User talk:RZimmerwald

November 2008
Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to User talk:Digwuren. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Bremerenator (talk) 17:48, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Panama invasion
I am the creator of the Timeline on that page, and I would prefer it if you left the description of the military operations in. They are relevant, and are a superior description to specific events than my timeline is, of those particular events. Would that we had similarly detailed descriptions of, say, the US psychological warfare in Panama prior to the invasion, or other such events, but we do not. As it stands, you are involving my material in an impending edit war. There is no reason that both the timeline of the larger picture and the blow-by-blow depiction of the military operations cannot coexist in the article. So it looks like Rommel's diaries or something, so what? It is all verifiable, it is all relevant to the subject. The fact that it is, ultimately, vacuous and pedantic pseudo-information, an invoice posing as literature, will be apparent in any case to those that are receptive to that fact. Thank you for your consideration of my request. Anarchangel (talk) 07:37, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

RFCU initiated
A checkuser request naming you as a party has been initiated. See Requests for checkuser/Case/Anonimu for details. 62.65.237.199 (talk) 18:18, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Claims in your edit summary
What exactly are you claiming was "resolved" on Talk:Hama massacre when you didn't bother to reply to any part of my comments? AnonMoos (talk) 10:06, 12 November 2008 (UTC)