User talk:Florentino floro

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives

June 28 2007 to January 3 2008 January 3 2008 to February 27 2008

Contents 1 Your talkpage is ok and archived 2 Dominican Order 3 Re: psychedelic drugs on Moses, abc news 4 About the adoption thing 5 Arturo Brion 6 Luminous Cross 7 Quezon 8 Tagalog Wikipedia 9 COMELEC article fixed 10 News Again 11 I prefer to be adopted by a foreigner-experienced adopter 11.1 3,152 edits / Contributions, and I share to Wikipedia, my 367 pages and 900 pages Books on Philippine Dwarves 12 Miriam Defensor-Santiago 12.1 Disbarment Case Dismissed and Head Fall, not Notable? 12.2 Term sharing - Puno and Quisumbing vs. Santiago: the fall and 3 stitches OMEN 13 Tips 14 Blocking, Judge Floro 15 Your edit to Stephen Hawking 16 St. Hedwig's in Chicago 17 UP Charter Change 18 Adoption 19 Reply 20 User:Maxschmelling vs. you 21 Paul McCartney 22 Tadić victory 23 Advice 24 May 2008 25 Jelac 26 Neptune Statue 27 Florentino floro v. Maxschmelling 28 Big Brown link, and some advice 29 The dwarves 30 Please be more succinct. 31 ITN

[edit] Your talkpage is ok and archived

Sir, I just archived your usertalk page. No need to worry for now. -iaNLOPEZ1115 · TaLKBaCK · Vandalize it 07:08, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

oops, trying to fix it. -iaNLOPEZ1115 · TaLKBaCK · Vandalize it 07:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, thanks for your time. Actually, when the French Doctor administrator got angry to me due to Wiki linking on Rhino Kofi Annan, and reminded me on blocking, I took it as blessing in disguise: I began a Wiki break and started finishing editing my book. Central Books here Philippines printed my 100 books and I donated most of them to top Libraries here, now OPAC[

http://rizal.lib.admu.edu.ph/TLCScripts/interpac.dll?LabelDisplay&Config=SAMPLE&Branch=,0,&FormId=-1422&RecordNumber=405878] [1], and I am now on the 800th page, while the 2007 edition is just 357 pages; well, due to stress in writing the book, I created per break the deleted article by Filipino editors. So, I found therapy or rest from stress in writing the book by debating with these Filipino editors. AndI found or discovered, that it is really true that many forum members or users (I joined and registered in 140 forums which posted my story of dwarves) opined that Wiki is smart. Many users here are tough to deal with. Vandals, crab mentality and weirdos, like in forums too. But, unlike in law practice, here, the interpretation of Wiki rules is by vote. Courts decide cases by vote too but rarely, since that happens in collegiate courts. I am sorry if this is too long. But you may edit my reply to you if this violates our adoption agreement. Regards. -- --Florentino floro (talk) 07:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

You seem to misunderstand. Rules are not interpreted by vote. The administrators use the supporting arguments that come with the votes as a guide for deciding what to do. In the end, the action to be taken is still at their discretion. --Migs (talk) 12:35, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

"Wikipedia is not a democracy" - If only Wiki rules are interpreted with cold neutrality and plain objectivity, digging their spirits and policies, there would be no problem with the end result. But, the evil of subjectivity, bias and prejudice, mixed with bitterness, anger, hatred, and vendetta of some editors or users, often determined or adjudge this non-democracy in Wiki. The administrators do have the final say, and I bow to their wisdom and fair judgment. I just imprecate and curse under Wikipedia Psalm 109 and 73, this miserable misuse of the good policy and rules of Wikipedia by my very own Filipino editors. This is my uncompromising stance. -- --Florentino floro (talk) 15:12, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

You need to slow down for a while, sir. You are quite stressed and I could be liable for your behavior (since I adopted you). I (partly) recommend another wikibreak (?) or a slowdown in editing until Easter Sunday, but this can be either ignored or accepted. I'll try to defend your edits from time to time, but I'm also busy (and quite sick due to the weather) and pressured since I have schoolwork. If you need help (in Wikipedia-relatedd stuff), try to send an email or go to my talkpage. Thanks and Good Afternon po. And no, that doesn't violate our adoption agreement. You can go back to the Tambayan talkpage on March 8 but be very careful (again), since words are good tools for certain opinions - and certain trouble. -iaNLOPEZ1115 · TaLKBaCK · Vandalize it 08:00, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

This is my talkpage, and I replied with wisdom to the message sent by Migs. All users here are co-equal and are under administrators. I thought that the discussion on my deleted articles were over, until I received that message which is totally irrelevant to my reply to you, since I do not need any advise from any Filipino editors, since you adopted me, due to my choice. I have few edits since I am writing a book. It is pathetic that I have not committed any mistake in my latest edits, but the message above echoing a homily to me, when it has not pointed to any edit I made, is utter disrespect, accusing me of misunderstanding the Rules. Thus, I squarely traversed the uncalled for message. Wikipedia is governed by the rule of law, not by whims and caprices. --Florentino floro (talk) 08:26, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dominican Order

Just wanted to inform you that I have been looking to edit the entry on the Dominican order. One of the things I suggest removing is the discussion related to September 2007 events at one foundation within the province of the Phillipines. If you want to suggest a place to move it, see the Talk page for the Dominican Order article. theloavesandthevicious (talk) 18:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for visiting my talk page, and for your message. Actually, I really have no idea on this, since I am not an expert on this religious article, for I am more informed on law and Philippine matters. Parenthetically, Arch. Leonardo Z. Legaspi, OP became University of Santo Tomas rector, and we know him, he is great. Just sayin and regards. - --Florentino floro (talk) 05:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: psychedelic drugs on Moses, abc news

Hi. I'm very interested in seeing this point of view represented in the article. However, there is absolutely no evidence for it other than the opinion of one researcher, who btw, has openly said, "but there is no evidence". So, adding it to the article is somewhat of an appeal to "recentism". I'm trying to come up with a good way of representing this in the article based on addressing the psychedelic properties of acacia rather than unsubstantiated opinions of human behavior. I feel that this is the best way to address the topic as there is evidence for the ingestion of psychedelic plants. Do you see where I'm going with this? Speculating about what Moses may or may not have seen while high on drugs is not helpful. We can easily present a mundane explanation for every and any supernatural description, so selectively isolating the burning bush incident and explaining it away is not informative. What will work better, is to develop a section about psychedelic plants and their use as religious sacraments. This, in turn, would explain the entire gamut of religious experience in the appropriate context, with examples. —Viriditas | Talk 23:51, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for visiting my talk page. I fully agree, that the drug article is just a little voice unsupported by genuine scientific support. However, it might interest the departments of theology and culture. I was really afraid that adding it to Moses might not be on legal par with 5 pillars of Wikipedia. So, thanks for your great concern. - --Florentino floro (talk) 05:46, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I've added a link to the full text of the journal article on Talk:Moses#Entheogenic theories. Please help create a new section in this article. —Viriditas | Talk 06:52, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I will have to make research on this. It's a very controversial thing, and we need perhaps, solid links to support this. Give us time. - --Florentino floro (talk) 15:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] About the adoption thing

I received some notice that I had quite neglected my duties as your adopter. Due to those "allegations" or what not, I would suggest that you should try to cool down more often and refrain from edit wars at all times. It is also my duty to monitor and defend your edits, if necessary. Most of all, please refrain from using threats of using your God-given talent (I have to use this since other people use more derogeratory words aginst that certain talent) against other Wikipedians since it violates this policy. And also, if your edit was wrongfully removed or reverted, justify it in a sensible and diplomatic way. Thank you po and good afternoon. (sighs) --iaNLOPEZ1115 · TaLKBaCK · Vandalize it 06:12, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Please don't be bothered by any Filipino editor who naturally would bother us, not matter how we edit the Wiki 5 pillar way. Parenthetically, I viewed GMA News Network video last 2 days on crab mentality, and it tells all about this. I have not issued any personal attack against anyone: I voiced my lamentation on this system of crabs. The best way is to ignore these editors, who must bring their tirades to the proper fora, like deletion, etc. Remember that I was sued as sock puppet and the editor lost. There must be an end to cases here. They deleted my 2 articles and I lost, but I never resurrected these issues. I had been editing my book and I ignored any deleting by the same editors who do not like me. Wikipedia must be defended against this kind of system. I know that I and you will be hounded by these severe attacks and waves. But there is a procedure or process on this, let them just read the Wiki rules. Go on with your studies. REMEMBER, it was a foreign editor who suggested adoption. I, in strong terms, suggested non-Filipino adopter since I foresaw that a Filipino adopter would be bombarded by the same crabs. IF YOU READ the archives, I was against any Filipino adopter adopting me. I gave you a chance, and prove it. So, if you wish to be replaced by a foreign adopter, I welcome it. And there is nothing wrong about Psalm 109 of Wikipedia, it is part of religious belief, and Wikipedia is governed by the Constitutions of the world. Using biblical imprecation is not included in threats. Vide definition of threats in dictionaries or thesaurus. So, I suggest that you be replaced by foreign editors so that you will not be bothered or badgered in your studies by the same hatred and vendetta. It will never end. It is therapy for them, though. -- --Florentino floro (talk) 06:59, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Sir, it is your wish for me to be replaced by a Wikipedian of non-Filipino origin. However, I'm giving you advise and help you out, even if I no longer adopt you. There's a reminder: Please don't put email addresses of notable persons like what you had did to this article. *sighs* Good evening po and may God send us good leaders to guide this country and this wiki. -iaNLOPEZ1115 · TaLKBaCK · Vandalize it 12:37, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Arturo Brion

In the interest of fairness, I wanted to say that I thought your edits to the Arturo Brion article were very good. I think it is interesting that along with those edits you pleaded with other editors not to delete them. No one would delete those, not because of your pleas, but because they were good edits. They added relevant information to the article. Your comments about the edits and in the talk page seemed to indicate that you are aware that these were good, useful edits. I would encourage you to continue in that vein. Thanks, maxsch (talk) 23:10, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, thanks. In law, I really can provide Wikipedia with my best. But with others, like medicine and health, inter alia, I was always corrected (just that I cannot understand the difference between Wiki news and Wiki encyclopedia, there is a grey area). But I do not complain against many foreign editors who really had a hard time with my great mistakes. My edits on Arturo D. Brion is just too small, for his big stature. If you read his profile, BRION's mind and academic excellence cannot be equaled by any Supreme Court Associate or Chief Justice since 1901. Why? Ateneo, since the time of Jose Rizal never produced a mind so brilliant as his; he is the only Atenean who topped the bar without any Atenean in the top 10 for 40 long years; He topped the MCLE exam with record grades, unequaled today, before he was appointed CA Justice. There is no link on this. But you can verify it from the PHILJA. On his health, there is no link, but his doctor is Dr. Jane Gaston of St. Luke's MAB, the endocrinologist who supervised the 2 spinal cord operations of Renato C. Corona. I know that I wrote emotionally in his Talk Page, since he and his wife were the ones who called me in 2002, to help them solve the blocking of his nomination in the CA and S.C. by tons of oppositors. I have text messages and original writings with genuine signatures of both Brion spouses who thanked me, for the prediction. It was a 2002 Sunday afternoon and he prepared "Pansit Canton" and nuts for me. The agenda was healing of Tonette and 2010 Chief Justice post: Antonio Carpio or Brion. He laughed at me, since I told him that "upon your assumption as S.C. Associate Justice", Antonio Carpio will have a hard fight on 2010. I lost my job, and I thanked Brion and Tonette for the card reading which caused my separation due to the spinal cord operations of Renato C. Corona. Thanks for this opportunity to let me expand Brion article on Wikipedia. I am afraid of being banned here due to Filipino editors who might cite Wiki rules if I expand Brion's article including a section on HEALTH on his severe hypertension and diabetes. He was hospitalized for 2 weeks, and medical records are confidential. Wikipedia rules do not allow original edits but must have sources. Also, Brion described to me his retirement mansion in Laguna his hometown, where he won as Assemblyman. Tonette was beside me as seat mate, not just classmate, 4 long years, 1978-1982, Ateneo Class '82 which I cursed when Brion SMS texted me that my case would be decided on September, 2004, but it was delayed. Hilario G. Davide, Jr. enjoined the decision due to 2004 deaths of his 2 brothers Jorge and Jose while his father Hilario Sr. died on July 17, 2006 after my decision was released. Brion fought for me in the Court but he lost due to his very own best friend and buddy buddy Canadian Renato C. Corona who was twice operated because of me. Brion and Corona went to Canada during those Marcos Cory days. Brion knows very well that it is because of me that Corona made it in the S.C. despite curses by my very own lawyer Rene Saguisag. But they failed me. God is kind, since I am jobless today - do you know the PAIN and CROSS of having been on top with Second Full Honors, Ateneo, and 12th Placer, 87.55% Bar exams, ending jobless, begging money from a brother? I eat daily the Google immortality. And this is my legacy to Wikipedia: the heavily googled immortal Userpage, which will never be duplicated by any editor in Wiki: I hope that my User Page will not be shortened. --Florentino floro (talk) 06:39, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Luminous Cross

Your recent edits to Quezon [2] and to Adgandan, Quezon [3] are a little out of place. First of all, I don't think it is a good idea to put the exact same edit in two pages. And the placement is strange, it is not part of the history of Quezon, yet that is the section you put it under. What I would recommend, if this sanctuary is indeed notable, is for you to create an article about it specifically: Luminous Cross of Grace. Then you could do other research about it, talk about where it is and who built it and who visits it. As it is, you rely on one news article that says it is the only sanctuary in the world with life-size murals. I don't think that is actually true. I am trying to help you. I want your edits to be good. Do you see how it doesn't make sense to put this content where you did? It does not help the reader to understand Adgandan or Quezon, so I am going to remove those edits. maxsch (talk) 20:31, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I really had a hard time, before I added this FRONT PAGE banner news in our Philippine Daily Inquirer, to look where or in what section of Agdangan, Quezon, I could put this. I wanted to make a good article on this, but the problem is, there is just one link on this plus its website. In Fernando Suarez who is mobbed here and abroad, when I created that article, I found great hardship in finding links on him, until the Ottawa editor cautioned me about tabloid links on Suarez which I thought were not. I told the Canadian Wiki editor that Fr. Suarez is just a celebrity in healing, but a total unknown in the world, in google links, since everyday, evangelists resurrect the dead, make the lame walk and the blind see. So, with kindness, I told the Wiki editor that - if only dwarves were used by Suarez in healing, oh, he would compete with Florentino Floro 32,000 entries in Google as of 2006. I don't know if our Philippine Daily Inquirer was ads paid, or it really is GREAT. So, I do understand my predicament and your having noticed my difficulty in editing this Cross. If I can find links on this Luminous sanctuary, then, I will think twice before I create it, due to strict Wiki rules on sources. Thanks. - --Florentino floro (talk) 05:18, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Quezon

--Florentino floro (talk) 06:08, 24 March 2008 (UTC)--Florentino floro (talk) 06:08, 24 March 2008 (UTC) Can you please explain to me why you would add this video [4] to the Quezon page. maxsch (talk) 16:00, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

GMA NEWS is Philippine's top Television. It delivers news in 2 forms: ordinary wire reports and news videos. The GMA NEWS video is encyclopedic and not just news, since it is Lenten season and deals with such theme. --Florentino floro (talk) 07:36, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not disputing that GMA NEWS is an important news outlet in the Philippines. But this video does not belong on the Quezon page for several reasons. 1) It is not in English. This is an English language encyclopedia. 2) It takes place in Quezon, but it doesn't tell us about Quezon. In other words, it is not encyclopedic. 3) The Lenten season in Quezon is not the subject of the article, and even if it was, this video wouldn't tell us about it.

I would ask you sincerely not to ever put any news items in wikipedia articles. maxsch (talk) 04:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Noted. There are many times when the demarcation line between news and encyclopedic material is too thin. For example, in health and death, current events ... who will be the judge? Is there a rule in Wikipedia that says, video news must be in English? Just sayin ... --Florentino floro (talk) 04:53, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

In English wikipedia, all content needs to be in English. maxsch (talk) 16:21, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Definitely. But there are lots of article here that are pure Tagalogs or Filipinos. Please support your opinion by citing to me, specific Wikipedia rule. I have read lots of articles here that are pure Filipino or Tagalog (like in Filipino Folklore). And please cite to me the exact Wiki Rule which forbids the use of GMA NEWS videos as references. - --Florentino floro (talk) 06:10, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

If there are other articles in Filipino or Tagalog in the English Wikipedia, those should be fixed as well. And GMA NEWS is not forbidden as a reference, but the news that you add does need to be both relevant and notable. The video of Lenten rituals in Quezon fails both relevance and notability. It fails relevance because the article is not about Lenten rites, it is about Quezon, and there seems to be nothing in the article that is illustrated by that video. It fails notability because there is nothing (at least nothing in the article) to suggest that Lenten rites in Quezon are different from those elsewhere or are particularly important to the identity of Quezon. News is not forbidden as a reference, but most news does not belong in Wikipedia because wikipedia tries to have a balanced historical view, a summary of the subject, and news tends to be about the present moment more than the context. It is hard to know, in the moment, whether news is really going to be the turning point we might think it is going to be. See WP:Recentism for more on this subject. Because you seem to have trouble with these policies, I think a good editing strategy for you would be to never, under any circumstances, put news items into wikipedia. There are plenty of other things to do. maxsch (talk) 16:06, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

If you only DID read carefully WP:Recentism, you will never cite it, as support, which I requested, to make your messages here in my talk page Wikified. When I studied law for 5 years, Justice De Leon, Jr. in legal Philo said: "Be master of facts." You direly forgot that you are talking to an infamous judge who was accused of consulting dwarves. Now, please read your cited rule, which I quote: "This is an essay; it contains the advice and/or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. It is not a policy or guideline, and editors are not obliged to follow it. Articles on Wikipedia have a tendency to focus on recent events. Wikipedia has been praised for the way it deals with current events. However, it may be appropriate to have some awareness of balance and historical perspective." Fr. Jesus Fernandez, S.J. (in our Pre-divinity class with my classmate Fr. /Dr. Romeo "Archie" Intengan, SJ, 1973, ex-Jesuit Provincial) taught us "argumentation and debate", and I did master this subject with B+. Dean De Veyra (Ateneo Law School) mandated on our first day, 1978: "You are not here to study law, never, to be lawyers, since you have only one agenda - to top the bar!". So, I earned full second honors and placed 12th in the 1983 Bar exams, 87.55% where 60% of Ateneo and UP failed, they cried. How can I convince you, how to read Wikipedia Rules in the light of statutory construction. Premises considered, I hereby deny for lack of merit, your unsubstantiated, submitted thesis. As sur-rebuttal, I submit for your cursory perusal my truckload of documents[5] as proof. - --Florentino floro (talk) 05:10, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tagalog Wikipedia

---

Finally, Wikipedia is the 7^th most visited site in the Philippines. Then why is it that the Tagalog Wikipedia, the Wikipedia in your own language remains unknown to most of the Filipinos? The mission of this campaign is to change that. Will you join us?

---

I have not mastered the Tagalog or Filipino language. In fact, I just had one subject of Filipino in high school. Besides, I joined WikiPilipinas (the article I created), but I seldom contribute to it, since I have to meet yet the owner, regarding the publication of my 2nd Book. -- --Florentino floro (talk) 04:53, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] COMELEC article fixed

I had fixed it (yet again), and wait for my instructions via email. -iaNLOPEZ1115 · TaLKBaCK · Vandalize it 07:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, my adopter. You fixed it, thanks, but the problem is: I had a hard time putting in the gallery Jose Melo as new Chair, he has no image. Now, non-lawyer or even some lawyers here would not understand why Melo is in and Brawner is out. The legal meaning of ad interim is essential in understanding this. The president can re-appoint a by-passed appointee (by the COA, Senate), a) during session or b) out of session; now, like Hilario Davide, Jr., this guy was first appointed during session, but since he could not make it, he was appointed ad interim or when Congress was in recess. In this ad interim appointment, he assumed office even without confirmation. Lots of them are or were bypassed. So, because of the double murder of the COMELEC legal chiefs, Melo was forced to assume his post against his will. He knows he will be bombarded with complaints. Melo is well-known to be so corrupt on Court circles. Here in Malolos, Bulacan, our very honest Executive Judge Petrita Braga Dime worked under Melo in the Court. Who does not know his reputation? The Pastoral Council is also known to be filled with corrupt power hungry guys. So, now, Brawner (who was so notorious in the Court of Appeals) felt the heat out. It is sad that most of my edits were deleted by a Filipino editor. Like yesterday, it was the first time in Comelec history that 2 legal chiefs were murdered (yesterday and on Nov. 9, Dalaig, as I predicted to my counsel Rene Saguisag on the 4th day after my natal day and the day after Dulce Saguisag went off the air). These are encyclopedic materials vandalized. If you inspect my edits in foreign articles, except in health and medicine, many editors and administrators here, would never ever let a Filipino editor vandalize my works. Sad to say, foreign editors and admins are not at all interested in looking into our Filipino articles, so you have this kind of crab mentality. I teach you as adopter, since I have more edits than you did, since you study. My only handicap is I just learned computer internet last April 2006. I never encountered this crab minds in many foreign articles where I contributed - this kind of quite funny thing which Manny Pacquiao direly hated yesterday as crab mentality. It is sad that Filipino journalists cursed his verdict, while in USA and Europe no newspaper article ever criticized the split judgment of the boxing referees. I have no idea how this vandalism by Filipino editors can be medicated for it is an epidemic. But it is quite funny and it is therapy for me, a jobless judge in a pretend world. I am not frustrated since I encountered many kind of like this crabs in court since 1984. In fact, Atty. De Castro did fist fights in front of me, when I presided as Judge of RTC, Malabon. Instead of sending him to jail, I ran to my room to talk to the dwarves. Final point: can you not put Melo in the gallery, even without image? - --Florentino floro (talk) 09:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] News Again

Florentino, please, please, please do not put news items in wikipedia articles. Your recent edits to Samak Sundaravej, Tubbataha Reef, Chocolate Hills, HIV/AIDS in Asia and Faith Healing have all been reverted because they are not encyclopedic. You should know by now that this is not the way to add content to Wikipedia. maxsch (talk) 17:11, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

How can these edits of mine be considered plain news and not permanent encyclopedic matters. Please read carefully the letter and intent of Wiki rules so that you can easily comprehend the demarcation line between plain news (current affairs, breaking news) and encyclopedia content. Who will be the final arbiter between what you say or edit and my opinion? Example: deaths of persons are news, but they are tagged with templates and the news is encyclopedic. How can our 2 great reef and corals vying for the top post of new seven wonders be considered plain news? How can notable death due to mistreatment and considering the long history of this religious sect, be considered news? How can the hospitalization of a head of state be news? PGMA and Cory were hospitalized, and are these news? Please do not vandalize my edits, have respect for a judge and lawyer who interprets the rules; you must refer these recurrent matters to other administrators for go signal, rather than be judgmental, otherwise, Wikipedia will suffer. Anyway, you already had a stand, I cannot bend your hard and fast view of the rules. Many Wiki rules like the one on news, are not fixed but they are just policies that must be implemented. As a judge and lawyer, we too are highly divided on interpretation of rules. Take the case of Neri and Imelda, etc. Learn from me, use the rules intelligently and attain wisdom. Refrain, please for this Wikipedia crab mentality. Many are out to muscle my edits, so be it. I already decided to use Wikipedia Psalm 109 as sole weapon against vandalism and badgering my talk page with useless messages. Edit and delete if you wish, but ask guidance first from learned administrators, unless you possess the genius mind of notable Filipino editors. - --Florentino floro (talk) 06:19, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

A bit of advice... Please, stop calling edits that you disagree with as "vandalism". That term is only used to describe edits that deliberately attempt to compromise Wikipedia's integrity, not edits made in good faith. Calling people vandals when they are trying to help only serves in exacerbating arguments. TheCoffee (talk) 14:12, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Noted. With further statement that, all my edits were made in utter good faith; however, the fine line between news and encyclopedia content had been miserably misunderstood and misconstrued by many editors here who flooded my talk page with mystifying messages on this. If they deleted my edits without any complaint from me, I do not see any reason to badger or disturb my page, sending message to me here. It would be better if, out of courtesy and respect, if they have integrity, they should have sent the message before deleting, so I could share my view, so as not to make Wikipedia a biased or incomplete online encyclopedia. - --Florentino floro (talk) 05:51, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

For the record, I did not revert all of those edits, some of them were reverted by other editors. I have repeatedly tried to explain to you why I feel the way I do about news in wikipedia, and you have repeatedly not paid attention. There are full explanations of why each of your edits was reverted in the appropriate edit summaries, and each one was carefully thought out individually. I do not have some kind of vendetta against you. In fact I have really been trying to help. I do not doubt your good faith, so please do not doubt mine. What I have noticed (in good faith) is a pattern in your editing behavior. I have tried to make you think critically about what you are doing so that you will contribute useful content that does not need to be removed by other editors. I am not attacking you. I am giving you advice. And this is my advice: you should refrain (in almost all cases) from putting news into wikipedia articles. When adding news to a page, it is important to make sure you are putting in a place where it helps an article, and it is absolutely necessary for it to be pertinent to the subject. I am not the final arbiter, wikipedia uses consensus to decide issues, I am just one voice trying to do my part. If you would like more guidance, please ask. maxsch (talk) 21:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for this good advice. Please also accept the fact, that there are many Filipino editors here in Wikipedia, who know me (Ateneo) - I fought against Philippine Supreme Court Justices and I caused their 8 medical surgeries. Well, that is a critical fact which cannot just be ignored. How can we both measure the cold neutrality, impartiality and integrity of some Filipino editors who know my cause for justice and who deliberately, at MY BACK are or were out to muscle me due to my 2 deleted articles which contain inside these very articles, predictions of the justices' surgeries? Anyway, if you have time to inspect my contributions (3,000 edits) some of which were deleted by foreign editors, I never complained and I was so submissive since I have never seen any reason why I should object. Browse the archived pages here, and I never complained against corrections or advices of foreign editors, since in Wikipedia there must be respect. But I lost that respect due to the amazing bombardment of messages and deleting of my edits and the 2 articles I worked for, for 2 years by my very own Filipino and Ateneo editors. So, to remedy this problem, I opted to be adopted upon suggestion of a kind foreign editor, and I stress: non-Filipino, non-Ateneo experienced editor. On the news aspects, as you see, if you delete my edits, I do not complain, and there is no need to repeat the messages here, since I knew already your points. But I do have a different reading of Wikipedia rules: there is a very fine demarcation line between news and permanent reports. (A head of state hospitalized, is that just a news, yes, if an ordinary guy like Fr. Suarez). So where do we draw the line? Example when a Supreme Court Justice is operated, is this news or health? Since there are many editors and admins here, give them a chance to be the one to go into this grey area. And please, if you will, I want to read more about your User page, are you Filipino or related to the Filipino editors? ... where are you from and etc. like my very own page, since I need to know who are the Filipino editors here. I cannot divulge to you the names of those who persecuted me in Court cases. I have no evidence that some Filipino editors here, especially from my alma mater Ateneo were subject of my Psalm 109 and 73 Imprecation of biblical curse up to the 4th generation. I admit that I had many time moved a person sitting in a computer. I am not saying that I say this, but in my YM chats, one said that he was pushed 4 inches (Leyte). And he is a USA officer. I preserved these chats. So, in my spiritual fight, evil abounds, and it is like cryptology, they can read my lines. - --Florentino floro (talk) 05:42, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I am not Filipino, and I am not related to any Filipino editors, but I don't think it matters. I think that your fears of mistreatment by Filipino editors are a little overstated. I think most editors are simply trying to write good content (assume good faith). I commented on the AFDs of those two articles you wrote because I felt strongly that they were not good articles. I am worried that you wrote them because you were personally invested in the subjects and in your predictions. Your alleged powers are not grounds for a wikipedia article. While you may write articles about people or things you know personally, it is important to remain neutral. When you write about bad things happening to people who you feel have wronged you, you risk violating the Neutral Point of View pillar of the wikipedia policy. maxsch (talk) 20:39, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I am not Filipino, and I am not related to any Filipino editors, but I don't think it matters. I think that your fears of mistreatment by Filipino editors are a little overstated. I think most editors are simply trying to write good content (assume good faith). I commented on the AFDs of those two articles you wrote because I felt strongly that they were not good articles. I am worried that you wrote them because you were personally invested in the subjects and in your predictions. Your alleged powers are not grounds for a wikipedia article. While you may write articles about people or things you know personally, it is important to remain neutral. When you write about bad things happening to people who you feel have wronged you, you risk violating the Neutral Point of View pillar of the wikipedia policy. maxsch (talk) 20:39, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, but it matters for me, since I have strong evidence against some Filipino editors. You got it right, that these 2 deleted articles were correctly deleted, in Wiki terms. I admit that I failed to first see to it that there was already a 2007-2008 event article, ok, mea culpa. Second, you are correct that I wrote those 2 deleted articles to insert my predictions which happened. Well, at first, yes, it was not neutral, but when templates were added there by editors, I added many edits of events which were not my predictions and which were really standout, to make it neutral. I was made a JOKE, when the editors asked me to make it neutral, but in the 2nd round of AFD, they fought and muscled me. Past is past, but it will never be forgotten. If you take a cursory perusal of my written articles, even as a junior editor here without even any college background on internet and pc, still I managed to write the articles copying the styles of good articles. I have not written any article which is biased. In fact I never complained when a very good admin deleted or re-directed my healing and coconut oil articles. We all commit mistake, but the critical fact is that many Filipino editors are really here out to muscle me. Human nature and human psychology are factors on this. For this reason, I pasted the adoption template asking for a disinterested and fair adopter. Anyway, I do not complain regarding my edits which were deleted by you or them. So, I leave these matters to all editors since we are all here equal. If you have time, I want to share with you my life, story and the values[6] I fought for as I learned from the real "ratio studiorum" of St. Ignatius which the Jesuits / Ateneo alumni failed to follow[7]. I wrote my first book and I am writing my 2nd book.--Florentino floro (talk) 07:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I prefer to be adopted by a foreigner-experienced adopter

Since the first adopter ended the adoption at his and my option, and when I posted the template adoption for the first time, I opted and insisted on the adoption by an impartial, non-Filipino, any nationality other than Filipino, AND not related to any Filipino user or editor, so that the problems of many useless and irrelevant messages from Filipino editors might be tempered if not permanently enjoined, and to tutor me on the fine demarcation line between news and encyclopedia content. - --Florentino floro (talk) 05:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 3,152 edits / Contributions, and I share to Wikipedia, my 367 pages and 900 pages Books on Philippine Dwarves

As of today, my total contributions to Wikipedia: 3,152 edits. Today, I want to share with editors, administrators and all who would open this great Online encyclopedia my First and Second Books, the very first articles in the whole world about living, true, virtual reality ang Googled immortal Philippine duendes or dwarves, "LUIS, Armand and Angel". The first book (367 pages) which I had POD by Central Books was just donated OPAC to top libraries; the book's cut of is merely December, 2006; hence, the 2nd Book, about 900 pages (but may broken down to 2 books) is the real and complete story on my case and the 3 mystic dwarves that became world famous on April 6, 2006; this book is not a legal code/matter or essay; this is principally a FIRST book on Filipino Culture about Philippine duendes; the rest of the elementals, elves, gnomes, hobbits, leprechauns, etc. are just folklore, fiction and tales in games or internet; I posted these, in WikiPilipinas[8]]: Floro wrote his[9] 400-pages[10] First Book[11]on Philippine Dwarfs' - ISBN 9789716916195; [12]"World-famous Mystic Armand, LUIS and Angel[13], the Three Dwarves MEET THE JUDGE,[14]Psychic and Healing Martyr or Filipino Justice".[15]. His second book[16], "LUIS, Armand and Angel Meet Fortune-telling Judge" (900 pages)[17] REVEALS the real triune holy angels, more deeply. --Florentino floro (talk) 07:45, 9 April 2008 (UTC) - --Florentino floro (talk) 06:54, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Miriam Defensor-Santiago

Dear Mr Floro, if you continue like this [18] [19], I will have no choice but to seek to have you blocked. Wikipedia is not a forum in which you can seek redress for perceived wrongs. A minor injury is not surgery, it is not an "omen of her fall." You cannot add content like this to the biography of a living person: see wp:biographies of living persons. Wikipedia is not a tabloid, and you should know this by now. maxsch (talk) 17:27, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I have read carefully the links, and the source is our top paper which is not tabloid: Philippine Daily Inquirer; and this head accident is not minor since it is headline all over here, and I personally saw the news, not only in top papers, but in our top TV (GMA Network and ABS-CBN). She was CT scanned, but the head injury needed 3 stitches. She is not an ordinary person here in the Philippines; she was one of the top winners of the Senate slate; she lost to Fidel Ramos in the 1992 elections by very slim margin. New abound that she was cheated, and was the real President of the Philippines. So, from a foreigner (if you are) point of view, without reading other news links here, not tabloids, it seems that such accident is not notable. But, but, and but, I am here in the Philippines and it was top headline all over, defeating even other foreign news. I had contributed more than 3,150 edits, and, I never complained if my foreign edits were deleted, since I have no access to foreign news. But here, before I edit a news, since you repeatedly sent message to me, and I always explained that from my deep study of the articles, I tried to have found the same worth notable to be "IN THE FUTURE source of research of students". Miriam Santiago-accident is a major encyclopedic section here in the Philippines and it must even be in a health section. Unfortunately, there are lots of editors here, including administrators, who have different views.

So, if you have traced the history of Santiago, the article was written and created as if by her own peers. It was so biased and not neutral. When it was cleaned up, all the health and slur sections were deleted, making it more biased. So, if you read it now, it seems that it is 90% positive and so, very partial: SPAM advertisement of her wares: she got only 77% in Bar exams, contrary to her claims and news about her alleged brilliance. This accident will balance the matter. Remember the alleged suicide of her son who died, A.R. Santiago. Such is not even her life but it was in here. How much more is her own head CT scanned? Is this a mere news? I suggest that you consult administrators, to be fair. I was told that there are lots of administrators here, why not bring this up with them. I wasted time here, only to have my important articles deleted. Who would suffer, of course, Wikipedia and its controversial standing. In fact, in many forums I joined, many members criticized Wikipedia as very unreliable and I defended it, since it is good article for scholarly research. But, if editors and administrators would be biased against another editor or administrator, what will be the future of this encyclopedia. If you have the power to block me, I had been banned in 20 forums of 120 I joined (by wiccans and atheists). I am uncompromising, with respect to integrity, justice and ideals of truth. While IT and learning, or great education can seemingly cover-up anger, vendetta and bitterness among editors and even administrators, as GIFTED, I state with certainty, that I discern what is vengeance from scholarly edit. It's your choice. You need a rest, in editing my articles. In my entire life, I debunked FEAR. Fear causes cancer, stroke and death. I fought and faced death 3 times. I fought for the right. Last October 15, 2007, I filed the disbarment case against Miriam Santiago, due to the P 10 million bribery landmark case of first impression in Philippine history, implicating Consuelo Ynares-Santiago. Since it is cover-up, the Supreme Court of the Philippines, in January 22, 2008 resolution En Banc, DISMISSED my case, and it was released on March 15, 2008, I received the judgment on March 24, 2008. And when I read the tons of top non-tabloid news here, on her FALL, I added, edited it. Wikipedia, I know is not a court for redress. It cannot reverse the dismissal by our Court. But the CRITICAL FACT of head accident is a major and notable news which would be an OMEN of dire punishments due to lies, corruption and vendetta. I read the Wiki rules and most of them are not hard and fast but policies. The interpretation of many of the rules led to corruption, like in courts. Black and white may be gray depending on the money or considerations of anger or rage. It is the same here, very long rules, and very great leeways for interpretation - toss coin judgments. I read between your lines. Before you had been editing my works, I did use Wikipedia Psalm 109 and 73 not against a race or nation but against bitter Filipino editors who unfairly deleted my 2 articles, using Wiki rules as cover. I admitted defeat.

Now, you stated that you are not a) a Filipino and b) not related to any Filipino. I am a judge and lawyer. I had been in practice since 1984, and I had observed the demeanor of lawyers and witnesses. I know lies and truth. I know hidden agenda. I had seen all who wisely kept bitterness, anger, vengeance and hatred in their pockets. But you FAILED to tell me what is your nationality. I viewed your contributions, and I found it hard to accept that you had singled my contributions since the very time my 2 articles were deleted. I do not want to suspect that you have bitterness against me. But, but , but, since I contributed here, I know that there are lots of administrators and editors. And I never found an administrator who had your "persistence and determination" to single me, despite my fair and good articles contributed here. I allowed you to delete my edits, and I have no objection if you are an administrator, to use the rules or the button, to block me. I was accused by the court of being the Angel of death. That is a lie. An accusation is not a judgment. I am the real and only living Angel of Death, not Adolf Hitler. I have preserved copies of chat yahoo messenger between me and a former USA multi-decorated navy Master Chief, inter alia, who stated to me that I moved him 4 inches, several times, when he was in southern Philippines (and that in the whole world, I am the only person he saw with a snow white and orange aura). LUIS, a holy angel, my guide is not a phoney. He was responsible for all the 5 mystic fires, the dire deaths and surgeries, accidents - in the 2 deleted articles. Unlike administrators who only have the button to put off a good man and editor, I do not have the power to destroy: I solely possess the GIFT of annihilation up to the 4th generation. I state with certainty here in Wikipedia to prove to you that I contribute to make article fair and neutral: I am the only USER whose user page is world-famous, internet celebrity/personality and no user here can match ever, forever my userpage. I repeat I have NO FEAR, and it is your choice. And I will repeat, since 1989, and since 1999, I was and am a very poor lawyer, judge who has no car, rents a house, beg from a brother, and was is jobless in pretend world. It is a waste of time to concentrate on me. I am nothing. ---Florentino floro (talk) 06:04, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

• Florentino, I have mentioned to you before that it is considered extremely distasteful to bring up the race or nationality of another editor as a negative. Please re-read Wikipedia's policies on civility and personal attacks. Beeblbrox (talk) 06:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

• Also, you should only be representing your own opinions. If your mystic dwarves want to have a say on Wikipedia, they should create their own accounts. Beeblbrox (talk) 06:39, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

• But then, if they would, you and others would file a sockpuppet case against them, will they? --Florentino floro (talk) 07:01, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

• With due respect, and lest I be misconstrued, and if you read my previous replies to this user, this is merely a rejoinder or Sur-rejoinder on our long debate on news. I admitted defeat, when my 2 articles were deleted (vote by most Filipino editors). I read Wiki rules on nationality. What is prohibited is attack because of a race (other race and not my own nationality). I am a Filipino and proud to be one. I do not cast aspersion on Filipinos. I complained legally and Wikilly against Filipino editors not all of them but those who voted against my 2 articles. I do not cite my own or their nationality in contempt. The critical fact, is: I found bias NOT from NATIONALITY or FILIPINO race but from specific Filipino editors: it is their unfair act, that I complained of and replied to in the AFD and here, and I admitted defeat. I thought that was the end. Now this user is pestering me on news. I don't know, if I am so ignorant of news and encyclopedia, and maybe he is a genius on this issue of news. In, fact, he deleted many of my articles like modern wrist watch auction record, but I kept quiet, IGNORED him, since I cannot do anything about the pathetic situation. Now the THREAT of blocking. But where is FEAR, who has one? What Wikipedia rule and its spirit prohibits is for an editor to hate a race, since this is against international law. Why should I curse my own nationality? So, the above musings are only REJOINDER to his previous statement that "he is not a Filipino editor and not related to Filipino editors", and I am just developing that angle of debate,since that is the very lis mota of the discussion. I do not attack our Filipino nationality, only the extreme vandalism using Wiki rules by Filipino editors, it it the act that I complained of not the race, for why should I hate my own native land? Yuo suggested adoption, but they scared my adopter. I have only one spiritual weapon in this broken world of materialism called Rule of Law which is the source of sin, and sin is cause of death per St. Paul's letters: Psalm 109. Miriam Santiago had long news of attacks and complaints on corruption. She is a giant and I am a dwarf. And it pains me that my crusade against national corruption was put to rest when the Court last week nailed my disbarment case against her in the coffin. But God is watching us: she fell and had serious head injuries. Is this a minor new? And please, do not include my holy angels called mystic dwarves (due to our painful colonization as slaves of Spain from 1521-1899), from their spanish Duende (mythology). I edit here on myself, and I do not consult dwarves, as I was removed from service due to false accusation of writing decisions due to dwarf consultation. In return, the one who wrote wrote that decision (Atty. Bibing Timbangkaya) had 7 stitches, her first born, while my lawyer of that world famous case Rene Saguisag who is the partner of my lawer Atty. Timbangkaya, the mother of Atty. Bibing, suffered 7 broken ribs on November 8, 2007. Why should you include my spirit guides in this discussion. How can we make Wikipedia a better reliable encyclopedia, when crab mentality flourishes. Assume good faith and please read the rules on statutory construction of the intent of the rules of Wiki on news. Please be guided accordingly. --Florentino floro (talk) 06:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, could you stop casting curses on us Filipino editors under Psalm 109? Some of us who have never even touched your edits have started feeling the effects of the curse; my family was massacred and my house burned down the other day and I blame you and your curse. Please stop, your curses are growing out of control. :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.28.150.66 (talk) 07:47, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I never recited Psalm 109 and 73 against you, I stated that: these holy and biblical psalms are the only personal and spiritual defenses against injustice, specifically, those who in bitterness, used Wiki Rules, to have deleted my 2 articles. Since you said you never participated in the deletion, why should you worry, there is no higher power than God. I am a closed Catholic and former Vincentian seminarian, and I am in total war against evil, so why should I curse those who are innocent like you? There is no truth of any massacre or fire on you houses, since my mystic dwarves only burned with violet spiritual lights, the 5 courts, where they said: Mary and the Eucharist must be enthroned. Repent, get off hypocrisy, lest dire punishments befall upon sinners. Watch EWTN, and you will know more about biblical curses, or take a bath. Last First Friday, I challenged teh Supreme Court per 39 pages[20] Motion for Mary and the Holy Eucharist, for repentance, and to reinstate me against the null and void appointment of Carlos Flores to replace me; I promised them that within days, my 3 elves will show to the whole country a dire omen of "godly reprisal", after this Court dismissed my disbarment case against Miriam Santiago last week. And it pains me, until she FELL. Now my edit was deleted, and I am so sad, and then threatened blocked. I annihilate, up to the 4th generation. Consider this:

[edit] Disbarment Case Dismissed and Head Fall, not Notable?

I just received this Supreme Court Resolution in disbarment administrative case A.C. No. 7663[21][22], which dismissed my disbarment case (the very first in Philippine history docketed against a Philippine senator since 1901, you can check the Court, www.supremecourt.gov.ph), last week, and I uploaded it on flickr and friendster to prove to all of you that the head fall and 3 stitches of Santiago are not coincidences but a prophecy of "godly reprisal" against lies, deceit and corruption in courts and government. Assume good faith in editing, and this edit on the head fall, supported by a Supreme Court authentic resolution in bank, first in history, would suffice to prove my point that the edit of her fall is NOTABLE and cures the neutrality of the biased article which showed her false wares. --Florentino floro (talk) 08:06, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

This really only confirms my suspicions. You had a lawsuit against Ms Santiago; it was thrown out for lack of merit. So now you seize upon any misfortune that befalls her and seek to publicize it through wikipedia. In the process you deliberately exaggerate the facts, "serious injury", "surgery". A CT scan is pretty standard procedure for a head injury, three stitches is not very many. The newspaper article you used as a source calls it a minor injury. Then in this long series of rants, you accuse me of lying. My nationality is irrelevant, and I refuse to let it become a part of this discussion. Then you brag about your user page, and your prophesies. You claim to have predicted "a dire omen of 'godly reprisal.'" Frankly, that's a little vague, and it does not make Ms Santiago's slip notable. When you say "I annihilate, up to the 4th generation," is that a threat? Wikipedia is supposed to be neutral, and you are bringing a decidedly non-neutral point of view. I do watch your edits, because I have told you over and over that specific types of edits are not appropriate. You continue to make that kind of edit, and I continue to fix them. maxsch (talk) 15:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

NOTED without action. I was advised and I admitted that it is pure wisdom not to debate with nor discuss with skeptics, atheists and agnostics. What you need perhaps, is to review the policies, the statutory construction vis-a-vis the spirit, letter and intent of Wikipedia rules and FAQs. I will sum them up for you: Wiki rules were formulated like laws, and their main purpose is to set parameters so that the online encyclopedia would be a permanent and not transient repository of (like Wiki news) research materials and articles which, in the future, would be cited by mankind; a news today, would, in the future be a notable thing; for example, you deleted this Santiago injury, alleging that it is not notable. But I do not find logic, when you did not delete the section or sentence on the alleged suicide of A.R. Santiago, why? In law, ascendants and descendants are equal in inheritance. So, if the parents (if living, of Santiago were murdered, then that is not notable for you and for me, since such matter does not concern the Senator). Let me notify you, regarding my spiritual and just battle for truth: when Santiago was JBC ex-officio member, I wrote her several pleas, so that my case would since 1999 would be decided; but 10 times, she threw my appeals; so, since we are Catholics, and 99% with religion here, I notified the court of my vision of dire death in her family, and that was the A.R. Santiago alleged suicide. I studied for 8 years at the Ateneo, and when I was photocopying a pleading, A.R. Santiago's classmates told me that the truth is that A.R. Santiago did not commit suicide but ti was cover-up of the father's killing, they are not sure if it was accidental, or parricide. I have no personal anger against Santiago, but I have to fight against this system of corruption. Like you and many Filipino editors here, all of us have ideals. But I am apolitical, and I never voted since 1965. I only believe in the political philosophy of Plato and Socrates, and there is no remedy for all these corruption except, as I said, the enthronement of the Image of Mary and the Holy Eucharist in the 5 mystic court fire places.

On Rene Saguisag: parenthetically, on November 5, 2006, I cursed the entire judiciary per cleansing under Psalm 109 and 73; thus 6 days and a month, thereafter, James and LUIS Bersamin were murdered after I talked to and begged from CA Justice Lucas Bersamin; then, the 5 mystic fires which burned our corrupt courts starting January 15, 2007 came to pass; so, on November 5, 2007, [23] my birthday, I challenged the court, to close my case and let me just use these Psalms to cleanse them; in the motion, I discussed and argued about Rene Saguisag, my counsel in this world-famous case; I gave him 3 chances, until on November 8, he had 7 broken ribs and Dulce Saguisag died; then, last first Friday, after the court denied my disbarment case against Miriam Santiago, I filed on April 4, the motion to reinstate me or to close my case forever, and to annul the appointment of Carlos Flores to replace me due to lapse of time, unconstitutional appointment, that is more than 90 days, and to consecrate the entire judiciary to Mary and the Eucharist. Yes, I warned and threatened the court of more e-j killings if they would not follow the Fatima 1918 pleas of Mary. I told the court that the Philippines will witness another SIGN or OMEN before the happening of the great and dire more punishments here. And so, before Santiago fell, I had that vision of her fall. While you may be correct that such fall might not be like the surgery of Tiger Woods or cancer of a USA Senator, still, the relevant antecedents I submitted here, are impressive to make this notable. And Wikipedia is different from Britannica and the rest, since, it can be a vehicle for truth and justice, observing Wiki rules.

Since a year I contributed here, it was only you who singled me out, and continuously deleted my edits done with good faith, sincerity, and with honesty. If your points are valid on the NEWS vis-a-vis notable issue, why don't you let other editors participate? If you take a cursory perusal of articles - hundreds of them on Philippine movie stars, stubs and class ones, where I contributed, you will find that even petty things were added there, and you can help deleting these, not mine. Most of them, especially the Famas Awards and other movie awards do not even have links or references, and they are SPAMS, to make advertisements of their prizes and careers. In my years of experience here, I found lots of spams, ads, and vandalism, and most important are no references and adding of not only news but very very petty things, from movie and entertainment tabloids. I repeat, please do not waste your time on me: I am just a jobless judge, renting a house, without any car, having begged money from a kin, who suffered a lot due to Filipino injustice and this is my destiny which I cannot really change. I am proud to be a Filipino and I do not curse my nation or my race or any Filipino; what I do imprecate is this system of bending Wiki rules for Filipino crab mentality (I lost the link of Gma news on crab mentality, should be here as proof). Further, you would notice, that, I did not complain when you and only you (not even an editor) deleted my edits. I gave you the benefit of a doubt, and I do understand your predicaments, personal problems, and I might be an answer as therapy for your pains and trials in life, an outlet so to speak. If it will make you very happy for my account to be blocked never say it, but do it for happiness sake. I am here in Wikipedia, as long as the administrators and the rules allow me to contribute, since life is short and if we are not yet bedridden, let us do something so that the world will benefit from our labor. So, I have no objection if you start the proceeding of blocking my account if the administrators will find that I violated the rules and the violation would fairly and justly demand ban. Otherwise, contribute to Wiki by cleaning up Philippine movie stars spam bios and articles, or add references there. Put them in your watch list, including mine. This will be good therapy for you. --Florentino floro (talk) 05:28, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Do you not realize yet that whether or not they are on your side, nobody is going to read all that? Please keep your replies short and succinct. Six sentences at most would be good. If you need ten thousand words to explain yourself then perhaps you should reevaluate whether or not your stance is the most reasonable one of all. --Migs (talk) 05:56, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

This is an old law trick, if you are losing an argument, change the subject, obfuscate. The core issue here is that you deliberately exaggerated Miriam Defensor Santiago's injuries so that they would seem notable and because you personally have a vendetta against her. By virtue of your lawsuit you cannot be neutral regarding her. This specific behavior is inappropriate, and it follows on a pattern of inappropriate edits. I have tried to help you and you have not tried to be helped. maxsch (talk) 13:58, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

You did not squarely traverse my rejoinder that A.R. Santiago suicide edit was just petty news and Miriam has another kid, 2 adopted children and parents, including former Defense Chief brother. So, if all these would commit suicide or die, you would not delete the same, but when Miriam herself meets an accident like this, you would find it not notable. It is up to you. - --Florentino floro (talk) 13:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

It is not up to me to justify every edit made by other editors to this article. It is however, up to you to justify edits you make. And generally, I would say that the death of someone's child is a more significant event than slipping and hitting one's head. Remember that we are talking about a real living person. Misinformation (like what you wrote) on wikipedia can affect a person's real life. maxsch (talk) 16:33, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Precisely, I justified with wisdom and reason for future research my edits; then, I suggested to you re - editing Philippine articles on movie stars to make them cleaner and more Wikified; and finally, let me contradict your statement that accused my edit on the head fall and 3 stitches of Santiago, as misinformation; the link I used to support the critical facts are top sources, and most reliable; study other links and they are the ones, like the tabloids, that muddle the issues on her fall; the best evidence to prove that my edit is faithful, true and correct, based on good records, is to call her office, to check if she really had 3 stitches since you stated that she is a living person. If there are really 3 stitches on her own head, as the source reported in fair reporting, then, such will not in any manner affect her life, since we live by truth of our acts; if she had 7 stitches like 7 broken ribs of my lawyer Rene Saguisag, then please add edit on my deleted edit, revert it, if you wish; at any rate, let us wait for further developments on her mental condition in view of the CT scan. It has chilling effect on the survival of the Senate of the Philippines, not so eerie, though. ---Florentino floro (talk) 04:50, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Term sharing - Puno and Quisumbing vs. Santiago: the fall and 3 stitches OMEN

Hi, thanks for visiting my page. I read your page and you did have great contributions. Well, as a lawyer, and judge, we were used to discuss and argue with more words. At the Ateneo we were taught on the first day: "KIS" (keep it short, since the bar examiner might not read). I confess that I must take the opportunity to REVEAL the truth about the death of A.R. Santiago, from the Ateneo student council's point of view, and the truth about Santiago's fall. Were it not for maxsch messages and replies vis-a-vis my rejoinders, in this discussion page, I would not in any manner, be allowed by Wiki rules, to bring these twin matters of great import to our nation. Let me digress, but this is important in the case of Miriam Santiago's fall and 3 stitches: a) today, Reynato Puno announced and admitted the term-sharing with Leonardo Quisumbing; the latter bowed down and convinced the 12 Justices to debunk Miriam Santiago, who was 99% to be appointed by GMA at the last moment of [24] "The circumstances surrounding Puno’s oath-taking in Malacanang were unusual. He was summoned to the Palace very late at night, and at 11:15pm, close to midnight of December 6, 2006, he took his oath. Only one justice was present (Dante Tinga) as most of the justices were not informed." I had lectured for more than 4 hours inside the chambers of and to Leonardo Quisumbing before a former mayor of his Masbate town about how GMA would appoint Santiago on December 6; but Santiago fell, due to my advices and prophecies of Reynato Puno's appointment, when his sister Marilyn Puno Santiago and p.s. for 25 years, Queen of the Supreme Court of the Philippines vice Luzviminda Delgado Puno+, the most charming, Jasmin Mateo[25] asked me per the mystic dwarves, in 3 hours Spanish card reading session at the 2nd floor of Supreme Court[26] to help Puno against Santiago in the appointment. The end result is: dalliance or covenant of term-sharing - Gentlemen's UP class '62 term-sharing agreement. But is it Leonardo Quisumbing's destiny to be Chief Justice, despite the curse of the dwarves? I replied to your message, quite clear and emphatic enough. - --Florentino floro (talk) 06:32, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tips

• Keep your comments down to a bare minimum, as I said before, to about five sentences. People can't absorb that much information in one sitting.
• We don't know the intelligence levels of any editors here so quantifying them might be offensive
• Edits can be reverted but not ordinarily deleted unless for security reasons (see WP:OVERSIGHT)
• Don't drive people that are willing to help you away by not listening to their advice. Even they have their limits.
• News cites are important if they give non-trivial information. For example for "X" gameshow, controversies regarding X would be a good cite as it is important to the subject itself. A news cite that tells us that Y person one X gameshow is hardly non-trivial and should be discarded.

--Lenticel ^(talk) 09:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your time, and kindness. I was emailed weeks ago, by a Filipino editor that there really was/is a campaign to muscle me by co-Filipino editors, and I was further advised to post a section here that "I am now for the time being, taking a final break from Wiki". I replied that, I do have another path, and since 2006 I cursed FEAR, since it is cause of all anxieties. I deeply understand that editors or admins are like justices or magistrates who are humans and might be offended. I often write in cryptology, and you must read the message inserted in the lines, not read between the lines since I have no FEAR, but I predict or inscribe prophecy. They might of course, have not reached this spiritual level, but in accordance with Wiki rules, such spiritualism it the best defense against violation of the Wiki policies and rules. Sincerely, and I still keep in my chest, your barnstar, hoping that I would be back to see Negros, Mambukal, again (It was good Friday, 1998 and I thought I would fall in the deep ravine, the small path was just 2 feet. I will never forget that resort and now it has butterfly garden. Visit Mambukal). ---Florentino floro (talk) 09:38, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blocking, Judge Floro

Hi, are you still an administrator? I just want to COMPLAIN and NOTIFY you about a threat to block my user (I am not familiar how to deal with this guy and vandalism). I was emailed by some editors per private message that many Filipino editors were out to muscle me and to ban me, due to my prophecies, inter alia. I told them that WikiPedia is merely one of 140 forums and places I registered and joined (I was banned in 20 wiccans and atheist forums), and I don't care if guys are stupid and unruly. I debunked FEAR in my life. I have high respects to you, since I knew you were so impartial, and when you deleted or re-directed my oil articles, I never complained since, I found that you are on biology etc. not related to these. But this User:Maxschmelling. User talk:Maxschmelling had been pestering me[27] on Philippine news editing. He had gone wild, and he even deleted my modern wrist watch record auction from Reuters news. I ignored him since he must have had a family mess or job crisis, inter alia. I discern and let these go. Is this guy an administrator? He claimed that he is not a Filipino and not related to Filipino but has lots of fear to show his nationality. I had used WikiPedia Psalm 109 and 73 since when I read Wiki rules, I could not defend myself against vendetta or cover-up and hidden agenda by editors and administrators who were out to muscle me, for reasons, as personal defense based on Bible and spirituality, since the world is full of rage. Please enlighten me on the power of this guy to block and to threaten to block when all my edits are not news. And what is my remedy against him? Can you block him? Thanks. - --Florentino floro (talk) 06:26, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Sir, yes, I am an administrator. I don't believe Maxschmelling is an administrator, but if an editor is concerned about your behavior, they can bring it up at WP:AN/I, the administrator's noticeboard for incidents. I didn't peruse all of the text you have above, but I didn't see any "threats", as you claim. Nor are his edits vandalism. Regardless of the editors who e-mailed you privately, I sincerely doubt there is a conspiracy to harass you on Wikipedia. And indeed, the best course of action would be to continue constructive edits.

Thank you for the compliments; I appreciate that you regard me as impartial. In the same vein, might I also ask something of you? I don't pretend to know much about your prophecies and, as a scientist, it would be hard for me to accept them. In your editing, could you possibly abstain from editing articles that you have a personal connection to, such as Miriam Defensor Santiago. Editing articles like that can be seen as a conflict of interest. Additionally, I agree with Maxschmelling that your edit (diff) introduced language, "seriously injured", that misrepresented the facts. Per WP:BLP, Maxschmelling was correct in removing the information immediately. I might also say that such a small incident, while some news organizations may cover it, have no place here on Wikipedia unless it's somehow also connected to a major event. As it stands, the news story you put into that article did not pass our notability guidelines. I would take Maxschmelling's advice - news stories are troublesome because while the information may be immediately pertinent, it doesn't mean that every news item needs to be included in that person's biography on Wikipedia. Would you expect to see such reported in any other encyclopedia? Keep that question in mind when you consider adding something to Wikipedia.

Additionally, I hope you consider dropping your inquiry into Maxschmelling's nationality. It is not pertinent to this discussion. If you feel you're being "muscled out" by a larger group, consider gather evidence (diffs and that e-mail you spoke of) and leave me another message with the details. You are also able to e-mail me. But again, I highly doubt that any such conspiracy exists. Cheers, Rkitko ^(talk) 02:19, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your time, and impartial insights, and now, I stand corrected: I do question or appeal your wisdom, and I never did, for I read your profile or page, and it is a great one, for me, very personal. Anyway, it is so nice, that a Filipino jobless judge would be known and be guided by a very kind administrator. God Bless, and good luck. - --Florentino floro (talk) 11:36, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to Stephen Hawking

Hi. You recently changed the spelling of "realisation" to "realization" on Stephen Hawking. From your edit summary it appears that you are not aware that this is an acceptable spelling of the word in British English. As there are many different national variations of English, general practice is to use the variety that has the closest connection to the subject. As Hawking is British, it is appropriate to use British English in his article instead of American English. Natalie (talk) 23:08, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I apologize, since my computer showed red, so I clicked the correction, for I thought that was spelling error. Thanks for your concern. - --Florentino floro (talk) 08:35, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] St. Hedwig's in Chicago

Thank you for your wonderful addition to the article on St. Hedwig's in Chicago about the shrine to Our Lady of Manaoag! Its always wonderful to acknowledge all the diverse cultures and traditions that mix in Chicago. I was hoping to improve the article on Our Lady of Manaoag by adding a picture of the original statue, would you know anyone willing to upload one onto wikimedia commons?--Orestek (talk) 19:02, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I had a terrible experience in Wiki commons. I uploaded many original pictures there[28], and almost all were deleted. I was just able to upload my pics, but it was almost deleted here Florentino Floro. My account in commons was blocked for 3 weeks. I read the Rules of commons, and as lawyer / judge, I felt these so hard to digest. I uploaded my own picture, but I made a mistake there, of showing the Topico watermark, hence copyright violation. I had gone to our Lady of Manaoag about 4 times, and I took pics but it was so hard to, and dim[29]. Maybe, you can get a kind help from any administrator, since, if you have a good pics of our Lady, then, it might be possible to upload one. Thanks, too. - --Florentino floro (talk) 06:45, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] UP Charter Change

I think it is notable, just provide the necessary reliable sources.--Lenticel ^(talk) 06:21, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I hope it must stay there. There are many UP editors here to protect it. - --Florentino floro (talk) 06:45, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Adoption

I would be interested in adopting you. Just let me know. Cheers! - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 19:44, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I had been waiting for long, long time, and now there you are. It is the greatest honor for a jobless Filipino dwarf judge, Florentino Floro, I, myself, and no other else, to have a legitimate foreign and royal Wiki blood administrator, as parent. Please teach me to leave better footprints in Wikipedia. God Bless. --Florentino floro (talk) 08:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

[edit] User:Maxschmelling vs. you

Just wanted to let you know that I'm going to work on reviewing the points you have provided at my talk page. [30] [31] However, I have to caution you of one thing: you come across a little too aggressively in both of your posts, so I would suggest calming down and just providing the evidence. You should start by using all caps less often, and also Maxschmelling did not "vandalize" you edits; he instead reverted them. However, I will still review all of the evidence fairly. - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 22:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. Regards. --Florentino floro (talk) 07:23, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Paul McCartney

Discussing a content issue on an article's talkpage (as I did at Talk:Paul McCartney) is not disruptive. It is the right thing to do. What you did, bringing up irrelevant personal issues and attacks, now that is disruptive. maxsch (talk) 18:25, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Please ask the editor who fairly and correctly delivered the right homily to you. The problem is not with me and the other editors. The core issue is you style of editing. It is very negative, disruptive and makes Wikipedia very unreliable. First, your editing, by reverting and deleting with submission of false and bad faith reason demonstrating badges of vendetta, fraud towards vandalism, in the edit summary, is a virtual contempt and insult on the intelligence of co-equal editors. That is negative karma, and a virtual biblical curse per our and democratic spiritual and religious beliefs. Premises considered, your argument and stance is hereby DENIED for utter lack of merit. What will you gain or profit, by the such your modus operandi, scheme, habit, system and style of editing? Nada. None. Nothing. It will be a vicious circle of your editing by reverting, then, homily or like yesterday, insulting words by a very good and honest editor, thereafter, reverting by editors and by myself. All you need is therapy, which I can provide you in yahoo messenger. What is your personal problem. Please learn how to be a good Wikipedia editor. It is for your own good, lest you be into perdition like my lawyer Rene Saguisag, who attacked not myself but my religious beliefs. May you find peace in your troubled mind. I suggest you travel to Iraq or China and Burma. You need fresh blood transfusion to enkindle your kindness of ... if you have one. --Florentino floro (talk) 06:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tadić victory

OK is good that you added this, but why were you wrote same at talk pages? Are you doubtful is this belong here? What one can discuss here about it?
--Čikić Dragan (talk) 19:20, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for visiting my page. The reason why I took pains in explaining an/or discussing my edits or contributions to any article, since 3 weeks ago, more or less, is: I have a pending complaint to ban or disable user-[32][# 119 Petition to Ban/Block User:Maxschmelling or to Disable his edits on my edits User:Maxschmelling who edits by reverting or deleting almost all of my daily edits since about 3 months ago. What I do is, I have to revert and add again after his deletion. My first adopter User:Ianlopez1115 resigned due to this problem, and, I am presently adopted by User:Diligent Terrier, who was an administrator. So, after each editing or contribution, I have to discuss the notability and propriety of my edit, inter alia. Regards, and Good luck. --Florentino floro (talk) 05:58, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Because I'm partially fresh in understanding Wikipedia's inner staff I didn't understand all you wrote me. But I see there is a reason. Somehow logically such explanations don't belong to talk pages for me. But on the other side I see that maybe there is no other mechanism to solve such problems.
Have fun in writing!
--Čikić Dragan (talk) 09:23, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

It is thus wonderful for us editors from all parts of the Globe to know and meet each other, aside from our leaving footprints here to make Wikipedia a better research book or encyclopedia. I am here in Malolos, Bulacan, Philippines, and thanks to Wikipedia for knowing you. --Florentino floro (talk) 09:28, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Advice

I appreciate your support, but can I give you some advice? Leave out the references to dwarves and bible passages when writing comments. I am not deriding your beliefs, but people might get the wrong idea. I wish you the best.--andreasegde (talk) 09:51, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the message. Actually, I desire to limit my replies by just using Wiki style, brief and objective, or in accordance with express rules. I deeply understand, that unlike in my Philippines (here where 99% has religion), many countries do have other beliefs or non-beliefs. However, my dilemma or predicament, is that Wiki forbids personal attacks, etc. This kind of things are the same stuffs hated in trial before jurists, since, the best way to destroy a case, is to raise your voice, temper and blow your head.

Editing is Wikipedia, consists of throwing all sorts of angers, bitterness, vendetta and mental illnesses gathered from life's trials, not to the kitchen sink, but to co-equal editors, via reverting, etc. So, with the negative impact of citing religious or spiritual matters in talk pages, I became immune from Wiki suit, but at the same time, I admit that some editors who have different kinds of beliefs would be turned off. In my experience as user/member in[33]LUIS, Armand and Angel in 140 World Forums, and more importantly in my created legendary 28 pages, 54,000 views, 1,355 replies Rush forum thread[34], I encountered and learned to respond to all kinds of weirdos, wise and idiots, alike. I opted to use Psalm 109 of Wikipedia against this user, since only time will teach this user, and not words, to calm down. Ignoring this user, or delivering a homily ... how can we teach this user contribute much better to Wiki? Imagine,90% of all my edits were reverted by deleting, and I never shouted at this user.

I spend more than 7 hours daily to contribute to Wiki, with my present 3,700 edits. And this user, does nothing daily, but to revert all I worked for. I know that life if not fair, but ... Like at trials, I used my head and not my heart, so I tamed this user by prayer. Thanks, again, and I hope for your deep understanding of my crusade against this user. --Florentino floro (talk) 10:32, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] May 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Unidentified flying object appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. SomeUsr |  Talk Contribs 11:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your correction and amendment of my edit. I am new here, in Wikipedia, despite my some contributions. I stand corrected, since this article is non-legal (I am a lawyer, and I admit that this is not my excuse for not reading the report well); and UFO is really a very hard subject. Regards. --Florentino floro (talk) 07:01, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

• a'right, no problem. btw: i didn't notice you're really "new" here to wiki...well then: welcome :-) SomeUsr |  Talk Contribs 12:18, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, again, for your kind understanding. --Florentino floro (talk) 11:01, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jelac

It's been done. I created a redirect to the main article using the acronym "Jelac". You can now type "Jelac" in the search box and you'll get redirected to Judicial Executive Legislative Advisory and Consultative Council. You can also read WP:REDIRECT to learn about creating redirects. Happy editing! — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 11:53, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, for your kindness, and for this great info, on re-direct, since it adds to my learning, here. You edit is a great help for the legal community, on this 2-pages MOA, first in our legal history. --Florentino floro (talk) 06:44, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I just noticed today that it is Jelacc but papers use Jelac. So, may I again visit you and quote my message to this kind user who alerted me of this. I typed Jelacc in Wiki search but it won't re-direct. "Hi User:Richarddr1234. Thanks for contributing to Jelac or Jelacc. Even if I created the article, I just noticed only now that the acronym is Jelacc, even if the papers or the S.C. would call it Jelac. So, I asked the kindness of Kurt to re-direct Jelac to the article since the title is too, too long. In fact, I told Kurt the problem of the legal community and of myself in looking for this by typing the title in Wiki search engine but I failed 3 x, so I had to go to my contributions. Maybe, let us ask the help of Kurt to include Jelacc in re-direct so that if a jurist or reader would type Jelacc in Wiki search, it would also re-direct there." Regards. --Florentino floro (talk) 08:13, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Done. Now, whether you key-in "Jelac" or "Jelacc", you'll get re-directed to the correct article. — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 10:55, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the second time. By the way, as new user here, I am not sure when and how to archive my/this talk page, as my former adopting resigned parent did once, Ian Lopez. Hence, I wanna bother you again, if there is a need now to archive my page it might be too long, if so, please, since I do not know how to. Regards. --Florentino floro (talk) 11:00, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Neptune Statue

What do you mean by saying "this is the only statue and the rarest" here [35]? It is not the only statue, here are a couple of others: [36] in Florence, [37] in Bristol, [38] in Gdansk, [39] in Bologna. And as for "the rarest," rarity has no meaning when you are talking about one of a kind artworks. The Neptune (mythology) article is about the Roman god, a figure in classical mythology. There are many statues of him, made at various eras in history, some are in museums, some are lost, some are found. None of them are relevant to the figure of Neptune in classical mythology. If you put this edit back in the Neptune page again, I will report you for edit warring. maxsch (talk) 17:21, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

DENIED for lack of merit. Reasons of my RULING: First, the article is about Neptune (mythology). What is the meaning of mythology? Well, in layman's terms, it is about the Greek's culture, specifically on their religious beliefs on Gods, like Athena, and here, Neptune. Like us, Filipinos, we have idols, like the Rice God, Bul-ol, Bathala, Anito, etc., all considered by our history as culture, religion and folklore and mythology. Second, the discovery was treasure, for it was reported part of the treasure trove, and is not only NOTABLE, but one of the rarest find ever, as far as the bare and like-stub article at bar. Third, your citing of links on other statues are not only irrelevant, immaterial and impertinent to the discussion, since the pivotal issue, is only the notability and propriety of adding the treasure discovery of the statue of Neptune to this article. Why? So what if there other statues or millions of them? Here in Philippines you can find millions of statues of anitos, bul-ol etc. in Baguio, but Neptune's treasure discovered statue, as the report stated, is so rare in terms of time, place and events. Fourth, why don't you discuss in the talk page of the article, the links and citations of other Neptune statues, so that other editors can rebut me or you, for a better and more intellectual discussion of the issue. Fifth, you had been here in Wikipedia, just to edit or revert my scholarly and well-researched contributions, amid other editors disgust upon your method and agenda. Sixth, you never created an article nor had you, like us editors who spent long hours of research to create articles and add edits, we, aired frustration, disgust and were most perturbed by your disruptive editing. Seventh, why are you threatening me, a well-respected editor who had more than 3,700 edits, of editing warring? What is your basis? I spent and wasted lots of time to work for Wikipedia, and then, by reverting or amending your edits, to cure the defects of your bad faith editing, of your stubborn refusal to read the rules, to read carefully the links like in University of the Philippines and lots of articles where I contributed and you reverted without any valid ground. Please read carefully Wiki rules on edit warring and assume good faith. Please be guided accordingly, since I have a pending petition to ban or suspend you. I leave all these matters to my adopting parent, since daily I am currently submitting tons and hard evidence that a) you do not contribute by creating any article nor adding any edit, but b) you solely revert, delete or take off my and your fellow-editors' edits, only to be regularly reverted by us. All rights reserved, none waived. --Florentino floro (talk) 05:54, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Mr Floro, please be civil. Using phrases like "DENIED, for lack of merit" and "my RULING" is not polite, and presumes an authority that you do not have. I cited links to other statues because your edit summary [40] said "this is the only statue and the rarest." I wanted to show you that those two statements were actually false. And since those were your stated reasons for making the edit, their factual status is pertinent. A few more quick point of fact: 1) Neptune is a figure in Roman mythology, not Greek, as you stated above. Poseidon is the Greek equivalent. 2) I did discuss the edit in the talkpage of the article. See [41] 3) I have created articles, see this [42], [43] for example.

Edit warring, described here WP:EW is a serious charge. On the Neptune (mythology) page and the Heather Mills page, you have repeatedly reverted without engaging in the talk page discussions that I initiated. No, I don't think saying "Denied for utter lack of merit" is the same as engaging in a discussion. maxsch (talk) 17:47, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Again,again and again. I repeatedly demanded that you study carefully and objectively the rules. I cite to you the rule subject of our discussion, to prove to you that you had continuously made confrontational edits of almost 90% of my edits. The only solution to your problem and our infinite battle is that you submit our day-to-day debate, contradictions and battles to informal and formal dispute resolution. I repeat, for your guidance, please create articles, then read the rules on how to edit or add contributions, and when you are already a veteran user like me with 3,800 edits, you can start editing other editors edits. You will face many editors who will shout and spit on you, unlike me who is so kind enough to just biblically curse you and your loved ones by my spiritual Psalm 109/73, to let you behave and make good edits. Here: "Edit warring is not necessarily characterized by any single action; instead, it is characterized by any mindset that tolerates confrontational tactics to affect content disputes. Edit warring is the confrontational use of edits to win a content dispute. Identifying edit warring is often a judgment call administrators must make when cooling disputes. There are several measures that administrators currently use to determine when a user is engaged in edit warring[44] Alternatives -Editors with combative mindsets should seek to replace an edit warring approach with that of Wikipedia:Revert only when necessary. Before making multiple reverts, consider discussing the disputed changes on the other editor's user talk page or yours, and remember that it is easy to misunderstand intentions and overestimate others' aggression on the Internet. Believing that an adversary is simply "wrong", "POV pushing" or "uncooperative" is never an excuse for edit warring. Bringing wider attention to a dispute can help lead to compromise. Consider getting a third opinion or starting a request for comments. Neutral editors who are made aware of the dispute will help curb any truly egregious edits while also building consensus about the dispute. When these methods fail, both informal and formal dispute resolution is available." And please do not teach me the Rules, I am a lawyer and judge, and Wiki Rules could more intelligently be interpreted by us, than you, who repeatedly misused and misinterpreted the letter and spirits of Wiki rules and policies. Please take a good vacation or visit a psychiatrist, it will help you to have a peace of mind. It is utter waste of time, if daily, you concentrate on my scholarly made edits, as I repeatedly demanded that you improve and expand Philippine movie articles which are stubs. Edit them endlessly. --Florentino floro (talk) 09:03, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Florentino floro v. Maxschmelling

[edit] Big Brown link, and some advice

Hi, I've been noticing the discussion at User:Diligent Terrier/Florentino floro and Maxschmelling... you say that Maxsch should be banned because he removed a video link from the Big Brown article. The link does not seem to belong on the page in accordance with the Wikipedia:External links policy, based on the "What should be linked" and the "Links to be considered". And even if the link does belong, the errant removal of an external link is very very very far from warranting a ban on a user.

I thought that my adopting parent, had asked me to fill in the blanks there, so, from time to time, I had been filling the blanks there. Further, the mediators are also to come forward to submit their opinions, and a conclusion would be handed soon. It was not I who created that page but my parent, since I am under adoption. I suggested, and that was my repeated opinion as co-equal editor, that since there is a pending battle between us on the news etc. and reverting etc., it might be proper for that user to ask the opinions of the creator and other editors, before my edit is reverted or deleted. But please do examine this user's edit summary: the reason submitted was redundancy, but this user failed to read the link and view the video. I first put there the Kentucky video, and I added the next video, which is the rarest, since all in horse racing circles know, that there are only about 3, and this includes Big Brown, of horses that won 2 jewels of the American Triple Crown, since 1978. So, if the added video is not proper there in external links, you or this user / any other user, can remove it on that ground and not on redundancy, explaining it in the talk page. And it can be a reference support for an edit on how this horse became the only 3rd horse to win this so many horses since 1978. --Florentino floro (talk) 11:08, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, regarding your aggressive tone elsewhere on this talk page... Being a lawyer and a judge makes you no better than any other editor on Wikipedia, and doesn't make your actions or positions any more correct. Wikipedia doesn't give a damn what you are in real life. If Jesus Christ himself were to return to the Earth just to edit Wikipedia and clear up some facts on the God the Father article, he would still be held to the same standard as everyone else and the community would revert his edits if he didn't cite sources. Wikipedia's culture of ignoring the personal life of editors is the only thing preventing me from permanently blocking you outright because of your well documented and publicized history of mental illness, so next time you get any ideas about claiming intellectual superiority because of your legal background you'd do best to think again. TheCoffee (talk) 13:32, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

First, thanks for your advice. May I inform you of the following critical facts: a) I had been here in Wikipedia, even if I just learned PC and internet when I was Googled on April 6, 2006. I had been jobless and only renting a house since July 20, 1999, when Alfredo Benipayo recommended my preventive suspension due to consulting dwarves, inter alia. Since, I have / had no money and continuously begged for financial support to live, on measly sums since 1999, I suffered all these years, and I accepted my destiny as closed Catholic amid a broken world of materialism, hypocrisy, hatred, rage, vendetta and anger. I gained wisdom, when I mastered pain in all these long years of suffering. I am luckier than the earlier Christian martyrs and the 11 apostles who faced the Roman courts and were crucified, tortured, fed to the lions ... convicted of blasphemy, pronounced insane, etc. It was until 2004, that 7 p.m. night and the last was on August 29, 2006, that I begged and knelt before Rene Saguisag, my very own counsel of record in this infamous of famous dwarf case (75 pages Decision by Minita Chico-Nazario), to help me find a job, to give me a case, so that I could live, since I wanted to live, without begging money, and I finally asked him beg from his Corazon Aquino to help a very poor and jobless separated judge who has / had no case to handle and could not even handle a case. I was rejected, until the very 4 p.m. afternoon, of February 10, 2006, when, after more than 60 personal visits since 1999 to the home and august chambers of Regino C. Hermosisima, Jr., I was told that I had to choose money / separation from service or continue my filing of endless motions for reinstatement. I begged the very kind justice not to release the decision but just to give me a clerical job by his very own boss Corazon Aquino, since I wanted less sufferings. b) I am here because I accidentally met a CEO of a charcoal (small) company who wanted to market my coconut healing oil to help very poor Filipinos. So, I began to grope and crawl, since, in my experience in 140 forums, many members warned me that there are lots of smart guys in Wikipedia. I told them that there are lots more in the corridors of power in all judicial departments of the civilized world. I had been banned in 20 and admired in 120 forums, not because I am a prophet, but because, the dwarf story is unique and they wanted entertainment. You can see resurrection of the dead, healing and magic, daily, from weirdos and holy guys, pastors, etc., but you will never find a court decision which stole the robes and ruby slippers of a jurist. I was repeatedly asked by many to take a graceful exit since I am hated by many Filipino users, inter alia. Let me be candid with you: in my internet and pc experience since 2006, I still keep in my yahoo email, letters of sincere apologies to me by forum users or members who were physically moved by me at least 4 inches off their seats, and others had accidents. A retired high profile USA navy living here sent me his confidential links with tons of awards and pictures of his mansions. He said that I moved him 4 inches and he met 2 accidents after we chat. I never had done anything bad to him or to his family, and he is not angry to me, but he never opened any communications to me, due to fear. c) I would like to inform you of the email of my former adopting parent User:Ianlopez1115 to me, reporting the very heavy fights of Filipino editors to muscle and ban me. I asked the advice of a foreign administrator here, but, since she was so interested in the beauty of the Philippines, she remarked that I should rather travel and ignore those. But I am fed up of travel, since I performed so many rites of Psalm 109 against all my detractors and future enemies on First Fridays since 1999 until April 2006, when I became a prophet, the Angel of Death, unleashed. It took time before this / my new parent adopted me, but it is sad that my parent now, is no longer an administrator. Yes, I am gifted with bilocation, healing, exorcism, and annihilation, but I am just a very very poor Filipino, and I do not boast of anything. All my Ateneo honors, records, and bar ratings, which I worked for in those 8 long years from 1972-1983, are now in the rusty trash can. I have no illusion that anybody will be kind to help me move on, since I have to suffer more and more. I am not against any nationality or the Filipino race. But I do not believe that the Filipino is worth dying for. My Catholic faith convinced me to ignore and biblically curse those who have tons of detractors and litany of enemies only to bring their frustrations here especially when I edit. Many would use the rules to attempt to or conspire to ban or block me by digging Wiki sins I allegedly committed, resurrecting the dead, the past and my tones. I do not want to believe the email report of my former parent. I know that there is still hope in Wikipedia for all those who hate themselves and breed rage. Since I became a prophet, at the time of the creation of the angels, I threw fear and psychic phenomena which is evil. I faced physical death 3 times, but it ran off. I would have been lucky if I died on 2001, etc. Fear kills everyone. I had accepted my destiny and all I suffer today, is my very own immortality. I do not know how to die. I write here in utter cryptology. I caused the angioplasty of Jaime Licauco, since it was written in the books. Blessed are the dead and unborn since they will never see the injustice in this world (Ecclesiastes). Life is not fair, as Artemio Panganiban said (as he opened my yahoo chat messenger, but was so afraid to chat with me, even if on July 21, 1999, when I was suspended, he had utter faith in me against the lies of mental illness. d), I want to refute the accusations of mental illness from the decision which 75 pages were entirely written by Atty. Bibing Timbangkaya, the daughter of my very own lawyer/s, Atty. Vicky Timbangkaya, the senior partner of my lawyer Rene Saguisag. You can ask my classmates Cesar L. Villanueva, inter alia, and most especially, Fr. Romeo 'Archie' Ingtengan, S.J. ex-Provincial: I topped the Jesuit mental tests of 2 days under Fr. Parissi, SJ in 1972 and only 5 of us were admitted as PNSJ novices. My mental tests were falsified, from 108 to 68 IQ. The one who drafted the decision, Atty. Bibing, suffered the 7 stitches on the head of her son, after I begged her to let off the decision and just give me a low job. Rene Saguisag suffered 7 broken ribs, as Jejomar Binay last month begged for prayers for his mental sufferings. e) from the time I was here, I was told and knew that even If Bush would edit here, he would be treated as co-equal with any other editor, amid the Wiki scanner discovery of editing by the Vatican and PC of Queen Beatrix. f) if I had committed Wiki violations which require my account to be banned, or blocked, all I ask you is to push the button, after referring the matter first, to my adopting parent, who was an administrator, and to other administrators. What are their opinions on me, should I be blocked? I have no illusion that I can ban or block this user who is my stalker. This user is used by another, and I am here guarded due to hatred. But I believe in Wikipedia. It has rules and policies, and it was envisioned to help future researchers, professionals and even grade school students to made education and professions better. You, as administrator, are here, for reasons. We in this world are here, for reasons, as atheists, skeptics, agnostics and holy ghosts. This world is populated not only by hypocrites, the insane, weirdos, freaks, geniuses, but it is not made only for humans and animals. You are YOUTH, and your future might be rather bright, I hope and pray that you will not suffer what I suffered and suffer. I had little edits these days, since I lost a civil case here at Malolos. My only lot where I was born (at Meycauayan, was stolen due to P 80,000 bribery, even if I filed with the CA a writ of amparo case. And I am appealing. They wanted to rob my lawyer title also to stop my mouth and hands from talking about serious corruption, and surgeries, fires, accidents. I have no future, but to suffer and all is taken from me. But it is hard to suffer immortality. I had ridden a space ship. I had traveled all over the world, without any visa. I had seen your place, and was everywhere. It is your choice. I do not claim any legal or any superiority against any co-equal user here. I just from time to time, do share my thoughts of horse racing, law, but I bow to other editors, in medicine, science, etc. were my edits were often amended. Do have mercy to a very very poor jobless judge in pretend world. Since 1999 I always begged. So how can I have superiority. Visit my dilapidated rented house, and the bed I sleep on. It is better that the manger where Christ was born. A final word. Since I became a full-pledged prophet on April 7, 2006, I had no need to physically eat, and I am the only creature on this earth who was bestowed the gift to see the violet and white lights. "Lux in Domino" (Ateneo If this is too long, please do edit it, since I could not express my very own self in lesser words. --Florentino floro (talk) 12:23, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

wtf --Migs (talk) 12:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Why? --Florentino floro (talk) 12:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

If you can't see why then you have problems. --Migs (talk) 13:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I can see, and I do not have problems. --Florentino floro (talk) 13:10, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Fine, here's a more helpful response: I recommend you move to Conservapedia if you really think that your edits are correct. They're much more conservative over there and don't take kindly to people like maxsch who revert the truth. Go take a look, you may find that it fits you better. --Migs (talk) 13:19, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, with great honor, but I already graduated in 140 forums and made lots of people entertained (or confused due to my limited wisdom in forum problem-solving theraphy).[45][46] Maxschmelling is cute insofar as fun here is concerned. I bilocate, and had seen the other side of the earth. I failed to find kindness in my own country, but my dire failure adds wisdom due to more suffering. Had you ever lost your job? Had you known the essence of 9 years begging for money? It is more fun. It enriches the soul. Athletes master the art of extreme pain. Filipino horse race jockeys use steroids and are mentally tortured when they see food, just to sustain the 50 kilo weight limit. I really can't understand why so many people are so interested on me. I hope I could show you where I sleep and how I beg money just to live. At Malolos, Bulacan, for 14 hours, last 1999, terminal patients came to me to beg, for extension of time and pain. Life is really unfair. No cross no crown (by Fr. Corapi in EWTN, he has cancer). I watch EWTN daily, and I invite you and all Filipino editors to keep a close watch on Our Lady of Fatima's 1918, warnings. Philippines, this year, will witness the wrath of God. Last 2 months, I was asked by a Serbian darkwall forum user to solve his countries woes. But I submitted only one solution: consecration of their country to Mary. Twice I wrote the Supreme Court of my plea to have the Holy Eucharist and Mary's Image to be displayed in 5 mystic fire places, and the consecration of the entire nation / judiciary to Our Lady of Hope and Fatima, as Pope John Paul II did for Russia, which was converted. Yes, this is my hidden agenda here, on Mary: lest I be hated by many atheists and skeptics. But here we are 99% with religion. Peace of Christ. If you have time you can visit me, and I will tell you all about yourself and what will happen. I am gifted, and I can show you the light and the way. --Florentino floro (talk) 13:41, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, could you stop that already? You have, on multiple occassions, been told two things: 1. Keep your replies short, to five sentences at most, and 2. that nobody cares if you're poor, jobless, a prophet, an Ateneo graduate, etc--don't talk about any of this personal life stuff on Wikipedia, as it completely digresses from the subject matter of any of the articles. Do not talk about prophecies, Psalm 109, or crab mentality. Keep it on topic. --Migs (talk) 13:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Fine, but you sent me, in this talk page your message, and you asked me to reply, and I quote: "I recommend you move to Conservapedia if you really think that your edits are correct. They're much more conservative over there and don't take kindly to people like maxsch who revert the truth. Go take a look, you may find that it fits you better. I never digress from the discussion. My reply is so responsive to your message. Premises considered, you recommendation is hereby DENIED for utter lack of merit. I am under adoption, please, for the sake of courtesy and respect to my adopting parent, course your messages through Diligent Terrier. --Florentino floro (talk) 14:06, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The dwarves

How did you meet them?

Are they demanding? --AnotherSolipsist (talk) 18:51, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Percy, when I opened your userpage, I saw this schizophrenia. My mother died of diabetes, with secondary cause of pneumonia and other cause of schizophrenia (on her birthday of Dec. 5, 1995). This is the first in WIkipedia that I was asked this question. As in Artificial intelligence, I state that your query is a profound / fundamental one, and my reply thereto might end up with more questions. But in layman's terms, I say this: I will answer first your second question: Yes, and no: Yes, because, i) when I left Vincent de Paul seminary in 1970 to have been accepted by the Jesuit Order in 1972, LUIS, the King of kings of elementals, (holy angel, the word is changed to Filipino dwende from Spanish Duende, due to our Spanish colonization in 1521-1899; 95% of Filipinos are Catholics: Vide - Wikipedia Philippine Mythology; Only 0.001% of Filipinos do not believe in God) did repeatedly call me to return to the priesthood (by LUIS' repeated visions to me from 1999, when I was suspended, until today); ii) LUIS asked me to cleanse the corrupt Philippine judiciary by fire and dire punishments (illnesses, accidents, deaths)[47]; iii) and finally, LUIS asked me on First Fridays of November, 2007, January and April, 2008, to plead and move per court pleadings to our Supreme Court, to enthrone the Holy Eucharist and Our Lady of Fatima/of Hope, in the 5 mystic fire places and to consecrate our entire nation / judiciary, to her Immaculate Heart, as John Paul II did for Russia. iv) finally, LUIS told me that he will not yet allow me to get a job or work to suffer more, as I am jobless since 1999, July 20 (longest suspension in world history); No, LUIS is not demanding. And why? The answer, as LUIS teaches: a) If man could not see us (only the destined few and 3 years old children, but the black or evil dwarves / elementals could easily be seen by psychics / third eye / sixth sense), what can a person do for us or give to us, when they are blind - blind, since they see the poorest of the poor, the beggars, but they do not give! b) but from 1984 until today, I, daily, and 3 times a day, offered LUIS, Armand and Angel, foods that we eat, just to remember them; for example, if I offered roasted chicken, then, by next day, it would be tasteless, but could still be eaten by our poor neighbors. In their kingdom, gold, diamond, precious stones and jewels about, with all kinds of kingly foods and feasts, with magic carpet and UFO space ships (I only rode a bamboo space ship, since I was afraid and had Fear when LUIS asked me to ride the others. I will now answer your first question: a) I am a scientist and philosopher / theologian (8 years in Ateneo / Jesuit elite education). I hated all these - psychic phenomena, third eye, sixth sense, and debunked them, and only believed, as I do now, in St. Paul's gifts of the Holy Spirit - prophecy, healing, exorcism, levitation, etc., as my Catholic Faith. So, when my gifted brother told me that these 3 holy angels appeared to him on the wake of my father on June 2, 1983, I challenged him and LUIS to give me gold and diamond, or money. I brought him to our Fr. Jaime Bulatao, professor of psychology at Ateneo de Manila University in the Philippines, considered as the father of "Filipino psychology" (List of Jesuits), and after series of mental tests, Fr. "Bu" adjudged and concluded the authenticity of LUIS and Armand, Angel (Fr. Bu was a member of the Philippine Catholic Commission on Vision and Phenomena). So, It was only in 1992 that I saw the violet and white lights lights, that only LUIS has, as No. 6 in the rank of angels, with St. Michael as prince and on top. b)In 1996, March 1, the covenant or dalliance[48] was made whereby they and I were bound by the violet lights and white lights, and I ascended to the higher plane of the angels' lights, but below the lights of the mystic saints like Padre Pio and John of the Cross. c) The focal and supreme prophecy of LUIS, is the January 9, 1999, feast of the Black Nazarene 6 a.m. vision of i) global millennium earthquakes, disasters, unduplicated in magnitude from 1999-2012, List of earthquakes, the latest was 2008 Sichuan earthquake, the Burma Cyclone Nargis 9-11, etc., ii.) the several Marian apparition to foretell these dire punishments, and iii.) the physical hurting of V.P. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. You have to read all these, to comprehend the complicated messages and answers to you very, very short but profound questions. a) My 2 books, [49], b) Cabinet of Wonders by Hyde[50], my reply to same question, and b) CA Atty. Kevin Underhill's query[51]. For more, yahoo messenger [judgefloro@yahoo.com] A final note: I topped the hardest mental tests of Fr. Parissi, S.J. with 110 IQ, 1972, and the world reports, plus decisions are contrary to the critical facts, since the decision was falsified, causing the errors in Florentino Floro article, but User:Florentino floro rectified the same. Psychosis was the finding by the Court amid perjured documents (if you read the entire 75 pages decision[52] Regards and good luck. --Florentino floro (talk) 07:45, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Please be more succinct.

Like in your UST edit, you could've just said that "Rolando dela Rosa is the new rector at the start of the 2008-09 academic year. --Howard the Duck 15:38, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok, but I had to add that he is the 95th Rector, since this is so important for the readers and researchers. Why? Due to the 2012 big event. Let me note, that yesterday, Fr. De La Rosa, asked the Pope to come to UST's 2012 400th anniversary. I was present and took 3 pictures of Pope Paul VI when he visited UST. Parenthetically, when I recruited Atty. Domingo Legaspi to the St. Vincent's Seminary, as 2nd year high school, 1965, I met his brother, UST's newly appointed rector, now Arch. Leonardo Zeta Legaspi, O.P., D.D. (both are sons of Mrs. Zeta, the friend of my deceased mother; I (daily) met her husband, their father, Mr. Legaspi, a very tall and holy man, who would hear mass daily at Meycauayan, when I served as sacristan; also, every Sunday, at the Seminary from 1967-1969, my mother and Arch. Legaspi's mother would be together to visit me and Atty. Legaspi). This is the memorable reason why, I rather edited more facts and numbers ... just sayin ... memories ... --Florentino floro (talk) 08:37, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ITN

On 11 June 2008, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article(s) Yasuo Fukuda, which you created or substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--BanyanTree 22:33, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, thanks. I found that it is the first in Japanese history, since the creation of the Post-War Japan constitution. But it has no legal force, according to their law. However, the political impact is great, unless it is contradicted by vote of confidence in the other house. --Florentino floro (talk) 10:32, 12 June 2008 (UTC)