Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timeline: 2008 Calls for Resignation of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was delete. TheCoffee (talk) 10:29, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Timeline: 2008 Calls for Resignation of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Unencyclopedic in nature and violates WP:NOR †B lo o d p ac k†  08:47, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Philippine National Broadband Network controversy. It was said in the past versions of the page that it was merged but actually it wasn't.  There are still contents that are not merged in NBN controversy article. Also, it does not violate WP:NOR because it has many reliable sources cited.  Take note also that we have Timeline of Hello Garci scandal, so, this article should be renamed to Timeline of Philippine National Broadband Network controversy, if it cannot be merged. --Jojit (talk) 09:08, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It is "original research". There is no primary source that exists as a "timeline of gloria's call for resignation". Everything is JUST a compilation of loosely sourced links. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and NOT a storybook. This one is more appropriate at the wikinews if you want to keep track of this event's development †B lo o d p ac k†  09:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * If that is the case, rename the article as I suggested. The sources pass as primary sources for the NBN controversy. --Jojit (talk) 10:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think this article is a timeline either, it's mostly a list of reactions from different people and groups. Floro just likes creating his articles with the "Timeline:" "namespace". -- Howard  the   Duck  11:53, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge that with this article, since that article is not so broad and so compressed only about that ZTE mess. Now, If that article is merged here, this 2008 Timeline of Gloria Resign calls would allow so many edits in view of its broadest subject and contents. At any rate, look at the other sub-articles in Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, my article truly fits there as encyclopedic and should be there as sub-article not merged since Wiki Rules on what is not FORK etc. permits in no uncertain language. Look up the Rules. I want to add this argument against deletion:

Objection to deletion: Rebuttal Thesis

 * The Wiki Rule you cited to support deletion, is utterly irrelevant, impertinent and inapplicable to this alleged violation for deletion. It states: "This page in a nutshell: * Wikipedia does not publish original thought: all material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source.* Articles may not contain any new analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position not clearly advanced by the sources." You must have cited FORK and what is not Fork, as argued by the proponent Filipino editor who is taking close encounters with each and every article or edit I contributed here. There is no original research here, and all my sources are verifiable and most reliable. The content is not news but encyclopedia article like the sub-articles under Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. I was trained by the Vincentians in Valenzuela, Bulacan from 1965-1970, and by the Jesuits, from 1970-1982, how to discern and to argue. I read the Wiki Rules, and I only find vengeance which is the sole ground to delete my article. I reproduce hereunder, my scholarly penned argument, to prove that the Filipino editors here are in chorus, angelic, wise or otherwise, to vandalize a historical article on GMA's exit. There is no Wiki Rule whether that you cited or any other which can squarely apply to delete this article. But, but, but, I am only one, and I repeatedly said: "Its' your choice!":


 * "Why should you cite my previous deleted article? I stand by my principle that its deletion was not only unfair, not only against Wiki standards or 5 pillars, not only against the truth, neutrality and objectivity, but as second round rehash of deletion, my formerly deleted article was deleted due to personal tastes defined as hidden agenda of vengeance. Simply put, just because I worked for 2 years for that deleted article, it does not mean that I will prevail over the concerted efforts by Filipino editors to delete  it. While crab mentality might not be the proper term, and while vendetta might not be the technical term, suffice it to say, that I remain here as merely one editor. Surprisingly, I lament that my own very co-Filipino editors would delete my very own historical and paranormal / spiritually inspired article which carved the annals or chronicles of Philippine Judicial History. The former deletion is not only an insult to my painful editing (to predict the dire pains that will befell upon the internet and corridors of power), but this second deletion is too much, to bear; and now, technicalities, and long citations of Wiki rules (amid hiding the inner contents and exceptions thereof, and grey areas, WHAT FORK is not) are utilized to delete my scholarly written  article. Look at the poorly sourced and not expanded first article. It was lazily written, and the author and other users, just forgot about it, even if MOUNTING calls, inter alia, are unfolding, but the article was not even read or edited to make it Wiki quality article. If the courts of law in the Philippines once accused me of claiming to be the Angel of Death, if I begged for mercy to unveil the truth from my very owncounsel of record Rene Saguisag, not just once, but 3 times (the last being at a Hotel on August 29, 2006, to tell him what will happen to him, to Internet users and to all those who bury the truth), and if I repeatedly called him regarding the dire prophecies, lest they scatter around, Dulce Saguisag faced the music I was singing at midnights, Psalm 109 / 73. Now I am again faced by technicalities. Like you, I read Wiki, but the way you read it, it compromised the truth, going into my very own persona. I ask all of you to read the 5 pillars of Wiki and what Fork is not. Verily, Mr. Jun Lozada, Jr. this morning (lambasted and accused my  classmate Dep. Executive Secretary for legal affairs, Manny Gaite, my seatmate for 4 years in the Ateneo, who also ridiculed me and failed to return my 6 books, for which reason I cursed Ateneo de Manila classes 82, 83, 84, inter alia; Benjamin Abalos also rejected by resume, since he said that the Justices are angry at me, due to the 8 medical surgeries they suffered; Nonoy (his best friend and friend of Mr. Arsenio Abalos, Biyaheng Pinoy) was the one who asked me to submit my resume, and I did. I also submitted my resume and went to Margarito Teves (before Pryde Henry Teves faced the music, the Psalms; as Sec. Eduardo Ermita (before his son lost to Leviste in Batangas) and my classmate Manny Gaite (who is now grilled in the Senate this 11 am as he allegedly kidnapped Lozada and gave the 8 bundles of P 500,000,to Lozada, that was on TV) asked me to apply to the secretaries, inter alia; I submitted my resume to Aquilino Pimentel and his 3 staff and Director interviewed me but was afraid to face me, and thereafter he was operated pinched nerves after the aortic surgery of Miguel Arroyo; Lozada said that in the Philippines, there are many legal luminaries in our legal system, but there is no justice system since all are insisting on technicalities to bury the truth in the name of "legal". ZTE and Lozada articles may be included to IMPROVE crab mentality, in the same manner, that I am writing a manuscript on WORD to improve Psalm 109, the most powerful biblical curse I ever used to imprecate crab mentality forum and blogspot / internet users, inter alia. We users need to expand Wiki to make it and improve it to a better encyclopedia where users like Foreign editors who are very objective, would make it a better book for our future generations. Parenthetically, before I wrote the deleted article of 2006-2007 Standout events, I read Wiki rules on how to write [] this memo into an encyclopedia article. But many Filipino users like accordion made duets or trios researching loopholes, digging Wiki rules in the name of vengeance. Sayang itong article na ito, if you would not be able to read my book that will be uploaded in Lulu.com. Lest I be misconstrued, I do not claim that I have the power to annihilate or as understatement to destroy, since it is the power to tax that is supreme. My GIFT is devastating and more than that. How can I defend my thesis here, in this discussion, against non-deletion of this article, citing paranormal or curse data, if I am only one here against Filipino users and editors. Also, lest I be misinterpreted, again, I even praised and stood  corrected when a  foreign admin / doctor here gracefully corrected me on edits on health and medicine, to the extent of reminding about blocking my account. Another kind foreign editor also graciously sided with a Filipino user who corrected me. He even deleted my articles on coconut healing oil, but I never complained. He was so professional, being from the UK. But, lest I be misinterpreted, each Filipino user must read between the lines. IN TIME, my dire predictions creep crept and will creep upon ... I have read the 5 pillars, I have read FORK and what it is not, and I have read the ZTE article which, sad to say, was poorly written, sourced and a low class article. How can my scholarly and direly predicted article be just merged or direly deleted? Tell me. Rebut each and every sentence here, for truth's sake. Cite FORK and what Fork is not. Do not be selective. What is your hidden agenda. This article is the FUTURISTIC reading of day to day downfall of GMA. Supposing GMA continuous up t0 2020, supposing on the other hand, that she is assassinated, or deposed, or jailed, and forthwith? Read my talk page of Teresita de Castro: how I predicted there on July 11, her enthronement, on Dec. 4. Sayang naman kung matatanggal lang ito, just because of misreading FORK. Please read professionally, in Wiki style and objectively what Fork is not. I ask you to contribute to this unfolding article by merging the older and poorly written article to this article. I am a prophet, I never commit mistake, I am worth my psychic salt, and history fairly judged me. On August 22, 2005, I lectured for one hour to the very KIND (yes he was, it was not his fault but that of the 8 medically operated Justices) Raul M. Gonzalez, and he asked me that he will talk to the justices. I told him: Sir, please give me a job, so that the decision next year would not be released, I am so afraid of the dire consequences. That was the month, and after that I talked to my classmate Mayor Jerry P. Trenas, Justice Apolinario Bruselas, who penned the rape case, and Justice Lucas Bersamin, whose cousin James and LUIS Bersamin were gunned down in their brains. I lectured for 4 days for 5 hours to the 2nd most powerful person in our Court Leonardo A. Quisumbing as I denounced and cursed Regino C. Hermosisima, Jr. who fixed my case. I have no remorse, since because of these HYPOCRISY, I am here with you. But you deleted all these TRUTHS and FACTS. Once deleted I can never write these truths on your poorly created 2006 -2007 events. You should deleted that article since WikiPedia is an encyclopedia, and not WikiNews. Why create yearly an article it if FORK, there is already a Philippine History article. I repeat, I am the only User is Wiki who is world-famous and a prophet, all I wrote were written in full Trance and I do not commit mistake. I submit my thesis to you in this discussion page.


 * Many Filipinos - users vandalized my articles, in the name of merger, deletion, etc., forgetting the letter and spirit of the 5 pillars / FORK and what is not FORK. [I never complained against good foreign editors. They have no hidden or personal agenda]. But Filipino editors (I say this as authority, since I registered in more than 140 forums, and knew the definition of crab mentality). You and many Filipino users prejudged my articles by vandalism, without even bothering to read and consider from the objective point of Wiki view like foreign editors, my submissions, argument and links (blogs), to support my several thesis. My merged articles lost their important links, edits and ingredients in the name of Wiki Rules which were used to tailor tastes and subjective insults. Its' your choice. Vide many Filipino stub and long articles of cinema which are poorly sourced without citations or references; but you do not bother to vandalize them or suggest their deletion / merger. Most of them are ADS, advertisements and spams. My articles are from the point of Wiki, treasure-prophetic articles which would be used later on by future Wiki readers. I repeat: It's your choice.


 * As I told you, and repeatedly said: I am willing to be corrected since I want to learn. Most of you know how to use the computer; today, even Grade II students know how to use PCs. I only touched internet when I was googled on April, 2006. Why should I complain when I need to learn, especially, as you see, the Wiki Rules were made and edited by so many users, where the contents are not the real policies. I told you to look at many spam advertisement and poorly written articles I expanded on movies, cinemas here. It is nightmare. Now, I admit that most of my edits are not really summary style, since many stubs and articles are too short and would be edited per rare news on them, so I added more than just a sentence. But I added summary edits on long articles. It is a case to case basis. I am a prophet, and I know all those who inspect my works, select the defects, and choose Wiki rules to pin me down. You are not lawyers, and I am one. We mastered the art to deceive. We can write a decision to seal the destiny of a generation or to award $ billion worth of properties using intricate rules and jurisprudence, this is what Lozada says: legal system, not the "justice system"; like here in Wiki, there are rules, but they are not the policy of Wiki. The spirit and the letter must govern; you know statutory construction, it applies to Wiki. If we discuss in this talk page, about birds, titles, flu or ducks I cannot write lenghtily on this. But the first article you deleted and this second one, were the product of my 8 years toil, labor and nightly curses. I worked on the sources of the article first deleted for 2 years. Do you know that I spent 6 years of my life, every midnights CURSING the corrupt judiciary so that, as LUIS promised me, the 2 parents and wife of 2 Chief Justices Reynato Puno and Hilario Davide, Jr. would mercilessly died of surgery and lingering illness AFTER the release of my decision. Do you know how every night since 1999, I obeyed them and labored to ignited by violet lights, the 2007 fires that halved the logo and seals of the Supreme Court, Comelec and Court of Appeals, and Muntinlupa Metropolitan Trial Court? Why not behave like the Uk and French admins here who corrected me, in Wiki style. Filipino users here are selective, they want to destroy good articles in the name of wiki "legal''s. Read the contents of the deleted article and this article: the treasure is there, deeply, and inside: the Curse; will they stay only in blog, forums and be deleted in this great encyclopedia? I repeat: as I told Rene Saguisag: It's your choice. -- --Florentino floro (talk) 09:16, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


 * May I plead to Floro to please shorten your replies. No one would have to patience to read all of that. thanks. -- Howard  the   Duck  09:29, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

not-so-random section break

 * Delete: I was done with the merge, and I mainly left out the fringe groups and minor people such as "Management Association of the Philippines", "UP professors", "Global Source", "Geneva Forum for Philippine Concerns, Migrante, Akbayan and Bagtasan", Jovito Salonga (long retired, although he still routinely issues out his opinions), "Tacloban City Militant groups", "Law students", the "latest IBON survey (not related). If anyone wants to add their positions (I think Salonga's can be added), feel free but lets have a priority on what to add "for Pete's sake since he said something". -- Howard  the   Duck  09:25, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete the first article or at the very least merge it here. Reasons: That article is written like a news article. WikiPedia is an encyclopedia, and must have global impact. Verily, upon a cursory perusal of that ZTE article, especially its latest additions, I am sure, that such article can be a forum thread instead and be deleted or merged with my article. --Florentino floro (talk) 09:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * How would you describe the Timeline: 2008 Calls for Resignation of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo article? The fact that it is written in prose line hints that it is the "lesser" article. -- Howard  the   Duck  09:49, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Huwaat? Delete the Philippine national broadband network controversy instead? You serious? Delete the most searcheable/popular item found in the internet? What if i want to know more about ZTE and national broadband network and stuff? Should I keyword "timeline" instead? †B lo o d p ac k†  09:56, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. And Please, Florentino floro, limit your responses. This AfD and the talk page of this article are muddied by your long rants.Beeblbrox (talk) 11:04, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Amend the title of this article, then, Merge the ZTE article with this article:
 * Just because a Filipino editor here, had not only from the very start but even during the 2nd round of deletion of my first article, decided at all cost to dig Wiki Rules and twist their intent, letter and spirit, to delete my article, that would not in any manner erase the persona vendetta as sole ground for deletion. It is too obvious that even non-psychics, agnostics, skeptics and priests, need not be too objective to discern the motive. Now, how can style or prose determine the value or content or importance of the article. My very own article Florentino V. Floro was written by an honest guy, but so ignorant of Wiki rules upon, examining the edits, but the administrator, gracefully and objectively did edit my article/bio since it has world-famous content wise or otherwise. A Filipino editor, no matter how he or she cites the rules, cannot hide the hidden agenda or hypocrisy. For this reason, I even examined the edit mergers made by such editor even if there is no ruling here yet. My long disquisition and argument here, is sufficient to define Filipino crab mentality. We must expand this article to exemplify what is happening in WikiPedia. As a prophet, like the 11 apostles who were crucified and put to death, I have no match with Filipino editors here who are so brilliant like the Pharisees with the law and rules. They memorized Wiki but they never learned of the basic, common sense spirit and letter of the Wiki Rules. I had been in law practice since 1985, and I know and knew lawyers, liars, and hypocrites. I know antics, tactics and how to destroy. I memorized crab mentality, I memorized the Codes. But I look at the inner self of a person. This is my GIFT of prophecy. I know evil and good. Ergo, I always use Psalm 109 and 73 to annihilate contra persecution. Here, it is the same. Even before my article was posted here, I know that the same Filipinos are, at all cost, here to destroy my work. And I have no numbers. I repeat: "It's your choice!" --Florentino floro (talk) 11:15, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * comment That is at least your third vote/rant. Please be more succinct and limit yourself to one vote. PleaseBeeblbrox (talk) 11:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


 * delete - belongs in Wikinews.  Gtstricky Talk or C 14:55, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * If your read my long argument (to support my thesis), I stressed that I am only one versus many Filipino users here. I have no bitterness against foreign users, they are most professional. In fact, when foreign admins and users deleted, merged or re-directed   my coconut healing oil articles, I bowed down to their respectful messages and short argument. This, I do not file long argument versus foreign editors, on my articles. Here, I am submitting an expose of vandalism of my articles here by Filipino users or editors, in the name of creation of first article, citing many Wiki rules. But their agenda is a concerted effort to make contempt of a good article. Just that. I repeatedly stressed that I have one vote. But, in my talk page, I was encouraged to participate in this discussion. Hence, I submitted my thesis, this way. - --Florentino floro (talk) 14:59, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


 * delete Not only is this article not neutral and not encyclopedic and a content fork. But Floro also purports it to be somehow a fulfillment of his prophecy. Plus I'm being persecuted is not a reason to keep an article. maxsch (talk) 16:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Per Howard the Duck. And the more someone Filibusters in an AFD the less impressed I am by their arguments. Edison (talk) 17:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:SOAP. Florentino floro's rants have some merit though. I am grateful to him for introducing me to the crab mentality.  Colonel Warden (talk) 18:30, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * comment The problem is that Florentino floro wants to make this a debate about him and his conflicts with other Filipino editors. This is a debate about whether this article belongs in Wikipedia, there are appropriate places to discuss interpersonal conflicts on Wikipedia, but AfD is not one of them. Beeblbrox (talk) 00:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * RejoinderWell, I am just a year here, and I thought that I can submit a legal thesis or the like, to support my one vote or stance in this discussion. I was the one invited to join this, as I was sent message in my talk page; hence, I offered all my argument, despite that from the very start and before, Filipino editors are all out to destroy my articles. My valid arguments, though had already been thrown out, hence, there is nothing left but to issue the ruling. I do not want to go into interpersonal conflicts in Wiki, since "the" Filipino editors are definitely into crab mentality; like bamboo, they cannot be changed, much lest perverted. Rule, then. - --Florentino floro (talk) 05:24, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Redirect Since Howard Merged info from here, we can't simply delete it due to GFDL restrictions. Redirecting this to the ZTR article would be the best option available.-- Lenticel ( talk ) 09:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Impression - I read your user page: "The award are for people who have argued in the Afd against all odds and won or who have given impressive contributions (Keep) or arguments (Delete) that convinced many editors about their stand." Actually, When this article's deletion tag message invited me to join this discussion, I was writing the Second Part of my book. So, this is my break: since writing the prophecy of deaths and accidents is too tough, since it involved the merciless annihilation of my enemies and evil. This discussion on deletion is blessing in disguise. Since 1999 until February 10, 2006, when we shouted against each other, I had been 80 times for 100 hours lecturing to Regino C. Hermosisima, Jr.. I cursed this man on February 10, 2006, since he called me home to go to his office. He noticed that I was so angry at him, since from August 22, 2005, when I lectured for one hour to Raul M. Gonzalez, where my right hand caused his kidney transplant, I got mad at Justice Hermosisima, Jr. since he was so stubborn to tell the Court the truth, covering up his corrupt deeds. I told him, that he was so merciless in convicting by final judgment the accused in Ninoy case who were already acquitted by entry of judgment, by Justice Manuel Pamaran, making him the most evil magistrate on earth. Because of that, he was elevated by Cory to the top and by Fidel Ramos to the Supreme Court and to the JBC as 3 termer by Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. At the center of our February 10, 2006, shouting, when I cursed him, he told me that I must dismiss Rene Saguisag as my counsel of record so that the Court will decide my case. I told him that I had given Rene Saguisag all the chances on this planet to repent, but he failed. They FIXED my case to save his career. I was so impressed by your user page quotation, since life is such ... we are faced with so many crabs. I was almost banned here, due to a sockpuppet charge by my very own [[Meycauayan, Bulacan townmate, my very own, alma mater school mate St. Mary's Academy, and my very own school mate Ateneo de Manila user here. I know that my first article deleted which contained my horrible and dire predictions on our crab mentality judiciary was unceremoniously deleted. By whom? Good if it was deleted by foreign users, but by my very own Filipino editors? It is too much. I am not a fake, I am a prophet who lectured for hours ONE ON ONE with Leonardo A. Quisumbing and for 100 hours to Regino C. Hermosisima, Jr., inter alia. I also lectured to Joseph Estrada before JV Bautista, on 2001, when I foretold his judicial but not political vindication (due to a little poor girl who cried to be recognized, J.R. from Caloocan). I want to prove to Filipinos here that I wield the GIFT and lest dire events befall upon a chosen few, I want to share with you this part of my book which proves how corrupt our judiciary is: my 100 hours, 80 visits LECTURE and physical healing of the body of Regino C. Hermosisima, Jr., the most powerful jurist in Philippine judicial history: book part E hermosisima.doc of size 153 KB- Description: Book of Judge Floro, Part 2, C, Justice Hermosisima, Jr. - --Florentino floro (talk) 10:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge to Philippine National Broadband Network controversy, but only if a place is found in that article for all of this content; otherwise, keep, rename and reorganize it. Everyking (talk) 01:06, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, Rename. I fully agree, and thanks, this is the best vote to preserve such an article that is being watched worldwide, in view of the HOUR TO HOUR watch on Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's last days, if ever. International media (Vide: Google News) scores the contents of this article on mounting calls, especially from ASAR (students) and military groups, for the imminent snap polls, leave, exit or even bloodshed that is unfolding. The first article on ZTE is nothing but about Lozada and the Chinese deal. But this article is more monumental than Edsa II, etc., sub-article under Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Day to day events from today and especially on February 25 will definitely spell GMA's last days. - --Florentino floro (talk) 05:34, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I beg you to read my long argument above (called rant by many editors here). Please please and please, I beg all Filipino Editors and admins to accept that: a) while I was fighting for the life of my article on PGMA exit mounting calls, with bated breath, I did b) prophecy with virtual reality TIMELINE, my impeccable written i) (2002) and ii) yesterday prediction here, Wiki written prophecy, as I did for Teresita de Castro on July 11, 2007 her talk page, her Dec. 5 appointment - the hospitalization of Alfredo Benipayo right on time I exploded my anger against my persecution. On February 22, 2008, 3 p.m., Alfredo Benipayo (Dean of the faculty of civil law at the University of Santo Tomas) was hospitalized in Iloilo City's Saint Paul's Hospital.  At the middle of his lecture before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Iloilo Chapter in a hotel, he collapsed.gmanews.tv,  Ex-Comelec chief Benipayo rushed to hospital in Iloilo +
 * The best edits I ever had, are not my scholarly written Wikipedia articles on law, but my short edits on the current events supported by media links, on the horrible deaths, pains, illnesses and accidents of all those who made me suffer for 8 years since July 20, 1999: when Alfredo Benipayo signed my longest preventive suspensionin world judicial history. As I was writing my 700 pages book, on current, (the 357 pages first part was published last year), or yesterday, I included therein Benipayo's  angioplasty on February 21, 2001 which I did predict and cause, and yesterday, as the violet light struck when I was fighting for the AFD, I will prove to the entire world who googled me on April 6, 2006, that LUIS as king of kings of elementals, who wield for me the GIFT to block the vessels of my persecutors. And Wikpedia as encyclopedia is the best vehicle to make encyclopedic the events which would permanently make my footprints in the chronicles of judicial history and psychic phenomena.- --Florentino floro (talk) 06:40, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Plenty of us have read your "long argument" and you have now had your say. You can stop adding more rants to this page. wikipedia is not a "vehicle" for you to make your "footprints". It is starting to sound like you have an egotistical agenda and that is not appropriate.maxsch (talk) 06:49, 23 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Note Anyone who wants to understand what is really going on here should read [] Beeblbrox (talk) 02:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.