Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Gene Poole vs. Samboy/Archive1

This is an archive of the original complaint against User:Gene_Poole. Samboy 02:30, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I&#8217;d like to note that User:Gene Poole runs his own &#8220;micronation&#8221; project, the so-called &#8220;Empire of Atlantium&#8221; which he has been heavily advertising on this site and trying to get it a featured article status. I&#8217;d also like to note that he has been removing all criticism of his undertaking both from the article and even from the talk page, frequently engaging in edit wars and apparently even violating the three revert rule. Thus I ask the honorable mediators that he be restrained for further altering, reverting and inserting his POV on the Empire of Atlantium and Micronation articles, due to the conflict of interest, and the lack of the necessary detachment to be able to have a true NPOV, as he is personally involved with the project. I&#8217;d also like to remind everyone involved that self-advertising is against our policy. GeneralPatton 01:35, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Response concerning GeneralPatton: I have had no contact at all with the above editor prior to a message posted by him/her to my talk page several hours ago. I dealt with that in a polite and honest manner . He has since posted several inflammatory statements to my page, one of which I have deleted. The assertion above concerning "heavy advertising" is an outright lie. My active contributions to the Empire of Atlantium page in 2004 have been limited almost entirely to formatting changes, spelling corrections and very minor correction of factual inaccuracies. Aside from that I have reverted multiple vandalism attempts against the article by Wik, and most recently by the sockpuppet Natryn. Indeed, as the page edit history clearly shows, the majority of content changes have been instituted by many other editors, without any intervention at all from me. Furthermore I did not nominate Empire of Atlantium as a featured article as claimed by GeneralPatton - which constitutes a second outright lie by that editor within the context of this RfA. In fact I voted against the article's candidacy. As the basis of GeneralPatton's RfA has been shown to be based on irrefutably false statements, and as he/she him/herself has admitted below that he/she has no editorial dispute with me, I see no basis for arbitration with him/her: --Gene_poole 02:52, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * I'd like to point to User:Samboy/George, where his behavior is described in much more detail, as well as his response and some further looks into to his way of doing things and his attitude (User:Gene_Poole/samboy) like this Usenet discussion . And here&#8217;s an example of his revert war with his multiple breakings of the three revert rule and continued even though he was warned by several users on his talk that it's against our policy. Here is another example; this time with eight reverts in a five-hour period, again he continued, even though he was warned. Gene_poole I&#8217;ve also asked you to restore what I&#8217;ve written on your user talk, since you are now by concealing it, making it look like it was some vulgar personal attack, which it was certainly not.GeneralPatton 03:08, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Gene_poole has violated the three revert rule once again [.http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Micronation&action=history], seven reverts in a 24 hour period. GeneralPatton 00:29, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: The 3 revert rule does not apply to vandalism, which I have properly reported.--Gene_poole 00:36, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: This is only vandalism is "Gene Poole"'s head. Samboy 00:36, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * All these revert wars you have engaged in have not been over vandalism but because of your differences with other editors. So according to your logic User:Danny is a vandal, right? GeneralPatton 00:45, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Here’s an another example, while promoting his own project, Gene Poole has removed references to numerous other “micronations” he deems “fantasy” and “not relevant” while adding his own creation to the list, , , , , , , , , , in the case of the “Empire of Pacifica” he went so far as calling it “rubbish” . In this edit alone he removed links to three other micronations (Kingdom of Hanover, Kingdom of Greenia and Principality of Sarmatia) while furthering the advertisement of Atlantium. , and in this one “Kingdom of Babkha”, “Fourth Republic of Baracão” , “Feianovan Commune” . GeneralPatton 23:58, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is really the most egregious part of his self-promotion strategy. There could hardly be a sillier micronation than his own "Empire of Atlantium", yet he has the nerve to remove references to, and vote for the deletion of articles about, other micronations, as part of a plan to artifically install "Atlantium" as one of a select group of only a few "significant" micronations. It would be of no use to him to have Atlantium only listed as one of a list of 100 micronations, so while defending Atlantium he opposes most other similar entities. At the same time, he wants to associate Atlantium with vastly more important entities, for example by adding links to a website he made with informations about real ephemeral entities like Biafra and Katanga - but also, you guessed it, Atlantium. And removing those inappropriate links is, of course, "vandalism". Gzornenplatz 00:10, Sep 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * The purpose of any article is to give an overview of the phenomenon it describes. It cannot, be exhaustive - particularly if, as in this case, there are tens of thousands of micronations in existence. Wikipedia can and should only list those micronations whose existence is documented in third party sources, and which illustrate specific contentions within the article. It should be noted that Gzornenplatz, has been an extremely vocal supporter of numerous votes to delete numerous micronations from Wikipedia, so his views on this subject are hardly unbiased. --Gene_poole 00:38, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * The fact is that you’ve inserted your own project into the Micronation article while systematically taking out most others. . While at the same time you had been inserting links to imperial-collection.net, a website that is owned by you . You’ve also requested deletions of articles about some other micronations while protesting loudly when your was listed for deletion, going so far as to messaging more then a dozen users and apparently instructing them to vote in order to save the article about your “empire”.GeneralPatton 02:11, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * I have substantially re-written the Micronation article, almost from scratch, over a long period of more than a year, in association with numerous other editors, the vast majority of whom have made dozens of positive, documented, verifiable contributions which I have neither challenged nor even commented on.
 * The great majority of the micronations described within the article were inserted, described and linked to by me. Why you believe that the contribution of large volumes of valid content constitutes "self promotion" is anyone's guess, but given your recent unprompted posting of abuse to my talk page I do not find your actions particularly surprising.
 * I have certainly removed numerous irrelevant, non-notable and promotional insertions concerning micronations not specifically referenced by the article. There is nothing whatsoever wrong with this. Each and every instance has been documented with a reason for removal, and none have been challenged (except by you, today).


 * Bit the fact that still remains and the issue you have avoided completely is that while you yourself inserted the link to your own Atlaneum project at the Micronation article, you have systematically purged numerous other microstates out of that article, going so far as listing for deletion the articles concerning your “rival” microstates. A conflict of interest if there ever was one. GeneralPatton 04:19, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * I did indeed originally include a reference to Atlantium within the Micronation article, in a paragraph that describes the disproportionate number of micronations that arose in Australia in the final decades of the 20th century. Atlantium is obviously one of those, and as it has been documented as such in numerous press articles, radio interviews and television stories round the world it is obviously as relevant as any of the others. Indeed, specifically excluding it is factually incorrect - however in order to avoid further conflict on the matter, and because it already has a dedicated article, I have elected not to fight for its continued inclusion - although if other editors decide to reinsert it in the future I will certainly support them.--Gene_poole 04:41, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * "Gene Poole" is inaccurate when he alledges that "none [ of my deletions of links to competing micronations ] have been challenged". I challenged one of his deletions here.  Here is another example of "Gene Poole" deleting content concerning other micronations, and forcing another editor to revert his changes. Samboy 03:41, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * In fact the history of the Micronation article is riddled with Gene Poles revert wars over links with about a dozen different editors . GeneralPatton 03:55, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Here is another edit war over deleting links to Micronations competing with his own Empire of Atlantium: (begin list) one two three four five six.   Samboy 04:17, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Correction: None of my edits have been challenged by by editors who are not cranks. --Gene_poole 03:47, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Correction: None of my edits have been challenged by by editors who are not cranks:
 * Again, Gene Poole demonstrates his contemptuous attitude and the fact that he has trouble communicating in a productive way with people of differing views than his. GeneralPatton 04:12, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * The first instance cited by Samboy shows my deletion of a reference interpolated by a very well known, highly abusive crank editor who is also well known in the micronation community as being a complete raving lunatic - IndigoGenius. This editor believes himself to be a "genius" and a "god" who will "judge" everyone who disagrees with him at the Apocalypse. This crank editor published numerous original research articles in Wikipedia, most of which have been deleted via the usual processes. Here is the most recent published example of contempt for Wikipedia community standards by IndigoGenius: . It is interesting to note that Samboy actively encouraged IndigoGenius on several occasions.
 * The second reference cited by Samboy, The Heathen Republic of Vinland "The Heathen Republic of Vinland" is a link to a porn site, which I properly deleted from the article.
 * I have provided no reference to an edit war over deleting a link to http://heathenrepublic.net/, which is now a porn site. What I have reference to is a case of "Gene Poole" deleting over half of the Micronation article (which he now alleges is an editing mistake), and an edit war over the inclusion of Feianovan Commune, a legitimate Micronation which he dismissed as an "irrelevant link".  In other words, 1) "Gene Poole" claims to have never been challenged over deleting a link on the micronation page 2) GeneralPatton and myself show, well, irrefutable evidence that his removals have been challenged 3) He presents false evidence in reply to our rebuttal.  Samboy 04:37, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Samboy appears not to understand the nature of his own evidence, where he cites the following, which clearly shows my deletion of a porn site from the Micronation article.--Gene_poole 04:50, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * It was not a porn site at the time "Gene Poole" deleted the link. A whois record shows that the porn domain in question was registered on August 2, 2004, and The WayBack Machine shows that the page in question was a link to a micronation in mid-2003 (see http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://heathenrepublic.net ).  The deletion in question was done on July 29, 2003 and the edit summary by "Gene Poole" is "Deleted imaginary nation", not "Deleted porn site".  Samboy 05:02, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * So, on review, your evidence shows that in 2003 I deleted a link to what I apparently clearly stated at the time was an imaginary nation. That imaginary nation was deleted by me because it had no documented existence whatsoever outside of its own website, and was not referenced within the context of the Micronation article. In other words, it was not notable at all. Subsequently that micronation - which only ever existed as a website - disappeared completely. This clearly supports the validity of my reasonng in originally deleting it - unless of course you wish to promote the ludicrous assertion that the Micronation article should list each and every micronation with 1 web page that has ever existed.--Gene_poole 05:30, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Do you want to claim that your own project is any less "imaginary" than all other micronations? And you’ve purged numerous micronations from that page, while at the same time listing your own. I should also note that for instance, “Empire of Septempontia” and The Solomonic Empire of Attera  just some of the micronation he purged from the Micronation artice, hve web-forums that are far more active,  than the one over at the Empire of Atlantium .GeneralPatton 05:47, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Firstly, Atlantium is not my project, nor is it a web-based discussion forum. Atlantium is an organisation that produces physical evidence of its existence, interacts with other organizations and has active members in dozens of countries. Secondly, I do not intend to claim that Atlantium is less imaginary than most micronations. I will state it unequivocally. And I can support that statement with multiple media references as I have done repeatedly in the past.

--Gene_poole 06:17, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * You have to go through a lot of flamage with "Gene Poole" before he provides the links supporting the noteworthyness his own micronation: A single offhand mention in a Guardian article, and some press clippings he has kept himself on the Atlantium site here. Beneath all of his nonstop personal attacks and rants of  "irrefutable evidence", this is what you really find.  My issue with "Gene Poole" is that he needs to stop attacking anyone who questions the validity of his micronation, and provide evidence instead of empty claims of "irrefutable evidence" and attacking the person who disagrees with him.  He needs to be put on a "no personal insults" parole, and quite frankly, a "no empty claims" parole.  He also needs to be barred from editing any micronation page (Micronation, Empire of Atlantium, Sealand, etc.) because, he obviously has a conflict of interest concerning micronations, and because he gets too emotional and savagely attacks other editors when he gets involved with these pages.  I mean, in my case, he should have started off with a simple "I feel Atlantium is supported because of this Guardian article and because of some press cippings I have kept myself" instead of his usual rants (which he has posted in this thread for the arbitrators to read) about "crank editors", "crackpots", "irrefutable evidence" and what not. Samboy 06:08, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * The third reference cited by Samboy is an obvious editing error that was corrected by another editor.
 * These references show how irrational Samboy's fixation on me has become. His desperation at clutching at straws in this manner shows that pure unadulterated spitefulness is his only real motivation. --Gene_poole 04:21, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)--Gene_poole 03:47, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Concerning article deletions, I have nominated or voted to delete many articles that are not notable, and to retain many articles that are notable. Drawing the attention of editors I knew would be interested in a third deletion attempt of the Empire of Atlantium article made on spurious grounds by the crank editor Belgsoc (who incidentally, was responsible for documented instances of vandalism which included blanking a VfD discussion and removing a VfD tag from an article, on 3 separate occasions) was and is entirely within my rights. Your suggestion that I instructed people to vote is another example of your shameless use of outright lies to support of your POV. I did not instruct anyone to do anything. I merely described the circumstances of the VfD and suggested that if they were so inclined they could review it themselves.
 * Gene Pools seems to display a contempt of most other editors and “micronations”, calling everyone with a different opinion or opposing him “crank editors” “vandals”, “irrelevant”… While at the same time his own actions are to him indisputable and his projects “relevant”. The fact that he’s listed “rival” micronations for deletion accusing them of being “irrelevant” tells a lot. And i've never said you've "instructed" them, i've said "apparently instructing", as in how it looks to an outside observer, please don't bend my words.GeneralPatton 04:09, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * I do not need to "bend" your words. Your own irrefutable use of outright lies when originally listing this spurious RfA within an hour of your first contact with me - an editor with whom you have had no prior contact - has already been documented. Others can draw their own conclusion from this. --Gene_poole 04:26, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * You still haven’t answered most of what I’ve said. Instead you’re just continuing your ad hominem and disdainful attacks (“spurious”, “crank editors”,… ) while avioding the real issues. You’ve engaged in savage revert wars over the Decimal calendar article, as you insisted on the mention of your micronation in the article., now tell me that’s not self-advertising. Your own contempt for our rules and other is best shown in your response when Danny told you that it’s not our policy to remove comments from talk pages, to which you nonchalantly responded “Well we ought to review our policy”. GeneralPatton 04:39, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Concerning the external links to . Firstly, several of those links specifically those on the Hutt River Province and Republic of Minerva pages) were inserted entirely without my knowledge by other editors who obviously found the site while researching the articles to which it is undoubtedly relevant. Secondly, irrespective of the source of the insertion, the website I own and manage is internationally recognised as constituting the only reliable and complete online source of comprehensive data on the subject of micronational stamps, coins. medals, flags and related artefacts. This has been recognised in documented specialist publications and periodicals, by international collector organizations, and by the publisher of a major international coin catalogue amongst others. I have cited a number of these specifically on the relevant talk pages. Any suggestion that the material contained within the site is somehow "invalid" is irrefutably false. --Gene_poole 03:09, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Response concerning Samboy: This editor is a malicious crank. He and Gzornenplatz were extremely vocal proponents in the most recent attempt to delete the Empire of Atlantium article. Since failing in that endeavour he has stalked me relentlessly. In fact, virtually all of Samboy's dozens of edits in August and September relate to me . He seems to believe that he is some sort of one-man Wiki Police Force - even to the extent of publishing extended rants on subjects that pre-date by many months his own involvement with Wikipedia - the present RfA being a case in point. I venture to suggest that Samboy's edit history clearly shows an editor who lacks all sense of rational perspective, and that his bizarre fixation on me is totally outside the bounds of acceptable behaviour. His mania extends as far as publishing abuse about me on his personal website and on Wikipedia itself . Some of his documented actions constitute potentially criminal behaviour. With respect to the "content disputes" Samboy claims to have been engaged in with me, I have in all cases cited 3rd party sources in support of my position on relevant talk pages. Samboy has either simply dismised out of hand or ignored these references. Those reviewing this RfA should take note that Samboy's raft of allegations have been made by an editor who has contributed almost nothing of any value to Wikipedia during his very brief period of involvement. That needs to be weighed against the many hundreds of positive, almost totally uneventful contributions I have made, in full co-operation with dozens of other editors since early 2003. --Gene_poole 02:17, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Response to "Gene Poole"'s response: Instead of addressing the issues of his behavior on Wikipedia and the edit wars he gets in (not to mention the history of his hostility on the internet), he tries to divert these issues by engaging in Ad_hominem. Even if I am the grinch (which, hopefully, I'm not), it doesn't change the issues concerning "Gene Poole"'s behavior.  I'm also not the only person he has called a "crank editor"; he has called many people "crank editors" and "crackpots".  Samboy 07:04, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Here are citations of "Gene Poole" calling other editors cranks: one two three Samboy 19:58, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * I would like to point out that I feel that arbitration is appropriate concerning "Gene_poole"'s actions. For example, he constantly gets in edit wars on the Micronation page and posts inflamitory comments.  Samboy 00:00, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * The request for mediation between "Gene Poole" and myself has been declined. So, we either arbitrate this, or we do nothing.  Either one is fine with me.  Samboy 21:14, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Comments regarding Arbitrators' votes and comments
I just want to make it clear that I&#8217;ve had no personal editorial conflict with User:Gene Poole, however I was moved to request arbitration after observing and studying his editorial history and consulting other wikipedians. The fact that he systematically erased my comments on his talk page, calling them "trolling" also didn&#8217;t help. GeneralPatton 20:54, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I also want to make it clear that I&#8217;ve initially raised this request just by myself, and not in partnership with User:Samboy, he merely attached himself along due to his history and prior conflicts with User:Gene_Poole. GeneralPatton 02:28, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The arbitrators have asked for a history of people trying to bring up issues with "Gene Poole" and him ignoring people. There are a number of examples of this. I will bring up just two examples: in April, "Gene Poole" was told of the three-revert rule. Despite this, he continued to do more than three reverts in a day: this being a recent example. Another time, he continually tried reverting the talk page for Empire of Atlantium to remove a comment he didn't like: one two three four five At this point, he was told to not remove the comment in question, but he refused to listen to this administrator, and tried removing the comment in question four more times before giving up: one two three four. This shows a complete unwillingness to listen to other editors or administrators; he is completely unwilling to reason with anyone who he feels disagress with him. He also has a history of being very abusive and engaging in personal attacks with anyone who disagrees with him; details on my page about him. "Gene Poole" needs to be barred from editing Empire of Atlantium, barred from making personal insults to people, and barred from reverting other people's edits or otherwise getting in to edit wars. Samboy 05:58, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Comment: None of the instances cited above show any interaction between myself and Samboy, as they all pre-date his arrival on Wikipedia. They therefore have no relevance to any RfA brought by him. They are however a good example of the extent of Samboy's bizarre fixation with me.--Gene_poole 07:48, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * [Oops, I meant to place my comment in Cantus v. Guanaco.] [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk)]] 14:28, Sep 4, 2004 (UTC)


 * These are just two examples of a pattern of behavior, Peter. Do you want other examples?  Samboy 08:19, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes. In fact, I can give one right now: He tried to list you on Vandalism in Progress, but it was removed. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk)]] 15:10, Sep 4, 2004 (UTC)


 * In fact, the allegation of vandalism in question was reinserted by "Gene Poole" after being removed; it was removed twice by two different editors. His response, when I put him to task on the Micronation talk page was "Those reviewing this page may wish to note Samboy's (a) use of personal abuse above, and (b) continued failure to respond to or cite sources to support the irrefutably false content he is attempting to interpolate into this article".  In other words, he engaged in his typical pattern of threats and intimidation instead of adressing the issue.  His calling of edit wars vandalism, as pointed out by GeneralPatton, is a pattern:  example one example two three four five six seven eight nine ten eleven twelve etc. Samboy 19:15, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Gene Poole is keen to call any editorial dispute he has “vandalism”, although he’s been told that he’s misusing the word, he’s continued doing so quite fervently. It’s just one of many reasons for this arbitration. GeneralPatton 18:29, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * The editors above do not appear to understand the term "vandalism" as it is defined by current Wikipedia policy. In all of the instances cited above Samboy and Gzornenplarz have repeatedly attempted to either interpolate content that is irrefutably false, or remove content which is irrefutably valid. In all cited instances I have cited 3rd party sources to support the inclusion of valid data, or the removal of false data. They have ignored or dismissed this out of hand. Alleged "content disputes" have nothing whatosoever to with any of the cited instances. They are all clear and unequivocal instances of outright, overt vandalism. It should also be pointed out that citations 5-9 in particular are totally spurious and actually show an instance of sockpuppet vandalism that was accepted as such when listed on Vandalism in Progress. When the Natryn sockpuppet was warned by another editor to cease vandalising the article or face a ban, they immediately did so. Samboy's use of spurious information of this nature shows the extent to which his fixation on me has caused him to lose all sense of rational perspective. --Gene_poole 22:54, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Is there anyone out there besides "Gene Poole" who seriously thinks the edits he was reverting were reverts of vandalism? Samboy 02:48, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Note above another example of Samboy failing completey to address evidence of his documented unacceptable behaviour. Instead of responding to my assertion concerning his attemptes at interpolating data, he instead asks an irrelevant rhetorical question, designed to lend validity to the vandalism (acknowledged as such by others) of a sockpuppet. This is symptomatic of his stalking technique, and shows that he is motivated solely by a high level personal dislike of me, rather than by any real concern for article content, as he loudly proclaims. --Gene_poole 03:37, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * I would like to add that if there is a crackpot here, it is Gene_poole, whose entity is known as the Crankiest micronation of them all outside the Wikipedia, which is already, quite frankly, not much of an authority on the Micronational Community to begin with... Gene Poole hasn't just deleted a whole range of micronations whose existence he's well aware of, because he has even spoken to these folks in micronational forums, and representing himself as a much more admirable man than the low-life he actually is. Gene Poole hasn't just nullified evidence in the Wikipedia of micronations who are run by persons with much more notable contributions than his in terms of micronational history. He has also deleted an entire class of micronations. It seems Gene Poole wishes to write about Atlantium, his own pet project, but wishes to bury all evidence of nations which are in fact technologically and morally superior to his pathetic Sydney apartment, nations whose Internet infrastructure alone compares well with territories like the Falkland Islands. The way I see it, he shouldn't even be allowed to touch the Micronation page simply because he is the Emperor of a micronation. The fact that he does, and continues to do so, hardly fulfills the Wikipedia's own NPOV standards. You can't be both a micronational, as well as a one-sided critic of micronations, and be entirely objective, even if you tried, and Gene Poole doesn't even try! I still don't understand why the Atlantium page was not deleted, and it seems to have more lives than a cat, perhaps also because some Admins in the Wikipedia are helping to keep it alive, while the same usually try to bury all evidence of the existence of other micronational entities. I also resent that Gene_poole has become here also a judge of my character and moral fiber. People get sued for a lot less in the United States and Europe, and I'm a citizen of both, I will have the Wikipedia note. What right does Gene_poole have to judge me, and why should his mere words be admitted as final evidence here? I'll have you note that I'm no longer contributing my micronational expertise to the Wikipedia, and I resent the fact that Gene_poole is still calling me all sorts of names, and without repercussions to his Wikipedia status. For a more balanced view on myself, I suggest that Gene_poole and others read This Bio of the President of the Fifth World Council. Gene_poole is no micronational expert, is not objective about micronations by any standard, including Wiki's own, and he certainly has never known me, either personally or professionally. --IndigoGenius 20:46, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)