User talk:Peruvianllama/Archive04

'''This is an archive of this talk page. Please do not make any further edits, thanks!'''

Archive 01 (Mar 28, 2004 - Nov 30, 2005)

Archive 02 (Dec 01, 2005 - Dec 31, 2005)

Archive 03 (Jan 01, 2006 - Jan 31, 2006)

Talking does not help with regards to Kurdistan
It is a highly contested article which is being turned into a political forum. It has been established that the unofficial flag of Kurdistan is not banned or criminal in Iran but is being written as so. After evidence has turned up that it is not banned and no proof given by the party that claims it as so they still edit it as so and even add phony sources....sources that have nothing to do with the flag. This article needs to be locked.
 * I didn't vandalize. Thats 2 messages in the last 5 minutes and I--212.138.113.16 02:27, 1 February 2006 (UTC) did not vandalize.

Members of WikiProject edit counters, good news!

 * Version 3.40 of Flcelloguy's Tool has been released: all edit summary bugs are quashed. Also, Version 4.00 is under development, and this version will allow for direct downloading of a user's contributions - copy the source code at the Java Sandbox and at bottom of the Tool's page to test out the new version. I've marked a few things that need to be done - if you're interested in doing any of them, please feel free to contact me. Tito xd (?!? - help us) 05:32, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Patttersonc
Thanks for unblocking me. It was a rough few hours. Pattersonc(Talk) 4:57 PM, Thursday; February 2 2006 (EST)

My sig
Is a work of art! &mdash;This user has left wikipedia 22:21 2006-02-02

rm speedy notice
rm speedy notice - how implausible can the typo be if the article creator made it?

True, I suppose ... I screwed up when creating the redirect


 * Incorrect:Alnwick Adveriser --> Northumberland Gazette
 * Correct:Alnwick Advertiser --> Northumberland Gazette

Moved the redirect to the correct spelling when I realised. Suspect that the old redirect is clutter more than something other clumsy typists would find useful, therefore tried to delete it. You think that it should be kept, or that it should be removed in a different manner?

cheers AndrewMcQ 22:52, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations on adminship!
Congrats on adminship, albeit a bit late from me! NSL E (T+C) 09:12, 3 February 2006 (UTC)


 * PS how old are you exaclty, because judging from your pic on your user page you don't look particularly old, but you say you're doing graduate studies? Another Ral315? :P NSL E (T+C) 09:18, 3 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah congrats on adminship. I voted but you should have told us if you made it ;). You may just get the record for most vandalized page. -- a.n.o.n.y.m  t 14:40, 3 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Congrats. Are you familiar with the Tintin comic Prisoners of the Sun ? It has a couple of interesting incidents involving llamas. That was the reason why I noticed you even though you may not know me :-) Tintin (talk) 06:48, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

82/1/0...good show and congrats on your promotion!--MONGO 08:30, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Congrats, seriously. If it looked like it was gonna matter, I would have changed my oppose vote. :)  Pschemp | Talk 07:56, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

You are awesome!
Thank you for removing the vandalism on my page. The haters abound. Thanks a bunch! Pacdude 20:59, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I spit in your general direction!
Congrats on the adminship, man! I know you'll do a super-awesome job. :) I'm off to congratulate you in the IRC channel, if you're there. Mo0 [ talk ] 08:15, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * You are welcome. Congratulations.-- Dakota ~  ε  09:15, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Congrats from me, too. Have fun with the admin tools! Grutness...wha?  09:22, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Ditto! Congratulations, and thanks for having such a great username and sense of humor! (A Llama on my talkpage! What next?) Cheers  Ban  e  z  10:20, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Although I already congratulated you, here's more spitting from me. :P NSL E (T+C) 10:32, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I now spit in your general direction. :p--Shanel 14:20, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Last night i've reverted vandalism on your userpage 3 times, you become popular before getting admin status. Congratulations and good luck--Ugur Basak 21:59, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Congrats :) &mdash;Quarl (talk) 2006-02-05 05:29Z 

Thanks for getting my started, mate
I'm going to have to learn all these fancy tags before I start editing... -- Therealhazel (formerly 134.173.92.238)

Thanks
Thank you for your advice. That was a first for me, as I'm pretty careful. I presumed it was a spam link that needed to be removed, but tried to check it to give the benefit of the doubt. Won't do that again. Pollinator 14:27, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks or reverting deletes on my userpage (twice now). --mitrebox 23:08, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Repeated vandalism on the Fin Fang Foom article
The user 205.188.116.9 has reverted edits on the Fin Fang Foom article to include the "dragon panties" vandalism that he made previously. I chat with the actual user, and he has sworn up and down that he will continue the vandalism. Perhaps stronger action is needed.--Perceive 23:56, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Your accusation of vandalism on the [CeeGee : user] article
Young boy, you did not see, because you are certainly 'enlighted' by your own convictions, that impeach you to see the facts, that mister CeeGee seems to be related to many vandalism problems.

By the way, I warned him that, as he is himself a Rotarian, he did not had to vandalize my own pages onto Rotary with his Rotarian point of view. Wiki has a neutral policy and is not the place for the damned RotaryClub propaganda.

By the way, I think that

- it is not very courageous, as CeeGee does, to give lessons without regarding the facts, AND to hide your real name and and mail address, as I do. I think that I would be a coward to give lessons and hide my identity and mail address. - you use the lama image to enlight others and hide yourself. - You do not like lama and Perou, but like your own image of yourself 'loving Peru' This attitude is not scientific and push to the growth of violence on the Wiki - you should grow and learn to have opinions onto the facts

Wikipedia User : PierreLarcin, France pierre.larcin@ifrance.com

Hamas
Please participate in the discussion about the introduction before reverting it to a version you like better. Bertilvidet 10:20, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

About Freud Vandalism
Thanks for pointing out and correcting the Freud thing. I really only meant to add the pseudo-tag to try to get on the Bad Jokes list. I didn't mean to remove anything. Please accept my sincere apologies. I also apologize for making you do it three times -- I am on a slow connection and submitted repeatedly to try to get the send to "take". My mistake. -129.66.1.202 19:18, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

LO? LO? LO?
Can I please get down and leave the room, to pick my nose? Skull &#39;n&#39; Femurs 20:00, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar


Hey, you've been working hard...so I stopped a barnstar by. See you. ε γκυκλοπ  αίδεια  *  20:58, 6 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Why thank you! Now truly, the sentiment is much more important than the bauble itself. That being said however.. this barnstar seems to be of the invisible variety. :) --P e ruvianLlama(spit) 21:06, 6 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Whoops, all fixed. I say the clear, transparent kind are the best. :-)  ε  γκυκλοπ  αίδεια  *  21:07, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

NPOV
As a new user, doesn't the 'criticism' in this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invitrogen violate the NPOV guideline...?

You reinstated the "criticism" part after someone I know deleted it. They were not trying to vandalize, but doesn't that part of the content seem unverified (no survey/citations) and against NPOV?

Brian

I shouldn't have but I did.
I thought you might get a laugh out of the story I put on the Payson, Az's vandal's user page. User:24.121.122.92--mitrebox 04:43, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Guiness
Something is wrong. It looks like a script attaching the page. My protection did not work. I am not an admin so I am not sure how to use it. Gadig 22:50, 7 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, in fact, only an admin can 'protect' a page from other users. I've noticed the vandalism and have been reverting it, so I don't think it's a big deal yet. Thanks for the notice though! Cheers. --P e ruvianLlama(spit) 22:52, 7 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the tip. I will keep it in mind. And I will ask you for some help if I have to deal with that again. Later. Gadig 23:26, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Permanent blocks
Hi, I notice that you have blocked User:Hobbsie permanently. His talkpage is being vandalised by User:Stuart kirby, who may be a sock. thought I shd alert you. --Gurubrahma 17:58, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Stephen Harper
I feel there is a valid reason for removing the electoral record, it's not relevant to him at all. It's also not on any other MP in Canada, nor any other Prime Minister. I fail to see how that is vandalism.

Nevermind, I worked it out with the said user. Tkyle 23:42, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

User: Pentalityism
Okay, why are you deleting my articles I write? I dont see why you have deleted them "Several times" if you QUIT deleting them ill QUIT writing them again. Simple as that. I dont see what makes you think you have the right to decide what is "Relevant" as that as purely an opinion. Another thing, there are articles about Myspace.com and that is relevant? I dont get your ideology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pentalityism (talk • contribs) 03:46, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

217.33.207.195
Hi. A favor por favor- Would you please block this IP Freely Phallus? It's a serial vandal who has been repeatedly warned. Gracias,--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 12:35, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppets
Chadbryant has for some time been the subject of sustained and deeply childish attacks, as my page of sock-puppets indicates. It may be that user TruthCrusader was involved, but he has since seemed to me to be a decent editor in most respects. Chadbryant's behaviour, on the other hand, has sometimes veered towards being as bad as those attacking him. His responses to TruthCrusader, for example, have been on the paranoid-hysterical side. I washed my hands of the whole business a while ago (my page of sock-puppets has mainly been up-dated by others). --Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 20:08, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Administrator
This user has been harassing me. I call attention to all other administrators that this user is abusing his power as an admin to strike down articles based on POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GreatBarrington (talk • contribs) 20:38, 9 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure I even understand - are you saying I'm the one who's harassing you? Or are "calling my attention" to some other user? Regardless, please sign your posts - thanks. --P e ruvianLlama(spit) 20:41, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Message for Peru on Rocky
THIS IS VANDALISM, SO MUCH EFFORT HAS BEEN PUT INTO THAT SITE, REMEMBER, SITES YOU HAVE WILL SOON BE GONE, IF YOU DONT BELIEVE ME CHECK TOMORROW, IT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED AND TALK ABOUT, YOU ARE IGNORANT AND YOU DONT UNDERSTAND, IF YOU DONT LEAVE THIS SITE LIKE IT THIS, HELL, WE ARE NO LONGER WASTING TIME ON THIS BS...


 * New messages go at the end of my talk page, please. And I really do think I've already addressed your concerns on the Rocky Marciano talk page. Specifically, it's better to discuss what changes you like/don't like, than it is to simply continue reverting edits. --P e ruvianLlama(spit) 01:13, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my page. --Nlu (talk) 04:20, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

My Edit
That content belonged at WDTW-AM. I was making a necessary correction.

-M Daniels

Thanks
Thanks for reverting the vandalism by 82.234.48.203 on my page! Copysan 09:45, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks again for reverting more vandalism on my user pages. It is much appreciated! Copysan 00:15, 13 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Happy to help. :) --P e ruvianLlama(spit) 00:16, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
Hi, you've done well to block the user User:69.105.39.132, but why haven't you removed his vandalism on that page at the same time ? I had to stumble across it, it didn't seem to have hurt anybody else's feeling... Worried, 82.230.180.185 17:43, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, he's back and still as mad . Cheers 82.230.180.185 13:06, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi PeruvianLlama, FYI, the IP has been reblocked for a week by Bbatsell. FreplySpang (talk) 17:28, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Picture
Is that picture on your user page really of you? You are one ugly SOB!-RicardoTubbs 00:02, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Not a personal attack. I'm just stating fact.-RicardoTubbs 00:07, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Cheney
A photo of the guy Dick shot in on the page I linked to.

I don't know of any other plce that has one.

132.241.245.49 00:55, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Another Esperanzial note...
Hi again Esperanzians! Well, since our last frolic in the realms of news, the Advisory Council has met twice more (see WP:ESP/ACM2 and WP:ESP/ACM3). As a result, the charter has been ammended twice (see here for details) and all of the shortcuts have been standardised (see the summary for more details). Also of note is the Valentines ball that will take place in the Esperanza IRC channel on the 14th of February (tomorrow). It will start at 6pm UTC and go on until everyone's had enough! I hope to see you all there! Also, the spamlist has been dissolved - all Esperanzians will now recieve this update "newsletter".

The other major notice I need to tell you about is the upcoming Esperanza Advisory Council Elections. These will take place from 12:00 UTC on February 20th to 11:59 UTC on February 27th. The official handing-over will take place the following day. Candidates are able to volunteer any time before the 20th, so long as they are already listed on the members list. Anyone currently listed on the memberlist can vote. In a change since last time, if you have already been a member of the leadership, you may run again. Due to the neutrality precident, I will not vote for anyone.

Yours, as ever, Esperanzially,

--Cel es tianpower háblame 09:00, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

(message delivered by FireFox using AWB on Celestianpower's behalf)

Linkdude's well-intentioned vandalism
Thank you for reverting some of Linkdude's changes to several Dragon Ball-related articles today. I'm sure he means well, but he keeps moving things to their Japanese names rather than their English ones, changing character names to have accent marks which don't appear in the US, etc. Anyway, that is not your problem but since you have been touching this today anyway, could you please do an admin-move of Jinzō'ningen Family Tree to Android Family Tree. Frankly, I think this page is a candidate for AFD anyway, but this is one example of Linkdude being "helpful" that I can't deal with myself. JRP 23:28, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Aristotle vandal
regularly vandalising Aristotle is back. Could you give him another block, worth of his "contributions" here? TIA Pavel Vozenilek 21:00, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Continued Problems in the Messianic Judaism Article
Llama, below is my response to Eliezer. I believe it is the only solution that will work.85.65.219.226 06:50, 19 February 2006 (UTC)


 * However I removed the caveat tag to try to come to a compromise. --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€  02:39, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

This is not much of a compromise when none of the blatant factual inaccuracies raised in section 23, 25, 29 and 30 of this discussion have been addressed. Anybody who does even the slightest research into most "facts" in this article will find them to be embarrassingly wrong and unfair to Messianic Judaism. Whenever somebody tries even the smallest adjustments to make this article unbiased and accurate, Eliezer rejects their changes and threatens to block them. I am more than willing to retain the services of a Conservative Jewish scholar who teaches at an accredited university. His expertise includes Messianic Judaism. Allow him to write an objective article that gives a neutral point of veiw. Then we should lock his version of the article against vandalism. Can we agree to that as a true compromise? 85.65.219.226 06:50, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Chadbryant's return
Please see User:PyterTaravitch. User:Chadbryant has edited that article once again to reflect his views and his views only. He has deleted the views of others on the same subject. Rather than revert it myself and get into an edit war much like the one you banned Chadbryant for, I though I'd bring it to your attention instead. tv316 00:00, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I wish to concur on this. I do NOT want to get into another edit war regarding this issue and I am tired of Mr.Bryants attempts at harrassing me by posting what HE thinks is my real life information. TruthCrusader


 * I wish to request that these two documented troublemakers not be allowed to make accusations that they are completely unable to support with evidence. - Chadbryant 19:01, 20 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I would like to see the "documentation" that backs up your claims of "documented troublemakers" (your words -- see above) as I simply do not see anything in the history of either one of them which would lead to such an assumption. Really, the only way I could interpret that is a form of paranoia on your part; but reading through your past history on Wikipedia, the edits you have made, the reasons you gave for them -- this does not surprise me at all.  Isn't it funny how you claim that neither one of them are able to "support with evidence" their accusations yet you call the two of them in one lump "documented troublemakers" without any of your own?  --Eat At Joes 03:57, 21 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Now you're just making baseless personal attacks. Sort of like this one here . How are we the ones who are troublemakers, when you are going around making personal attacks and reverting PyterTaravitch's page back to a version which doesn't accurately portray the facts? You asked TruthCrusader to cite some evidence, but I've already done that and your replies were just one smart-ass comment after the other. tv316 19:12, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I will make this comment. The 'name' that Mr.Bryant likes to refer to me as, is not in fact me. However, if it was, and since NOWEHERE on Wikipedia does ANY of my real life information appear, than Mr.Bryant's posting of such 'info' would in my eyes, be grounds for immediate ban from Wikipedia. This seems to be something that people 'overlook' when dealing with Mr. Bryant. Mr. Bryant accuses almost anyone who edits anything he does, as a sockpuppet of Dick Witham. The ironic thing, which I know no one here at Wikipedia is aware of, is that on the usenet group rec.sport.pro-wrestling, where Mr.Bryant regularly posts, its was HE HIMSELF who invengted the name 'Dick Witham" and who posted under that 'alias' for a long time. This can be easily verified by doing a google of rec.sport.pro-wrestling, as Mr.Bryant 'X-No Archives" his posts. TruthCrusader 20:36, 20 February 2006 (UTC)


 * The Wikipedia official policy on harassment actually states "Posting another person's personal information (legal name, home or workplace address, telephone number, email address, or other contact information, regardless of whether the information is actually correct) is almost always harassment. This is because it places the other person at unjustified and uninvited risk of harm in "the real world" or other media."


 * Chadbryant is in violation of this policy and has been for a long time. As a sidenote, Truth, I advise you to remove that comment about the lawsuit. Your true meaning may be misinterpreted and could get you blocked. Legal threats are taken seriously here.tv316 20:59, 20 February 2006 (UTC)


 * He's made it public many times - he's in the midst of pretending to be someone else to hide the fact that he's only here to harass me (and has done so for almost a year), of which there is a vast amount of evidence archived online. Do some research.
 * BTW, threatening legal action is much more of a reason for an immediate ban from Wikipedia, Stephen. - Chadbryant 22:14, 20 February 2006 (UTC)


 * You have the burden of proof. You do some research that has concrete proof. Even if there is a page out there with some form of proof, it still falls under harassment in Wikipedia policy. He may have mentioned his name at one point or another on the internet, but purposely posting it around Wikipedia in order to antagonize him is harassment. tv316 22:49, 20 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not interested in being harassed by the likes of you & Mr. Signorelli. Unlike you, I'm here to contribute in a positive manner, not to argue with a kid that has "316" in his screen name like a mark, or a guy who got run out of a wrestling newsgroup for posting really disgusting messages. Find a new target for your collective obsession. - Chadbryant 23:02, 20 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not even going to dignify that with a proper response. You have got to be joking. tv316 23:23, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Again, Mr. Bryant appears to regard himself as above Wikipedia rules. It amazes me that he is allowed to continue to post, what he claims, to be my real life info (which it is NOT) and is not banned or even blocked for such behaviour. And abusing others because of their chosen screen name shows a level of immaturity that truly astonishes me. I am not the one posting basless accusations of sockpuppetry on anyone who dares to correct or re-edit anything I write. I am NOT the one posting supposed real life information everywhere on Wiki. I am NOT the one who has caught re-editing user remarks on talk pages to make it seem like they were saying something else. All of these things Mr. Bryant has done and continues to do. I wish to also point out Mel's comments that he posted a few paragrahps above.

If the posting of supposed real life information is grounds for banishment from Wikipedia than I wish to request that Chad Bryant be banned for said offense. TruthCrusader 23:12, 20 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I must be forced to concur that Mr. Bryant should be banned from Wikipedia, at least under his current account. Immediately jumping back into and reverting the entry he received a 24 hour ban for violation of the 3RR rule shows that not only did he not learn his lesson, but he will continue to engage in the same immature and destructive behavior which earned him that banning in the first place.  --Eat At Joes 03:57, 21 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Wow, I take just one weekend off, and come back to all this! I'm glad to see that this issue was brought up on the Administrator's Noticeboard. Again, I would urge you both to have a look at the various options for dispute resolution on Wikipedia. If you feel you are being harassed, belittled, embiggened, annoyed, whatever: it's best to stay calm, get the facts out in the open, get some third-party input, and then stay calm some more. Cheers. --P e ruvianLlama(spit) 08:13, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my page. --Nlu (talk) 07:16, 21 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Happy to help out! --P e ruvianLlama(spit) 08:14, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Ditto. :) Thanks. Yid613 10:00, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Same here. Nice to know someone's got my back! =) Thanks! -- † Ðy§ep§ion † Speak your mind 20:45, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Hiya, just wanted to say a big thank you for reverting the vandalism on my user page! Beat me to it :) -- Daverocks (talk) 01:56, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Just a note re. Blocking Policy
You just blocked Funkymonkey4ever indefinitely for vandalism. There is nothing in the blocking policy that specifically allows this. The only time an account should be indefinitely blocked for vandalism is if it's clearly a sockpuppet, or is doing something horrifically malicious (page moves, etc.) Ral315 (talk) 01:40, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


 * It was my understanding that user accounts that were apparently created for the purpose of vandalizing articles (as in, the first n edits are exclusively vandalism) warranted an indefinite block. I'm poking around in some of the blocking policy pages now to see if I can find where I read that. If I'm definitely in error, then feel free to adjust the block to a more reasonable time period. Thanks for the note. --P e ruvianLlama(spit) 01:58, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks (seems I'm a bit late)
Several other users beat me to the gun, but thanks for reverting vandalism on my talk page. &mdash; Ambush Commander (Talk) 01:49, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Congrats!
New admin, congrats! Tan DX 06:43, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Spike
Hiya, I think now moved talk page. Thanks -- Paxomen 03:20, 25 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I accidentally didn't tick the box to move talk pages. I just cut & pasted all the talk, so would be great if you know how to move history. -- Paxomen 03:35, 25 February 2006 (UTC)


 * No idea how you did that but thanks! -- Paxomen 03:46, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Buffyverse characters
Hiya, I have finished giving all the Buffyverse characters the same naming format where specification is needed (by adding "(Buffyverse)" to their article names) but botched these two by accidentally editing short-cuts, then it wouldn't let the 'move' function work. Could you passs over the histories?

Connor (Angel) to Connor (Buffyverse),

and

Jasmine (Angel) to Jasmine (Buffyverse)

Help or advice massively appreciated -- Paxomen 16:44, 25 February 2006 (UTC)


 * OK really sorry but I forgot to do the 'Angel' page, and also had trouble with the normal 'move' function, but now all Buffyverse characters conveniantly named in same way;


 * Angel (vampire) to Angel (Buffyverse)


 * Thanks -- Paxomen 15:07, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

afd
Ok so I have a question here, and I want a second opinion before I submit this as an AfD

The Drowned Baby Timeline appears to me to be non-notable fan-fiction. It's admittably fan-created alternate history by User:Johnny Pez. A google search of Drowned Baby Time Line and Drowned Baby Timeline both come up with a handful of hits, however two of those hits are the wikipedia and answers.com wiki entries, and the remainder appear to be either blog entries, submissions to short story database, and a link to a Flickr.com photo archive,. Now I'm of the belief that while the article appears to be well written, it's non-notable. I don't want to generate any ill-will, however, and I wanted a second opinion before I submit to AfD. Do you think this should be submitted for deletion? Thanks. &rArr;  SWAT  Jester     Ready    Aim    Fire!  14:34, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Talk page fix
Thanks for reverting my Talk page vandalism. I wasn't on wiki all weekend and if not for the new messages notice and my talk history, I wouldn't have even known anything had happened. Dannybu2001 17:55, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Would you mind doing me a quick favor?
Under the AfD list, I believe on the Feb. 22 page, there is an entry for Ipod Hacks (second submission) that I submitted. It was a second submission so I had to use the afdx template. Unforunately, I apparently messed it up, though it seemed to work mostly. If you could look ath the page Ipod hacks and let me know what I did wrong and how to fix it on the afdx template, I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks &rArr;   SWAT  Jester     Ready    Aim    Fire!  04:23, 28 February 2006 (UTC)