no right dictating. Taken from my talk page: "It was uncivil of me to change the header of this talk page, and I apologise. brenneman(t)(c) 12:51, 25 August 2005 (UTC)". You really need to do a deep examination of your behavior. Wrongful accusations of 3RR, calling people trolls with no evidence and making suggestions of vandalism when it involves content dispute is not the way to build a good reputation here. I won't bother Rfc-ing you on all of this because I think they are a waste of time. Don't act so threatened. --MONGO 00:10, August 26, 2005 (UTC)


 * I do understand Wikiquette, if that's what you mean. I did not change your subject header on the talk page; but I think doing that is kinda borderline in terms of wikiquette.  One definitely should not remove someone's actual comments&mdash;as you have done numerous times to various people&mdash;but changing a header is a bit more context dependent.  The headers are organizational and navigational, and as such are more of collaborative content.  Obviously, if a change really undercuts the intention of the original header, that's bad manners... brenneman's change ambivalent enough that I did not myself revert it, but also such that I did not object to your reversion. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 00:41, 2005 August 26 (UTC)

Whats happenin'?
Hey Mongo, wassup! Sorry to bother you, again, but I was wondering what is the current status of Encyclopedic merit? I am keeping tabs on the talk page and all I see is a lot of hot air and debate which is simply going in circles. I am not for one minute blaming you, but I was wondering what can be done/is being done with regards to the aims of the project? Or are we in a big debate cycle, putting a stopper in any project activity? Banes 13:14, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikipedians for encyclopedic merit No. 2
MONGO, the page was a good try, but I almost think that Agriculture was correct, not in quitting entirely, but in this page being useless. It is just one big edit war with no productive edit or standard in sight. It is entirely, with just a few exceptions, filled with editors who do not want to contribute anything to the goals except to see it die. I am not an Admin (and have no desire to be one), so I don't know how you control it. And if it is not controlled, then the page is useless. You might note that was removed from the deletion category today. The people who want to lower the concyclopedic standard of Wiki, violate all common sense, totally ignore the purpose of Wiki as Jimbo set it up, have won. I don't think there is anything we can do. That's Wiki. --Noitall 20:49, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * For example, see Gibadabmoob below. Just for laughs, here is his post on that page. --Noitall 23:23, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Hippies
 * No censorship on Wiki hippies. Wiki is not for you to censor.  Who made you god?  The pope?  I don't think so.  Even the pope understands naked people can be educational.  This project is a violation of NPOV and needs be stopped. Gibadabmoob 22:59, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * How so...a violation of NPOV...in what way?--MONGO 00:14, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

What you're doing is wrong
Wikipedia is not for you to censor. Some of us aren't offended by the human body. Gibadabmoob 22:55, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * You're entitled to your opinion.--MONGO 00:15, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Dude
dued, you fucking rock. Bottom line. You're awesome. I'm gone but I just had to say. Out of all trhe people here. You're like the king of wikipedia, if wikipedia wasn'g all trolls. So rock on, peace out, ya;lld vooll. ~ Agriculture

2004 election
I've protected the page for now. Hope that helps. Please keep me posted if there are any new developments. Radiant_ &gt;|&lt; 13:26, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Your post
No, I'm actually heading out. I wouldn't have been editing at all if it weren't for an excessive volume of Bourbon last night that for some reason compelled me to do so. Less hard feelings now towards people, but Wikipedia is still full of trolls. Hell, look at what you've done to WfD. Stellar effort, but the trolls don't want you to finish it. Particularly I find it interesting that a number of admins are abusing their powers there and violating WP:POINT repeatedly, but as admins, they get a free ticket and others jump to their defense despite your quite responsible actions to stop them. Thats Wikipedia. It's like trying to turn the slashdot comments page into something worthwhile. The Signal to Noise ratio is not good enough. Anyway, thanks for the message. I might drop in from time to time to catch up on your efforts. But no serious editing for me. Peace out. Agriculture 15:05, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikipedians against censorship and Vandalism
Please see my proposal at WikiProject Wikipedians for encyclopedic merit. --Noitall 17:53, August 27, 2005 (UTC)

Give a hand
You want to give a hand at Bobbi Eden. People just kept piling on every nude cover they could find. The version I reverted to still has plenty of skin for the skin folks. I don't oppose some minor stuff, but this was childish and unnecessary. Anyhow, it is a stupid revert war, but I think it has broader implications of people intentionally going out and loading up Wiki pages with as much nudity as they can find, even really bad pictures and box covers. --Noitall 03:02, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

Peak Height
No problem, I just typed in Heavens Peak, Montana, altitude, into the search engine and I found it. It was pretty easy, feel free to metricate it as I (in South Africa) use the metric system and dont know how to convert, I will see if I can find that lake info, but I reckon that'll be harder though. Might I just say what a beautiful are you live in! Banes 08:47, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, where I live in S.A. (Cape Town) is one really wonderful place. I am quite an avid mountaneer. Regarding Heaven's peak, it looks great now, but I notice that none of the peak articles mention first ascents. BTW, I notice the war a WPEm is dieing down, mabye now we could get to work regarding the projects aims. Cheers! Banes 08:59, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration
Would you be happy to go to RFAr, with the intention of stopping users Hipocrite and Lulu of Lotus Eaters - the two biggest trolls, from editing the decency project? I will happily fill out the details, as it's getting to the point where nothing else is going to work.  Erwin 
 * Don't feed the trolls. I've reported to WP:VIP. Let them take care of it. --Tito xd  05:14, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks.--MONGO 05:15, September 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, thank you--172.156.178.23 06:21, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Do you have email? I will send you a copy of the RFAr and you can decide to endorse it.  I will only file it if there are several supporters. I think the latest episode of personal attacks and trolling by the anon can also be included.  Erwin 

Thanks for your support
Hi, just a quick note to thank you for your support on my RfA. I was pleased to see so much support, especially from people such as you who I do not know very well, if at all. Now that I am an administrator I will do my best to please the community’s expectations. Best regards, Sam Hocevar 17:28, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Important notice, for immediate attention
This message has been posted on the talk pages of all users actively editing the Decency project. The RFAr has now been completed, documenting an extensive range of disruptive edits by Hipocrite and Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters, and is available on request.

Before the RFAr is submitted, I think a conversation on Noitall’s talk page User_talk:Noitall should be read, where Hipocrite seems to indicate he might be open to mediation. Perhaps the mediation process might be productive on this occasion, and I am willing to extend an olive branch before banning is contemplated. I will file a mediation request in the next few days, unless there are any objections on my talk page. Of course, if Hipocrite and/or Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters do not agree to mediation, the case will go immediately to arbcom.  Erwin 

admin (self-) nomination
Thx for the (pre-)support, but I've been asked before, and I do not wish to self-nominate, but have an eye on RfA...Lectonar 08:26, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Esperanza
Hello again, I liked your comments to that golfing New Orleans thing. Anyways I thought you'd like a new association called Esperanza. Here's weird part... me and Agriculture are both members :O R  e  dwolf24  (talk) 08:39, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Ray Nagin
I would like to become an admin, and RedWolf24 strongly recommended that I stay away from heavy POV and contraversy so people won't just vote down my RfA just because they disagree with an opinion of mine. So, until 7 days after October 15, when I will make my RfA, I am avoiding such issues. Good Luck though,:).Voice of All(MTG) 22:38, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and yes, I really don't like vandals/trolls/POV warrior(I have reverted both anti-Bush and anti-Kennedy POV warriors). I will have a look at the article for vandals and see if there is any thing I can do without causing any trouble. But my paticipation will be scarce nonetheless. Article watchlisted.Voice of All(MTG) 02:17, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Ted Kennedy
Please watch this article as TDC, Agiantman or 24 might try to add in more POV.Voice of All(MTG) 18:06, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

RfA
Thanks for your support (and pre-support) on my RfA...I'll try to be good Lectonar 10:49, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Android79's RfA
Thank you for your support on my RfA. android 79  22:18, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

Just a thought
This may not satisfy all of your needs, but if you don't show some support, we're not likely to get even this much. &mdash; Xiong &#29066; talk * 10:45, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Assistance
Ever since the Wiki project, Hipocrite has been trolling my edits and causing major disruption around the globe. First, could you weigh in on Images and media for deletion/2005 September 13 when I was minding my own business and Hipocrite tried to delete more of my work. Second, would you support an RfC against him, particularly for what he did on the Wiki project? --Noitall 14:01, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Humor
--Noitall 05:31, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I'd be the first to say that wasn't Bush's fault. He's not without blame in general, but that's definetely not pinnable on him. --kizzle 19:30, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Agreed...I was surprised he "fessed up" since I certainly don't think that the Feds are any more to blame than a half dozen other entities. I got pretty emotional though when I heard about the deperation of those stranded at the Superdome and the Convention Center and I know that they could have gotten supplies into those two areas at least in very short order...oh well...I'm happy I'm not Michael Brown! He'll be lucky (probably all he's qualified for anyway) to get a job as a janitor at Denny's.--MONGO 20:18, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Right. In government, there are always certain jobs reserved for political hacks where it won't get you in trouble. FEMA used to be one of those jobs. A lawyer was fine in the old days. Whoops! Katrina showed that as a problem. But also see this article on as a different perspective on the Bush Admin response, --Noitall 23:03, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

SPAM
brenneman (t) (c) 00:40, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
 * To whomever is sending me e-mails. I'll include those lynching photos with goats.exc in my "list of things I wish I'd never seen".  As they took the time to find my e-mail address, create a new hotmail account, collect those photos, and send them to me, I hope they'll take the time time to read this.
 * My comment was not intended to be taken as a racist comment. It was a parody of Tony's suggestion that I should not be hurt or offended because there existed a group for whom this label was self-applied.
 * I did, and still do, believe that anyone who read my comments without prejudice will see that. However, I understand that I have caused hurt with my comments.  I deeply regret this, and do wish I had chosen my words more carefully.
 * While attacks against me as a "deletionist" are hurtful, they do at least have some basis in reality. I do vote delete more than keep. That is no excuse, however, for those who would dismiss myself (and others) as "deletionists".  I am more complex than that.
 * Attacks against me as a racist, however, are completely misguided. Please feel free to examine my contributions, as I can offer no further evidence to the contrary.

Bmicomp's RfA
Well, my RfA has not quite completed yet, but either way, I'd like to thank you for your vote and your support, regardless of the outcome. -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING) 23:34, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

The charter is here. (Relating to Esperanza)
Hello MONGO, the Charter for Esperanza is up. Take a looksie :) R  e  dwolf24  (talk) 02:52, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Esperanza made less bureaucratic
Hello again, I have (unilatterly) taken away the 'assembly' idea, as per my reasons at that edit summary and per Wikipedia talk:Esperanza/Charter. I have left the admin general, as some leadership is good. Now, all you have to do is be a member to establish consensus, the whole assembly idea is gone. Also, I have added an advisory committee, of four members, with limited power besides watching over the admin general and making sure he doesn't do anything stupid. Please look at the ammended charter, and I would love a comment. R e  dwolf24  (talk) 00:26, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

The last time I'm spamming you all with Esperanza stuff
Hello MONGO. As you may or may not know, there have been some troubles with Esperanza. So now, as a last ditch to save the community, please vote at Esperanza/Reform on all neccisary polls. P.S. I'm very sorry for spamming you all with these messages, and this will be the last time. I recommend putting ESP on your watchlist. Cheers and please look at that, let's stop the civil war then. R e  dwolf24  (talk) 02:48, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Latest breaking news
Check it out! JamesMLane 04:05, 22 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I agree with you about Bush and Neuman. The other difference between them is that Alfred E. Neuman has never lied to me. JamesMLane 07:43, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Admin?
Have you been asked if you want adminship yet? You're on the top of my list of candidates to nominate. Let me know if you're interested. --Tony Sidaway Talk 16:03, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Well consider yourself to be one that I would like to nominate.

Reasons to nominate you:
 * You've been around a while and you've done lots of different kinds of editing.
 * I've had a chance to interact with you and you're a nice guy.
 * You aren't afraid to stick up for your beliefs. I like that a lot.
 * You take criticism seriously
 * You don't take criticism too seriously.

I'm going to leave this to cook for a while. I think you should probably take more notice of "Do not bite the newcomers".

If you're still interested in mid-October, and I haven't approached you in the meantime, remind me and I'll nominate you. --Tony Sidaway Talk 22:36, 24 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Agreed on most points. I disagree that MONGO "bites newcomers".  I think overall he'd be an excellent choice for admin, I would whole heartedly support. We need more administrators who realize Administrators have no more rights to edit than any other contributor.  MONGO understands this, and the basic precepts of Wikipedia better than most current admins. Agriculture 22:40, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
 * You would make an excellent admin, but I am concerned that some would vote oppose on the basis of politics.  Erwin 

9/11, User:Jimmywalter
I had a complaint from that you described his addition on 9/11 as nonsense, and vandalism. Well his addition was somewhat POV but I don't think it qualifies as vandalism. It all comes down to whether his sources are credible (most, but not all, educated people would agree that they aren't). Could you please make it up with him? Explain that you disagree with his opinion that these sources are credible. --Tony Sidaway Talk 12:42, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

User:Kyla
Well, on the Internet, nobody ever knows if you're a cat, do they? Trolls can be very subtle. It's of course possible that the page was put up by someone other than her, someone who wishes her ill, but if so, it's awfully well done; it looks just like what you'd expect someone real like that to do. If it's really her, I already did tell her that if there were any items in the history that she wanted vanished, I would do it. If it's not her, well, how would we find out? You want to try tracking down the real one, and contacting her offline? You could also try suggesting to her that she might not want to put so much personal info online, and ask her if she wants any of it removed from the history. Just give me a list of versions to delete, and I can selectively make them go away (albeit with a bit of work). Noel (talk) 13:45, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Deletions (from archive 2)

 * moved from User:MONGO/user talk archive 2 &infin; Who ? &iquest; ?  19:46, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

I find it ironic that deleting the data I contributed is vandalism. Howvere, its OK to edit a state page that thinks inbreeding is just swell.

OKEY DOKEY Out OF HERE. I have requested my removal. Do NOT reply. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Whitby Mark (talk • contribs) 19:27, 24 September 2005  (UTC)


 * I haven't supported, in any way, the slander or libel that West Virginia is inbred or is populated by inbred people. I have tried to coach the instigator of such nonsense to NOT put it in there. I am very familiar with West Virginia and personally have no problem with the place...in fact, I consider it to be one of the most beautiful states in the east, so I'm not sure what you're getting at. I'll look again at what you claim to be as deletions and see if I have made an error.--MONGO 19:57, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of my article
I wrote in the edit summary that I was the article "Craters of the Moon National Wilderness" was "in progress"...as I went to add an infobox as is standard in all the wilderness articles I create, I saw that you had speedy deleted my article. Admittedly, all I had inserted was the title, but it was hardly a standard vandalism or bogus type of article....I request you try to be more careful in the future. Thanks and see you around!--MONGO 08:28, 25 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Ah, sorry, I missed the edit summary. Yes that should not have been deleted. But actually it looked like a standard form of vandalism, as many people will create articles with just the title in the context and the leave it, as a test I guess. Thue | talk 09:01, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * No problem...you didn't do anything wrong as far as I am concerned...I should have saved more info so not to confuse anyone...see you around.--MONGO 09:06, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Henry Hill
What are you doing with the Henry Hill article?

The disambig was created for a reason.

Message me back please

chazz88

replied
To your post at my talk page here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JimmyCrackedCorn

wanted you to get a message waiting banner --JimmyCrackedCorn 05:51, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Replied again.

--JimmyCrackedCorn 01:44, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

September 11, 2001 attacks
You reverted my edit on September 11, 2001 attacks yet apparently declined to discuss the issue on the talk page. Truth in our time 09:28, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Protected Areas Infobox
I have been tinkering with the Infobox, and think I pretty much have it done. See recent edit on Mesa Verde National Park. I admit I unwittingly deleted your extra space, though. What did you mean by "I also have templated"? Can you give me an example?

I did notice a Template:Protected Area Table, but it currently is only used at El Morro National Monument and seems to have a text wrapping problem.

My only concern with the use of the current infobox is that it has been bastardized at least twice on sites I have added it. See Fort McHenry and Mount Rushmore.

Will think about joining "the project." &#151; Eoghanacht  talk 18:19, 28 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I think I understand -- you made your own version. Consider reworking in wikimark (whatever that means, but it is the format for the one in the Mesa Verde National Park article) and adding to WikiProject Protected Areas/General.  Tomorrow, if no one comments on the infobox at Mesa Verde, I am going to copy it over to the project page in lieu of the one there.  The wikimark table format is easier to read and edit, but displays the same. &#151;  Eoghanacht  talk 18:42, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

I wikimared your wilderness area infobox on Bob Marshall Wilderness and copied it as an example to WikiProject Protected Areas/General. Modify them if anything I did causes you heartburn. &#151; Eoghanacht  talk 14:55, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

My RfA
MONGO-- Thank you for your comments concerning my RfA. I will try to keep up the good work and in a few months may be nominated again (sinse this appears to be headed towards "no consensus"). I appreciate your time. Cheers. -- Lord Vold e  mort  (Dark Mark)  14:25, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
 * As it is now, there seems to be a consensus voting LV an admin. I urge you to change your vote to oppose. Keep in mind he works closely with Hipocrite, the user who threatened to have you "removed". freestylefrappe 21:02, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I voted neutral due to a lack of time here more than anything else. Hypocrite nominating the Lord doesn't matter to me...the other way around might, but I rarely vote oppose to a nominee since my opinion may be biased...if Hypocrite were to attempt to become an admin, I would probably abstain unless I saw that he was engaging in abusive rhetoric with a number of other editors.--MONGO 03:11, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I would oppose my own nomination. Hipocrite - &laquo; Talk &raquo; 18:14, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
 * PS: You quote me as saying that I threatened to have MONGO "removed." Could you provide a diff?
 * As I said, politics aside, I don't carry out revenge tactics just because I had a disagreement with someone. If you were to be nominated for admin, I would abstain. I've got better things to do than seek retributions over a petty content dispute I may have had with someone months ago. Life is simply too short. You did once say over the wikiproject for merit thing, I think on Lulu's talk page that you would have me removed...can't seem to find it now...it's water under the bridge at this point...fogit 'bout it.--MONGO 18:24, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I believe you are confusing me with someone else. That whole sordid episode is already forgotten from my mind. Good wishes. Hipocrite - &laquo; Talk &raquo; 18:30, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Copied from freestylefrappe's talk page:
 * I just noticed your comments on User talk:MONGO and must disagree with you. I do not, nor ever have "worked closely" with User:Hipocrite. His query about my desire about being an admin was as out-of-the-blue as they come. I had only interacted with him a few times, and frankly, disagreed with him many of those times. I hope you do not judge me on who nominated me, and urge you not to try and persuade others to do that either. I understand Hipocrite nominated me, but that wasn't my decision. Thank you. I have copied this onto MONGO's page as well. Thanks. -- Lord Vold e  mort  (Dark Mark)  21:18, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism warnings
Hi MONGO. Just a quick request that you warn vandals when reverting them so others know whether to block or not. I can see you've done a few tonight including a revert on ip 165.29.244.6 who I've been watching repeatedly vandalize the same couple of articles despite my warnings. Would you please consider placing warning messages when you do it though? I've added one for your revert to that user page. A list of the basic tags can be found at Template:Vandal tags though there are more. Many thanks, ~ Veledan • Talk + new 19:27, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Who's RfA
Thank you for supporting my masters RfA. He appreciates your support and comments and looks forward to better serving Wikipedia the best he can. Of course 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. --Who's mop?&iquest;? 20:45, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

My RFA
Thank you very much for your vote on my RFA, it is now the 8th most supported RFA ever, and it couldnt have happened without your vote. I look forward to serving wikipedia. Again, thanks. →Jo urna list  >>talk<<  23:48, 30 September 2005 (UTC)