User talk:Rio de oro

Please leave your message below the line below and I will reply as soon as possible.

Cloverfield
Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. — Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:29, 19 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I know; I've been away from Wikipedia, otherwise I would have brought up WP:TALK when the motion sickness topic. However, I don't want to remove a discussion that's so far long at this point but instead give heads-up to editors who start new discussions. — Erik  (talk • contrib) - 22:35, 19 January 2008 (UTC)


 * It's cool. I understand what you're trying to say about other discussions being there.  With new films, especially those with a lot of Internet exposure, there'll be a lot of ignoring of the disclaimers at the top of the talk page.  It's better to find other editors to talk to films about on each others' talk pages -- it's more private and appropriate.  My personal philosophy is mixing business and pleasure, but keeping all the article-related talk pages strictly business. — Erik  (talk • contrib) - 22:42, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Eagles Catalog CD Album Box
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Eagles Catalog CD Album Box, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.rhino.com/store/ProductDetail.lasso?Number=79681. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 01:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Eagles Catalog CD Album Box
Another editor has added the " " template to the article Eagles Catalog CD Album Box, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also What Wikipedia is not and Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the  template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 00:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: vandal?
Hey there, how goes? I received a reply from Mike saying we were doing the right things. For now, it seems the guy stopped. If he comes back, we can try filing a complain with the ISP or, if that does not work, searching for the local police. I hope the guy came to his senses and realized it was a pretty bad joke.

By the way, Prodego has my talk page fully protected (there is a a bug there), so you won't be able to reply there (and even if you could, you should not). Just reply here if you need anything, I will keep watch of the page for the time being. Cheers! -- ReyBrujo (talk) 05:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Your Request for adminship
I have withdrawn and closed your RFA, because it had almost no chance of passing, at a final tally of 2 supports, 7 opposes, and 3 neutral votes. Cheers, -- Anonymous Dissident  Talk 08:20, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Your abuse report
Go check out Abuse_reports/68.90.62.244. I have investigated and made contact regarding this case. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 21:22, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid not, I'm not an admin. I can't protect any page. Try Rjd0060 or Darkwind, I think they're admins. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 01:04, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't get your hopes too high, we don't really know yet. Lets wait and see what happens. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 01:11, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I semi-protected my user page until he is arrested. Rio de oro (talk) 01:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey! Sorry to butt in like this but I popped in to tell you I removed the semi protection template from your userpage. Regular users cannot protect a page just by putting a template there. However, admins can and page protection can be requested here. Thanks. Swirlboy39 (talk) 03:11, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I've got good news and bad news. The good news is that AT&T is a Better Business Bureau member and the BBB has been notified, as you can see on the abuse report, and they'll be more likly to respond to the BBB. The bad news is that Mmbabies is back (you probably already knew) and there's always a chance they won't respond (I hope they DO respond). Sigh... GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 23:52, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Did you notice a response was recieved from the FBI? GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 22:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

He came back today using another IP 75.1.23.79, IP was blocked a few hours ago. Momusufan (talk) 04:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Reagan Cross Country Revert
The material you added to the Ronald Reagan High School article was removed because it is unencyclopedic and/or insignficant within the scope of the article (that is to say, it's importance doesn't merit inclusion in the encyclopedia). The article communicates specific and broad information about the school - what you added appeared to be a chant or cheer excercised by one team of one atheltic group of one department of the school. It is my belief that it doesn't merit inclusion, though I certainly appreciate the thought it adding information to Texas Schools project.

Thanks very much for your time.Sahrin (talk) 00:57, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar
It may be interesting to know that I have not recieved a barnstar for reporting mmbabies either. The only barnstar I have is the Real Life Barnstar which someone gave me for being in JROTC. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 22:30, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Go look at Long_term_abuse/Mmbabies. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 01:56, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:548323.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:548323.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:16, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:The Doors box set in DRLP01SET.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:The Doors box set in DRLP01SET.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:33, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Your comment at ANI
Hello. Please read my reply to your comment at WP:ANI, as well as this thread. Thanks, Agüeybaná 23:05, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 23:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Page protection
Dude, read this! Pre-emptive full protection would be a bit of an over-reaction to a perceived threat of vandalism, and a bit of a no-no generally - even if it was protected don't you think the user concerned would just find another page to vandalise? GBT/C 18:22, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Plano Senior HS
The IP was from Pennsylvania. I sent an email containing the link to the edit to the abuse center for that IP's ISP. ---CWY2190TC 23:50, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yep. ---CWY2190TC 23:53, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * None that I know off. ---CWY2190TC 21:57, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

New Mmbabies sock 64.219.79.193
Here is the new sock, figured you should make note of it. Momusufan (talk) 02:23, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Essay that really should exist: WP:WOLF
Hi. I've noticed a common thread in many of your postings at ANI. It leads me to ask if you have read The boy who cried wolf? If not I think you really should read it, and consider the implications in re calling the police every time some bored kid makes an obviously frivlious threat of some sort. Loren.wilton (talk) 04:14, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

List of number-one modern rock hits (United States)
Hi, I've reverted this a couple of times - on the List of number-one modern rock hits (United States) page, there is a collapsible template (with all the year-links) right there on the page which makes all of the links you re-added unnecessary. If you want them put back that's fine, but there's really no need to have them both there. - eo (talk) 18:00, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Are you a sockpuppet of Mmbabies?
Enough playing games. I'm going to come right out and ask it. Well are you? Theresa Knott | The otter sank 22:25, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Why do you act for his benefit? It's been explanied that you comments are not helping yet you continue on regardless of what anyone says. Feel free to reply here. Lets keep the conversation in one placeTheresa Knott | The otter sank 22:31, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not him okay. I swear to god I'm not him.Rio de oro (talk) 22:33, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Then please stop acting to inflame things. Revert, block ignore. See WP:DENY Theresa Knott | The otter sank 22:35, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay.Rio de oro (talk) 22:35, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for being so responsive. I'm sorry I suspected you. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 22:38, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually looking at your recent contributions to thr ANI your behaviour is problematic. Please calm down about the FBI. You are not helping. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 09:25, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Seconded, particularly in relation to this edit. I suggest you calm down quite considerably. GBT/C 17:40, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


 * No, and frankly I find your question somewhat offensive. Shouting about approaching the FBI, the Secret Service, Interpol and the US Marshalls does nothing whatsoever to resolve the situation (which had, incidentally, already been resolved by the time you made your first contribution. Subsequently raging against anyone who does not support your approach, threatening legal action against them, and generally acting in an unnecessarily inflammatory and antagonistic manner does even less to resolve the situation. That's why any number of people, myself included, are telling you to calm down. GBT/C 17:19, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

As you can see from the discussion on the page Wikipedia talk:Long term abuse/Mmbabies it has been decided that your edits there have not helped. Therefore you are banned from editing that particular page or Long term abuse/Mmbabies for the forseeable future. If you wish to discuss this please do so on my talk page rather than there. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 08:09, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Taliban methods don't work
You wrote:

Anyone who posts x rated images of kids is going to be reported to the police and Interpol. The doctor posted X rated images, and its against the law. I can support my claim, (ex. What if this doctor guy was a pedophille and some how gets a "turn on" from this paraphillia , or this images could be victims of sexual abuse. Anyone how doesnt agree with this are contributing to pedophillia, and will be prosecuted by the highest extent of the USA law , and INTERPOLRio de oro (talk) 17:34, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Who cares if he get's turned on by looking at a certain pattern of pixels? Fighting child abuse is a good thing. If we see pictures of abused children let's try to rescue them and prosecute the people who are abusing them. But by criminalizing pictures even if they are not made by abusing children (e.g. purely digitally made images, paintings etc. of fictional children) we are becoming like the Taliban.

The Taliban really believe that it is better for women to wear a Burqa. Just like you are concerned about pedophiles being turned on when they look at certain imagises, the Taliban don't like themselves or other men to be turned on if they look at other women. If you say that women should not wear a Burqa, they'll say that by arguing that way, you are contributing to rape, sex outside marriage (which to them is similar to rape).

Back to child abuse and pedophiles, one can ask what the best way for a democratic country is to deal with this isue. Paradoxically, the best way would be to produce a massive amount of digitally made child porn, put it on some government approved website. The pedophiles can then look at these images all they like. The number of visitors to pay sites containing pictures of child abuse victims will go down; the child abusers will go bankrupt.

So, we should stop acting like the Taliban and implement policies that work in a democratic free society. We must try to remove our own Taliban from power. In the mean time we must violate the stupid Taliban laws, not just on this issue but also to deal with drugs problem.

Why not legalize drugs? There are millions of non problematic cocaine users whose money now goes to the FARC. Heroin is a dangerous drug, but why don't we give the heroin to the addicts directly in clinics? We could import the drugs legally from Afghanistan, the profits would go to the Afghan government and not to the Taliban.

Just think about it. If, unlike Saudi Arabia, the US is the Land of the Free, then how come you are only allowed to drink decocanized coca tea? Count Iblis (talk) 16:52, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I would compare the Taliban theory to a comment made by a paricular teacher who was on the news for comparing George Walker Bush to Adolf Hitler, which was considered highly disruptive by many people, including myself. No, I don't approve or what the Taliban is doing, but comments like those might offend some people, and that gets Wikipedia in the news just like the teacher who compared Bush to Hitler. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 17:43, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Restricting Freedom of Speech or asking people to voluntarily impose restrictions on what they say just because some people may be offended is not what we should do. Analogies are, by definition, imperfect. You just use them as an illustration. In the long text above I explained the issue in detail. I don't know about the comment comparing Bush to Hitler, but what would matter to me is if that analogy was explained. Count Iblis (talk) 13:26, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * BINGO! While I agree there has been times when Rio de oro has overreacted (mainly because of inexperience in IC fighting in my opinion), why not permit his comments just the same as your's? Last I checked, he has freedom of speech too. But there are rules in Wikipedia, and it is my opinion that comparing Rio de oro to the Taliban, a brutal terrorist organization, is uncalled for. It's introducing off topic contraversy. While I'm all for freedom of speech, I am completely against abuse of any freedom or right. I'm not saying that you can't make comments like that, I'd leave that for the administrators to decide, I'm just saying that it might not be the best idea on your part. Believe me, I hate the Taliban and all similar organizations, but the last thing I want is comments like these to inspire them to vandalize this website. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 00:02, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I never explicitely said that Rio is in any way similar to a Taliban member. I simply explained why "Taliban methods" don't work, making it clear why repressive methods don't work in democratic countries. So, basically, what I have done may be similar to the person who compared Bush to Hitler, but without actually saying that Bush is Hiter, instead only giving the reasons why Hitler's policies led to big problems. Bush would never be offended by that, because he would not accept the validity of the argumentation and therefore he would not feel that he was compared to Hitler.
 * Using extreme examples to illustrate a phenomena can be very useful. If you want to explain why some chemical reactions lead to explosions, you may use a simplified model which is easier to understand but may predict a much larger explosion that actually happens in reality.  Count Iblis (talk) 00:40, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * All I said was I was against pedophillia and all the pedo and perverts that upload X rated images(youths) on the net. I saw on WP:ANI a issue over a user having inapprotie images of youths, so I thought I should report it to the FBI because I thought it was a federal offence okay. After I did that everyone started to question my validity on wheter or not that guy(USER) was possessing pedophillia or not. --Rio de oro (talk) 00:32, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * If an American violates US laws, then that's a matter for US authorities. You, as an American citizen, can play a role in that by reporting that person to the police. However, as far as wikipedia is concerned, we won't take an active role helping countries to prosecute people based on what they do on wikipedia. Should we help the Chinese to prosecute Chinese people who post content on wikipedia that is banned in China, like e.g. inappropriate images of the Tiananmen massacres :) ?  Count Iblis (talk) 00:51, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, it's time to ice this hot disscussion down. Lets not argue like elementary school children here (no pun intended). GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 00:29, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, since Wikipedia servers are hosted in the State of Florida here in the United States, it seems sensible for Florida and United States law to take priority to China's laws. If Wikipedia was hosted in China, then you would have a point, but Wikipedia is hosted in the United States, so content on Wikipedia should have to abide by the laws of the United States, but not Chinese laws. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 01:53, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Trolls...
A few talk page trolls rolled by and didn't think you wanted to see anymore of that rubbish so I protected your page for 48 hours. Cheers,¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 00:27, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Due to the exceptionally violent nature of the trolling that took place, I have contacted a total of three ISPs on your behalf. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 00:28, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikiquette
Hi Rio! thanks for your work on Wikipedia. I'm a regular old nobody around here, but I read a lot of talk pages and have come across your edits a few times. I just wanted to leave you a note regarding Count Iblis and your response:

If someone starts a theoretical discussion on your talk page which you are offended by or uninterested in, you have every right to ask them (politely) not to continue the conversation-- or to call their attention to WP:UP. If you want to make an opposing point, you are of course welcome to do so-- talk pages are not WP:NPOV spaces. Saying to another editor, however, "You [Count Iblis] your [sic] pro-[pedophile] because you support [hosting illegal images on Wikipedia]. SHAME ON YOU .[sic] You have been warned," treads a little close to the toes of WP:NPA, WP:AGF, and WP:MASTODONS.

If there's an issue you feel passionately about and wish to debate passionately, great! Opinions are good. But unless they're well-reasoned, substantiated opinions which are relevant to wikipedia and which you can express without getting too worked up, then they would be better off on a blog or forum. If you find yourself repeatedly getting worked up about Wikipedia or its policies, blog about that! http://wtfwiki.livejournal.com is currently available. Possibilities are limitless.

Again, I realize you weren't the one who initiated the discussion with Count Iblis. But when people contradict/offend/insult/threaten/vandalize you, it's crucial for you to follow WP:ETIQUETTE and avoid escalating conflicts. If the person in question has violated the rules of Wikipedia, calmly inform an admin. If they haven't, ignore them! Shake your head and laugh it off. We're here to build an encyclopedia, not to win fights. And making personal judgments, assumptions, and threats against other editors is disruptive to the work we're doing and could lead to banning in the future.

So good luck editing, your work is appreciated, and I encourage you to drink in WP:CIV and avoid moral panic while continuing in the vein of the useful edits you have made in the past. Please rest assured that there are thousands upon thousands of experienced, capable, and circumspect editors working alongside you, including the CIA.

I find it easier to keep conversations all in one place, so if you want to respond you can do so here-- I'll keep an eye out. Cheers! - Fullobeans (talk) 06:29, 31 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I came here to say much the same thing. You simply cannot state that people are pro pedo simply because the disagree with you on how to deal with suspect images. How would you like it if someone said that to you? Wikipedia is a collaborative effort and we have to be able to get along with others even if we disagree passionately with what they say. Making personal attacks (which is what that was) does not help to build a consensus and in fact only divides people. Please don't ever do that again. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 11:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I just noticed another one which I didn't see earlier. You simple cannot do this. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 11:22, 31 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I replied to the post that Theresa is talking about a little way back up your talk page as that's where the original thread was. The public face of GBT/C 12:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I've been wanting to point this out for a long time but haven't because I figured it would anger you, but crack-pot fighting tarpon vandal fighting style (not a personal attack on you, but more of someone in real life whose name I will not disclose) doesn't earn ribbons and metals, it earns pushups and court martials (don't take that literally, it's ROTC talk). I totally support a zero tolerance policy for vandalism, but creating crazy free-for-all can not only enflame vandals, but it can also impact the opinion of law enforcement and abuse depts towards Wikipedia. I'm not saying you're wrong for wanting to fight these vandals and supposed sex offenders (supposed because I've not looked into those cases), but you can't over react, and you especially can't make legal threats. Believe me, for a teenager, I'd have to say I've seen more than enough fraud and IC (Internet Crime) (not to brag or anything), and I know what is a good idea and what is not. When dealing with IC in general, it's usually a good idea to not confront the criminals at all, I leave that to the proper authorities. Wikipedia is a bit special because to an extent, editors are the authorities, anyone can issue official warnings, and the admins, who are regular editors with special powers, can block vandals. A lot of what goes on here at Wikipedia is not illegal except perhaps a minor offense as a result of the criminal mischief laws. Threats and child porn are illegal and should not be ignored, but flipping into total insanity is what the Tarpons do, not us Wikipedians. Trust me, I've been dealing with this kind of crap for about three years now, it took me a year to figure out what works and what doesn't, and sometimes I learned the hard way. If online criminals view a person as a threat, they tend to try to do some really bad things to that person. Fortunately, Wikipedia vandals tend to be a little bit more naive than spammers and hackers, most of those are bored laborers and school students. I hope this doesn't make you upset or anything, but it's just the cold hard truth, it's not always good to overreact. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 02:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

July 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Dravecky (talk) 21:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Dravecky (talk) 21:40, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Rock music WikiProject
I'd like to invite you to join the newly-formed Rock music WikiProject. There's alot of Rock-related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help us get this project off the ground and a few Rock music pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks! --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 09:06, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Regarding Threats of Violence
This is a personal response to your recent note on ANI regarding a recent vandalistic edit which can be construed as a threat to President-Elect Obama. You ask if I am naive and state that these are felonies which should be reported. I agree in that is it a felony and one can report it, however I am not naive. I take threats very seriously. In fact I am the original author of Wikipedia:Threats of Violence. I work as in public safety as an EMT and I have some experience in Law Enforcement and terrorism having been in an Israeli police unit for a period of time. I encourage everyone to report real threats of violence, however I believe this particular one was a simple act of vandalism. There was no threats in there in the way of saying, "I will kill Obama" or "Obama will be killed Tuesday at 2pm". There was just a statement that he would be president until he was killed. That's not a good thing to say, for sure, and a visit from the FBI or Secret Service would surely prevent the vandal from repeating it. However we all would agree, those of us in law enforcement and public safety, that it was a vandalistic edit and not a real threat. However, as I write on my user page I encourage people to report threats here. In the future, please remember WP:NPA and don't refer to me or anyone else as naive. Thanks and have a great weekend! Bstone (talk) 23:29, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * YOU! RIO DE ORO! KNOCK IT OFF!!!!! Why are you posting time wasting reports at WP:ABUSE? Not to get personal or to sound like a personal attack or a cyberbully or whatever, but seriously, do you have mental illness or something? Okay, I'm not sticking up for vandals, but you have repeatedly over-reacted to these kind of things. I'm not going to say that an ISP report would waste somebody's time since we could report somebody for inserting "HI!" in the middle of an article, but contacting the FBI and crap would get us laughed at. Mmbabies was a problem, but this one's just a simple drive by vandal. This is a first level warning, if you continue to over react, then I will take this to ANI, not to be mean, but that's just blatantly disruptive. GO-PCHS-NJROTC  (Messages) 23:44, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Er... yes, "do you have mental illness or something" is a personal attack. Commented at User talk:GO-PCHS-NJROTC. --Fullobeans (talk) 01:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I have replied to your post about this topic on my talk. Icewedge (talk) 06:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Deaths in 2009
Please don't insert a cause of death for Billy Mays until it's officially announced. And why are there no edit links in your page? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 21:44, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Abuse reports
Please fill in the abuse report here, as I've tagged the IP page you created by accident for CSD. Thanks for helping out with abuse reports! Netalarm 16:08, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

May 2010
Please do not attack other editors, as you did here: Talk:200 (South Park). If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. diff -- Cirt (talk) 13:59, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)