User talk:Coqsportif

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Picture of the day
Korean War train attack

United States Army forces target railway cars south of Wonsan, North Korea, an east coast port city, during the Korean War. Trains in North Korea were targets of attack by U.S. and other U.N. forces, so much so that both military and civilian trains often had to wait out the daylight hours in tunnels.

Photo credit: United States Army
Archive – More featured pictures...


Share your love with WikiProject Hawai‘i Participant Coqsportif Honolulu Hawaii
 Coqsportif 05:58, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Contents

Image:Gropecunt-Lane.gif

Image deletion warning Image:Gropecunt-Lane.gif has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. If you feel that this image should not be deleted, please go there to voice your opinion.

--Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:47, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

OK — it's not the photograph that's faked but the sign. I'm still not clear that it belongs in the article, though (what does it tell us, aside from what's already in the text?). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 14:07, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
There is clear consensus among a number of editors that the image shouldn't be included in the article. That removing it leaves the image an arphan is unsurprising, because it's unclear what use it has on Wikipedia. I certainly am not going to leave the image in an article from which I think it should be removed simply in order to bolster its chances in an IfD decision which I think it should lose... --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:05, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
Your argument is peculiar. You want me to leave the image in an article from which I think it should be removed, and your reason is that this will help it to survive an IfD for which I proposed it. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:19, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
  1. The image shouldn't be in the article.
  2. As there's no other use for it, it might as well be deleted.

What do you find difficult about the fact that I hold those two opinions? Why, in particular, do you think that I only want to remove the image inorder to make sure that it be deleted? (It's not even clear that that makes sense.) --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:36, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Angry young man

Get bent, Trollboy. And your edits? I was reverting them, too, not just Viriditas -- for reasons of general worthlessness. Such trollery where there should just be actual contributions. --Calton | Talk 13:22, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

Hey blalah!

You really live Hawai'i? Where you stay? Where you grad? Zora 21:50, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Zionist terrorism

Thank you. Are you a new editor?

Guy Montag 00:22, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

3RR

You've been reported for a 3RR violation at Gropecunt Lane and have been temporarily blocked from editing. If you feel this is unfair, you're welcome to e-mail me using the link on my user page. SlimVirgin (talk) 08:06, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

Are you..

..really British?? I've noticed you have a lot to say about American politics, and not much to say about anything else--205.188.116.70 18:18, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Request for citation

Since you agree there is a need for citation at Israeli terrorism, I'm not sure why you keep deleting the request for it. Can you explain? Jayjg (talk) 23:23, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Fidel Castro

The reason that the term dictator doesn't need to be in the intro is because the only purpose it serves is anti-Castro POV, and the rest of the article has more than enough of that. It makes the article look POV, and therefore bad. WP articles which describe serving head of state seldom descibe them as dictator in the intro as it's too politically-loaded (see Pervez Musharraf for example). Dictator is, in itself and according to WP policy, a POV term - and there is also difficulty as it is unclear exactly when a leader becomes a dictator, such as Indira Ghandi. illWill 23:45, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Consistency

So what did you mean by "Consistency" on Saddam Hussein? --Golbez 23:24, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

Ah. But then again, by that logic, you'd have to mention his dictatorial ways in EVERY paragraph. :P I just don't understand what's wrong with keeping to pure objective NPOV fact in the first paragraph. --Golbez 23:31, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

Stalking & vandalism

  1. Stalking is deprecated, and may get you permanently banned.
  2. Adding VfD notics to articles for no good reason, and without completing any of the VfD process is vandalism, and will get you blocked from editing if you continue. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 12:30, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Block

I've blocked this account indefinitely for trolling, disruption, and WP:POINT. The tag at Qibya massacre is the latest example, but the list is as long as the list of contribs, and dealing with it is a waste of other editors' time. If you feel this is unfair, you're welcome to e-mail me to discuss it. SlimVirgin (talk) 18:39, August 19, 2005 (UTC)