User talk:Musical Linguist/Archive06

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

Archive One Archive Two Archive Three Archive Four Archive Five Archive Six Archive Seven Archive Eight Archive Nine Archive Ten

Contents

Block

Curps, blocked my IP for greeting new users...something I was told I could do. I left a few messages on both the IP page and my regular talk page...he didn't reply to either although I happen to know that he was online. To try to get his attention I started to trail banners of text from my edit by using the user summary, which probably wasn't the best approach for it got my talk page blocked. I eventually called my IP provider and they gave me a new IP...and while it is against wiki policy to do such things I hope it will be forgiven. I also would like your help. I don't exactly know how you can...but is there any way I can file a full complaint? Thank you, Chooserr

Ratzinger article

Hello,

I'm not involved in wikipedia, but I felt a need to communicate with someone regarding my shock at reading the Ratzinger article. The article is so blatently partisan and fawning over Ratziner that it is incredible.

I am a Buddhist monk and a gay man. Ratzinger's reputation for his beligerant and hostile activities against Gay people and against Buddhism are infamous throughout huge populations across the globe. Countless hundreds of millions of people are mortified by the sight of this man. Yet no mention of this appears in the article on Ratzinger.

He made a speech in Mexico in 1997 in which he declared that, since the collapse of Communism, Buddhism the greatest threat facing the western world.

The article is mere pro-ratziner propaganda written by some extremist Catholic conservative. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.165.113.50 (talk • contribs) 17:15, December 10, 2005

Welcome to the Cabal!

You are more than welcome, Ann, and congrads. I fully understand, I was a college student once myself...in the last century;> Besides, you have LOTS of supporters to thank. Such is the cursed blessing of popular candidates. I don't see where I would have a problem with any action you will take and I'm sure you will make a fine addition to the "Cabal". Congrads and welcome!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 08:49, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Ann's Rfa

And I even work in the same institution! Dlyons493 Talk 18:50, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem, and I was surprised that you bothered to thank your supporters at all, since there are about 1000 of us! All the best with your adminshp! Borisblue 19:30, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

My pleasure, you're very worthy—I, for one, have no doubt that you'll do just fine. Congrats, and good luck! Blackcap (talk) (vandalfighters, take a look) 08:36, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Interim Committee

Thank you for repairing the vandalism to the article I started on the Interim Committee. User:Cuppysfriend 24:47, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your support on my RfA

Hey Musical Linguist! Thanks for your support on my RfA. The final outcome was (57/4/3), so I am now an administrator. If you need help, have a question, or just want to chat (or if I get out of line!), please don't hesitate to let me know! Again, thanks! :D

Tomertalk

Year of the Eucharist

Hello. I started a stub article Year of the Eucharist. I don't pretend to know enough to do it on my own. Would you mind helping? --Elliskev 21:44, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Templates

Thanks for watching out for vandalism. If you type {{subst:name of template here}} instead of {{name of template here}} you can reduce the load on the Wikipedia servers as it will add the contents of the template instead of a link to the template, thus eliminating the need to reload the template when the page is viewed. Thanks. EdwinHJ | Talk 00:35, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

name change?

Why the name change? Glad you corrected my page...but why'd you change it? KHM03 11:38, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Christianity, tolerance, and equality

This is an article that was started (not by me!) in relation to Criticism of Christianity. When you have an opportunity, please take a look at it and give your take on the article talk page or make edits. I had redirected it to the "Criticism" page, but the original author didn't seem to care for that option. Any help would be great...thanks...KHM03 13:16, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Pudding

I finished cooking the first one... the second is under way... It looks strange :-) I think I will eat the first before Christmas to ensure my friends won't scream in despair :-) I am seriously not sure I was successful here :-(

I also made one mistake... Would you believe that, I doubled the doses of alcohool !!!!

We'll see :-) I made the tree today. This one looks great :-)

Anthere 21:12, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Pro-life celebrities cat. up for deletion!

Hi, I see that you are listed as a Pro-Life Wikipedian, well the Pro-life celebrities category is up for deletion. Category:Pro-life celebrities The abortion zealots don't want anyone to think that any celebrity is actually pro-life. Dwain 23:42, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

EffK is forced to Abandon a Corrupted Wikipedia

I refer you to my response of a few moments ago at 15 December [[1]],http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/EffK/Evidence#3_December_2005 EffK 01:38, 16 December 2005 (UTC)


You cannot be serious. You are unable to answer to 30 priests and the Bishops letter and all, come off it with your attempt to depress me, I remove this gentle ad hominen attack from my page. I have no belief in anything that I source, it sdishonest to frame it so, do you get my drift ?, whereas I leave you believers corruptly and dishonestly undermining this organ. Leave me alone and dont be so sure I will be thrown out- I just will not waste my time for a disingenuous two-faced editor, which is what 15 December Evidence proves your friend to be. I am not leaving at all, I am forced to abandon work in-voluntarily, and this is no admission but a report of Wikipedia abuse. Your religion suffers by the immorality and dishonesty I prove.

EffK 03:06, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

R.fiend 3RR

There was a 3RR by R.fiend, and I don't appreciate you unblocking without at least a courtesy note to me. I'm not required to report anything at AN/3RR, I am justified in blocking on sight when I observe a 3RR. This kind of back and forth nonsense is exactly why I decided to leave. -- Essjay · Talk 03:34, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for unblocking me. I agree that Essjay counted wrong. At the time, I was thinking I had only done two reversions, but I see that it was three. Certainly not four though. Thanks. -R. fiend 16:46, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Copy of reply I left on Essjay's talk page

Dear Essjay,

I saw a note left on your page yesteday, in which you said that you were still not going to come back, but that you had blocked someone for 3RR. I looked at the block log, and saw that you had blocked R. fiend for "3RR @ John Seigenthaler Sr. Wikipedia biography controversy" I know nothing of this user, and had no reason to doubt the appropriateness of the block, but, just to see what the edit war was about, I had a look at the history. I could only find 3 reverts, not 4. Since you had written, I am not back, and I will not be coming back, I saw little point in asking you for clarification, and I saw also that you had not notified R. fiend of the block, so I went to WP:AN/3RR, thinking that it might have been reported there, and that I would see the diffs. There was nothing there about it, so I posted a message, asking for advice from more experienced administrators. I was advised that it would be appropriate to unblock, and that since you had left, it was not necessary to try to discuss it with you first. I went ahead and unblocked, and it turned out that another administrator did so almost simultaneously.

After discovering that he had been unblocked, and after restoring (and even increasing) the block, you wrote on his talk page:

For those who can't count:

My interpretation is different. I read it as follows:

I saw your indignant message to me when I got up this morning. I also saw that you had increased the block. I was rushing in to work, so had no time to reply, but I was still convinced that you had miscalculated. I left another message on WP:AN/3RR. When I unexpectedly had a few minutes free, I logged on from the staffroom computer, and, since nobody had responded, I unblocked him myself. I hastily wrote another message to WP:AN/3RR, but there was no time to write one to you or to R. fiend.

You also wrote on R. fiend's talk page:

As an administrator, you should know better. Further, using administrator powers like rollback in an edit war is inexcusable.

While I know that it's certainly considered politer to reserve rollback to cases of outright vandalism (which is what I try to do), I don't think that this is policy to the same extent as the 3RR rule. Certainly, I've never heard of a case of someone being blocked without warning for inappropriate use of the rollback button. (I accidentally used it myself recently, when my finger slipped.) The link you provided (on the word "inexcusable") was to the ArbCom's comments on Stevertigo's RfAr. The comments were in context of an admin editing a protected page to conform to his own version, unblocking himself, and blocking the admin who had blocked him. To extend a block by 12 hours for using rollback was, to say the least, controversial.

I assure you I meant no disrespect to you in unblocking. If you had not announced that you would not be coming back, I would certainly have left a message for you last night. I am disturbed by this and even more by this which seem (though perhaps I am mistaken) to be directed at me. I did not attack you, and I certainly did not want you gone in the first place (though I did want your parody of my Church gone). I was very touched by the kindness that you showed towards a recovering drug addict. I would be very happy to welcome you back to Wikipedia. But I'm sure you'll agree that it's unreasonable to expect an administrator to leave in place a block that was based on a miscalculation of the number of reverts, on the grounds that unblocking might upset the person who had carried out the block in the first place.

I would have liked to thank you for your vote on my RfA, but after you left, I felt it would be more tactful not to. I explained why, when I was thanking Redwolf24 for his vote.[2] It's unfortunate (and embarrassing for me) that this (i.e. the vote on the Catholic Church of Wikipedia and your mistaken calculation of R. fiend's number of reverts) all happened just after I became an administrator. But even if my RfA were running at the moment, I would still vote to delete that page, and I would still try to get an incorrectly-blocked editor unblocked. I do appreciate the good work that you did here, but that does not oblige me to go against my own conscience.

You may not look in again until long after this unfortunate blocking war has died down, but if you do, perhaps the best place to discuss it would be at WP:AN/3RR. Regards, AnnH (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Request

I see you've recently contacted Essjay over a 3RR dispute. While I don't know the details of that issue, I do see that now there is a larger problem. I thought that you would want to know of this. Regards, Bratschetalk | Esperanza 21:13, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Copy of my reply to Bratsche

Hi, Bratsche. It's always good to hear from you, even when the subject of your message is one that I don't feel particularly comfortable about :-( and I'm glad to see that you seem to be contributing regularly again.

I did not know Essjay particularly well, but was unhappy with his Wikipedia:Catholic Church of Wikipedia (now moved to User:Sam Korn/Catholic Church of Wikipedia), and I sent him a polite note a few months ago, pointing that out. He made it clear that he would be happy to userfy it, and that if it came to a vote, he expected that the members would vote to keep it, those who opposed would vote to delete it, and others would vote according to their conscience.[3]

When you kindly nominated me for adminship, Essjay voted to support. (I don't know whether or not he had forgotten my name as one who had complained about his "church".) When my RfA was successful, I began to thank people, but got quite busy with assignments, and had to interrupt my thank yous. I still logged on occasionally, and during that period, Essjay's church did come to a vote. I voted to delete it.[4], and he put a message on his user page (later deleted) saying something like "If it goes, I go. Permanently." I felt a bit embarrassed, knowing that he was one of the people I still had to thank, and that one of my first actions as an administrator had been to offend him, but I did not in any way regret having voted to delete that church. Then, although the vote had not closed and was very much looking like a "keep" consensus, he did a heavy edit on his userpage (now deleted), changing examples of "I am" to "Before I was martyred, I was". He also put Image:Wikistress3D 4 v3.jpg on his page, quoting underneath, as the caption, the words of Jesus from the Cross: "It is finished". He wrote on the church page: The Wikipope has been martyred.[5] Support messages came flooding in, with remarks from his supporters about the people who hadn't been nice to him (presumably meaning those who had voted to delete his church). The wub posted to the vote for deletion page linking to that massive userpage edit (now a broken link because of the deletion) with "Congratulations!! Look what you did." A few people made snide remarks about his departure. I had no part in those remarks. The church was moved to Sam Korn's user space, and Sam edited with a remark about people "not being nice to one another" [6]

When my college pressure died down a little, I resumed my thank yous. Having seen this, I decided not to thank Essjay. I did, however, thank Redwolf24 (who had been, as far as I know, a good friend of Essjay, and who had clearly supported that church), trying to explain the reason for my vote.[7] I have not received a reply.

The next step in this saga was that Essjay came back, saw that R. fiend had edited an article and had then reverted three times, and mistakenly counted his edit as a revert, and blocked for making four reverts. I was sure (and am still sure) that there were not four reverts. I asked for advice here, and was told it would be appropriate to unblock. I did so, almost simultaneously with Sam Korn. Essjay came back and saw what we had done, reinstated the block, extended by twelve hours because R. fiend had reverted non-vandalism with the rollback button, left an indignant message on my talk page, another at Sam's, and another at R. fiend's. I saw this when I got up in the morning, but was rushing into work, and just left another message at WP:AN/3RR, hoping that someone else would deal with it. It was getting more and more embarrassing for me. I unexpectedly had a free period at work, logged on from a staff computer, saw that nobody else had handled it, so unblocked again. Another admin, Extreme Unction, left a message saying that it was clearly not a 3RR violation, and that he was going to unblock if nobody else had done so.[8] When I got home, I left a message for Essjay, which I have now copied to my own talk page, in case he deletes his. Sam also left a message for him. When Essjay saw the new messages, he deleted his own user page with the block log summary "Taking the hint".

I'm frankly stunned at the amount of ill feeling that this has caused, and certainly don't want to make matters worse by making lengthy comments on his reaction. Since he is getting so much support from his friends, I assume that he has done a lot of good here, and I did notice his kindness (and yours, by the way!) to Private Butcher. I will say, though, that I think his reaction has been unfair on me, as it seems to imply that I should have refrained from voting (politely) to delete something which I and many other Catholics found offensive, simply because my vote might make someone feel unappreciated, and that I should have left an incorrect block in place for the same reason. (I would not have unblocked if I had felt that a block was over harsh; but this one was based on a miscalculation of the number of reverts.) I did not intend the unblocking to be seen as criticism, and am quite shocked by what he wrote on his user page afterwards (no diff, as it's been deleted):

My Wikipedia career came to an end in November 2005 after a number of stressors were capped off by a vitriolic and hateful attack against my work. Additional controversy arose on December 16 when a minor admin action (taken after reading a story on Yahoo! News about attacks on Wikipedia) received heavy criticism. As I obviously am unable to take even the slightest action without being attacked (by one of those who wanted me gone in the first place), I won't make the mistake of contributing again.

(I did not heavily criticize him; I did not attack him; and I did not want him gone in the first place.)

I note that the heading of your message to me was "request", but you didn't actually make a request. Did you want me to leave a message for him? I think the wisest thing for me is to stay well away from his talk page. I have already explained to him why I didn't originally leave a message to discuss the block. I could not in sincerity express regret for having voted to delete his church, or for having unblocked R. fiend, and I think that a message saying that I don't regret what I did but that I regret that he's upset would offend him even more. If there is anything that you'd like me to do, please don't hesitate to suggest it, though.

Apologies if this very long message is cluttering up your page. In a way, I'm using you to get all this off my chest! It has been very unpleasant. Having managed to avoid major disputes on Terri Schiavo, Ordination of women, Pope Benedict XVI, and abortion, I was not expecting this :-(

Thanks again for your message. Cheers. AnnH (talk) 11:33, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Bratsche's Reply

Hi Ann. Check your email for my reply. Cheers, Bratschetalk | Esperanza 23:39, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Happy holidays

Ann, I hope your holidays are cheerful and bright.--Dakota ? e 02:10, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Contraceptive patch

Sean Black has removed an informative section from the Contraceptive patch article describing a law suit which is currently taking place and some of the risks involved in using such barbaric devices. Since you are listed as Pro-Life I was wondering if you might restore the original version, for I don't personally want to get baited into a 3rvt ban. Thank you, Chooserr 07:00, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Don't worry, everything's okay. Chooserr presented some newspapers, so it's been restored. Merry Christmas, by the way :).--Sean|Black 07:29, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Userboxes

Just a heads up to let you know I'm using three of your usebox templates (the semicolon, fully faithful to Pope Benedict XVI & agree with Humanae Vitae templates). If this is not okay with you, please do let me know. --Peter McGinley 10:00, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Content Dispute

There is currently a bit of a content dispute on the Condoms' page between SarekOfVulcan, and I. Following wikipedia's policy of not being a how to guide I removed the proper use section, and after some research added a section on the dangers on lubricated condoms with two different sources. I also made a small edit on the drug section removing unwanted pregnancy because when it comes down to the line it is unnecessary...they could just as easily cause a wanted pregnancy. Please help, Chooserr 00:27, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Since no one is watching this board I will revise my version...Chooserr

User:Lapinmies

I became aware of this user after he left a somewhat aggressive message on Doc glasgow's talk page; I immediately noticed that the user may be engaged in other overly aggressive behavior, anti-Semitism, and vandalism. I'm not asking for any action, but I might suggest this user be watched a bit. Thanks...KHM03 12:26, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Help

Ann since you are very smart, knowing how to use the semicolon and all, can you please revert Aolanaonwaswronglyaccused's edit to the Cow tipping page. I got rid of the brackets because they seperate the subject from the sentence, and he thinks they are necessary and has called my contribution vandalism. Thanks, Chooserr 07:27, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Please stop this mindless nonsense, thank you--Aolanonawanabe 07:27, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
  • I agree. In my opinion, your edits to the cow-tipping page (not to mention most of your other edits) are vandalism, and the parentheses were perfectly correct the way they were. —Psychonaut 07:42, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Please don't use my talk page for squabbling about an article I'm not at all involved in. And please don't use the word "vandalism" for something that doesn't fit the the definition of vandalism. That sentence is grammatically correct with or without the brackets, though the meaning is very slightly different. Taking them out is definitely not vandalism. It's certainly not worth an edit war. And I personally don't like the way Aolanaonwaswronglyaccused seems to be tracking Chooserr's contributions, reverting him when it's not necessary (I agree that sometimes it is necessary), putting his stubs up for speedy deletion, sending harassing messages to his talk page, and using insulting edit summaries. Please stop. AnnH (talk) 08:02, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

My apologies. Chooserr has shown himself to be a relentless and often-blocked POV warrior (whether the fight is about religion or prescriptivist grammar) and couldn't let his comment pass without rebuttal. I suppose I ought to have rebutted it elsewhere. —Psychonaut 10:42, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Ann, I would like to wish you and your family a Merry Christmas and all the best for the New Year. Guettarda 15:59, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and Best Wishes for the New Year! Dr. Dan 16:39, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I pray you have a very merry Christmas and a truly blessed 2006. KHM03 19:43, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Need your help

Editor's contributions singled out for his faith, please help keep this notable article--172.159.25.124 16:30, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for Schiavo. Can you help on Morgan also?

Muse: I wanted to thank you for your work on Terri Schiavo. I am a Roman Catholic but my faith is weak. We are on opposite sides of the Schiavo argument, but I admire your efforts. Your detailed explanations put me to shame. I have an interest in the case from a point of view that is more formal, yet perhaps at the same time, more personal. Perhaps the hand of a woman should be applied to an article about one who is still alive: Elizabeth Morgan. You will note that the legal similarity to Schiavo case was noted a while ago. I am also in a lively discussion on the talk page. -- Fplay 20:37, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Ann, a very Merry Christmas to you and all the best for the New Year. I want to thank you for everything you do for Wikipedia, and on a personal note, for your support during the situation I had with a certain user, which was very stressful, and which I got through in large measure thanks to you. It's editors like you that are the best of Wikipedia and who make it worth sticking with. I hope 2006 is a great year for you and your loved ones. My very best wishes, SlimVirgin (talk) 00:21, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Mele kalikimaka

And, nollaig shona duit! --Viriditas 01:16, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

CAoW

Since you are listed as a Roman Catholic, I figured I'd send you this. Wikipedia:Catholic Alliance of wikipedia has been nominated for Deletion. Please vote and/or tell other people to vote to keep this organization on wikipedia. The link to the voting page is here: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Catholic Alliance of wikipedia --Shanedidona 03:15, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

BD2412's RFA

Thanks for supporting my RfA, Ann - I'll do my best as an admin to help make the dream of Wikipedia into a reality! BD2412 T 22:04, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Happy Christmas

Well I hope you had a Happy Christmas...and I thank you for wishing me one. (g)

As for your comments pertaining my edits I realise that not all of them were great. But if do feel the need in certain articles such as Condoms to further awareness. I hope to one day become an Admin - that's what I wanted from the start - but don't think I'll get it now... :( Oh well. Chooserr 00:30, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

I think we agree on more than we disagree on. In any case, I can agree on best wishes in Christmastide. Robert McClenon 15:40, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: Clarificaction

No, no problem. I agree that one week was harsh, and that Chooserr is being abused himself (and keeping in remarkably good spirits, as well). It seems to me that he trusts you, and comes to you for help often (which is not a problem, of course). I've interacted a few time (I blocked him for 3RR a couple of weeks ago, and talked to him about some edits to condom and contraceptive patch, which in turn led me to your talk page.). He has the capacity to become a good, if not perfect, editor, and I hope that I have not been too harsh with him. Again, no problem.--Sean|Black 22:05, 27 December 2005 (UTC) P.S. No, I don't use fada. I've got Irish on my dad's side, Poish and Russian on my mom's side and was born in the States, so my genes are confused enough without any accents in my name :).

No, thank you

Thanks for the message. I've seen that you've been great with Chooserr, including the bit about removing his "list of users to watch", and I appreciate that. The way you've been talking to him is exactly what I was referring to at WP:AN/I when I said that interactions with fair-minded and civil Wikipedians are what will teach him how this project is really supposed to work. I'm not sure why (considering how little I share his views) but I kind of like the guy, and I'd hate to see him driven away from here. Thanks again. -GTBacchus(talk) 10:58, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

By the way, I love your semicolon userbox! Is it, by any chance, free for the borrowing? -GTBacchus(talk) 11:13, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Your Holidays Greeting: Happy Christmas from A ghost

"..I meant to welcome you back and to wish you a Happy Christmas. (I presume I can do that without offending you?" You never did manage to offend me, M'Lady. No worries.  ;-) "I seem to remember that you referred to yourself once as either pagan or agnostic" Neo-Pagan. But I try hard to keep that off the project. My family celebrates both Yule and Christmas. Most of the family that considers themselves Pagan used to be Irish Catholic, and we want the kids to know their hertiage as well as follow their own paths. "..very happy Christmastide?.." As to your other concerns: I always hope to be your collaborator, rather than your opponent. And no, nothing bad caused my absence. Actually alot of good. Work and family pulled me away.

(1)User name: Wow. Sorry to hear that. In a virtual environment, some people feel that they can move beyond cultural taboos and behave badly. What they forget is that those taboos evolved (LOL) over generations, and exist for good reason. But you must do what's best to protect yourself. (2) Admin: Congrats! A belated vote from me. My only concern with the behavior of other Admins is that we all must hold ourselves to the same standard we hold others (or better). I have faith that you will based on what I've seen in the past. Unfortunately, I see Admins who do not. And this was FW misguided crusade. He made himself the cop of some Admins, because he didn't see the Admin community policing itself. To take the laws in one's own hands is to become a Vigilante. That caused him to Fall. But the root of the problem continues, and will become a cancer if not checked. (3) Less work: Kool. I am interested in rallying an effort to get the Terri Schiavo article to Featured status by the time the anniversery of her unfortunate passage rolls around. I'm not sure I'll have the energy. :-/ (4) Doctorate: Congrats again! Can I call you "Dr. Linguist?" LOL (5) Others: That's good to hear. We all need something to temper our spending too much on Wikipedia. Everything in moderation, nothing in excess... A Happiest '06 to you and yours! Bright Blessings--ghost 21:10, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Your request

Hi, Ann. I hope your wikireduction/wikibreak and your studies go well! I'll keep an eye on the situation with Chooserr, and try to keep things fair. I admit it's a challenge, since I'm politically and religiously opposed to Chooserr's positions, but it's good NPOV practice. GTBacchus made some excellent points. I'm quite impressed with both GTBacchus' patience and your own. Also, whoever Aolanonawhatever is, he/she seems to have stopped (at least for a bit). So perhaps things will be a bit calmer. Best wishes for the new year! FreplySpang (talk) 03:31, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Help on Rosary

A fellow who I am having a linkspam dispute is removing organization that he claims are using wiki as a vehicle; as retribution to what we showed the Fisheaters site was doing. The organizations are two "brick and moarter" organizations that operate in the US who promote the Rosary as part of larger works. I don't want to continue this. Should I not bother you and post to WP:AN/I or is this OK? Dominick (TALK) 15:05, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

User:Chooserr's block

Thank you for picking the discussion up. I didn't mean to overstep on an issue already being handled well by you, but since I removed the {{unblock}} tags, I felt obliged to leave Chooserr an explanation of my reasons. I hope I didn't misrepresent your views or actions on this! I will leave this matter in your capable hands. Thanks! Owen× ☎ 18:39, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Good work fighting the good fight. If you need a hand, drop me a line.--Tznkai 21:54, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for unblocking my IP. :D Chooserr 00:23, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Penis

Because you list yourself as Catholic I thought I would inform you of a particularly offensive image on the Penis page, or the subject in question. It shouldn't belong here, and the diagram is enough for me. If you feel the same please remove it, or help fight the case on the talk page. Chooserr 05:42, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Recent addition

Dear Ann, I hope you had a good start into 2006. If you are free, could you have a look into the recent addition to Christianity by "86.137.164.37". Thanks, Str1977 14:16, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Awww.

Thats to bad, we like having you around, but RL takes priority. Drop me a line when you get back, I'll help out Chooserr until then.--Tznkai 19:28, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Yum

Make me an apple turnover! Here's hoping your wikibreak will be short. · Katefan0(scribble)/mrp 19:30, 2 January 2006 (UTC)