User talk:Valrith/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Julia Vlassov

What part of her article do you particularly want sourced? It all seems very NPOV and non-controversial to me. Kolindigo 04:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Even things that don't appear to be controversial are required to be properly cited using reliable secondary sources. Valrith 04:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
    • And why don't her USFSA bio or ISU bio count as reliable secondary sources? Kolindigo 04:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
      • They're not cited as references. Valrith 20:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SpyHunter

Why do you keeping claiming there's no source? It's at the end of the sentence. --Wafulz 15:20, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Claiming that "so-and-so" said something is all well and good, but unless you can provide evidence that they actually said it, it's still not sourced. So either provide a citation for your source or don't bother adding the claim.
  • Never mind ... I see you've added a link to the assessment... Valrith 19:48, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Briana Banks unref tag

I actually referenced the points that were marked as needing references - what parts are left, please? --AnonEMouse (squeak) 20:29, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

  • That would be basically everything except for the sex toy lawsuit. Valrith 20:45, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
    • All right, got it. :-). The tag will stay for a while, then ... --AnonEMouse (squeak) 20:49, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Carnegie Mellon School of Design

Please check out the above page. I am keeping your tags just until we resolve this matter on the articles talk page.PadreNuestro 12:36, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Handbra"

Two editors have reverted you, you should cease your disruption. See WP:VANDALISM. Matthew 22:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Other editors have removed the same crap that I removed ([1]). See WP:OR, WP:V, WP:Crappy editors like you. (eg. you should shut the fuck up.) Valrith 03:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Keep your nasty personal attacks to yourself please. If you continue this disruption, you'll be blocked again. Majorly (hot!) 12:14, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reference for TV show elimination?

For the article Edyta Sliwinska, I don't know why you think the most recent elimination from Dancing with the Stars needs a citation, but I added a source lest you think the elimination was untrue. I fixed the article to what I hope is at least a decent state. Tinlinkin 11:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RfC on Big Sister (brothel)

Hello, I'm about to file a Request for Comment on Big Sister (brothel) and would like to solicit your position statement on Talk:Big Sister (brothel). Thanks, AxelBoldt 01:12, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

  • I've added a comment (and reverted the article) despite the fact that it will do no good. The inmates are running the asylum, ignoring policy and guidelines alike. There is likely money changing hands. Valrith 04:03, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
    Just because people don't agree with your point of view doesn't make them 'inmates'. You need to grow up and stop making idiotic accusations. Cary Bass demandez 12:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Hello Valrith, Look for an email from me. Take care, FloNight 13:01, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lauren

I didn't do that to the Lauren page. I did, however, delete a comment someone else had written that I considered vandalism. Chelsey21 18:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

  • My mistake ... I must've clicked the wrong user link... Sorry. Valrith 23:06, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brandi Lyons

Privacy information, no matter how relevent, is never appropriate for pornographic actors/actresses. Please try to avoid including personal names on articles about these people. Imdb, which is not itself verifiable, is not a credible source. Thank you. Cary Bass demandez 20:04, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jesse Capelli

The same goes for this article. Do not insert personal information into pornographic actors/actresses articles. Cary Bass demandez 20:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Wikipedia should not be in the business of omitting information. Information quoted in other sources will continue to be included here. Valrith 23:08, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

You have made an edit that could be regarded as defamatory. Please do not restore this material to the article or its talk page. If you restore this material to the article or its talk page once more, you will be blocked for disruption. See Blocking policy: Biographies of living people. Cbrown1023 talk 23:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

You have been blocked for disruption of Wikipedia, because you added material that could be regarded as defamatory. See Blocking policy: Biographies of living people. You may return when the block expires. Any further attempt to restore the material will incur another block. Cbrown1023 talk 23:28, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

  • What utter crap. Try looking up defamatory in a dictionary before you start slinging that word around. Valrith 02:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Please see WP:BLP. IMDB does not meet Wikipedia sourcing standards for information contained in the biographies of living persons. FCYTravis 04:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I may well have warned you again instead of blocking at this point, but if you keep reverting good faith editors with the edit summary 'rvv' as you did here, I'd have blocked you myself eventually, so I think Cbrown1023 was well within policy with this block. I'd strongly request that you reconsider your approach. If you contest the block there are channels to do so. Ask here if you are unclear as to what they are, but your block expires shortly. Use the time to reflect, instead, and come back with your good will and collegiality renewed. ++Lar: t/c 17:50, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jazmin again

Lost interest, buddy? Please, take another peek at the article. If help is what you need, I am ready to do whatever much I can. Respond to my talk page. Aditya Kabir 18:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, damn. I thought I've found someone who could actually improve the article mercilessly. Well, my darn luck. Aditya Kabir 14:03, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Sorry I'm not moving fast enough for you... sheesh. Valrith 21:22, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tim Clarke

Just letting you know that I have removed the tags that you put on his page. If a guy who has played almost 100 games of Australian rules football is not notable then I trust you will be spending the week deleting over 500 articles of Australian rules players wikipedia pages as they fit the same category as Clarke Crickettragic 03:37, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Marcus Christian page

I've added internal links to this page: to the New Negro and to Dillard University for example. Why do you insist that there aren't any to other Wikipedia pages?

Another of your criticisms is 'wikifying.' I'm still wondering what in the world that is. Is there a model that you can suggest? I mean, I have my own writing style.

This page is also being expanded. I will be adding pictures, more references and filling out the Negro Federal Writers Project section. Perhaps you didn't figure that one out. gab 17:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

The {{Orphan}} tag indicates that no other pages link to the page where the tag appears. Not the reverse. See Special:Whatlinkshere/Marcus_Bruce_Christian. The link in the header ([2]) might be of use in finding other Wikipedia articles that could benefit from a link to the Christian article.
And the {{Wikify}} tag is likewise explained in its header. See the Wikipedia Manual of Style and Guide to Layout. I've already done initial wikifying, however, and have removed this tag. Valrith 21:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

What the hell are you doing getting rid of all the revisions that I spent up to three hours doing last night (August 17-18, 2007)? Including linking externals that you said were missing last time you decided to go on a power trip? In the next few days I plan to put in photographs that have been approved for use by another site. This version I redid had better be there. gtdanyelzgab 04:45, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lisa Ann Taylor

You should see the discussion there that I have added. This should be responded to rather than edit warring. You also shouldn't accuse people of vandalism that have made good faith edits. It appears you have done this in the past also. I also hope you're not trying to bait me into a 3RR in lieu of discussion, as that would not really be a tactful thing to do. Chicken Wing 22:42, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kasara

I'm not sure why you placed a speedy delete tag on this article: [3]. Please could you elucidate. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nichalp (talk • contribs) 05:25, May 26, 2007

  • I would've thought it would be fairly obvious given the state of the article at the time. It was also explained by the speedy tag I used. The article was very short, providing little to no content and context. I couldn't even figure out what the article was trying to describe. However, that was in November of last year -- the article is greatly improved since then. Valrith 13:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Byron Calvert

I contest the 'speedy deletion' of this page. The subject of this article has been cited in numerous prominant publications, most notably the Washington Post. He came to national attention when his home was raided by the FBI and his views gain widespread attention throughout the American neo Nazi community.----Edchilvers 10:51, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] speedy tagging

G'day Valrith,

I'm in the middle of cleaning up CAT:CSD this arvo, and, as usual, roughly half the articles tagged for speedy deletion

  • Don't meet the speedy criteria, or
  • Are good articles

This is to be expected. However, I see that your strike rate in particular is very low. The vast majority of times you have recently placed a speedy tag on an article, you have done so inappropriately. Improper tagging offends the creators of good articles, and creates a heck of a lot more work for people like me.

I note from posts by other users and admins (and one bureaucrat!) on your talkpage that you have been questioned about improper use of the speedy and notability tags in the past. Please refrain from tagging articles in the future, until you feel you have properly understood the speedy criteria. We have a lot of work to do to make Wikipedia great. There is no need for us to create extra work for ourselves. Thanks, fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 08:47, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Josh Lewis Rugby League

This player is a well known professional sportsperson. He plays for the Sydney Roosters. He is well known in both Australia, New Zealand and Britain. Would also venture France as well. Certainly not to be deletedCorleoneSerpicoMontana 12:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I reverted your edit

Hi, unfortunately I had to revert you, please see Talk:Brittany Andrews#BLP issues for explanation. Cheers, MaxSem 14:21, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Please don't edit war over this. I'll review the OTRS ticket if you'd like. --Tony Sidaway 20:28, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
I'd appreciate that. If editing of WP is intended to be restrained by decisions made by OTRS (whoever that is), the decisions should be publically accessible. I'd also like an answer to my question about interviews on the talk page. Valrith 21:08, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
The interviewer is apparently a gossip writer, not a reliable source. The OTRS ticket cited by MaxSem is valid. --Tony Sidaway 21:17, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
I've made further comments on my talk page, and would like to continue any further communications on that page, or in email if you prefer. --Tony Sidaway 21:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

Please allow me to ask how many sources are necessary for one person? Or when I am allowed to delete the unref? Doma-w 22:48, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

  • In reference to what article? Valrith 04:25, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi! The article Annelise Coberger. The article has two sentences therefore I have added three external links as references. Nevertheless you have restored the unref. Is it really necessary to have more sources for these two sentences? Please see, that this is not a complaint, I respect your work! Thank you and :) Doma-w 19:18, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
External links aren't the same as references. I see someone else has already changed the 'External links' header to 'References', which should do fine... Valrith 13:39, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh, I didn't think that there is such a big difference. :) But thank you, I will be more careful. Happy editing and :) Doma-w 21:33, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sources complaint 2

Side Note, Will you please stop hounding over every single edit I make. If you would like I could give you her phone number so she can tell you personally --Spinachmaster 00:31, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alyssa

Dear Valrith, this is Zabriskiepoint from good old Germany. Please believe me: Alyssa is a name of Old German origin. --Zabriskiepoint 15:52, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

  • I don't doubt your word, but if we want to keep it in the article, we need a reliable source to cite. I've removed all of the unsourced claims from the article for now. Valrith 13:36, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I have given a reliable source earlier in the article. The very reliable source is: Deutsches Vornamen-Lexikon. You can also look at the German article in de.wikepedia.org --Zabriskiepoint 18:53, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re: Unspecified source for Image:Michelle-Lamour.jpg

Thanks for the notice. I am the photographer, and it was taken with Michelle's permission. I'll fix the Image: page.

MattHucke(t) 00:40, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Playboy celeb sources

I noticed you added the references tag back to the celebs section of the Playboy article. What kind of references are you looking for? Don't the issues themselves serve as their own reference? Dismas|(talk) 16:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

  • Well, crap. That's not the section I was intending to tag... What I want sources for is the "International editions" section. I'll retag... Valrith 18:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
    • Well, that's cool. Not that you made a mistake but that my confusion is sorted out. Thanks, Dismas|(talk) 21:21, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Katja Kassin

I have been watching you and User:Spinachmaster steadily flip-flopping back and forth between two versions of the articles. I for one am sick of it all and strongly suggest the two of you start hashing out your differences on the Talk:Katja Kassin. Tabercil 05:51, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

It's even a bit stronger than that - apparently it involves Katja Kassin's own edit, deleting unsourced incorrect information. Please read Talk:Katja Kassin#Katja Kassin's edits and revert war. --AnonEMouse (squeak) 07:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm getting pretty sick of being taken to task for removing unsourced/badly sourced material from articles.
Please note that User:Spinachmaster added the bisexual claim to the article [4] repeatedly ([5], [6], [7]), even after User:Katjakassin removed it [8] with a statement that it was false. After I added to the article a citation [9] for her being heterosexual, User:Spinachmaster removed the citation and restored the bisexual claim ([10], [11], [12]).
As to the usability of MySpace as a source, I still don't agree. Doing a "People" search in MySpace for "Katja Kassin" produces at least two profiles claiming to be hers [13]. We have no way to choose between them. Valrith 18:44, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Summer Olympics medalists

Up to now it is not a super-cat. But I think we had to create one, because we have 10,000+ "Summer Olympics medalists" with articles and there are "only" 100-200 listed in this cat. So it is easier to pick them out and add them in an appropriate subcategory. I am trying to clean the Olympic-cats. Thank you and :) Doma-w 21:35, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Acrylic glass

In the acrylic glass article, your deletion of a 'see also' link to a Wiki article showing images of acrylic sculptures by a noted artist is wrong.

The acrylic glass article even mentions modern sculpture among the uses of acrylic glass. It's as though there were an article about diamonds, and you wanted to confine it to discussion of the chemical structure of diamonds, with diagrams of the chemical bonds as the only images. Earlier, another editor deleted images placed near the portion of the text referring to artistic use of acrylics; and now you delete even an internal link to a Wiki article with images. Your behavior is contrary to sense and to the mission of Wikipedia. MdArtLover 16:14, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jenna Haze#External links

Looks like it's unfortunately time for admin action to enforce the guideline and consensus decision on Jenna Haze#External links. Please see Talk:Jenna_Haze#Ending_external_link_edit_war. --AnonEMouse (squeak) 12:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

  • It's about damned time. Er, I mean, Thank you! Valrith 13:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Categories for Ida G. Athens

Can you explain why you made this revert? Seems like since the article had categories, my edits were not wrong. Or am I missing something? Cheers. --Fisherjs 14:15, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

  • That particular page contains no date of birth or death, just the years, so those reverts are fairly obvious. Also, pages should remain as {{uncategorized}} until placed into one or more major categories, so that they get more exposure. (eg. "American artists", "Politicians", etc.). Valrith 21:03, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Ah yes, "Year" does not equal "Date". I see that. I also see what you mean about when to remove the uncat tag. Fair enough. Thanks.--Fisherjs 09:57, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re Eleanor Roosevelt as a lesbian Icon

Dear sir, Your edits are impressive and you seem from your user page to be a bright nice Man (I may borrow the little brother/sister templates). Let's be civil and agree to disagree as to the importance of Eleanor Roosevelt as a lesbian icon. As a lesbian I can tell you that I have an Eleanor Roosevelt poster and she is a role model for ALL women straight and lesbian. I have had similar disputes that were quickly resolved by moving my link to my pet project Look alike contest by moving this tidbit to the Trivia section and posting a page on the discussion board if anyone else objects to the inclusion. So far NOT ONE other editor has a problem with this and I have even made "Wiki friends" with my disputing editors. PLEASE humor me on this and send me a polite exchange with your concerns-Happy Editing. Cr8tiv 20:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

PS I Have a great hat with a flower in my Eleanor costume set. Cr8tiv 20:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

  • I am always pleased to make a new acquaintance. I think it's great that you've got a "pet project", but it has no connection of any kind with the Eleanor Roosevelt article, and is thus not appropriate to appear there. Please see WP:SECTION#See_also_sections. Valrith 00:33, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your knowledge of Pornography is vast

Fair enough, I noticed you are a Republican and male Republicans seem to love erotic works of art and German dungeon porn as much they love censorship. Is there a WIKI PORNOGRAPHY GROUP? Can we start one? Will your little brother and sister help contribute? My girlfriend is a GAY REPUBLICAN and a supporter of Log Cabin Republicans Which is her "pet project" could you help us?Cr8tiv 22:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] HR-XML

Can we move the afd discussion on the HR-XML article to closure? There doesn't seem to be a clear consensus for deletion. Hopefully, I and others also have put forth a reasonable basis establishing HR-XML's notability (HR-XML has been around for awhile (8 years), has a membership that includes the leading companies in the field of HR services, and as User:Jayvdb pointed out in the afd discussion, it has been cited in numerous articles and books.)

I imagine it must be a constant battle to keep marketing-driven articles about "non-notable" organizations articles out of wikipedia. I don't believe that every consortium is necessarily a "notable" organization. However, notability as a consortium should rest on the notability of its members and documented adoption within the particular market the organization is intended to serve.

I think the problem with the HL7 proposed deletion was the misunderstanding of the organization as some type of dot.com. In HL7 article, they devote a section to explaining that the organization is not a software company -- which is a common misconception about HR-XML as well. The other issue is that the work of many consortia, while important, is narrowly focused on esoteric, technical aspects of bigger business, industry, and societal issues.

On a positive note, the afd discussion served the purpose of focusing attention on the quality of the article, which I believe is now much improved.

[edit] Laura Michaelis

This article has two outside sources (the two Goldberg references in the references section) and there are three articles (Charles Fillmore, Paul Kay and Construction Grammar) that link to this one, so why restore the tags 'few or no articles that link to this one' and 'insufficient outside sources'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aquilafer (talk • contribs) 20:26, July 8, 2007

  • The {{Primarysources}} tag is for articles that provide no reliable secondary sources. It applies here because this article contains only references written by the subject of the article or references that don't appear to be about the subject of the article. The {{Orphan}} tag is for articles that are linked to by 'few or no' other articles. It applies here because there are three articles that link to this one. Valrith 20:01, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
    • It is highly unlikely that one *could* find corroboration of bio data on a junior US academic. The only source I could think of is the subject's departmental website. If that isn't sufficient, you should explain what would be. In addition, you have not explained what you consider to be a sufficient number of links to an article from other articles. Three seems sufficient to me, especially as there are other articles on living linguists that have fewer such links and yet don't show this tag. What is your numerical criterion for sufficient links? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aquilafer (talk • contribs) 16:13, July 21, 2007
      • I usually look for 5 other articles linking to an article before removing the {{Orphan}} tag, but since you disagree, I won't readd it. You shouldn't have removed the {{cleanup}} tag, either, but instead of readding that, I've cleaned up that section as you should have done. Generally, "junior academics" and people who are "highly unlikely" to have independent coverage are not notable enough to be included here. I've added the {{bio-notability}} tag to the article for this reason. Valrith 16:49, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
        • I removed the {{cleanup}} tag because it appeared redundant; the article was tagged for more specific faults (e.g., lack of reliable, third-party references), so this entails that the article needs clean up. The same holds for the {{bio-notability}} tag that you added: it's redundant with the {{Primarysources}} tag, and since too many tags affect the readability of an article, I'd like to remove the former. Would you be willing to compromise on that? More generally, I disagree with you that 'independent coverage' of a person is necessary to ensure notability. In academics, notability is secured through peer-reviewed publications in major journals and invited speaking engagements at scientific conferences. One would find biographical information on very few living linguists (with the exception of Noam Chomsky and George Lakoff, who are covered mainly for their nonlinguistic work). Laura Michaelis is notable primarily as one of the founders of Construction Grammar. The Construction Grammar article is extensive and it is widely cited by linguists, and since her name is prominently mentioned in that article, it should be linked to a biographical article on her.

[edit] Dawn-Marie Wesley

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Dawn-Marie Wesley, which you proposed for deletion, because I think that the deletion of this article may be controversial. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Dsmdgold 13:46, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Christa's Anscestry

Irish-Lebanese American. I made the following edit.

  • ... McAuliffe was the oldest of five children of Edward (deceased) and Grace George Corrigan. Her mother, born Grace George, is of Maronite Lebanese origin through her father and is a niece of historian Philip Hitti.[14]
  • the first time carelessly w/o the citation. Usually, when a cite is missing, a citation needed request is put in. But it was deleted. Fair enough I guess. I sourced the fact, then it was deleted again with the tag line that it was not relevant. Since when is bio info not relevant in a bio article. It is relevant to her bio that Christa is a quarter Lebanese American. Just as it is relevant to Guv Richardson's bio that he's part Native American, Sen George Mitchell that he's Irish-Lebanese or Barack Obama that he's American-Kenyan. So what now an edit wheel with someone with a revert button? Godspeed John Glenn! Will 22:32, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cynthia Myers

OK, I'll bite, Valrith. What is the reasoning behind your removal of Playboy Playmate and Russ Meyer actress, Cynthia Myers from the List of big-bust models and performers‎? Dekkappai 21:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Just that there's nothing in Cynthia Myers to indicate she has any reputation for performing in big-bust entertainment... Valrith 21:06, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
    • Ah, I see. Check out Russ Meyer sometime, Valrith. You might enjoy his work. I prefer the early stuff, pre-Beyond the Valley of the Dolls, but each to his own taste. Though it's true not every actress who appeared in his movies was a "big-bust model and/or entertainer", his name is pretty much synonymous with the genre, at least in film. Now I'll go put Ms. Myers back on the list. Regards. Dekkappai 21:25, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
      • Russ Meyer, as far as I can see, didn't make any adult entertainment. The claimed purpose of the List of big-bust models and performers‎ is to catalog women notable for performing in big-bust adult entertainment, which leaves Ms. Myers out... Valrith 21:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
        • Leaves a lot of people out. Who says all big-bust models and entertainers perform in pornography? And, from the Russ Meyer article: "Despite the fact that hardcore pornographic films would overtake Meyer's softcore market share, he retired in the late 1970s a very wealthy man." (From the Softcore article: "Softcore is a form of pornography...") It seems rather absurd to claim Russ Meyer did not deal in big-bust entertainment... And that Cynthia Myers was not a "Russ Meyer" girl. Dekkappai 21:45, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
          • I thought it was the point to leave a lot of people out. If you expand this to include every well-endowed woman in any form of media, it will quickly become an indiscriminate collection of information. Valrith 21:50, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
            • Yes, it should leave out well-endowed women in any form of media, since it is not set up as a "List of well-endowed women in any form of media". Nor is is a list of List of big-bust PORNOGRAPHIC models and performers. The list as it stands is exclusive to big-bust entertainment, and Ms. Myers, and Mr. Meyer both worked in that field. Dekkappai 22:03, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
              • For what it's worth, I agree with Dekkappai. Tabercil 23:36, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Last of the Believers article/entry.

I would love to know as to why you deleted the article that I recently created and submitted titled "Last of the Believers". It was all relevant and correct information with all sources cited. You seem to have a habit to plainly delete whatever you want just because you don't like it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abolishamour (talk • contribs) 22:34, July 12, 2007