Archive from April 5 to May 29.
Thanks for your support on the RfC and the deletion request. I'm going to try to change the focus there a little (later when I have time). Because all of the controversy around my edits stems from a disagreement of fact. I say parapsychology is a scientific field. I don't know whether you know about parapsychology, but its worst/best critics, like Carroll who is the author of the Skeptic's Dictionary, James Randi, John Alcock etc. all say it is a science. It has peer-reviewed journals, institutional support, and a long institutional history, and affiliation with the AAAS.
So, I think it is a scientific field. And all my edits would be non-controversial if this were acknowledged. Thus, this is the real issue. My behavior -the main stuff they are complaining about- stems totally from this. Martinphi ( Talk Ψ Contribs) 22:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
The April 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
Delivered by Grafikbot 11:37, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Wooyi. The editor did indeed remove the Infobox--which, by definition, should contain no essential information not also covered in the article. At the same time, the editor made substantive additions and changes, properly sourced, to the main text of article. You may have a difference of opinion on his edits; he may have a difference of opinion about the nature and/or contents of your infobox. But, even aside from assuming good faith--which you didn't do--what happened was very clearly not vandalism:
Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. The most common types of vandalism include the addition of obscenities to pages, page blanking, or the insertion of bad (or good) jokes or other nonsense. Fortunately, these types of vandalism are usually easy to spot. Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Apparent bad-faith edits that do not make their bad-faith nature inarguably explicit are not considered vandalism at Wikipedia.
That's our policy on what is and is not considered vandalism. I look forward to seeing an interesting debate on the article's Talk page. Best, Dan.— DCGeist 17:14, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
Archive4, thanks for your support in my successful
RfA. As the picture shows, the goddesses have already bestowed my new weapons, |
Do you know if any of the bots (Smackbot) were reprogrammed to date it yet? Mr.Z-man talk ¢ 23:12, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
I closed this discussion you started, without blocking. Mainly, this is because you didn't first contact the user with your concern: you did so after making the listing. This may seem like splitting hairs, but the point of being required to bring up your concern with the user first is so that they can simply agree to change usernames. If you think the name is so bad that it requires immediate blocking without discussion, try WP:AIV. Mango juice talk 16:43, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Alabamaboy, thanks for creating the article Spamigation, for a long time I didn't know it was created by you. It was an important subject but often ignored. Cheers! Wooyi Talk, Editor review 00:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
ANswers.com ( largely being a mirror of WP) and wikifur are both considered unreliable for several reasons. Both are "self-published sources" which can only be used in direct refence to themselves. Also neither have any dedicated fact checking departent outside of their own editors. As a rule of thumb RS should all be from professinal or journalistic sources. Hope that answers your question. I would also check WP:ATT and WP:V for additional info. NeoFreak 17:24, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Reverted. In situations like that, you have absolutely no need to check google. If it doesn't have a source in the article, it can go. This is true of most information on Wikipedia, but if it is regarding a living person, get rid of it immidiately, even if you think it might be true. WP:BLP makes is clear that unsourced remarks regarding living people should be removed. Thanks for the heads up. -- Deskana (ya rly) 22:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
I mean that I'm the one who proposed a website to be blacklisted. It's my first time doing something like this, so I thought I should confirm that I'm TOhru Honda13, since I left a link to my talk page at the blacklist thing as my signature over there. Perhaps I should change the wording... and you asked what my medical problems were? I'm a tad overweight for my age. My nurse says that I have a condition that can lead to juvenile diabetes.... last year. I'm failing to get healthier. That's about all. Tohru Honda13 02:29, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
It should be in your inbox. John Reaves (talk) 05:32, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
I have answered your question on my RfA. Thanks for asking. Danny 14:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Wooyi. I figured I should mention that you have voted both support and oppose on Steacker's RfA. Would you take a further look at it when you get a chance? Thanks! -- PS2pcGAMER ( talk) 22:52, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
sorry i just hate blagojevich
Several users have responded to the point you made: you may like to check their replies out. Cheers, Moreschi Want some help? Ask! 19:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Sure No problem I look forward to making more contributions to the project. Quadzilla99 12:39, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Since you admitted an adiction to caffine (like 90% of America), see this Kronik Energy Drink. CASCADIA Howl/ Trail 21:23, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
Archive4, thank you very much for your support in my successful
RfA. I am thankful and humbled by the trust that the community has placed in me, |
Hi just to let you know that I have reviewed the article you nominated for GA status. Unfortuntely I have failed it this time. However I have placed my concerns and reasons as to why the article failed GA status on the article talk page: Talk:Harry Pregerson. My biggest reason was that the article wasnt broad enough. Of positive note the article is well written and well referenced and is well on its way to GA status. If you fix my concerns than send me a message and ill be happy to review again. Furthermore if you have any questions about my review please feel free to message me also. Kind regards, LordHarris 00:28, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi, as a new member to the project, I've started an article which needs some expansion - please can you help?? Thanks, -- SunStar Net talk 15:54, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi-
I think this may be the second time I've edited. Still getting a feel for it.
It was a total removal of a brief passage, but the passage was so badly written as to be almost incoherent. I would have been guessing at the intent if I had tried to repair it. And, as the subject (the murder of Sharon Tate and her companions) was covered, in detail, in the very next paragraph, it was redundant as well. The clean removal seemed the best fix. Would this be considered one of the exceptions of the "no removal" guidelines, or should I just take that as a rule from here out?
Thanks,
DF dosflores@juno.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.192.51.46 ( talk) 04:11, 16 April 2007 (UTC).
Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 06:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. Much obliged. Cheers, Moreschi Want some help? Ask! 14:20, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Wooyi, I'm still feeling my way around image copyright policies. It seems to me that with civil war images, any copyright should have expired a long time ago--if I remember right anything published before 1915 should be in the public domain. If the website is claiming copyright, though, I'd be reluctant to say otherwise. Could you send me the link? I'll take a look at the copyright policies and see what I can find. --Akhilleus ( talk) 02:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, here we go, from Wikipedia:Public domain: "In the U.S., any work published before 1 January 1923 anywhere in the world[1] is in the public domain." Complications arise if the work was published in another country, of course. --Akhilleus ( talk) 02:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Unterweger.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 03:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Iamunknown 03:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Transnistria. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Transnistria/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Transnistria/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, David Mestel( Talk) 22:07, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello Minskist popper, thank you for supporting
my RfA!
I was promoted with a final tally of 68/12/0.
Also, please wish a Happy Birthday to
Her Majesty the Queen.
Vivat Regina!
Well, Honda Pilot got caught with checkuser and banned (puppet of JD), but the rest of the case was "inconclusive". Darn. I was more after Uninsured Driver/Jeff Defender (and whoever is ultimately actually behind those) than HP which was rarely activated, but oh well at least it's something. Thanks for the help with that. The results are here: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Jeff Defender. — SMcCandlish [ talk] [ cont ‹(-¿-)› 17:06, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Fontana is not a reliable source for MacRae's employment history which was explicitly under dispute. -- ScienceApologist 20:00, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Destructo 087 has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Dude, I'm soo sorry Wooyi! I completely forgot about your email! To prove I am Tohru Honda13, I shall reply to it ASAP. Thank you for your concern, Wooyi. I was touched. Peace man, The Hippie 04:45, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you also! I noticed that you translated part of the "Influence in Malaya" section, which is great. There's just one more section to go, and then it's general formatting stage. ( AQu01rius • Talk) 16:39, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
One word: Oops. :) — $PЯING rαgђ 23:59, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
谢谢您,干杯
perfectblue 06:35, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm working on a few papers and projects at the moment, but I'll give you some information as soon as I'm finished with everything (by this coming Monday). In the mean time, here is a little quip by William James:
Some observations of the effects of nitrous oxide gas-intoxication [...] have made me understand better than ever before both the strength and the weakness of Hegel's philosophy.
Simões ( talk/ contribs) 19:10, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
I Destructo_087, challenge you to find my hidden page on my Userpage. Have Fun.-- Destructo 087 03:45, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Wow, my first barnstar. :) I appreciate it, thanks. I meant to ask you earlier, do you think it would be a good idea to list crime-related articles and categories in the to do list or would it be easier just to keep them on the talk page ? Also, I was thinking of bringing up the idea for a joint collaberation between the British, Australian and main crime page to collaberate on a crime article. Maybe the each project could have a join collaberation of the week project ? MadMax 04:47, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! Just add these two things after your text: Think outside the box 12:23, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
|} |} |
The May 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 17:00, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, that was pretty funny. I wasn't sure whether Congressman Westmoreland got to 3 or 4 of the ten commandments (Since Jon Stewart stated that only one of the commandment he stated was edited out). Esperanza Ortega 20:13, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
That oppose on mastcells rfa was less than constructive. Why not explain your rationale for those of us that have no idea what your are talking about. It currently reads like a rant and says more about you than him. David D. (Talk) 20:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
In regards to the recent cfd nomination of Category:Gangs by ethnicity as well as virtually all existing ethnic and historically related street gang categorires on Wikipedia haveen propsed for deletion/remaning. As mentioned at WP:CRIME, I feel this is a serious issue which is becoming more and more frequent in recent months. It seems crime related categories, lists and articles seem to be under attack from what I can tell are editors far less knowledgable on the subject. MadMax 19:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Wooyi,
Yes, I made the mistake of adding my last name, and Secretlondon was kind enough to change my username. Zucchini Marie 18:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
You might recognize someone on this list. Zucchini Marie 19:43, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Nearly all of his socks are blatantly obvious, so it's not enough to call him "suspected." Blueboy 96 20:49, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
On the paranormal arbitration I pretty much agree with your views and try to be moderate, but the sides seem to be irreconcilable, how do u view about it? Wooyi Talk to me? 21:41, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
You commented on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qian Zhijun. It has been closed early after a confusing and IMO unfortunate sequence of events. I have now listed it on Deletion Review. You may wish to express your views there. DES (talk) 01:39, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Per WP:FU, the image can't be used in the infobox of the article. It may be able to be used in the body of the article though I'm not sure of that. There is only so much legal-eze that I can store in my brain as far as what qualifies as fair use, where we can use certain images, etc. and I know that the images in infoboxes are supposed to be free, not copyrighted as the Kata Kärkkäinen image is. Dismas| (talk) 03:37, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Neither of those links are my hidden page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Destructo 087 ( talk • contribs) 22:38, 13 May 2007 (UTC). User:Destructo 087/Userboxes/Fooled2 You can have this since you found it the wrong way.
Thanks for letting me know. I've added you to the list of involved editors; once you bring a case, you're involved. Jayjg (talk) 01:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
The user meant User:Yagikaru, not User:Yagi Karu. Zucchini Marie → Complain here Please sign! 01:56, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that you took part in State terrorism by United States of America discussion for deletion. After the article has survived many deletions, you may be interested that there is a user right now who is deleting large portions of the article. 69.150.209.15 17:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for participating in my RFA, which passed with 53-1-0. I will put myself into the various tasks of a administrator immediately, and if I make any mistakes, feel free to shout at me or smack me in my head.
謝謝你的祝賀。 Aquarius • talk 01:18, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I, Wooyi, hereby award this barnstar to you, Thoric, for your outstanding and diligent contributions to drug-related articles. Wooyi
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 16:27, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Yea I made it, if for no other reason to piss off self-righteous admins like Cyde. I'm glad you agree with me, as is there no reason whatsoever to delete it. Eridani 21:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for making the new box and for your support on the issue. I appreciate it. - Eridani 22:08, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/PalestineRemembered. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/PalestineRemembered/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/PalestineRemembered/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, -- Srikeit 05:32, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
-- Please read the note here Yuanchosaan Salutations! 08:35, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
I added a late reply to your question:
-- Teratornis 14:44, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Completely understand how it could be misinterpreted. And John McCain used to be one of the good republicans until he sold out on torture. -- St.daniel Talk 22:18, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
You had no right to claim my good faith edits were "vandalism." I used the discussion page to explain my position carefully, and removed an egregiously biased passage that claimed certain groups were "extremist." BulldogPete 03:32, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Just popping by to let you know that I've finally (sorry to take so long!) replied to the comment you left on my talk page. If there's more to say we can continue there. — The Storm Surfer 13:25, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
I've left a reply on ScienceApologist's talk page which I think is relevant, and repeated here, [3] in case it is removed. Everyone is equal on Wikipedia, though I tend to have more respect for those who don't "exaggerate" -- Iantresman 13:37, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi, don't worry about it, I can handle polite disagreement. It seems that you are advocating for the "suicidals" as a sort of pop-identity for the disenfranchised and the moribund. I don't agree with this assumption and I don't think that it is pertinent to the deletion discussion. The potential for abuse and disruption is clear, that is what matters most. Cheers, ˉˉ anetode ╦╩ 19:56, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Dear Wooyi,
I dedicated this poem to our mutual friend Allison just a couple of days ago, but I feel it is most apt to gift it to you now as well.
No matter what is tormenting you, trust me, the clouds will pass - they always do. And in the end, all that will be left if you decide to leave in disgrunt will be the emptyness of not taking part anymore into a project you love, and into which you've invested good effort and excellent work. I have seen you around a lot, and I know you're an excellent contributor, destined to be a great admin in the near future. You represent some of the best of our encyclopedia. Please, don't think about leaving. Love, Phaedriel - 04:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
To which I have replied. I got your message right when you sent it. So I took a while replying. The Hippie 04:29, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi Wooyi,
I am fine with the block on the article. I note you requested a block for the article immediately after my edits. This may have been a coincidence, so would you please identify what you see as the "Dispute, Edit warring". Is it (a) over the "editing by Gozer Media" paragraph or (b) over the other edits done by 76.80.202.216? I assume (a). Of note, various edits suggest 76.80.202.216 may be a sock puppet for user Soonsuit. This user originally added the "editing by Gozer Media" paragraph. Do you know... Is there a way to determine in Wikipedia if an IP address and a user ID are linked to the same IP address?
For the record, it appears that I was the only one trying to delete this paragraph (I placed the reasons on the talk page) and no one warred with me over this (I only deleted it once—well twice if you count the fact that the same paragraph was simultaneously in two locations in the article). User 76.80.202.216 did a move that might have looked like a deletion — was just trying to move it from a place lower down in the article to the Synopsis — not sure you picked that up. It will be interesting to see if user 76.80.202.216 or Soonsuit chooses to participate at the talk page — I predict not. By the way, I encourage you to add your comment at the talk page — if only to say I blocked this and here is why. thanks— WikiLen 12:53, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't think you should leave. I understand that the Wikistress can get too much sometimes, and that some users can be obnoxious. There have been many times in the past when I've considered leaving, such as after my first (failed) RfA in November 2006. But what I've learnt about Wikipedia is that, for all its innumerable faults, there's nothing else in the world quite like it; and I'm sure that you'll want to return eventually. So go on wikibreak, but come back when you're ready. Wal ton Need some help? 15:56, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Wal
ton
Need some help? has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Thanks for your vote of confidence, my friend. But foreseeably the AntiNPOV bellwethers will come with their flocks. In my opinion, it would not be a good Wikipedia community event. If you could get the endorsements of the honorable users User:ScienceApologist, User:SlimVirgin, User:Jossi, User:Mel Etitis, User:Slrubenstein, and User:FeloniousMonk for your proposal, then I would agree, but otherwise I cannot. In any case, thanks again for your vote of confidence, my friend. -- Rednblu 17:34, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Wooyi,
Thanks for the kind message on my talk page. I'm sorry to hear you are leaving Wikipedia. I can empathise with your reasons, which is why perhaps I would be in two minds about standing for adminship. If you do decide to stay at Wikipedia, I would greatly welcome your nomination of me. Even if you don't stay around, comments like yours will be likely to support me if I ever were to run for it myself.
Hi Wooyi, I just saw your user page, and hope you don't take offense at my comment on Talk:Gordon Smith. I really don't have any problem with your comment, just some concern that as a politician headed for a potentially contentious election, Smith's page could be subjected to partisan bias in both directions. I've worked a lot on that page, and I suppose I'm a little protective of it, maybe overly so.
As for your departure...I hope you will stay, to whatever degree you can. Good natured sorts need to stick around, if we want WP to achieve its potential; in the end, it's as good as we all make it, and I prefer to see people sort out their differences, or at least learn ways to avoid letting differences interfere with making quality contributions...just my 2c... - Pete 01:24, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
I didn't want to put a real picture of myself, so I found that one. I apologize for what I did. Zucchini Marie → Complain here Please sign! 02:30, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Dear Wooyi, I'm so very sorry it took me a couple of days to get back to you, but I didn't want to leave your lovely and kind message unreplied. It pleased me and relieved me to see you reconsidered your decision of leaving us, because good and bright people like you are too rare to let go easily. I want you to know that, should you ever need my help, or if you ever feel like talking and blowing of some stress, my talk page will always be waiting for you. Take good care! :) Love, Phaedriel - 08:15, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Wooyi,
I do understand the difference between a joke and an insult; that's precisely why I reverted you. Jayjg (talk) 17:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
He was a famous segregationist, and you have made a straw man presentation of my views. Claiming an insult is a "jest" does not make it so, and please don't bother harassing me about this on my user Talk: page any more. Thanks. Jayjg (talk) 18:11, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Dear Wooyi,
First off, let me apologize to Durova for posting this message. She wrote on her talk page a while back that if I write her a nice letter in four months, she might reinstate me, and so I'm not trying to evade my block by writing here and on her talk page, but I felt it absolutely necessary to respond somehow to Wooyi as I was made aware of this editor's concerns for me. Anyway, if you see my talk page, I have updated it accordingly to indicate that my health has drastically improved. That's not to say that I don't still have some problems (I can no longer eat nuts, popcorn, seeds, corn, berries, etc. and my stomach doesn't look too good), but I seem to be over the really dangerous problems. I sincerely appreciate your kind efforts and concerns, as you seem to be a really good and kind person, but I do NOT expect to be dying any time soon. I am completely out of the hospital at this point. Thus, if you wish to discuss anything further with me, please do so on my talk page. If you were curious why I was blocked, it was because I created two other accounts (Wikipedian, Historian, and Friend? and Horace Horatius) out of frustration. So, you can see their edit histories to better understand Durova's intentions. I'm trying to respect her block currently and her note that if I don't create any new accounts or whatever in four months to maybe get another chance. Therefore, again, I'm truly sorry for using an anonymous IP to post this, Durova, as I'm doing my best to avoid creating any new accounts (I have not created anything after the Horace Horatius one) or anything else in the hopes that maybe several months from now you'll give me one more chance as you suggested a month or so ago, but I wanted to save you and Wooyi unnecessary trouble on my account as I should be okay. Again, your concern and efforts are admirable and really touching and I feel bad to have to use a friend's computer to reply and I hope doing so in this circumstance won't anger Durova too much, but I hope that this clarifies my situation and wish you all a pleasant day. Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles. -- 172.145.228.116 18:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
I gladly accept the nomination for Adminship. I wish you all the best in the future, whether that includes Wikipedia or not. Peace
Yes, dear Wooyi, I sent you an email a few hours ago regarding that - did it get through? Please check and let me know, k? Phaedriel - 22:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
Wooyi, many thanks for the Hugo Black award. Hope things are going well! Best, -- Alabamaboy 14:09, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Fred, I noticed you are the first to comment on the Paranormal case...but where are the other arbitrators? Wooyi Talk to me? 23:59, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry about Gordon's block, but I see it as something that was inevitable, and that would have happened sooner or later. I have constantly tried to help him, even e-mailing an arbitration committee member about the case, and asking other administrators to make sure (as far as they could) that he wasn't goaded. The problem was that Gordon was not prepared to stop annoying people. It wasn't malicious, and the administrator Marskell once compared him to a friend who talks all the way through the movie, and is therefore disruptive without intending it.
If I thought there was any possibility that Gordon would agree to stop making long posts, stop posting links to his website (I think forbidding the links on his own userpage was a bit harsh, but I'm in the minority), stop telling people that he's right and they're wrong, and not EVER, EVER, EVER try to bring any kind of case against anyone, and that he'd stick to those agreements, I'd be prepared to argue for an unblock. Just because I'm an admin does not mean that I can make him be unblocked. It would be like trying to insert your own version into an article when everyone else was against it, and Gordon certainly wouldn't help.
I don't think the block was fair or just, but I absolutely believe it was necessary. Musical L inguist 01:47, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the question on my RFA - posted a response! -- Ozgod 01:57, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks so much for supporting me in the RFA. I am grateful for your response, and it really means a lot to be appreciated. Thanks again! hmwith talk 04:19, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your speedy fix [4] to my format mistake. When I went to get it, I got an edit conflict with your fix. Thanks again! -- Kralizec! ( talk) 23:31, 29 May 2007 (UTC)