User talk:Snigbrook/Archive 5

AfD nomination of Traffic count
An article that you have been involved in editing, Traffic count, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:42, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

hi
wasnt me --DiscuccsionAmeri (talk) 22:25, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Kevin Park (disambiguation) page
Hi. I was wondering how to wikify the "Kevin Park (disambiguation)" page. I'm new to Wiki and didn't know how to do it.

Thanks.

Jake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JJohnsonadsg (talk • contribs) 01:40, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Sun Ra Arkestra
Hey, I wasn't aware that the content I introduced to the Sun Ra article was controversial. Apart from that, I was crewing the event, I just haven't had the chance to write and publish my book in the last 36 hours to provide a printed reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.232.160 (talk) 02:40, 3 August 2009 (UTC) 81.159.232.160 (talk) 02:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

---

Thank you for your verbose response. I love you too. 81.159.232.160 (talk) 02:54, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of These Streets are Watching
The reasons why you removed the nomination for deletion of the Wikipedia article The Streets are Watching are unclear. You state that this wikipedia article was nominated before and the nomination had been removed. However, there is nothing in the discussion page regarding why the nomination is removed. I will be raising this point in the discussion page and you are welcome to comment. IF you don't comment, the page will be nominated for deletion again. DivaNtrainin (talk) 19:42, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I've replied on the article talk page. snigbrook (talk) 13:12, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

AfD
You are fast. Beat me to nominating and notifying the user :) --Scythre (talk) 14:26, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

RE:Hamid Karzai
Regardless of references, that was factual information. It must be included. 80.2.15.201 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:02, 16 August 2009 (UTC).


 * It needs a reliable source, and you didn't cite one, also this edit was clearly not appropriate. snigbrook (talk) 16:12, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Amerinda
Hello Snigbrook, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Amerinda has been removed. It was removed by ExecTaxes with the following edit summary ' (Specifics of trademark information added. ~) '. Please consider discussing your concerns with ExecTaxes before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 21:30, 18 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

AIV report
Hi, I'd like to notify you of the below. The account you reported only vandalized once, and was warned by an admin.


 * vandalism-only account. snigbrook (talk) 20:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * -- Luk  talk 20:14, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I had to remove this report as the AIV page is often backlogged. Thanks,  ceran  thor 20:26, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Orthoceratidae
This isn't eligible for any of the criteria for speedy deletion, and it looks like it can be fixed by editing the article. I don't know what you intended to do, if you want the article to be moved to Michelinoceratidae you could nominate the redirect for speedy deletion, or if you want the redirect from Michelinoceratidae to be deleted you could nominate it at.... snigbrook (talk) 13:32, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It still has the article title Orthoceratidae when it should have Michelinoceratidae. Orthoceratidae needs to be a separate article written with Orthocerotidae (notice the "o") synonymized to it. Michelinoceratidae is a taxonomic name on its own with much information available. I need two fresh starts for both Orthoceratidae and Michelinoceratidae and then the articles will be correct. Noles1984 (talk) 13:47, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You can replace the existing content (of the article and the redirect) to remove anything that is incorrect, deletion isn't necessary. snigbrook (talk) 13:54, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You could nominate it at Articles for deletion, but as I mentioned it needs editing or moving, not deletion. snigbrook (talk) 13:58, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I tried a move before but it wouldn't take. I'll do a redirect to Michelinoceratidae' and see if that solves it and then correct info on existing page. Details are on the discussion page. Thanks. Noles1984 (talk) 14:04, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It should be possible to move the article, although I still don't know exactly what you wanted, as Michelinoceratidae only has one edit there which is the creation of the redirect and Orthocerotidae is a red link. snigbrook (talk) 14:09, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Orthoceratidae was rewritten and moved to Orthocerotidae. It's clean and concise. However, one cannot get to Michelinoceratidae without being directed to Orthoceratidae. What now? Noles1984 (talk) 14:57, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You can edit the redirect, if you have any information about it you can replace the redirect, otherwise nominate it for deletion at Redirects for discussion. snigbrook (talk) 15:16, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Skelmersdale Postal Town
Hi, not disputing your edit, just intrigued. I moved away from Skem 4 years ago, but while I was living there all my mail arrived stamped with a Wigan sorting office stamp. I assumed that this would mean that the postal town was Wigan, is my assumption incorrect or has the stamp changed in the last few years? Where does one find out this information? As it's been edited to at least three different places, if there's a source we can list, maybe that'd be for the best? Fol de rol troll (talk) 08:34, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The postmark only identifies the sorting office which is usually for one or more postcode areas (for all WN postcodes it would be Wigan). I can't find a list of post towns (the Royal Mail website only provides a link to order the book of post towns and postcodes), but they can be verified for individual postcodes on the Royal Mail website. snigbrook (talk) 21:50, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Tiara Air
Why did you scrap/re edit my entire history of Tiara Air? I was there for 36 months and know the company intimately. The facts are facts so why are they constantly either edited or removed entirely. It would appear that the company (Tiara Air) believe that Wikipedia is a forum for their personal advertising. I listed facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by No bias no bull (talk • contribs) 19:20, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia has a policy that all content should be verifiable in published sources, and you didn't cite any. The changes you made looked like they were based on personal opinion or original research (and were potentially defamatory) I reverted to the previous version. snigbrook (talk) 19:32, 31 August 2009 (UTC) And no doubt you have never even been to ARUBA and actually know nothing whatsoever about Tiara Air! User: No bias no bull

No facts are facts.

1. One aircraft is abandoned without engines at the Aruba International airport.[Reported to me by a member of staff]

2. I was present when the decison NOT to continue with aquisition of more modern pressurised turbo props was made.

3. There has been a very high turnover of senior managers over the past 3 years since the company began - average time in post has been only a few months each person; not indicative of stability in aviation [my speciallity]

4. The company has continually tried to 'hijack' the article with their own propaganda, most of which is at best 'suspect' and in many case simply 'untrue'.

5. The local Aruba Director of Civil Aviation HAS revoked their Air Operators Certificate 3 times in the past 3 years - another serious issue that people aught to be aware of. —Preceding unsigned comment added by No bias no bull (talk • contribs) 22:58, 1 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia has policies of verifiability and neutral point of view. If no published sources can be found then these facts should not be included in the article even if they are accurate.  As you continued to add them after they were removed by other editors, your edits appeared to be disruptive, and if you intend to continue editing on Wikipedia articles you should request to be unblocked instead of evading your block by logging out (see Guide to appealing blocks). snigbrook (talk) 20:29, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

1992 Football League Second Division play-off Final
Could you help me with this page please. Mr Hall of England (talk) 18:14, 4 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Possibly although I don't have any sources available - maybe I will look next time I visit the library. snigbrook (talk) 13:24, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!
Just wanted to drop by and say thank you for catching and fixing the "Bold text" I inadvertantly added to Jackpot (CSI). Not sure how that happened! But anyway I appreciate the catch. Have a great day! LoveStreamFlow (talk) 18:03, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Category:KwaZulu Natal geography stubs
Hi Snigbrook - I've moved your CFD nomination for the above category to WP:Stub types for deletion, which is where stub categories and templates are debated. Grutness...wha?  22:42, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Politiki Kouzina
I proded and removed the link, because of WP:Disambiguation guidelines. The relevant guideline is "before constructing a new disambiguation page, determine a specific topic name for all existing pages, and the name for the disambiguation page." I also don't think that "inspired by the cuisine" is an appropriately distinct enough reference to warrant being on the disambiguation page, and the other page didn't have a link (in fact, it linked to itself, a style problem) That movie, however, is "Politiki kouzina" in Polish, so it should be a redirect (and if someone creates a page about the cuisine, it should go at Politiki kouzina (lower case, not the uppercase one) and Politiki Kouzina should redirect to Politiki kouzina (disambiguation) or Politiki kouzina. I hope that's a satisfactory explanation. Shadowjams (talk) 01:26, 12 September 2009 (UTC)


 * It looked like the cuisine was intended to be the primary topic, so I thought it should be mentioned instead of redirecting to the film (there are no guidelines for this situation). Now that I've looked on Google, I think that maybe the film is the primary topic, and it's unclear whether there should be an article for the cuisine, so the explanation in the article A Touch of Spice is probably enough. snigbrook (talk) 09:47, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Hanley Grange
Hi: Since you contested my prod, I thought you'd like to know that I have nominated Hanley Grange for deletion. Your opinion at the deletion discussion is welcome. Best, Ray  Talk 16:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Fenesta
There are no references or even external links that assert notability. As such I feel that it should be deleted. Wizard191 (talk) 21:29, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Possibly but there are several sources available including a few on Google News, and if the claims made in the article can be verified the company appears to be notable. snigbrook (talk) 21:34, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Would you be interested in joining a WikiProject devoted to Lancashire?
Hi, I have noticed that you are from Lancashire and I was wondering if you have heard of the new WikiProject group of WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria. If you are interested in joining please feel free to become a paricipant and help us achive our goals. If you do join I am looking forward to your contributions. 93gregsonl2 (talk) 21:01, 19 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I've added myself to the participants. snigbrook (talk) 21:18, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Edit on Talk:Lostock Hall
I'm slightly confused why the link to GAN was removed. It was put there for easy access, for those wanting to check on the progress, plus it provided an easy route for myself too, who has done 99.9% of the work on the article, and also the person who put it up for nomination. Is there any reason why you removed the link? (Pr3st0n (talk) 20:13, 20 September 2009 (UTC))

Just seen the full edit... the guidelines set out on GAN didn't specify that "places" could be added into the suptopic bar. This does help, although I'm dubious as it didn't state this was permitted in the guidelines. (Pr3st0n (talk) 20:22, 20 September 2009 (UTC))


 * The shortcut box implied that WP:GAN was a redirect to Talk:Lostock Hall. I added a parameter to the GA nominee template to link it to the "places" section (it looks like the parameter only works if it is identical to the section title otherwise it appears to be blank). snigbrook (talk) 20:30, 20 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I can see what you mean, when I followed the guidelines set out for GAN, the template box didn't mention anything about adding "places" to the GA nominee subtopic parameter. Which is why I didn't add it in there, I didn't want to breach their guidelines.  The shortcut box was, IMO, the only way around this minor glitch, as it allowed anyone viewing the talk page to be able to click the link, to view progress on the nomination (if they wished to do so that is). (Pr3st0n (talk) 20:41, 20 September 2009 (UTC))


 * It's in step 2 of GAN – the list of subtopics is in the "contents" box. snigbrook (talk) 20:46, 20 September 2009 (UTC)


 * That was the confusing part, step 2 of GAN made it look like you only put the category shown from the list on the right, didn't really state you could also put a sub-category from one of those shown. Ah well, at least the link on Talk:Lostock Hall is now easier to access the GAN progress.  Thanks for that! Fingers-crossed, the article gets the award.  Worked my ass off on that one, and very passionately too, seeing as its where I live lol.  (Gareth aka Pr3st0n (talk) 20:50, 20 September 2009 (UTC))


 * It looks like it should link to the "Geography and places" section according to the instructions, but "Places" is more specific and I don't think it's important; most of the articles nominated in the same section have links to "Geography" although that is the other subsection of "Geography and places". snigbrook (talk) 20:59, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

The Helping Hand Barnstar
I've noticed you've not got one of these yet... here's your first, of what could be many to come!

Thanks for the barnstar. It isn't my first, there's one somewhere in my talk archives probably from before I created my user page. snigbrook (talk) 21:29, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Ahh right... I put all mine on display. Originally on my user page, but now I created a separate sub-page for them, which can be accessed via my user page. (Pr3st0n (talk) 22:24, 20 September 2009 (UTC))

Thanks!
Thanks for the help at Austin Craig! :) I was quite impressed at the speed by which got those links., and how you got them. Did you get them through google? Marax (talk) 08:10, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Eliza Gamble
Hi Snigbrook. The article Eliza Gamble was previously tagged for speedy deletion under criterion A7 (no indication of importance). I notice that you rejected this assessment of the article and removed the tag. I have now nominated the article at Articles for Deletion, as I believe the article does fit the criteria. I invite you to add your comments to the discussion if you still think otherwise. Kind regards, ∙  AJCham  (talk) 00:58, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Andrew the Apostle
Thank you for locating and correcting related redirects. Afaprof01 (talk) 23:19, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Southwell Minster School
I don't know why you made me do it the hard way. :( A refimprove tag is when there are references but there need to be more. An unsourced section tag is when the entire section is unsourced.  This is a BLP concern.  Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 20:29, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

High five
For getting to UAA with this just a few minutes before I did. -- Soap Talk/Contributions 15:40, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It appears there's no highfive but I think there should be. -- Soap Talk/Contributions

AIV Report
Dealt with Tigerdirect12345. Thanks! Master of Puppets - Call me MoP! :D  19:14, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Robot
I hope it was not my text that you saw as nonsense - I was trying to encourage the other user to be constructive with Wikipedia. If you look at his contributions and talk page, you'll see why.

Unrelated, but BTW, have a look at User:Redrose64. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:38, 8 October 2009 (UTC)


 * The other user has been editing since then, and has had a chance to read your reply. I don't know if "nonsense" was the most accurate description of the comment by 122.148.234.205, but it was unlikely to result in any improvement to the article; it was a potentially offensive comment about a living person, which is why I removed it. snigbrook (talk) 14:01, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Thankee!
Thanks for reverting the latest vandal on my talk page. I appreciate your help! Best, Jusda  fax  04:07, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

BigDunc's page...
...needs 'semi-protection', either that or numerious accounts will need to be blocked. GoodDay (talk) 20:28, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Strutt Family Trust AfD
Hi. This seemed to be incomplete. Also, there's a few other pages that should be nominated along with this (since there's some wierd sock stuff going on). (See the discussion I've been having with another user at User_talk:Accounting4Taste). -- B figura (talk) 17:22, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

thanks...
for sorting that out! Leaky Caldron  13:08, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

CSD error
Snigbrook - apologies for wasting your time with the incorrect CSD nom for the Narrows (EP) article. I had mistakenly read the criteria as "does not indicate why its subject is important or significant or where the artist's article does not exist. Lesson learned! Cheers, Jezebel's Ponyo shhh 19:32, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

File:Slpa.jpg
Thank you for noticing the copyright problem with File:Slpa.jpg. When a copyrighted or trademarked logo has been uploaded incorrectly as a public domain or user-created file, you can correct the problem with adding Non-free logo and a fair use rationale to the page. This way, Wikipedia can legitimately continue to use the logo in the article about the organization to which the logo belongs, and an administrator doesn't need to delete the file. You may find FurMe a convenient way to add a fair use rationale to the page. -- Eastmain (talk) 04:04, 13 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that – I wasn't sure that could be done (as there was no source) or if the image would have to be uploaded again with the correct source. snigbrook (talk) 15:07, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

TVP
Why you revert?--125.25.81.131 (talk) 12:46, 15 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I reverted because it was a cut-and-paste move. Moves shouldn't be done this way, instead you should request it at Requested moves.  It's also likely that this move would be rejected; none of the entries on the TVP disambiguation page are the primary topic.  If Telewizja Polska has changed its name to TVP, maybe it could be moved, but a disambiguated title would be necessary, such as TVP (TV company), TVP (company) or TVP (TV channel) – I'm not sure which would be preferred. snigbrook (talk) 12:56, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

But RAI
RAI is the italian T.V and its article name is RAI not its full name. But why this Polish T.V is Telewizja Polska not TVP? I think you must move it and TVP move to TVP (disambiguation). TVP is most known as Telewizja Polska--125.25.81.131 (talk) 13:51, 15 November 2009 (UTC)


 * It could be moved by an administrator, but moves such as this are unlikely to be done without discussion – you can nominate it for a move at Requested moves. Whether it succeeds depends on whether there is consensus that it is a primary topic, and it's unclear whether it is (maybe Textured vegetable protein should be there instead).  Whether the Radiotelevisione Italiana article should be at RAI (and whether Rai should redirect to it) isn't relevant to this discussion; that would have to be discussed separately and I would suggest, at least for Rai, that there is no primary topic. snigbrook (talk) 14:08, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

NEWT apology

 * I wondered if it may have been part of WP:NEWT – and I think I put more effort in than usual on that page because of it. I've been watching the discussion there, although I don't think I'll participate in the article creation part of the project. snigbrook (talk) 22:25, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Dear Snigbrook.

I dont know why editors hate me so much. I can vouch that I am not a sockpuppet!

Thank you, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lady Paddock (talk • contribs) 00:53, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't think that anyone hates you, the problem is that many of your edits have been disruptive, and that they are similar to a user who is currently blocked from editing. snigbrook (talk) 01:03, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

The American Outlaws
We have added several primary sources to The American Outlawsentry and would like to know what we need to do further to prevent deletion. Garrett3000 (talk) 19:55, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Offset printing
Nice work recovering the history section of offset printing. Somebody sure butchered it! —Parhamr (talk) 03:04, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism to Temple of Artemis
Hi Snigbrook - I just expediently reverted some extremely offensive (racist) vandalism to the above, and noticed that you posted a final warning to the IP on December 1. I'm neither very experienced nor technically competent in such matters: would it be possible for you to take it further? I personally feel such offence justifies a block. Regards, Haploidavey (talk) 19:39, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


 * You can report users at WP:AIV. However I had only given a level 3 warning to that IP address, so a report would probably be rejected; I have now added a final warning. snigbrook (talk) 19:49, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism on Much Hoole
Mnay thanks for the revert back, think i must have done the undo of the vandalism at the same time as yourself, will have to keep an eye on it! there is someone going around recently editing silly things into the area topics, so keep an eye out! Thanks again! Bankhallbretherton (talk) 23:53, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Tram in india
That picture is of public transport in Indian state West Bengal's capital Calcutta,Tell me if it doesn't come under free license for fair mean. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Race911 (talk • contribs) 04:48, 3 December 2009 (UTC) --Race911 (talk) 04:53, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The image page had a template for fair use of a non-free image, and mentioned that it was copied from a website. According to Wikipedia's non-free content criteria, images with free licences should be used if possible (e.g. one you create or one from a website with a suitable licence).  Use of non-free images is restricted, and where they are unlikely to be needed or are replaceable, they are nominated for deletion. snigbrook (talk) 15:42, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for removing the template for me
Thanks for this. Did you know we had a bot who used to do this kind of work? See User talk:Bot523. &mdash; Sebastian 01:44, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Alto High School
Thanks for fixing my typo at Talk:Alto High School! Cheers, Cunard (talk) 09:29, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Added a link to the Mellor Village Hall Website
Hi, Please can you tell me why you removed the Link to Mellor Village Hall. It has been removed a couple of times and I would like to know why. Thanks

Stuhodgson (talk) 09:24, 11 December 2009 (UTC)


 * The link had been moved to the external links section of the article; it isn't necessary to link it in the text. Links in the text should usually be internal unless they are references. snigbrook (talk) 01:09, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

OK I understand this, I added this link as the same type of link is on the Mellor Brook Page Mellor Brook. Should this be removed also or is that allowed to stay? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stuhodgson (talk • contribs) 11:46, 16 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I've removed it from the text (it was already in the external links section). snigbrook (talk) 18:53, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Kerry Katona
The Sunday Sport, while a total rag of a newspaper, was cited and established as a source for the nude pgotos of Ms Katona. This was done three years ago and remained stet until Hullaballoo Wolfowitz worked his magic all over the article (removing things it took me 10 seconds to find citations for, etc). Your comment about 'declined' is spot on, but other issues have long since been processed. You don't want to shadow an editor the 'calibre' of HW...! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.1.168 (talk) 19:31, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * The only source agreed was the Sunday Sport, where they were published. Unless that publication mentioned that it was a censored version of a more explicit photograph, an additional reliable source is needed. snigbrook (talk) 19:40, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

That publication actually showed the censored images, printing the 'open leg' photograph (as can be seen on the internet, etc.) with a 'CENSORED' sticker over her labia. No additional RS required then. 80.192.1.168 (talk) 20:04, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * That wasn't made clear by the editor who added the source (leaving it unclear whether "nude" was intended to be "topless"), or by Hullaballoo Wolfowitz when changing the words. snigbrook (talk) 20:13, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. Makes you wonder why HW deleted it. Actually, that's rhetorical, as HW has an extensive history of deletionism. The image (which, as previsouly mentioned, can be seen in image searches on Google, etc.) was nude, was 'open leg' and was printed in the Sunday Sport with a censored sticker over her lady parts. Should that info be included ar will it suffice to leave it as it is? 80.192.1.168 (talk) 20:27, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

EDIT: It was made clear on the talk page that 'topless' wasn't completely accurate, however. Definitely nude. 80.192.1.168 (talk) 20:29, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I noticed that, but it was only an assertion by Magpie1892, who was using unreliable sources (such as a forum) in an attempt to show verifiability. snigbrook (talk) 20:38, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

I guess that nude is acceptable then. I removed 'open leg', even though it was accurate. Re-instate or leave it, what do you think? I should maybe put it back as it's relevant. 80.192.1.168 (talk) 21.19, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * If "nude" is verifiable it can be used, I don't think "open leg" is necessary. snigbrook (talk) 22:15, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm still mulling it over. Can only be a matter of time before Hullaballoo Wolfowitz attacks the entry again, however. Nude is verifiable as per the citation, hence why it's in the copy. talk) 20:29, 20 December 2009 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.41.73.133 (talk)

Big butts
That's an IRL ladyfriend of mine. Go away. Miserlou (talk) 03:58, 25 December 2009 (UTC)


 * It isn't usually acceptable to edit other users' user pages, it is likely to be seen as vandalism, particularly when personal attacks are being added to them (how is anyone supposed to know whether comments such as those are welcome and not an attempt at harassment?) – and you have made a few other similar edits, including an attack page at User:Namine (an account that appears to have no edits). snigbrook (talk) 04:06, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Climategate
The policy of Wikipedia to refuse to mention the possibility that the Climategate emails were released lawfully by a whistleblower is an instance of objectionable prejudice, which we shall now publicize worldwide. Your contributions to this policy will be reported to the police now investigating this affair, since it appears that Wikipedia has made itself part of the underlying scientific fraud that is now under investigation by Interpol, Europol, the East Anglia police, and the e-crime unit of the Metropolitan Police, as well as by the US Congress. Wikipedia's unreasonable unwillingness to allow proper and balanced discussion of anything to do with the debate about climate, and its refusal to block editors such as Connolley, ChrisO, Dabelstein-Petersen and others who are paid full-time to hack and disrupt the Wikipedia biographies of anyone who dares to question the scientific "orthodoxy" about "global warming", is no longer acceptable and appears to be part of a pattern of criminal behavior. It, and you, will be reported to police in this context.

PFFF
You don't have to tell me that I forgot something on a page about Frans Duijts, if it is not okay. Just delete it. Scream and cry, but I don't care. My English is not very good, but that's because I'm a Dutchman. So don't send me incomprehensible messages in you're stupid English languague. JUST DELETE THE PAGE. don't thank you. User: Daan2