User talk:Radicalsubversiv

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please add new comments at the bottom of the page, using a new section if you're not responding to a previous discussion. Discussions about the content of articles usually belongs at the article talk page, and I reserve the right to move it there.

Contents

[edit] The Persecution of Andrew Villeneuve

I think you've gone in very hard with Andrew Villeneuve. Calling him all those names seem particularly cruel, even by our rough standards. I think it would be best to withdraw your deletion proposal while some more research is conducted. What say you JudgeRad?

Libertas

Thanks for your comments! I think Villeneuve is basically "peeking on the horizon" of encyclopedic notability, WP style. I changed my vote to keep mostly because of the strong opinions and interest expressed in the VfD. From a personal standpoint, Villeneuve sounds like someone I wouldn't trust with my coffee money (this is only a metaphorical remark), and in editorial terms, I'd prefer to see a bit more biographical information about him in the article. Wyss 00:44, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Your Personal Attacks

Radical, you have in the space of 24 hours called me a liar and that I practice deception. Is this what you mean you speak of personal attacks? Libertas

Replied on my talk page. —Charles P. (Mirv) 04:16, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I was aware that Libertas (it's a she, apparently) caused some unrest. However, I did not consider myself involved, and did not consider my comments on her 'list of shame' an attempt of dispute resolution. You may still quote me, of course, but what I said was merely based on looking on her talk page, and without any background knowledge. regards, dab (ᛏ) 07:17, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RFC

Much as I am enjoying the Request for Comment drafting, I acknowledge that it is a guilty pleasure and bad karma. I was very careful not to initiate such a process but given your pattern of abuse and trolling, a failure to counter would have created a very wrong impression. I will keep writing the RFC until I hear from you affirmatively but I would be happy not to waste the time of the Wikipedia community (which you purport to represent I noticed) with your outrageous claims and my detailed assessment of your contributions. I am not sure it is a very healthy exercise, as I'm sure you're not as bad as your worst contributions and I like to think I'm not as bad as my worst either. In any event, there seems little enthusiasm for what you're doing to me and to other users like Andrew Villeneuve, so I'd be very careful in speaking for the "Wikipedia community" in future. I'm not sure they all like what they're hearing... Libertas

[edit] Libertas RFC

I almost can't believe it took this long from someone to get fed up with Libertas enough to start an RFC, but I'm actually not suprised: I would have myself, but being thoroughly sick of Libertas I had little desire to immerse myself in her edit history sufficient to gather the evidence, let alone write the RFC. Thank you for starting this. Now we will see whether we are simply deluded and Libertas' behaviour is harmless and innocent, as she asserts.  — Saxifrage | ☎ 22:44, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Michael Sherrard

A profile I wrote on this young activist has been listed for deletion. You may want to intervene. (signed as "User:Antiwar" but edited as "Zulitz") 17:32, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)

There was no attempt to harass anyone. The profile was produced out of genuine admiration for Sherrard's record, and a belief that record has been vindicated by the conduct of the Bush Administration. The record of over thirteen hundred and fifty American soldiers dead--and no end to the killing of either Americans or Iraqis in sight--is a shameful one which vindicates the opponents of the War. That vindication will only gain force as the tragedy escalates in the months and years ahead. I believe that Sherrard and other antiwar activists of both eloquence and achievement should have their biographies profiled in the Wikipedia, and I will work--hopfully with others--to produce such profiles in the future. If standing up against great force producing policies of enormous American and international tragedy is not a sign of notability, I do not know what is."((User:Zulitz/Zulitz))") 0:06, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Excellent Work

I think your articles are nicely written and well thought out. From the articles I've read so far, they don't seem one sided at all. If my son could write as well as you do, I'd be clicking my heels. Keep up the good work. Paradigmbuff 02:06, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Personal Attacks

You have made a personal attack of sockpuppetry or impersonation of Libertas and some other charges. I will give you this opportunity to withdraw these falsehoods prior to seeking arbitration. Ollieplatt 10:03, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

In light of your continued personal attacks, I have requested arbitration against you. Ollieplatt 10:25, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)


I believe you RfA is motivated by the blog site about you. I assure you I had nothing to do with it. Ollieplatt 12:55, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Arbitration

I am enjoying your attempts to look for anything other than reasonable entries. Keep trying. I enjoyed your blog by the way "Michael Sherrard Exposed", please be assured that I will find out whether it is you trying to "frame" me to get me disqualified from Wikipedia. Ollieplatt 06:27, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ollieplatt

I'll keep an eye on him. He's a troll. RickK 06:56, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ollieplatt, too

from: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Ollieplatt

Technical evidence found by Tim Starling confirms that Libertas has multiple sockpuppet accounts. See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Libertas/Proposed decision#Sockpuppets 2.

Salazar, Ollieplatt, Razalah, Jennypratt, Suna, Dean12, Viewvista, Fylc, Billclinton, Anilingus, and Nutrosnutros are all sockpuppet accounts of one user (as acknowledged by technical evidence), likely Libertas.

Davenbelle 08:31, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Salazar et al

I've looked at a lot of the socks' "Contributions", and tried to clear-out the pov-pushing, but there's lots. (Sorry 'bout the Green Party page.) Tomorrow I want to look into Moro_Islamic_Liberation_Front && Nepalese_People's_War. Except for Ollie && Sal, I thinks the other puppets' damage is fixed. I only saw Ollie blocked, so I expect s/he's on a fixed IP, which should help. — Davenbelle 10:25, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Martin or Michael Luther King?

I looked at the discussion on Martin Luther King Jr.'s name at birth, it seems that he was actually Michael? Anyway, I leave it up to you, though you should be aware that there is an inconsistency with the Martin Luther King, Sr. page. Please change both or not at all. Tedneeman 08:28, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Libertas

FYI - Libertas and all sockpuppets are banned for a year (Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Libertas#Ban_for_disruptive_behaviour). Effective whenever a non-involved admin issues the block. --mav 00:33, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedians who blog

Hi! if you have a moment, could you please see m:Wikinews and blogs to comment? We're interested in learning how Wikinews can work with bloggers; what they might be interested in, how they can take advantage of Wikinews, how they can contribute through their blogs, etc. Thanks! Amgine/talk

[edit] Chuck F's arbitration case

A final decision has been reached in Chuck F's arbitration case. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Chuck_F#Final_decision. --mav 00:28, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup

Some people say adding tags does no good. But I have to say thanks for "cleanup" tagging Council of Conservative Citizens. The old article was horrible, copied directly from the ADL, (and which was not a work of which they could be proud). Several weeks ago I wrote a beautiful, detailed article with many sources, which I promptly lost in a crash. Your tag gave me the incentive the write at least a better stub. Thanks for the push. Cheers, -Willmcw 01:31, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Craft unionism

Took your suggestion. Also took the liberty of erasing the curse of inaccuracy/POV template. Invite further comments. 24.126.41.116 04:05, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC) (who would sign in as Italo Svevo if this computer did not freeze every time I try to log in.

[edit] Chomsky

Hi Radicalsubversiv. Reverts are, by Wikipedia convention, marked as "minor" edits. While I could have simply reverted his re-insertion of the deleted information (not deleted by me, I might add), I did him a favour instead, and left it physically there while commenting it out. I also used edit summaries to explain why. If you'd prefer I could simply hit the revert button, then there'd be no question why the revert would be marked as "minor". Jayjg (talk) 21:45, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Again, I deleted no text, merely commented it out. If I had simply hit the revert buton, the net effect would have been the same, and the "minor" edit designation would have been automatic, but it would have been significantly less friendly. A revert is a minor edit any way you slice it. Jayjg (talk) 14:56, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] NLRB long long titles

I'll take your suggestion (again). But your comment "great work" is unintentionally ironic: I did this instead of the "real" work that I came to the office to do. Thanks all the same, without any irony on my part. Italo Svevo 06:45, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Labor Wikiproject

I'm in favor of it, but what exactly does it mean? That we announce the project in order to attract contributors? Impose standards for content? List articles that need priority? Promote the good articles for recognition? Gather them up some way? I'm in favor of all of those things, but what is the process?

I'd also like to see more articles about other nations that appear to have been overlooked, Mexico in particular. Mexican union history is as rich and complex as that of the US, but we have nothing on the CTM and only a very brief piece on the PRI. Odd, considering the profusion of pages on the tiniest left sects in Sweden or the US. We may not be able to fill the gap by translating from other languages: the Spanish wikipedia has an article on Vicente Lombardo Toledano, http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicente_Lombardo_Toledano, but no discussion of the 1948 rail strike in it and no page for the CTM. The PRI article itself is not much to speak of . . . but I digress. -- Italo Svevo 01:14, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

International Workers of the World -- is my face red! or maybe reformist pink! I am deeply appreciative of your sharp eyes. -- Italo Svevo 22:59, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Calcutta -> Kolkata name change

Hi there. I noticed you voted in the Wikipedia:Naming policy poll to keep the Wikipedia policy of naming an article with the most familiar English name. You may not be aware that another attempt has begun to rename the Calcutta article to Kolkata, which is blatantly not the most common name of the city, whether it's official or not. If you want to vote on the issue you can do so at Talk:Calcutta. Cheers. -- Necrothesp 13:38, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Libertarianism in Canada and England

Looks like you're right about Australia. I'm not sure about England, but Canada has at least one Libertarian Party, which indicates that they (might?) use the term the same way as in the US. [1] I don't know much about England, but I suspect they should be removed from the list at the beginning as well. Dave 08:42, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Jay Inslee

Nice addition. However, please be aware of the distinction between "challenger" and "open seat" races -- the former is generally used only to refer to races where the incumbent is running for re-election. Inslee's 1992 race was for an open seat, as was his 1996 gubernatorial primary bid, and I've been unable to find any information on his 1988 election to the state legislature. RadicalSubversiv E 02:42, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Whoops. Should've checked whether there was an incumbent in those races. Thanks for fixing that. At some point, I'd like to make similar tables for other politicians (I just started with Washington ones because those are the ones I'm most familiar with and Inslee in particular because MCs tend to have a lot of info available and he's in the 1st district). Whether that actually is going to happen or not is debatable... Jonel 00:15, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] More schools on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion

As of March 25, 2005, there are an additional (6) articles listed for deletion under the POV notion that schools are non-notable (even though this is invalid reasoning as per the Wikipedia deletion policy). Please be aware that the following schools are actively being discussed and voted upon:

In response to this cyclical ordeal, a Schoolwatch programme has been initiated in order to indentify school-related articles which may need improvement and to help foster and encourage continued organic growth. Your comments are welcome and I thank you again for your time. --GRider\talk

[edit] Thanks on ACORN

Thanks for watching ACORN and doing the revert, I have the reference to SEIU well cited in the NRLB decision but every once in a while someone will come along and remove SEIU from being mentioned for whatever reason. --Wgfinley 07:31, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for reverting my user page. I appreciate it. --Holdek (talk) 22:13, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sockpuppet

Sockpuppet seems to be a popular expression. I am not one. I disagree with your edits to the Dean article which tag him "insurgent", "party animal" and other stupidity. How can you justify this? Lagavulin 23:03, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

In case anybody is reading this and gives a damn, Lagavulin is a sockpuppet of User:Libertas and/or User:JoeM, both of whom are currently banned from editing Wikipedia. Also, the dictionary definition of insurgent is "rebelling against the leadership of a political party", obviously an appropriate label for Dean's presidential campaign. If someone besides Lagavulin wants to come up with a less colloquial synonym for "party animal", please feel free. RadicalSubversiv E 23:08, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I am neither User:Libertas or User:JoeM, and have never been banned from Wikipedia which I have been using for over a year. You are editing an article in a manner that you cannot or chose not to defend and are using scurrilous attacks to change the subject. Attacking Dean for being an insurgent or party animal or whichever insult you can devise undermines Wikipedia's high purpose. Lagavulin 23:16, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

PS I have invited User:Libertas and User:JoeM to disassociate themselves from me. I don't know if they will but I demand that you stop falsely accusing me without evidence. I have done nothing to you to warrant your attacks. How can I possibly prove that I am not someone you say I am. I will gladly give my contact details to Wikipedia staff to discuss the matter. But I won't tolerate your continued questioning of my good faith. I didn't intend to make many edits, just to express my concerns about the bias in some articles I had read as a regular user of Wikipedia. Your attacks may be designed to stop me from removing anti-Dean bias but they will probably have the reverse effect. Lagavulin 23:39, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I'm sure it's just a coincidence that your choice of articles to "de-bias" coincides almost exactly with articles those that Libertas/Ollieplatt/etc. picked fights with me over, and that you use similarly-phrased over-the-top rhetoric and denials. It's also a coincidence that you appeared at the same time as a veritable army of "new" users began make POV-pushing and vandalizing edits to many of the same pages. RadicalSubversiv E 23:46, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I don't care what disputes you have with others, they don't involve me and I cannot imagine why you would say so. I don't wish a dispute with you of any kind. How do I make contact with Wikipedia staff to resolve the issue. I am *most* unhappy about this. I have done nothing to warrant your accusation. Lagavulin 23:52, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I would encourage you to take any complaints about my behavior to ArbCom, I'm sure they'll be very sympathetic to your plight. RadicalSubversiv E 23:57, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I don't know ArbCom, all I need is a contact on Wikipedia staff. Reviewing the pages of Libertas and JoeM, it is clear you mean no good by associating me with them. I wish for the question to be resolved quickly and for an apology. Lagavulin 00:00, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Whether or not you are a sockpuppet, your attitude is extremely obnoxious. Please review the Wikipedia help files, and familiarize with what Wikipedia is, what it is not, and how things are done here. Most of us have been very accommidating to the fact that you are new here, but you seem not want to adjust your attitude. It's wearing very thin, very fast. Again, the "Help" link in the upper left-corner box is a great starting point. Thanks. --Holdek (talk) 00:08, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

My attitude is that bias should be called bias. I'm sorry your attack piece on Oliver North is being questioned, just as Radicalsubversive's attack piece on Howard Dean is being questioned. While very different figures, the same issue is at stake, which is the facts should be recorded not just partisan opinion about the subject's enemies. Biased and factually wrong articles need to be fixed, when I realized the way of doing that I signed up as an editor and am contributing what I can (not much probably) but I can see blatant spin when I see it. I don't why we're discussing this on Radicalsubversive's page but it is now very unfortunately on the list of pages I watch. How sad, I'd prefer to be improving articles rather than responding to right-wingers and left-wingers attacks. Lagavulin 00:13, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I'm not looking for trouble, and after all, assume good faith, but are you implying that the changes made to the Karl Rove article after my own were me using a sockpuppet? Seems like a pretty serious accusation to toss around, but maybe I'm misinterpreting what you wrote. If you visit my user page you'll note that I'm not shy about taking responsibility for my changes. On an unrelated note, I think there's room to debate just how many unsourced allegations should be written into an article before it drifts away from NPOV. If someone wrote "Radical Subversive was accused of being a serial killer by a journalist in the Oregon Daily Blab, but he denied the charge," it might not warrant inclusion. I'm not saying to cut all of these things, because part of what makes Rove noteworthy is the degree of mythology that exists around him, as well as the depth of liberal animosity to him, but I do think we need to consider how much is "fair" to include. Sincerely, Kaisershatner 02:27, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, wanted to add that I took a closer look at the changes you reverted, and it's probably clear I had nothing to do with them (some things he removed I put in myself). Sorry for the misunderstanding; I still am curious about your view of my other point about NPOV allegations and rumors, though. Kaisershatner 02:36, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Pictures

Why did you remove the pictures? Those pictures are relevant, especially the one of the dead bodies. Clinton ordered and then took responsibility for that specific civilian attack. See an article titled "Civilian Deaths Inevitable In Warfare, Clinton Says" from page A11 of The New York Times on April 16, 1999. Link to press conference where he defended the attack

[edit] user Trey Stone

Hi, I have been following the debate over the Henry Kissinger article and I am beginning to wonder whether it isn't time to open an RfC on Trey Stone. I have also been having a dispute with him over Allan Nairn, and I would welcome your support on the Talk page if you have a moment. He is trying to sanitize the article and refuses to cite sources (see also Amy Goodman for more of the same kind of behaviour). Cheers, -- Viajero 21:51, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Hi again, I have opened an RfC: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Trey Stone: It would be most helpful if you could contribute to it, either about the Kissinger article conflict or anything else. Thanks, -- Viajero 12:44, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Trey Stone

Sorry for the late reply. It seems like someone is starting to address this problem at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Trey Stone. Thanks for the heads up. WebLuis 01:53, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Your attention, please.

Talk:Green Party (United States), thanks. Shem 09:16, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi, could you take a new look at that talk page and weigh in on my additions at the bottom? I would like to see a merge and I have suggestions there on why, as well as how it can be done without disposing of a separate page for the party's national committee (because I know you don't want to see that disappear). 65.28.237.180 02:49, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Regarding the discussion at Talk:Green Party (United States)#Merge?, I have suggested a move. Please see Talk:Green Party of the United States, and consider voting. --65.28.237.180 03:01, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Conservative Pulse

The deletion of the article on CP was justified because it was considered an "advertisement" and "vanity".

I also originated the article for NCCJ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Conference_for_Community_and_Justice Could this also be deleted on the same grounds? After all I have been involved with NCCJ for a long time, have an interest in its success as an organization, and a subjectively favorable view of it as a whole. Just making sure I'm following the letter of the law here. Khatores

[edit] Removed Link

You removed my link from E-Marketing .. that link was NOT to be removed .. this has already been discussed and was agreed that the link was ok to place there ... Discussed HERE with user SCEhardt

[edit] Barnstar

WikiDefender Barnstar

"The Defender of the Wiki is given to those who have gone above and beyond to prevent Wikipedia from being used for fraudulent purposes."

Awarded for protecting Wikipedia from dodgy sources. — Chameleon 21:05, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RfA thanks

Thank you for your support for my adminship. And welcome to the ranks of the "defenders". Cheers, -Willmcw 07:09, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Howard Dean

I've readded the stuff you removed from the Howard Dean article. We've been through this before. Wikipedia should have as much information as possible and that's what I'm simply doing. It isn't unnecessary of POV at all. As I've written before, personally I'm completely neutral on Howard Dean and if you don't think the section is balanced enough then add more information to counter what I've added, don't just delete usefull content. Believe me I'm not trying to start some kind of feud with you or anything, but with all due respect this is starting to get ridiculous. This website is about people collaborating together to make a helpful encyclopedia. And that's what we should be doing, not reverting other peoples useful edits. Please stop reverting. -- Judson 08:50, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summaries

Though I explained most of the significant edits, I was not aware that this was an expected guideline. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. --TJive June 28, 2005 22:00 (UTC)

[edit] Libertas=Ultramarine?

Has anyone ever checked to see if Ultramarine is Libertas? The similarities in personality, POV, and even his English are pretty stong. 172 | Talk 16:01, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

It's also somewhat interesting that Ultramarine was editing only sporadically for his first month as an editor, but then started making typically around 50 edits a day for the entire period since Libertas' ban. [2] 172 | Talk 17:39, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hmm?

You removed 39kb of text from Democratic Party (United States). Any particular reason why? Moreover, you said you were correcting your own edit....which you were not.

--Gaurav Arora Talk 19:40, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

No problem. :-) --Gaurav Arora Talk 19:59, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Anti-war

From your user page and edit history I thought you might be interested in joining the new wikiproject; WikiProject Anti-war. As you no doubt know, anti-war movments and ideas have had a massive influence on world politics esspecially since the launch of the "war on terror" and the global reaction to it. Events like the Febuary 15th biggest ever global day of demo's are historic in and of themselves and well deserving of more attention then the currently recive on wikipedia. Also the project will aim to get rid of any redundent repeted information through unifiy the different anti-war pages. Some right-wingers have allready shown interest in the project so hopefully we can achive ballance and NPOV. Hope you chouse to become involved. --JK the unwise 15:28, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hampshire College

Thanks for fixing the motto of your alma mater. However, I have reverted your change to the mascot. Just because you have never heard of something, that doesn't make it wrong. Two seconds on Google would have shown you this: [3]. Quote, "Taking Root explains Hampshire history, Hampshire legends, and the Hampshire academic system, narrated by the friendly mascot, Lily, the Hampshire frog." Rkevins82 - TALK 18:56, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hey there buddy

I've seen you talking a lot about it, so perhaps you can answer my question at Third way. It is an honest question. I'm not trying to start a political fight. Thanks. --Lord Voldemort (Dark Mark) 16:33, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Summer Reading Recs

Tried to post this on your blog:

Summer's almost over, but I'd add:

Ray Raphael, The First American Revolution C.D. Lummis, Radical Democracy Emspak, Labor's Untold Story (published by U.E.)

These three are must reads. I give them to friends all the time.

[Ben Manski]

[edit] American Civil Rights Movement

Please vote for the American Civil Rights Movement in the nominations for the Article Improvement Drive. [Click here and scroll down to (Nominated in August or later: American Civil Rights Movement... to cast your vote]. Thanks! Mamawrites 04:07, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Herbert Hoover article looks like a love letter

could you look into the Herbert Hoover article?

[edit] Lenora Fulani

We had an edit conflict; I guess I should have actually slapped on {{inuse}} instead of just saying in my comment "…as a first step…". Yes, I noticed that the laudatory material was straight from CUIP's site.

Please take a look at my effort to integrate material from both sides. Personally, I don't like Fulani one bit, but I'm trying to give her the same fair treatment I would expect for a politician I favored. If you don't like what I did with this, we can go on from there. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:19, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] CHNM Interview

Hello,

I’m a historian working at the Center for History and New Media at George Mason University and we are very interested in digital, peer-produced works of history, including history articles in Wikipedia. We’d like to talk to people about their experiences working on articles in Wikipedia, in connection with a larger project on the history of the free and open source software movement. Would you be willing to talk with us about your involvement, either by phone, a/v chat, IM, or email? This could be as lengthy or brief a conversation as you wish.

Thanks for your consideration.

Ken Albers

kalbers at gmu dot edu

[edit] you are needed

you are needed at the protestwarrior article.

[edit] Meetup?

Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle3. Interested? -- Jmabel | Talk 23:36, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up, but I've actually moved across the country (Washington DC), so I obviously can't make it. Guess I should update my user page... Good luck with everything, though. RadicalSubversiv E 01:37, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

The other Washington, huh? -- Jmabel | Talk 01:40, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] More Hampshire

Hampshire has unofficial colors but no unofficial mascot? Rkevins82 - [[User talk:Rkevins82|TALK]] 21:35, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RFC on Grazon (132.241.245.49)

An RFC has been opened on Grazon/132.241.245.49 for violation of NPOV and other issues; you can comment here. --DDerby-(talk) 08:18, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Socialist stubs

Hiya. I've proposed a socialist/social democratic stub category, and it's currently up for discussion. I'd much appreciate your thoughts on it. The discussion is taking place here. Thanks. aliceinlampyland 13:18, 30 November 2005 (UTC).

[edit] FairTax

At Talk:Ron_Paul#Income_tax, you expressed skepticism about abolition of the Income Tax being possible in today's economic climate.

If you haven't learned about it in the intervening months, you should read about the FairTax.  :) SFT 03:42, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Radicalsubversiv2

Is this you, user:Radicalsubversiv2? If so you might leave a note on the user page. If not the account seems like an impostor (though rather long-lived). Cheers, -Willmcw 09:37, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Question

A quick query regarding Schlafly, who apparently edited Phyllis Schlafly from 30 June 2005 through 15 July 2005, primarily with questionable judgment, which resulted in a near even match-for-match Rv per edit, and an accusation of vandalism by him when his edits were, understandably, reverted to NPOV fully sourced content. He has discovered a new hobby, which is the Kansas evolution hearings, where he has edited from 6 January 2006 and already called an editor a vandal when his edits (one inaccurate and one copyvio) were reverted.

Any advice on how to reach this editor? I've already suggested he read WP:NPA, WP:V, WP:CITE, and WP:CON. His response was "I am familiar with the WP procedures." and I am tempted to reply "Then why don't you follow any of them?" but might be considered biting and I try to be a good puppy in spite of my name. Any insights you may have would be much appreciated. Thanks - KillerChihuahua?!? 14:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

thank you, I will certainly let you know if the situation becomes untenable. KillerChihuahua?!? 01:26, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Nation

The issue of what article should be at this title has been placed on Wikipedia:Requested moves. You can offer your vote and comment here: Talk:The Nation#Article title. JamesMLane t c 06:49, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] thought you should see this

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/themix/#35679

[edit] Meetup

Looks like Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle4 will be happening September 9, 2006. - Jmabel | Talk 01:59, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/a/d/User_talk%7ERadicalsubversiv_1bf7.html"