User talk:Elaragirl/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents 1 Hey 2 Esperanza Reform 3 Thank you for reviewing me 4 About Esperanza 5 Personal attack? 6 Continued 7 and where screed-filled battles over the PSIpower of a Gundam combat suit run to 10 pages 8 Barnstar 9 Problems with comunication? 10 A proper thank you 11 MfD 12 Article about Wikipedia Users - Esperanza 13 Article writing 14 Congratulations 15 Edit summaries comment 16 Hello back at you 17 Shared IP's- not so fun 18 Moral support, eh? 19 Sam Houston 20 Thank you 21 You sent me a message.... 22 Thanks 23 Re vandalism and Homeland Security 24 Thanks....Any suggestions? 25 thanks 26 Bureaucracy, bureaucracy, bureaucracy... 27 Your kindness 28 some humour for you 29 Could you please explain? 30 Esperanza 31 Can I join the CVU? 32 Just wanted to say.... 33 Too kind 34 Smiley Award 35 Hypothetical answer 36 Barnstar for you... 37 Comment 38 Well 39 Deletionist? 40 Thank you 41 A smile, and Happy Thanksgiving 42 happy Turkey-Day!!!! 43 Your comments on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BDSL 44 I wonder if you can guess... 45 The irony is delicious, isn't it? 46 Boulder Independent Business Alliance 47 Boaz Michael Article

Hey

Sorry to hear about your daughter. Hope it's nothing too serious. I've had some pretty big issues with my son in the past, so I know that can ruin your day pretty completely.

BTW, just a suggestion regarding archiving. It's not a bad idea to leave the last day or two of items on the page when you archive. You don't have to wipe it clean. Of course, you can if you want, but it just tends to break up ongoing threads. —Doug Bell ^{talk•contrib} 18:06, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

It just occurred to me how incredibly irritating it must be to a deletionist to have me come in here and dirty up all her fine deleting less than half an hour after cleaning the slate. Oh well, too bad. Template:Emot —Doug Bell ^{talk•contrib} 18:13, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Esperanza Reform

Just a couple of links you might like to look at, namely [1] and this. Actually being a member of Esperanza means I can kick the poll off and vote, which is great. If the Lounge gets deleted in-house that will save a lot of blood, tears and folly at MFD.

Also writing to say thanks for the moral support with that editor who seems to think he can post whatever junk he likes on the Wiki and that we are all loathsome racists. Ah well. I was going to point you in the direction of that AFD - it's kind of amusing in twisted way - but I didn't want to be accused of votestacking. Thanks again. Cheers, Moreschi 18:19, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing me

About Esperanza

No, this time I'm not hear to attack you, or apologize. Just a purely neutral statement; you're coming up with a lot of proposals which would be much better posted at the Overhauls for Esperanza, as that is where a lot of the discussion is taking place, and it's best to keep all discussion in the same place. Incidentally, you might want to check my message at the MFD talk page, in response to you, I did my best this time. DoomsDay349 22:57, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Personal attack?

Thank you for the kind personal attack.

You first. If you think saying someone has a "creepy fixation" isn't a personal attack, your grasp of reality isn't entirely firm as you probably think it is. Again, the old phrase involving pots and kettles come to mind. If you can't stand by things you say, you probably shouldn't have said them to begin with. --Calton | Talk 23:46, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Saying that someone has a "creepy fixation" (exact quote) was not intend it as a personal attack does not pass the giggle test. Saying that you stand by it merely makes it a sincere personal attack rather than an insincere one, so plus 10 points for your personal integrity but minus several million for your psychological acuity and social skills.

There is much, much more that could be done on Wikipedia besides going after RHaworth and userfied pages

Spare me the sanctimony: I have over 17,000 edits so far -- at least 10 times as many as yours and at least 25 times as many Main Space edits -- and which tiny fraction I spend on which maintenance issue is none of your concern. Maybe you could spend more time on productive editing yourself rather than screwing around with new and different user boxes on your User Page or with making new happy-face talk-page templates. A greater proportion of my editing is on Main Space pages than is yours, so you are in no position to dispense the sanctimonious advice. --Calton | Talk 01:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

WARNING: The above statement is a blinding flash of the obvious. Cover your eyes.

Continued

Ironicaly its the most emotional pages are the ones that I want to edit the most. Saving the pages to my hard drive doesn't work for the simple reason that they can no longer be shared and edited by friends and associates. Alyeska 00:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

and where screed-filled battles over the PSIpower of a Gundam combat suit run to 10 pages

Man, you got me back. I choked on my beer when that one hit my brain. You need to put in a disclaimer on stuff like that. I think I'm going to run off and create a user page with a list of your best one liners, and then maybe I'll start another one with a 2.0 million word poem next. Priceless.

The really sad part though is that you probably didn't make it up and probably weren't exaggerating. —Doug Bell ^{talk•contrib} 01:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For being a great user, and doing excellent work here on Wikipedia! SunStar Net 01:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Problems with comunication?

I sense some angst coming from pretty much all your writings. However, I love the attempt to sound smart when you write by stretching out all your sentences into the longest ever recorded sentences, and saying rude things, and continuing to ramble on my user talk page like this, and going, and going, and calling people idiots. IMO it might be possible that you're in need of counseling. I have a feeling that you will be responding really fast too, since you seem to be on here 23-24 hours a day. Are you married? no no, it's ok, lets just talk about it, now come on.Orokusaki 04:02, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

A proper thank you

I do appreciate the barnstar—thank you. It's nice to be recognized. I see you've got one of your own now, and a rather appropriate and deserving one I might add. —Doug Bell ^{talk•contrib} 07:01, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

MfD

Elara, your subpage, User:Elaragirl/a, has been nominated for deletion here. If you want to make an input into this discussion, yada yada yada. The discussion has been live for some hours but no one has notified you, for some bizarre reason. Cheers, riana_dzasta 08:23, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

• I'm withdrawing the nomination. Next time, I'll mind my own fucking business. --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 14:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Do so, please. Pages that don't conform with WP:USER should go, but this clearly wasn't a problem. Moreschi 14:52, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Did so. --14:59, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I wonder if this'll make the list. —Doug Bell ^{talk•contrib} 15:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Article about Wikipedia Users - Esperanza

Hello,

I am a freelance writer working on an article about the wide array of people who make Wikipedia their life, their passion, their pastime. Wikipedia “addicts” if you will. I'm also looking at all the "behind the scenes" goings on at Wikipedia that the average reader of the site never knows about. I intend on focusing a little on several of the unofficial Wikipedia organizations that members are a part of such as Esperenza et al. I noticed a comment you made regarding a proposal to remove Esperanza from the site under the theory that it is actually counter-effective to the purpose of Wikipedia. I would be very interested in speaking with you about this. If you are interested in participating, please email me at brianwrites@gmail.com FFFearlesss 20:34, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I think he got our usernames from Kyoko's userpage, and is deciding to spam userpages. If I wanted to write an article about Wikipedia, and interview users as well, I would ask Jimbo for permission, first. Bearly541 22:07, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

That's an odd point of view. Why would anyone need to seek (or even be encouraged to seek) permission in order to write a story? Certainly not how I would go about trying to write a story if I wanted to avoid creating a conflict of interest. —Doug Bell ^{talk•contrib} 02:38, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Article writing

I've increased my article count from 87 to 215 now, I've been creating stubs on articles that don't exist (yet!) --SunStar Net 22:09, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Would you help me get an article to featured status?? You can help me decide on one if you like! --★SUNSTAR NET★ 23:46, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations

While I disagree with you about life, the universe and everything the Esperanza MfD, I admire your ability to keep your sense of humor throughout the debate. I have been rather uncivil in some of my Keep statements, because I lost my temper. Congratulations on iron emotional control. Alethiophile¹2₃ 00:44, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Edit summaries comment

In case you missed it, here is my response to your question over at WP:RFA. Carcharoth 18:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello back at you

The varmints never stop. It's OK; it gives me something to do on my lunch hour. NewEnglandYankee 17:42, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Shared IP's- not so fun

Hi,

I go on Wikipedia a lot from school, and of course, some idiot on the computer a few periods before me thought it would be fun to vandalize pages. You left a last warning (understandable).

It's a shared IP- the netblock 209.2.4.0 - 209.2.5.255 is (AppliedTheory/Somers Central School District). (see http://www.flumps.org/ip/c/209/209_2.html)

Moral support, eh?

You didn't strike me as someone to voice an opinion you don't really believe, so why the moral support vote? I prefer to use a neutral vote myself to make a comment without piling on the opposes...I think moral supporters ought to taken out to the woodshed.  :-)

BTW, I tried the email addres you gave me, get anything?

—Doug Bell ^{talk•contrib} 19:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Sam Houston

It was a useless edit and it may be true, but please don't call users idiots. [2] Thanks. --AW 20:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh well, not much you can do bar grin and bear it:)) Cheers, Moreschi 22:32, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your comments on my talk page. However, I didn't say or mean to imply that every non-Esperanzian was a dork. I stand by what I say. You may try to uproot my beliefs in Esperanza, and in the "heretical" thinking, but having gone through these MFDs convinces me of the fundamentalism that is happening throughout Wikipedia. I wish not to provoke a debate, but I believe that there are many other indirect ways to improve Wikipedia than direct editing. I do not want to bear any ill will, so I will not go through a whole rebuttal. You may stand by your guidelines, and I by mine, but please let me go from the memories of these MFDs, and the high blood pressure/Wikistress that resulted. Sincerely, bibliomaniac15 00:05, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

You sent me a message....

Hello. Recently you sent me a message about my supposed vandalism of Wikipedia on the Charles Drew page. I believe I did no such vandalism and that, respectfully, you are mistaken. I was told by numerous sources that my information was correct, and I apologize sincerely if the information is incorrect, I edited the article in good faith, not in an intention to vandalize Wikipedia. I would appreciate it if you could reach me on this issue. Thanks for your understanding.

Update - Thanks for the clarification, sorry for the inconvenience. I appreciate your help. Andrew King 04:56, 22 November 2006 (UTC)Andrew King

Thanks

I appreciate the support...and yes, I am tired of the drama, but doubt it's over yet. Thanks again.--MONGO 06:35, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I think civility is at an all time low...and yes, there does seem to be a lot of baiting as well as snide commentary. I am to the point that if someone baits me, I usually suggest they write up an Rfc or that we go straight to arbcom...and they almost always back down. I think by my not being passive-aggressive, the point is much clearer. Case in point...all I wanted was to see if an admin would rise above others and cease the snideness, the insulting edit summaries, abusing admin tools and labelling "Americans" in broad strokes...best to stay out of it, but for an example if you're bored...[3].--MONGO 07:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Re vandalism and Homeland Security

Yes, you're right - at first I didn't spot the full extent of the vandalism (this vandal was clever by redirecting links to nonexistent pages, e.g. ''[[Department of Sex and Sex Services|Department of Health and Human Services]]''. I should have reverted, but didn't want to because I didn't spot all the vandalism, and thought that some of it might be bona fide. Btw I checked out who was responsible for the vandal edits - I'm pretty sure it was a shared IP, as there were some bona fide contribs from that address. As such I don't think they should be blocked, as I know how annoying an autoblock can be to a genuine editor. Walton monarchist89 14:16, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks....Any suggestions?

Thanks Elaragirl, I wasn't sure my changes would stick since I am an extreme newbie at this. I am VERY interested in Messianic Judaism and the MJ wiki project. I have left a message for inigmatus about getting involved, I have tons of information and research available as well as I talk often with many of the leaders in the MJ movement that would help here. The only problem is I am such a newbie I am trying to find how I can best contribute, and I am learning how to make good articles, as well as learning all the tricks and tools of the trade. I have wrote Boaz Michael (head of FFOZ) to see if he will give me a short bio of himself to create my FIRST page for wiki. Any suggestions you have would be greatly appreciated. Jamie Guinn 15:00, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

thanks

Hi Elaragirl, thanks for supporting my merge idea. It's been something that I've wondered about for quite some time, but never voiced publicly until now. I really would like Esperanza or something that fits its stated ideals to continue on Wikipedia, and I thought that a hypothetical merge might work. I didn't anticipate that there would be much opposition though. I still think that Esperanza should continue its overhaul process before seriously considering a merge, and while I'm at it, I don't believe that any Esperanza pages should have been deleted until the whole overhaul idea was sorted out. We'll see how it turns out. Thanks again. --Kyoko 15:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

As you pointed out, Wikipedia process is not among my strengths, but I was under the impression that at least a few days if not a week were required for deleting something unless if the subject is obviously vandalism, a copyright violation, or non-notable. It would have been interesting to see the level of participation in the coffee lounge if it weren't deleted so quickly. It's pointless to request its restoration now, anyway. I had hoped that the coffee lounge could be recreated off this website, with a link provided on the Esperanza main page. That way, the lounge would be off Wikipedia servers, yet easily accessible to people who want to use it. I'm going to sign off now, I have to do other things. Nice talking to you. --Kyoko 15:47, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Bureaucracy, bureaucracy, bureaucracy...

Is very, very evil IMO. Have you seen this? I don't like it, per my reasons on the talk page. Your comments and assistance would be appreciated. Cheers, Moreschi 16:17, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Which I think is a very serious (once we've all stopped laughing) problem. It's just...wrong. Hey, I rate myself a reasonably bright lad, and I still don't understand a word that says. Nothing wrong with the idea of a supreme dictator IMO. Your idea is a good one, methinks. Cheers, Moreschi 16:33, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

O.K, I've done a simplified version and stuck it on that page. Comments? Moreschi 16:46, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Your kindness

Because you bestowed your moral support in this RfA , I want to thank you for your kindness. I don’t think we do that enough on this project. JungleCat Shiny!/Oohhh! 18:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

some humour for you

Hi Elaragirl, this is some admittedly unencyclopedic content that I thought of when reading the Esperanza Overhaul material. OK, it's a joke. Feel free to share it, with attribution to me.

• This user is an annihilationist. This means that this user strongly believes that the fewer Wikipedia articles there are, the better, and in this user's ideal world, Wikipedia would have no articles at all.

• This user is a completist. This means that this user believes that because Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia, everything in the world should have a comprehensive and ideally featured article about it, no matter how non-notable or trivial the subject is.

I believe that most Wikipedians lie somewhere between these two extremes. --Kyoko 23:49, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I was about to logout, but let me add this:

• This user is a wikilinkist. This means that this user strongly believes that every word should be wikilinked whenever possible.

We could develop a whole page of these wikiphilosophies, but that would be unencyclopedic. 'Bye! --Kyoko 00:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC), amended with links 20:05, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Could you please explain?

No, I agree. The MfD's currently dismembering Esperanza are not giving the organization enough time to get it's act together. Unfortunately, it seems to be proceeding apace. There's not much many of us can do, as it would be blatantly hypocritical to start defending the very programs we said needed to go, but more time is probably needed. I tried to point that out on the Coffee Lounge MfD but was pretty much ignored. It's times like this when a Deletionist Cabal would actually come in handy to prevent the lynching of miscellania like this. If memory serves, you gave Cyde a barnstar for his efforts to "remove things that serve only divide us and waste time". This is in complete contradiction to what you put on Kyoko's talkpage. Could I please have an explanation? Fredil ^{Shadows of Darkness} 02:51, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

That's true. I'm sorry. I didn't actually look up the barnstar; someone sent it to me in an email. Guess Cyde isn't the only one who provides biased information... Fredil ^{Shadows of Darkness} 03:27, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Esperanza

I have tried very, very hard to get them to see they are no different from the rest of Wikipedia, but their arrogance and determination to set themselves apart astounds me. Have you noticed that they deleted their programs on the basis that Esperanza would be deleted entirely if they didn't, not because they accepted our criticisms? How can they continue to believe that without "strong governance", Esperanza would collapse? Do they even edit Wikipedia? How can they claim Esperanza is an inviolable part of Wikipedia, when no-one, with the exception of Doomsday, displays any of the attitudes that characterises Wikipedians? What Wikipedian would tolerate being told what to do by a supreme council? What Wikipedian, or indeed, democrat for that matter, would argue that decision-making should taken out of their hands whenever possible? Why, when a similar program to one they have is set up for all Wikipedians, separate from Esperanza, do they actually suggest that they merge to Esperanza, and are actually surprised when their proposal is rejected? The mind boggles at just how insulated Esperanzans are from the rest of us.

Anyway, with that in mind, I wanted to ask if you were planning to nominate for deletion again after they've carried through their "reforms"? I'm not sure they can do anything that will get them out of this uniquely Esperanzan rut. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 07:27, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

(P.S. Have you noticed that most of Esperanza appears to be under 18?)

Thankyou for your reply, and I agree with you that a lot of editors are working at Esperanza in good faith. I do wonder at where some of these "social editor" think they are going, "Wikipedia as an encyclopedia is too narrow" indeed! Your comments about Esperanzans seeing non-Esperanzans as cold-hearted and robots were completely on the mark. You have my deep sympathy for the abuse you have suffered, and I can totally understand why you don't want to nominate it again. I suspect that all the overhaul will be finished in about a week, so by January it should be clear which way Esperanza is going to go. Hopefully it will be for the better. :) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 17:52, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Can I join the CVU?

Following on from our discussion earlier I am interested in joining the CVU, but the page wasn't very clear on how to join. Do I just add the relevant userbox to my page? Walton monarchist89 10:46, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Just wanted to say....

Hi Elaragirl. I wanted to drop a note on your talk for sometime now, but my attention has been elsewhere. Anyway, before I went away for a few days, I wanted to tell you that I think your contributions to the Esperanza discussion so far have been very constructive, especially your idea in the new charter talk page, and it's good to see a committed deletionist at AfD (ahhh....the memories >:) Anyway, it seems that you often get a lot of flack for your comments, but some of us really enjoy reading them. Thε Halo ^Θ 11:57, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

IRC, huh? Hmmm...I can imagine :P As an aside, I have started a thread here which you may be interested in commenting on. Your comments have been more than helpful so far, so I see no reason for that not to continue. I hope to continue to see you around wikipedia in the future. Best, Thε Halo ^Θ 14:46, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Too kind

Your comment at Wikipedia talk:Esperanza/New charter was far too kind, Elaragirl. You managed to life my spirits, and I appreciate that very much. -- Natalya 16:50, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

That made me laugh. You definitly add some spice to Wikipedia, and things always need to get interesting now and again. :) -- Natalya 19:42, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Smiley Award

Feel free to place this award on your user page, as a token of appreciation for your contributions. If you're willing to help spread the good cheer to others, please see the project page for the Random Smiley Award at: User:Pedia-I/SmileyAward

User:Pedia-I/SmileyAward1

Hypothetical answer

Hi Elaragirl, the answer would none of the above. What really keeps Wikipedia running smoothly is the Manual of Style.

Seriously, I'd guess common sense, but it can always be argued "Who defines common sense?". Even so, common sense would incorporate things like good faith (when justified), civility, and possibly kindness. --Kyoko 23:02, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar for you...

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I, Persian Poet Gal, hereby award you this barnstar for many vandalism reverts today!¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 01:23, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

• I am greatly humbled with the Titanium Award. Thank you.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 02:05, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Comment

I gave a reply to your post in the Talk:Messianic Judaism page. 12.65.96.84 01:44, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Well

Hello, I have noticed your great work on many different XFD's and yet you maintain a natural niceness and I don't think I have ever read a comment that you made without cracking up. So I award you a slew of barnstars! Cheers (P.S I am a deletionist also).__Seadog ^♪ 01:48, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

.. I'm nice? Hee. --Elaragirl^Talk|Count 01:59, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Deletionist?

A colleague of mine likes to say, "When in doubt, delete!" Feel free to borrow that slogan. :) As long as you don't delete any of my work. >:( Wahkeenah 01:57, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

My slogan is more like "if it's not terrible, why delete it". I would advise all on Wikipedia to be more laizze-faire. 12.65.96.84 02:03, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I have yet to see a case where laissez-faire leads to increased quality. Usually it leads to abuse of those who don't have any power and crap. Regulation is needed because humans are flawed. Deletion is needed because articles are flawed. --Elaragirl^Talk|Count 02:06, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

He can park his car in his garage, and I can't park mine in mine. That says something about our respective philosophies. Regarding "regulation is needed because humans are flawed", Atilla the Hun said it more to the point: "Violence is justified in the service of mankind." Wahkeenah 02:08, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

You don't understand, Elaragirl. What I am talking about is on two fronts. First, the policies having more shades of gray and being less arbitrary. Secondly, giving well-intentioned users more freedom to edit articles within reasonable boundaries (diametrically opposite to abuse of those that have no power by admins, as you mentioned). Deletionism policy is what got me canned from Wikipedia: the deletionists usually don't care enough to investigate what is and is not good for an individual article, so they throw the baby out with the bathwater. And why the Atilla the Hun quote, Wahkeenah? I'll have you know from experience that violence is NEVER a service to mankind. 12.65.96.84 02:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, I confess. That quote isn't really from Atilla the Hun, it's from Diane Keaton "quoting" Atilla the Hun, in Love and Death. I have a hunch your personal story is quite painful, so I won't go there. Back to the other thing, though... what if Hitler had been assassinated in 1938. Might things have been better in the long run? Worse? The same?Wahkeenah 02:19, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

You cannot just isolate events in history, Wahkeena. You must view history as a totality. And you certainly understand that if mankind had chosen dignity and understanding throughout history rather than violence, how axiomatically better would that be? 12.65.96.84 02:24, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't disagree. Now alls you has to do is convince the politicians. Wahkeenah 02:37, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

...too much philosophy for my poor talk page. --Elaragirl^Talk|Count 02:41, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, we'll "nip it in the bud," as Barney would say. Wahkeenah 03:02, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

If you want to do that, do you think you'd like to wade into another hailstorm by wading into the mess of POV forks that is Striver's "Sunni view of...""Shi'a view of..." "Non-Muslim view of..." articles? 06:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Striver? Oh fuck no. Leave that pile of banmobile summoning in the hands of others. Besides, I know shit-for-all about Islam. --Elaragirl^Talk|Count 06:30, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I know about as much about Islam as Barney Fife does. Wahkeenah 06:37, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but still...If I had to make up three rules for operating on Wikipedia, it would be

• Find sources
• Don't be a dick
• Stay the fuck away from screed-screeching meglomaniacs.

Striver sets off all my "holy arbcom" alerts, including not-so-subtle votestacking and the like. Nope. Got better things to do than stick my head in that mess. --Elaragirl^Talk|Count 06:43, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

More fool me. :( Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 08:29, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the something fucking hilarious from your Orange-A soda page. It was, truly. Thank you. ^~DBS ^Talk/_Contribs 02:09, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Thank you also for the spontaneous eruption of smileage I got from your "ball of fire" note to vandals and military ribbons. Very cool. ~Dbs

A smile, and Happy Thanksgiving

Your comments spread around Wikipedia, seeding humor in the unlikeliest of places, continue to make me chuckle and smile. I don't think I could get away with some of the comments you make. You have that rare ability to make seemingly outrageous, in your face, thought-provoking comments and dance on "the line" without crossing it—and to bring a smile to friend and foe alike while doing it. Keep it up!

Anyway, I just wanted to wish you and your daughter, and anyone else in your inner circle, a Happy Thanksgiving. —Doug Bell ^talk 09:37, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

happy Turkey-Day!!!!

I wish you a very merry Thanksgiving! Hope you and your family have a magnificent day! So, what are you thankful for? Hooray and happy gormandiziŋ! --Randfan please talk talk to me!

Happy Turkeyday! Cheers! :) —Randfan!!

Have a great day! Please respond on my talk page (the red "fan" link in my signature). Cheers! :) —Randfan!!

Your comments on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BDSL

You're mistaken, there is no requirement that any opinion posted on WP:AFD must be derived from policy. If you'll notice, Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy and there is no requirement that I act like a bureaucrat. If you disagree with my opinion, please do, but do not comment as if policy and guidelines were the limits of acceptable logic in this community. Please see WP:IAR. hateless 22:30, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I wonder if you can guess...

...Why all the Messianic Judaism articles are a rediculous crud-pile of steaming "maybe" theology from ten years ago in the movement? 12.64.158.197 21:05, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

The irony is delicious, isn't it?

Hi there. I don't know if this is crossing any lines or breaking any rules written or otherwise, though it's certainly not my intention to do so in any way. If you haven't already guessed, I'm here about your vote on College Tonight, and as a declared Deletionist clearly possessed of a sharp mind, I'm sure you must appreciate how unusualabsofreakinglutely bizarre it is to have me, who honestly tends towards inclusionism (without being crazy about it), here to "complain" about your recent vote to Keep! :-)
In short, as one of the two Weak Keeps so far, I was wondering if there was anything I could do, any argument I could make, that might change your mind. I note you stopped responding to points on the discussion page after Oakshadow stepped in, and I certainly don't mean to hound you on the topic, but as your vote seems to indicate you may not be fully committed to your position, I felt it was worth a try to see if I could, as I said, give you a reason to do what you said you wanted to anyway (as far as I can tell from the comments you've left so far, you're voting to Keep mostly to make a point to the people who had voted delete based on a reading of guidelines you felt was unjustified). If you haven't been following it, there have been several other exchanges on the page, though I honestly think my strongest points are contained in the very last one. If you could take a look and let me know (here would be fine, if not there) what's wrong with the reasoning or how it fails to persuade, I'd very much appreciate it. Thanks! --Arvedui 07:00, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Boulder Independent Business Alliance

The Boulder Independent Business Alliance post was not intended as promotional at all. It's an organization of particular note because it created a model that has been replicated in several dozen communities across the country in recent years.

I'm not personally invested in it and won't re-create the page or follow up on this, but please reconsider its deletion.

Thanks, Eric

Boaz Michael Article

Elaragirl, I just created an article on Boaz Michael. Please review/correct it as needed and send me your suggestions/comments. Thank! Jamie Guinn 17:05, 26 November 2006 (UTC)