User talk:Irishguy/Archive 16

Archive 10

←

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

→

Archive 20

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.

Is this discrimination?

SEE Bottom of this thread for latest...

Because you have not responded to the arguments that we made on the Bruce Payne discussion page about deleting our links, we are bringing the arguments to you. We would appreciate it very much if you would address our points and tell us why you deleted our links but not a fan site that has not updated in a year and no longer even has a webmaster. We have more current information about Bruce Payne than this now dead web site. Why should we not consider this discrimination?

Here are the arguments we offered on the Bruce Payne discussion page.

I just read the comments from Irish Guy on my User page. They make no sense. Our site does not fit the definition of "spam" as defined by Wiki itself (see previous argument below). Nor are we "advertisers." We provide additional information about Bruce Payne. We have discussed this below but Irish Guy has not responded to our arguments. We thought Wiki was a place for discussion. He has taken down all the fan sites but one without any discussion. How Wiki is that? And why was AGWLBP left up? If our fan site is "spam" so is AGWLBP. This seems to us to be blatant discrimination. How Wiki is that? So in the spirit of "fairness," we are taking down the link to AGWLBP also.

Ariel23 04:18, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

We have just discovered that Irish Guy took the links down to all the Bruce Payne fan sites except for A Girl Who Loves Bruce Payne. But AGWLBP has not updated in nearly a year. There is no longer even a webmaster at that site. The only sites that update with new information about Mr. Payne are the very ones he took down. Why is he doing this? Bruce's Angels provide information about Bruce Payne (biography, filmography, essays about Payne as Actor, etc) and is the only major site that updates with information about Mr. Payne's current projects such as "Messages" and "The Brothel." We think this is highly inappropriate. Why did he leave a site that doesn't update and doesn't even have a webmaster? Either all fan site should come down (which we think does a disservice to Wiki readers who want more current information and additional information about actors) or the ones that update should be left up.

Ariel23 03:54, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

[It is our understanding that differences of opinion about the page and uses of the page should be aired in this discussion section. ]

We see from the history on the Bruce Payne Wiki page that all external fan site/website links, with the exception of the IMDb and the Bruce Payne.co.uk sites, have been deleted from the page. In the page history, the deletion indicated that the links were considered spam. We looked up the definition of Wiki spam. Spam is defined as unwanted advertising or useless or irrelevant links Fan links do not fit this definition.

First of all, fan sites are not commercial enterprises. Not one of the ones connected with Bruce Payne are selling anything. It is our impression that most fan sites are of this kind. Several of them are on free sites so there is advertising but even the IMDb has advertising so that doesn’t distinguish them from other sites.

Please allow us to state our case why we consider fan links to be vital, informative contributions to this page. They are neither irrelevant nor useless. They do add to the total store of information about the person on the Wiki page.

A fan site is more than photos. You might say it's almost like an encyclopedia too. In many cases, fan sites provide longer and more complete biographies than the Wiki pages do. This is certainly true in the case of Bruce Payne. They also provide other history and information about the person, and news of upcoming projects for the person in question, as well as articles and interviews with the person.

Fan sites also contribute directly to Wikipedia. We were originally approached by Denis Hunter on September 19, 2005, when he was compiling a Bruce Payne article on Wikipedia. He found our websites very useful to his research and invited us to contribute. If you go back through the history on this page, you will find that we have indeed contributed many additions to this page and updated out-of-date info.

At this time, we (Bruce's Angels website) and our affiliate websites Kool Bruce Payne, Bruce Payne Rules, and Welcome to the House of Payne are currently and actively updating. Outside the United States, we are also affiliated with the Bruce Payne in French website and Magnificent Bruce Payne website in Russian, which are also currently active and updating. Fan sites AGWLBP, Bruce Payne a Tribute and Kool Bruce websites do not appear to be active and updating. Two of these sites have not updated in almost a year and the other has had no updates in almost two years. The Bruce Payne.co.uk website is Mr. Payne's official website, however, it has also not been updated in almost a year with any current information. But regardless of whether all the sites in the name of Bruce Payne are active or not, they are still important and useful sources of information pertaining to Bruce Payne and his career.

It would appear that people visiting Wikipedia find fan sites links useful because they come to our pages in great numbers. Some of them have told us how glad they were to find the web site. Perhaps Wiki should poll the Wiki audience in regard to such items as fan site links and find out what they want instead of one person deciding unilaterally what they may be allowed to see.

Once again to reiterate, we think fan sites are an integral part of keeping the public and fans informed about Bruce Payne or any other actor, just as Wikipedia does. If not, we feel we would not have been approached in the first place by Wikipedia to contribute. Regardless, we will continue to help with current info and new additions in maintaining the Bruce Payne Wikipedia page.

Ariel and Israfel for Bruce's Angels website

Ariel23 00:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Ariel23 04:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Please read WP:SPAM and WP:EL. Adding your own site to numerous articles is spam. IrishGuy ^talk 06:06, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I have made my case that we are providing useful information about Bruce Payne on both your user page and on the BP discussion page. You have not really answered my points. You have just made a flat assertion. I thought this was supposed to be a discussion forum. Is Wiki policy undiscussable? That would be very disappointing. I expected better of Wiki.

I have read the Wiki policy you suggested. I see where links to interviews are apparently allowed. Yet you deleted the link to interviews on Bruce's Angels--the VERY SAME interviews that are also on AGWLBP. But you left the AGWLBP interview link up. This seems suspiciously like retaliation for questioning your authority. Is it because I was the one who put the link up? No one is ever allowed on any page to put a link to a site with which they are involved?? If that is the case, to be consistent, you would have to delete 80% of Wiki. Shouldn't the link be judged on the merit of the content to which the link points, rather than who made the links? This is unfair and I intend to go through the proper channels to protest this unfairness.

Ariel23 05:00, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Your account has been used only to add links to your own website in multiple articles. That is spamming. Your "case" is that you want your website listed in Wikipedia. That isn't a case. Stop spamming. IrishGuy ^talk 19:13, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Wiki editors and admins have worked diligently to make Wiki more accurate and to establish appropriate guidelines. This is all to the good. Even when I disagree with some of the guidelines, I understand the rationale. Wiki would be even better if editors like IrishGuy actually held to the guidelines of accuracy. His statement that ”Your account has been used only to add links to your own website in multiple articles” is factually untrue. Some might even call it “libel.” * Apparently in his urge to slam me, he didn’t even bother to look at the history of some of those pages. How unwiki. Not only have I at one time or another placed or replaced links to sites other than my own on the Bruce Payne page, I have also made many normal editing changes within the purview of Wikipedia. I am the one, for example who posted Payne’s TV appearance list, placed the second photo, updated the upcoming movies, made sure all movies that had a page had their proper links, as well as other normal editing to conform to Wiki standards. It’s all there in the history if he had bothered to look.

Furthermore, I created 3 film pages: Paranoia 1.0, Warlock III, and Ripper. I added the links to the IMDB and to the movie website when there was one. I added the cast and crew, synopsis, movie poster, and photos to each of these pages. It’s all there in the histories if he had bothered to look. In the case of Paranoia 1.0, I also contacted one of the producers, Geo Shanger, who then added more material to the web site.

In addition, I have also added photos to the following pages: Dungeons & Dragons 1, Dungeons & Dragons 2, Highlander: Endgame, Passenger 57, Switch, The Howling VI, Operation Intercept, For Queen and Country, and Oxford Blues. The last 5 did not have any photos before I placed some. I have also done some editing on Switch and For Queen and Country. It’s all there in the histories if he had bothered to look.

But Irish Guy didn’t do his homework, as a good Wiki editor should. He was too set on accusing me of “spamming” to check the accuracy of his assertions. He has also taken down a link to material allowed by Wiki. I believe he has abused his authority. I don’t think this is appropriate behavior for a Wiki editor and my next step will be to follow the procedures described in Wiki Guidelines for resolving disputes. For starters, the Wiki Guidelines say that people should discuss their disputes in “good faith.” I have done so by arguing my case and giving reasons for my point of view. His only response is to accuse me of spamming. Not exactly a dialogue. And apparently I am not the first to have this kind of unpleasant experience, as the comments below demonstrate.

• Footnote: According to the Wikipedia page “Slander and libel”: “In law, defamation is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may harm the reputation of an individual, business, product, group, government or nation…. libel (harmful statement in a fixed medium, especially writing but also a picture, sign, or electronic broadcast)…”

Ariel23 02:59, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Please read WP:LEGAL. IrishGuy ^talk 03:12, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

A few examples of your spamming: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] and so on. IrishGuy ^talk 03:16, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Once again you avoid dealing with the actual issue I raise—namely, that you have said something about me that is demonstrably untrue and hurts my reputation. I wonder why… You obfuscate once again by merely putting up a link to a Wiki legal policy instead of addressing my complaint. So much for "good faith" discussion. Just for the record, I wasn’t threatening you--What? A lawsuit? Now how silly would that be? And besides, you're not worth it. I was simply pointing out your hypocrisy. You condemn me again and again, like a broken record or robot, for violating Wiki policy yet you yourself are violating Wiki policy with a defamatory statement about your opponent. You, as an editor, have an obligation to act in an appropriate and decorous manner but you have not done so. Whose is the worse offense--my alleged "spamming" or your defamation? But enough is enough. What’s the point? This is getting us nowhere. I’ll follow Wiki Guidelines and disengage and have nothing more to say till I communicate with a neutral third party.

Ariel23 01:31, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Proving a point

I'm sure you're aware of the bloody stupid conspiracy theorising about red signatures on your talk over at Wikipedia Review at the moment. As it's getting on my nerves, here's another red signature for you. Continue with the good work, I have no reason to think you're doing anything wrong. W-Love is a douche 22:17, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

OK. I just read that thread. Frankly, I've a pretty good idea who "Wikilove" is since he knew to search for an anonymous trolling comment that was deleted twenty minutes after it was posted.

Most of what he says is complete nonsense. As you pointed out, redlinks simply mean a userpage wasn't created (or was removed for some reason). A simple glance at the block logs for the various "redlinks" will show that none of them are blocked and therefore are in no way erased. A quick glance at the recent changes will show many redlinked usernames. Those users never bothered to create a userpage. It is fairly common.

I never tagged images uploaded by Hazer789. His one sentence article about himself was deleted numerous times. That I did do, but I never tagged any images. I don't generally do image deletions.

CandyLovesVampires wasn't "deleted as a sock". CandyLovesVampires isn't even blocked. She is, however, a sock. Under three different accounts she word-for-word recreated an article about herself and how she aspires to one day be a writer. That is a noble goal and should she acheive it, she may warrant an article. She just doesn't right now.

As for me "driving" users away. I'm not seeing it. He claimed that Glsvensson left. That editor's contributions show edits far after any comments left on this page. Cleary, the editor didn't leave. He/she even stated "I'll try again tomorrow" which is in no way a threat of leaving.

The redlinked user who was deleted AfD's (217.42.46.119) was warned repeatedly by numerous users and is now blocked for blanking the article and the AfD. He created the article and rather than argue in the AfD, he prefers to try and make it simply disappear. That is hardly a user who "clearly doesn't know the procedure for". Check his talk page. He knows the procedure, he just didn't care.

The band deletion conversation actually stretches back to a previously archived page here. The reasons were given and in her response, she even admitted "I accept your argument about promoting Rhythm Knowledge". How is his "driving a user away"?

Frankly, I'm pretty sure "Wikilove" is this guy and he has been harassing me and other users for months. He even got his college IP range blocked for weeks. Most everything he has posted on that site is directly refuted by actually looking at contributions and/or examining the entire conversation of a talk page...not simply cherry picking a sentence or two and claiming useful editors were driven away.

Thanks for dropping me a line about it. It was amusing to read the thread. Paranoid little guy, isn't he? IrishGuy ^talk 23:34, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Red Sox External Links

Hi, I restored a couple of the links you removed from the Red Sox page because WP:EL allows for blogs written by knowlegable sources to be used as external links. Black Harry (T|C) 19:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

deletion of my website.

I have no problem with your deleting my website link, however, Safety Bath (whose products I carry) has a link their site. May I ask what the difference is? Is this link to a variety of models more acceptable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheWalkInBathtubStore (talk • contribs)

Adding links to your own website is spamming. Please read WP:COI, WP:EL, and WP:SPAM. IrishGuy ^talk 19:24, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, neglected to inform what article I was referring to in the above message - Walk-In Bathtub

I was not trying to alter my search engine rankings, btw.

Okay, I get it. No problem. Odd though that the picture now showing is from Safety Bath, as is the link. Perhaps there is a chance that whomever posted both was just a little less forthright about their identity than was I. My revised article is much more accurate, however, and definitely not an advert. Have a good day. 19:31, 26 May 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheWalkInBathtubStore (talk • contribs)

I noticed that the previous editor changed the link to a commercial link. I reverted it back to the original external link. IrishGuy ^talk 19:47, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Justin Heckert

I see other journalists with pages. I'd just like to know how to have one that keeps with the quality standards of this site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Justinheckert (talk • contribs)

As noted in the conflict of interest guidelines, if you are notable, someone else will eventually write an article about you. Wikipedia is not a venue for you to advertise yourself. IrishGuy ^talk 19:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Stephen Durnan

You deleted my page, Stephen Durnan. You say he is not notable and your also say that there are problems with unverified information. Do you have an article about the bible or Jesus? Show me the proof that Jesus existed! I doubt you can yet the page is here in the Encyclopedia. I am Eric Durnan, great grandson to Stephen Durnan, who is an ancestor to many Durnans in this country. For those doing research on the Durnan name, many would be happy to come across the article on their ancestor which does contain documented fact that goes along with the "verbal history" that is handed down. I think I am quite qualified to write this article and I believe that this article would be quite useful to a great many people researching about someone. By no uncertain terms in Stephen Durnan the only ancestor found in this encyclopedia. Durnan is not the only surname found in this excyclopedia either. I would appreciate your restoring the page or removing all unverified individuals from this encyclopedia. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Captain cannibas75 (talk • contribs)

It was deleted under A7 which is a non-notable person. While you may question the veracity of the Jesus article, you cannot claim that Jesus made no mark on history. Durnan is important to you personally, but that doesn't make him encyclopedic in a larger way. Wikipedia is not a personal genealogical site. Beyond the non-notability, you shouldn't be authoring that article as you have a clear conflict of interest. IrishGuy ^talk 20:26, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I have asked for a review of your decision with all due respect.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Captain cannibas75 (talk • contribs)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Stephen_Durnan. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Captain cannibas75 21:05, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

There is no deletion review for that article. IrishGuy ^talk 21:07, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure? I submitted one.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Captain cannibas75 (talk • contribs)

OK. Now I'm seeing it. You didn't create the request until after you posted here. IrishGuy ^talk 21:16, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I didn't realize that it asked me to type the letters into the box proving I'm not a bot. It did sit there for a second. Like I said in my request, I am fairly new at this.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Captain cannibas75 (talk • contribs)

Oh, it's fine. I just didn't see it at first because it didn't show for a few minutes after you posted this. No problem at all :) IrishGuy ^talk 21:21, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

May I kindly ask you mean by this? He has the material since after putting it up for review, he went ahead and recreated it word-for-word at Stephen durnan. IrishGuy talk 00:10, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I am new here, I am flying by the seat of my pants. I put it up for review, but there didn't appear to be any article for review. I reposted it as it was originally written with the tag that I read about that stated the article was up for deletion. Did I do something wrong? How will others be able to discuss my article if it isn't there for their review? Is there something I'm missing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Captain cannibas75 (talk • contribs)

Deleted articles can be viewed by admins, it need not be recreated. I noted that since you had already recreated it, you appear to have all the material and it need not be emailed to you. IrishGuy ^talk 00:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I didn't know that. Thank you. I didn't realize that I re-created it at Stephen durnan. I thought I recreated it at Stephen Durnan. I didn't know that there was a difference. Yes, I do have the article as I ran it through my WP program for spelling. Like I said, I'm still learning. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Captain cannibas75 (talk • contribs)

Thanks

thanks for removing vandalism from my page ♥Fighting for charming Love♥ 21:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem at all. IrishGuy ^talk 21:45, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Kyle Hamilton Revert

Irishguy, In fact, you are quite correct. As you can see from the history of the page in question, I had three edits before yours and two after. I initially tagged the page for speedy deletion given it appeared to be gibberish, then realized it in fact had been a "legal page" prior to several acts of vandalism. I was attempting to correct my speedy deletion errors and reverted to what I thought was the last proper revision (which ended up being the disambiguation page). I then re-edited the page because the page I reverted to did not have the disambiguation phrase at the end of the page. During all of that you had created a valid edit that I did not see. My intention was never to revert any changes you had made, but to revert to a version of page that did not have any vandalism on it. I apologize for any confusion I caused. Grimey109 00:07, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

OK. No problem. I thought you were calling my revert vandalism. Apparently, I was incorrect. Apologies for the miscommunication. IrishGuy ^talk 00:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I never meant to get into a dispute or anything else regarding the use of alink to the website safetybtah.com in the walk in bathtub article, however, since you indicate that there is to be no advertising, etc, I am wondering why it is that the link to wasauna.com continu=es to be allowed. I would not have placed a link to safetybath if I had not seena link to wasauna.

Can you explain why their link should be allowed and not that of safetybath? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krushen (talk • contribs)

You were only editing that article to advertise safetybath. That is the only article you have edited. The existing link is to an informational page whereas you were altering the link to point to your site which is expressely commercial. IrishGuy ^talk 22:58, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikthink

I've protected his talk to shut him up for 23 hours. --Steve _(Stephen) ^talk 00:11, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

That works. Although one should always assume good faith, I feel fairly confident that if/when he returns he will go about the same behavior and earn himself an indef. IrishGuy ^talk 00:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

If he comes back at all. We'll see. It's a shame when folks get off to such a bad start. Have fun. --Steve _(Stephen) ^talk 00:16, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I think he is a sock. The talk page he AfD'd, Enthogenesis, wasn't a user who tagged either of his articles. A few of the articles Wikthink threw speedy tags on were articles that Enthogenesis had edited. It seemed personal. IrishGuy ^talk 00:19, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

He also used AfD tags, whereas all of his articles were speedy-tagged. That means he had to have learned about AfD somewhere before. Corvus cornix 01:18, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

True. While he didn't actually complete the AfD process he knew enough to slap those tags on articles. That doesn't seem like the work of a brand new user. IrishGuy ^talk 01:21, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

He was slapping AfD tags on articles I had edited, including Enthogenesis's Talk page. Corvus cornix 01:29, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

So it was you he was trailing? IrishGuy ^talk 01:30, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Apparently, in retaliation for my speedy noming one of his articles. Corvus cornix 17:18, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Does he remind you of anyone you may have come across before? IrishGuy ^talk 21:36, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand this at all

Hello. I made an article about a uk guitarist called Charlie Mead. It used a website and album sleeves as source material, no text was directly copied from them I must stress. The images used were not under copyright. So why on earth did you delete that article, I'd like to know as I see no justification for it and if there was then I need to know as to avoid it in the future. Cheers Andy Savaurino Andysavourino 02:32, 29 May 2007 (UTC).

As noted in the deletion log, it was speedy deleted as an A7 deletion: article about a person, group, company, or website that does not assert the importance of the subject. Frankly, I tried to search for this person and came up with nothing. This is a non-notable person. IrishGuy ^talk 02:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I still can't understand what I'm doing wrong?

The person I was writting about has had airplay in the UK, has a website, played at numerous gigs around the UK and sold albums via his bands website (although it was not officially recognised at the time by the UK charts). There was an article about him on here for months, I edited it and then you deleted the entire thing. As far as I'm concerned he, and the band are worth a small mention. I mean it's one page about an interesting person. Andy Savourino —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andysavourino (talk • contribs)

While you may find the person interesting, he fails WP:NOTE and WP:BAND across the board. Many unsigned bands sell music through the internet...that doesn't make them notable. IrishGuy ^talk 03:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Notability

He is very notable in his local community a town with a population of more than 100,000 people, I would assume is notable in the surrounding towns aswell. I thought the Wikipedia rules say if they're of notability in their local communities that warrents an article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andysavourino (talk • contribs)

The notability guidelines state nothing of the kind. IrishGuy ^talk 19:38, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

=GAYlordpoor

I would suggest he is a username violation: first, it's offensive and second it's disruptive (it's impossible to link to). HalfShadow 20:57, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

White Sox

No, you don't get it. IM CREATING A HISTORY ARTICLE THAT YOU DELETED. IT'S MEANT TO BE THERE. I'M REMOVING IRRELEVANT SECTIONS. SEE HERE AND LET IT STAY Soxrock 20:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

No, the article isn't meant to be there. There is no reason to fork the bulk of the White Sox article. You have gained no consensus for such an overtaking. Stop. IrishGuy ^talk 20:59, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I did this for many NFL articles. This is simply meant to help reduce article size. Soxrock 21:01, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Again, you have not created any level of discussion before undertaking this. Stop. IrishGuy ^talk 21:01, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Whatever, when I propose, I'm sure to get the thumbs up. Soxrock 21:02, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Now, how can this work out. This is now out for vote. Soxrock 21:16, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

David LaBounty

I do not understand why you have deleted the above referenced entry. David LaBounty is an accomplished and published author. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sethmnorman (talk • contribs)

No, he has published a single book with a vanity publisher that has existed since last year and he has published poetry online. None of this meets WP:NOTE. IrishGuy ^talk 21:05, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Just Recently Aware of Blocking Policy @ Wikipedia

I was just recently informed about the blocking policy at Wikipedia. Sorry for any confusion and/or disruption this may have caused. But I would like to say this. When I see a user misusing Wikipedia, I take measures that may seem a bit harsh but are needed to keep Wikipedia clean and as educational as possible. Redsox04 22:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

"History of..." pages

Please my post at Talk:Chicago White Sox. --Ksy92003 (talk) 22:38, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying. IrishGuy ^talk 22:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Well actually, I changed my mind entirely. When I first came to edit, I was actually logged in at my high school, Wilson High School in Long Beach, California. At the time, I thought it was a good idea. But when I got home and turned my computer on, I thought about this to myself. And that's when I realized that this wasn't really necessary. Sorry for any confusion this may have caused. But I'm sure that you will back me up on this... right? --Ksy92003 (talk) 22:44, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Of course :) IrishGuy ^talk 22:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

So, what's your opinion on this? Why do you think a separate article shouldn't be created? This way, I can back you up, as well. --Ksy92003 (talk) 22:51, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

My opinion is the same as what you wrote: I think people come to Chicago White Sox to learn about the team...past and present. Reading it chronologically in one place makes far more sense then being sent to other articles. Other baseball articles do it this way: Cleveland Indians, Los Angeles Dodgers, San Diego Padres, etc. There is no basis for breaking it down as the other article don't do this at all. IrishGuy ^talk 22:56, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Again on the subject of deletion...

Again I'm here to talk about the deletion of my article on charlie mead. The only independent source I can find on the web (via google) was at http://www.hantsbands.co.uk/pages/banddetail.asp?ID=2448 which gives a very brief band profile. I still feel as locally he is very well known and I believe made a large contribution to the local young music scene, by working with many artists which is how I know him; That he deserves an article on Wikipedia. The point of Wikipedia is to inform and educate people and I feel that people would like to know more about this person. I have a copy of a newsletter which had an article about the man. Again I don't know if this counts as an official document.

Can you please give me a couple of examples of criteria I need for a locally based musician. He has a cult fanbase, but I don't know if that's enough.

Thanks for your time, Andy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andysavourino (talk • contribs)

He must meet the criteria at WP:NOTE and WP:BIO or WP:BAND. Thus far, he doesn't. IrishGuy ^talk 01:18, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Persistent

little buggers aren't they! --Steve _(Stephen) ^talk 03:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

No kidding. :) IrishGuy ^talk 05:46, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Irishguy

Check out the deletion log. The page is now salted. :-P Nishkid64 (talk) 16:47, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

His other edit was interesting, too. :) IrishGuy ^talk 16:52, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Wow Irishguy I didn't think you'd become so popular! See this charming little page as well... hiarious aren't they? :) Majorly (talk | meet) 17:04, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm. Apparently I was born in hell but I have the same problem as the "Catholic Almighty God". Interesting conundrum... IrishGuy ^talk 17:12, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Some people don't know when to quit

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:N00bchild&oldid=134614131 San Diablo 18:03, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Eyes On Me {disambiguation)

Was that just a coincidence that I had marked it CSD (G7) with {{db-author}} then within two minutes you deleted it? Fayenatic london (talk) 22:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I was looking through the CSD and noticed it. IrishGuy ^talk 22:22, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks. 'Night all! - Fayenatic london (talk) 23:25, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Template:Speedytag2

I tagged the template by mistake, can you restore please? I meant to tag the redirect in my userspace. Thanks in advance! Evilclown93 00:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Same with Template:RfA-conom. Evilclown93 00:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem. :) IrishGuy ^talk 00:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

This isn't showing up in CSD. Can you delete for me also, please? Evilclown93 01:03, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Got it. IrishGuy ^talk 03:03, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Destruction of Tommorow

Recreated again, so I've blocked him for that, and not being able to spell "Tomorrow." --Steve _(Stephen) ^talk 00:57, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

It is two users (or socks) taking turns creating it. Crakitoa and Zeelo. IrishGuy ^talk 01:09, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed the other guy too. I've added it to WP:PT --Steve _(Stephen) ^talk 01:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

You've deleted my article on Picardism

I find that terribly insulting. Bizarre and ridiculous as the religion (and article) may seem, Picardism is my religion, and I find it a major insult to my person to delete it. I'm assuming you're a good person, as many administrators on wikipedia are, so I'd like to know if there's a consensus we could agree upon. I'd appreciate it if you'd comment back on my talk page. Picardism 01:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

While it may be your religion Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day. The article was nonsense and therefore was deleted as such. IrishGuy ^talk 01:33, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

That is an extremely insulting thing to say! Picardism is not 'something I made up in school one day!' I wouldn't dare insult something you held important in such a way, no matter how stupid it sounded to me. I assumed you were a good person, and I came asking to talk. You've clearly shown the opposite. I know just how you would react if I came to you slandering your religion and mocking you for your beliefs--it is repulsive to think that you would be so rude as to call my very way of life 'nonsense.' The very nature of such comments enthralls an unmitigated gall! I demand you retract such statements. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Picardism (talk • contribs)

Why don't you find somewhere else to play, OK? IrishGuy ^talk 02:30, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I intend to 'find somewhere else to play,' as you so eloquently put it. I'm taking this to a higher authority. Picardism 02:40, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to seek deletion review. IrishGuy ^talk 02:42, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: West Texas Whirlwinds

You removed them from the American Basketball Association (2000-) page, saying that they are a "non-team (per website)". Well, I have two links on the official website which say they are a team [6] [7]. I hope you see now. Tom Danson 14:07, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

On the list of current teams [8] they aren't listed. IrishGuy ^talk 18:17, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, they are (It's been updated)-right at the very bottom. Tom Danson 01:46, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, I see it now. Odd. It wasn't there yesterday. IrishGuy ^talk 02:15, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Harvest Moon Cocktail

Hey, I reverted your prod on Harvest Moon Cocktail since it has been prod'd already. The correct thing to do is to take it to AFD which I did already for you. You might want to weigh in on why you want it deleted. Postcard Cathy 14:56, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Alaska y Dinarama

Hi Irishguy,

Would you like to give me a hand working on Alaska y Dinarama? It's currently redirecting to Fangoria. Since Fangoria is a new act that came from Alaska y Dinarama (CDs are released under different names) I'd like to create A+D its own page. Would you like to help?

Joseph —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joseph77057 (talk • contribs)

You are simply duplicating the information from the Fangoria article. A redirect works fine in that instance. IrishGuy ^talk 19:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I will make the necessary changes so it's not duplicating the info from that article. Sorry about that. - Joseph

EliteBlondeSociety

Which of the 473 e-mails from the three accounts do you want?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 23:00, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

LOL. Frankly, I believe you completely but if you would like to forward a couple that is fine with me. IrishGuy ^talk 23:02, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I can. I have certain key words filtered so they may not be sent properly.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 23:03, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. IrishGuy ^talk 23:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Mark Johnson

Irishguy,

You deleted my company profile page yesterday - Instantiations. I modeled that page after an active company profile (Genuitec) In fact, there are a number of other company profile pages that are identical in format to the one I submitted that weren't deleted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JetBrains http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klocwork http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortify_Software http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasoft

I really hope you reconsider and retore my page; or at least restore it and point out what you object to so that I can correct it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdjohns5 (talk • contribs)

You are attempting to use Wikipedia to bring publicity to your company and sell your products. That isn't what Wikipedia is for. Please read WP:COI and feel free to pursue deletion review if you would like to. IrishGuy ^talk 23:07, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Would it be better/easier for me to create a new page without objectionable content...following the examples of the companies I reference above?

Double standards with external links

There are now only two websites in the world which are dedicated to Quentin Crisp. One of these www.crisperanto.org has not one but two links on his page. Yet when I try to add a link to the second www.quentincrisp.info you will not allow this. I do not wish to be associated with this site, it goes against what Quentin Stood for his whole life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.27.15.61 (talk • contribs)

Complaint

I wish to complain about the seeming vendetta you have against me. I realise that you feel sensitive about "Plastic Paddy" and I can understand why, but that does not justify accusations of trolling and random deletions of my comments. I have refuted your accusations of my being illogical and inconsistent but to little avail. You also accused me of Pope bashing when I spoke favourably of Pius VI.

It might be helpful if I reiterated where I am coming from, so to speak. I live in the Republic of Ireland and am a member of the Church of Ireland and of Fine Gael. I am a graduate of two universities, one a major league institution where I obtained a degree in history. I recently retired after a long career in management. And yet I see my various of my valid comments deleted, whilst semi-literate rants, often with obscene language, are allowed to remain. Examples are "Iamlondon's" reference to a "fucking list", and another reference to expelling "anglo saxton heretics" (sic) from Ireland (ref Bobby Sands). To take a specific example of a deletion of one of my comments (twice in fact), let me refer you to the one about the Boston Irish failing to support their team against Bolivia at soccer. My source was "The Irish Times", which commented on a feeling of being let down. This was deleted, but the ill-informed rants of others are allowed to remain. My comment about Charles de Gaulle's Irish ancestry was also deleted.

As a matter of interest I belong to another discussion forum, that of the Church of Ireland. I am always treated with courtesy and respect there, and the administator has told me that he appreciates my comments. But that particular Forum does not include semi-literate, ill-educated ranters.

I must add that for all our differences, I am not accusing you personally of being ill-educated, ill-informed or ranting. Far from it. But what I find hard to understand is why the main Wikipedia main articles are almost invariably sound and scholarly, whilst many of the comments are hopelessly unencyclopedic.

Millbanks

This comment has nothing whatsoever to do with the article. It is merely another opportunity for you to attack Reagan and Clinton for claiming Irish roots. I chose that single example because it sums up what you do here. You stated: As a matter of interest I belong to another discussion forum... that is the point - this isn't a discussion forum. It is an encyclopedia. The article talk pages are for discussing the improvements of articles...period. They are not a place to argue your own POV about others. IrishGuy ^talk 18:07, 3 June 2007 (UT

i) It says "discussion" at the top of the page;

ii) Pointing out de Gaulle's Irish ancestry is not attacking Clinton or Reagan.

iii) You seem to have ignored all the other points I've raised.

Millbanks 86.41.149.8 21:05, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Discussion for the articles. Please read WP:TALK. You will note at the top in very bold letters it says: Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views. As for the de Gaulle commenet you said: He was twice as Irish as Ronald Reagan, and eighteen times as Irish as Bill Clinton. and that most assuredly is attacking Reagan and Clinton because it has nothing to do with de Gaulle at all. It was just another instance of you taking an opportunity to take jabs at people you don't like. You didn't make any other points. There is nothing more to respond to. You are trolling and you know it. Stop. IrishGuy ^talk 21:26, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I am not trolling. I was merely showing how Irish de Gaulle was, and citing comparators to prove my point. I have reservations about Reagan, not because he was only one eighth Irish but because of his economic policies. I admire Clinton, and would have voted for him were I American, especially because of the good work he did in the north of Ireland. BUT I am still aggrieved that you home in on my contributions with great vigour, and leave illiterate, obscene and ill-informed comments alone. To take but one example, I have alerted you to the one about Bobby Sands and "anglo saxton heretics". The comment is racist, sectarian and semi-literate. But for reasons best known and/or kept to yourself you choose to let it go. Please explain yourself. Millbanks 08:45, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

confused

not sure why these "do not edit" warnings are coming up when i'm browsing from work. i don't even have a log-in and have never edited wikipedia, i just read it from work all the time. any idea why these warnings would be happening to me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.10.219.38 (talk • contribs)

That IP address has been used for vandalism. That is what the warnings are referering to. IrishGuy ^talk 00:20, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Download link, added to DVD Shrink

I'm merely providing a relatively easy accessible download link to DVD Shrink I've found on the net. Actually I don't care about advertising, promotions or search ranks. Strangerz 05:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)Strangerz

I have a question about the deletion of the article "ONUMA Planning System". The article itself was deleted and also a reference to it on "Building Information Modeling". There is a section on with references to software on this page, and initially there was an error about what our software does, which someone else had posted, so I corrected it. I noticed a deletion since there was an external references, so I removed that and created the new article to explain what this software does. Could you please explain the policy, since it does not seem consistent to have pages and links about some software, yet not about others. I wonder why you consider this advertising even if we are listed on other government BIM guides. Thanks for your answer, i do want to follow guidelines, and am new to Wikipedia. --KimonOnuma 21:38, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

First, you shouldn't be creating that article at all as you have a clear conflict of interest. Second, Wikipedia is not a venue for advertising your company/products. It was a blatant advertisement and was deleted as such. IrishGuy ^talk 21:41, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Patrick Cortes

I tried making a page about a filipino american hip hop head/ grafitti artist on wikipedia. Irishguy said it wasn't significant biographical information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ensci (talk • contribs)

He isn't notable enough for an encylopedia article. Please read WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC. IrishGuy ^talk 01:34, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Rich Williamson

Dear "Irishguy",

I recently contributed an article on the subject of "Baserape" which described a specific offensive tactic used in paramilitary multiuser video games. You deleted it with the lame excuse reason of "patent nonsense". Please take the time to read the Wikipedia rules, as you'll notice that this reason should be used for deleting articles filled with gibberish characters or confusing content. My article was written in intelligible English and had clear and specific content. I hope your actions are not representative of the Wikipedia community at large. —Preceding unsigned comment added by W7ki (talk • contribs)

...and no meaningful content. Hence the deletion. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. IrishGuy ^talk 01:41, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the prompt reply. The subject lends itself to expansion because there are many methods of doing it, many games which it applies to, and lends itself to an ongoing debate of whether it is an ethical practice in the video gaming community, not to mention another tangent discussion on whether it could be characterized as a design flaw or poor coding on part of the game software developer(s). (Also, please look up "murder" on Wikipedia... should that be removed as well since Wikipedia is not a dictionary ???). Regardless, that was my reasoning for submitting the information here rather than to a dictionary site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by W7ki (talk • contribs)

Accidental Move

Hi Irishguy. Sorry about my accidental move of the Tracking article. I have explained what I was trying to accomplish on my talk page. --Jomegat 02:33, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Got it. OK, accidents happen. :) IrishGuy ^talk 02:48, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello IrishGuy

I was just wondering, where in ireland are you from ? Gazh 10:54, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I guess that means you're actually American and not Irish. Gazh 22:54, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

It means I don't give out personal information. IrishGuy ^talk 22:56, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Well it was only a guess, surely your nationality is not too personal? come on i'm curious - i won't give you the plastic paddy routine i promise. Gazh 23:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Myst Franchise article

Hi Irishguy :-D
May I ask you the reason to delete all the Fan Sites Links in this article ?
The Myst Community is very important and the main part of informations about these games can only be found on the fan sites and boards.
And "Kehrin's D'ni Desk Reference" is not an offical site ;-D
Sorry for my english, I'm french.

Thank you for your reply
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.123.56.235 (talk • contribs)

There were thirteen fan sites...so many that they had their own subsection. Wikipedia is not a repository of links. IrishGuy ^talk 17:02, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Bulldog2010

I noticed you blocked Bulldog2010 from editing, but it appears he is doing so anonymously using IP Address: 70.144.162.3. Any way you can block that too? Ccrashh 19:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

He appears to have stopped for now. Feel free to contact me if he starts up again. IrishGuy ^talk 19:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

RE:Irishguy (comment)

Irishguy,

Would you like me to get sources for my information on Irish Americans as well as others? Because I can.

P.S.

I have left sources for my information on red state-blue state divide many times and yet I have still found my added information was not suitable for someone despite this.

Thanks,

Autiger01 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Autiger01 (talk • contribs)

I have looked at your edits. You don't provide sources, you simply give your personal opinion. Please don't do that. IrishGuy ^talk 20:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

My apologies, I thought you were speaking of another one of my edits on red state-blue state divide. I can understand why you would delete or need citaion on that particular edit I made. My mistake.User:Autiger01

T.M. Productions and From Russia With Guns

Irishguy, why did you delete the pages T.M. Productions and From Russia With Guns, for your information they are real and not fictional, if it was fictional it would NOT have its own website, but it does, please e-mail me at tmanninoproductions@yahoo.com or post a comment on my talk page about why you deleted those pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by T.M. Productions (talk • contribs)

The fact that it is real doesn't make it notable enough for an encyclopedia article. I ate a sandwich yesterday...that is true...but that doesn't warrant an article. You were attempting to use Wikipedia to promote yourself. Your articles were deleted as blatant advertisements. IrishGuy ^talk 20:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Nordstrom

???? What is the problem??? Every other department store listed here has ALL the locations listed!??? Please reply ASAP, Very best, MF&Co. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MF&Co. (talk • contribs)

Actually, J.C. Penney doesn't. Kmart doesn't. Neither does Macy's (department store). Actually, I couldn't find any other articles that listed every location. Beyond that, the article you are continually recreated was deleted via AfD and shouldn't be recreated without undergoing deletion review. IrishGuy ^talk 22:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

WHY DID YOU DELETE WHAT I WROTE

WHY DID YOU DELETE WHAT I WROTE ON talk:NBA its been there for many days--BABOON MAN 04:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

First, the article has been deleted. Second, you have already been warned about trying to publicize your article all over Wikipedia. Stop. IrishGuy ^talk 04:14, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm fuckin sorry, I'll try not to do stupid shit like that again, I promise I want to do fuckin good.--BABOON MAN 04:23, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

BABOON MAN has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

THE BEAST

I wanted to rename my talk page this, I am sorry if you don't like that but you'll find I'm a good guy and I want to help. Give me a fuckin assignment and I'll do a fuckin good job I promise--BABOON MAN 04:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind the shit at the top, just help me out and take me under your watch guide me through this huge fuckin maze thats fuckin wikipedia and I swear to god i'll be the fuckin greatest contributer to this shit--BABOON MAN 04:29, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

DO me a huge fuckin favor and look at my user page and make a comment about my idea on my fuckin talk page talk you, you are the fuckin greatestn--BABOON MAN 04:30, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Anon vandal User:69.205.38.69 is at it again, with bad edits to Luis Valdez, and North Pole here and here. S/he has already been given an "only warning" by you yesterday. --SigPig |^{SEND - OVER} 18:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Why is my page down again?

Why do you keep taking down my page? What gives you that right? Please explain. AndyHartPFW 18:19, 7 June 2007 (UTC)AndyHartPFW

What page? IrishGuy ^talk 20:23, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Youk

Hi. What is your thinking on the deletion of the link to Youk's bio? Tx. --Epeefleche 21:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

The link wasn't to a website. It was a wikipedia link that went to the "edit this page". *[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kevin_Youkilis&action=edit Jewish Virtual Library bio] IrishGuy ^talk 21:50, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Understood. Tx. Don't know if it was vandalism or a mistake, but I will put in the correct url. --Epeefleche 03:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Ron DeWolf's alleged retracted allegations...

Have you bothered to read the affidavit linked to the allegation on Ron DeWolf's Wikipedia entry, stating "DeWolf retracted most of his statements in a later sworn affidavit of July 1, 1987 (Ronald E. DeWolf v. Lyle Stuart Inc.)[3]?" I have. And this allegation of 'most of his statements' is too vague. Please 'show me the pudding' before re-editing my removal of this allegation. Thank you. TheWikiWiki 09:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Apologies

I did not name anyone as a sockpuppet, and it was never my intention to imply that you were one. Apologies if in anyway you received such an impression. I am glad that someone is trying to bring some sense to what appears to be an edit war, and I hope that you can judge the issue impartially. I added a talk banner to that page as a reminder to participants, and so I could see what is going on. I have no wish to inflame the situation by jumping in with both my feet in my mouth without first seeing what is going on. Kbthompson 17:45, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

As I noted on the talk page, DreamGuy is correct with his formatting issues. As far as the content removals...I think all parties need to actually discuss it with each other instead of blindly reverting. IrishGuy ^talk 17:46, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I certainly agree with that. A consensus was attempted by some editors, but it appears others didn't participate/reverted anyway. Anyway, I shall watch and learn. Good luck with achieving some sort of agreement between the parties. Kbthompson 17:53, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

LOL. Indeed, I don't see consensus right around the corner. But if the edit wars continue, I will protect the page and then they will be forced to discuss the issues without being able to edit it. IrishGuy ^talk 17:54, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Irishguy, I am sorry - I didn't realise that you were an admin. I just assumed that Dreamguy was up to his usual tricks again. My apologies. Colin4C 18:30, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Just to clarify that I now know that I was wrong in that assumption, that's what I'm trying to say. Colin4C 18:38, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Why did you remove legitimate links to Errol Flynn resources?

Hello, I do not understand why you deleted my links to legitimate Flynn resources while leaving others such a Peter's EF Club and Rory Flynn's site on the list? My site has author's such a Tom McNulty and Professor Lincoln Hurst of UC Davis--the film historian who appears on TCM and in featurettes about Errol for Warners and other DVD collections. Jack Marino was a personal friend of Tony Thomas and is a very close friend of Deirdre Flynn. These are very legitimate resources for anyone interested in Errol Flynn. What gives? —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Errol Flynn Blog (talk • contribs)

Please read WP:EL and WP:SPAM. It is not appropriate to add links to your own websites. IrishGuy ^talk 20:48, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Explain how the other links to Flynn websites are legitimate and mine is not?

Can you explain how the other links to Flynn websites are any different than those I added to the page? Please detail each site's qualifications to be on the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Errol Flynn Blog (talk • contribs)

No. You were spamming. It was removed. IrishGuy ^talk 21:08, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I was not spamming--it seems you are incapable of defending your actions!

IrishGuy, what is your problem here? I was definately not spamming. Are the other external links spam? Justify to me why they are different! My links add great sources of information about Errol Flynn. What is the axe that you are grinding? Do we need to go into arbitration on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Errol Flynn Blog (talk • contribs)

If you want arbitration, give it a go. I will remind you again to read WP:EL and WP:SPAM notably where it states: You should avoid linking to a website that you own, maintain or represent. I am not grinding an axe, nor will I justify the other links simply because a spammer damands I do so. IrishGuy ^talk 21:49, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

About a revert

Hi. I just wanted to know why have you reverted an edit i've made on the Eastern Orthodox Church page. I put a link to the Christian Flag, i think it's in the context. You just reverted and gave no explanation. That's why i'm asking.

--Bluedenim 22:16, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

You were adding it to pretty much every Christian denomination article even thought the Christian Flag article itself notes that it is predominately used by Protestants and Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and other non-Protestant branches of Christianity do not generally use the flag. I couldn't see why it belonged in an article that expressely doesn't use it. IrishGuy ^talk 22:19, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok

Ok, i will contain myself :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluedenim (talk • contribs)

WP:AIV

Irishguy, could you do something for me, please. In WP:AIV there is a nom for User:172.195.112.109. I think that I am seeing an edit war, and have warned both this user and User:Space Cadet, the other main protagonist. But the nominator is not happy. And, OK, I could be wrong. Could you please take a look?--Anthony.bradbury 22:32, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Admittedly, I don't know much about the subject...but it does appear to be an edit war and not blatant vandalism. IrishGuy ^talk 22:35, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I asked you because I could see from the deletion log that you were currently on-line and active.--Anthony.bradbury 22:39, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem at all. As I said, I don't know much about the accusation of using incorrect Polish/German names but in totality it seems to be an edit war and not vandalism. But I could be incorrect. IrishGuy ^talk 22:45, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Witton Albion F.C.

Hi; I am more than willing to watch this page, and have flagged it appropriately. But I have an odd problem. When I hit the history button, I get the "Microsoft has a problem and needs to close . Sorry for the inconvenience." box. Happened three times. I do not know why. Any thoughts?--Anthony.bradbury 23:02, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

OK...I thought it was just me. It has killed my browser about ten times. I finally just stopped trying. IrishGuy ^talk 23:08, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I stopped after three. There must be some code inserted into the programme at this page. Is it worth taking to WP:AN/I?--Anthony.bradbury 23:12, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Oddly, Firefox works fine. It just seems to kill IE. And that is the only history page I have seen that does it. IrishGuy ^talk 23:23, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Well. that is totally weird. I will watch as well as I am allowed.--Anthony.bradbury 23:28, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I note that this article is now semiprotected, and that full protection has been discussed and decided against. I question this decision, as it is apparent from some of the edit summaries of the trolls and socks making the same repeated vandal edit that this is being done primarily to wind you up. I think it should be fully protected, at least for a period of time. Thoughts?--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 21:16, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree that is should be full protected for a brief time. The sockpuppetry is getting extreme. IrishGuy ^talk 21:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I have applied temporary full protection. (Also corrected user talk sig fault)--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 21:31, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good. I like the new sig. :) IrishGuy ^talk 21:32, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

username

Thank you.--<font color="Red">[[User:Anthony.bradbury|'''Anthony.bradbury'''</font>^{<font color="Black">[[User talk:Anthony.bradbury|"talk"]]</font>}]] 00:30, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it seems not to work.--<font color="Red">[[User:Anthony.bradbury|'''Anthony.bradbury'''</font>^{<font color="Black">[[User talk:Anthony.bradbury|"talk"]]</font>}]] 00:31, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Did you tell me to? I am sorry, that was not a serious comment. I am not very computer-literate.--Anthony.bradbury 00:43, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I think I forgot to initially, but yes you need to. IrishGuy ^talk 02:16, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I think the talk page should now be linked.--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 21:42, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it is.--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 21:43, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Sources

When including sourced statements in an article, please do not use links that require registration or don't exist. I'll be glad to point you to the specific edit in question here, but I don't think that's necessary. Also, it is not advisable to post comments to a user talk page that are about an article. Many people, who do not read individual talk pages, would be left out of a potentially beneficial discussion. In the meantime, I have commented regarding the Kevin Youkilis situation on that talk page. //Tecmobowl 19:32, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

None of the sources needed registration. Please don't create false reasons for blanking content. IrishGuy ^talk 19:33, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

A) You are 100% right on the idiot thing. I just dealt with a person who attacked me and simply let a fuse blow and I apologize. B) I'll address the rest of this on the youkilis talk page. C) I will say that I no longer hold the title of "admin" on here with any sort of preconceived respect. In the past few weeks, I have been called an idiot by an admin, who then hid under the guise of the action exuse (as in..he said my actions and not me). A number of admins have failed to follow due process and well just a whole mess of stuff. Again, your right, you are certainly far from an idiot (all though many on here aren't) and I just wasn't acting appropriately. //Tecmobowl 19:42, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

So i guess this counts as "ignoring" you huh? Nice job of being and admin, you just proved my point. //Tecmobowl 21:16, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I take it this is you being civil? You didn't bother to comment here until after you had blanked your talk page twice and called me an idiot. Yes, that is ignoring comments. IrishGuy ^talk 21:22, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

There is nothing uncivil about blanking a talk page, a practice which is not against wiki policy (here), and just because I didn't respond within two seconds does not make me unresponsive. Get over it and stick to the content. I had a poor choice of words and apologized. You can either accept that apology or not, but regardless, let's move on. The content issue on the Youkilis article was addressed sufficently, if you have any more problems, I watch the page, so feel free to chat up that issue all you want. //Tecmobowl 21:32, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

BBW vandal?

OK, there's this red-link User:EricTrivett, whose sole purpose is to post a weblog on the BBW article and others[9]. I reverted him once and he came right back with it. This could go on all day if I let it. Any suggestions? Baseball Bugs 19:44, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I reverted the spamming and gave him a warning. I will keep an eye on him. Thanks. IrishGuy ^talk 19:45, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

please see - thanks

Hi there,

Just saw you deleted my Jess King posting. I am the creator of jessking.com and the about section of this account. Should I completely rewrite this for Wikipedia - Sorry did not mean to do this improperly.

Regards,

Euriphile (Manager to Jess) —Preceding unsigned comment added by JessKingMusic (talk • contribs)

It was deleted as it was a copyright violation but as her manager, you shouldn't be authoring that article at all. You have a serious conflict of interest. IrishGuy ^talk 19:59, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Boilerplate vandalism messages on user talk pages

Hi, I was addressing a new user's talk page about a vandalism issue personally, but unfortunately my message was confused by your boilerplate vandalism messages which were all muddled up with mine. Please be careful about not littering talk pages with message templates that, even they are only level 1 warnings, might have offended and confused the new editor in the context they were given. Aliasd 20:22, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I had already deleted two of his nonsense articles about himself and his band. He had already vandalized the disambugation page with his IP before logging in and continuing with his username. I wasn't worried about offending or confusing him. I was trying to get him to stop without having to block him. IrishGuy ^talk 20:24, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I was aware of his previous edit from his IP as I reverted them myself, I believe the messages I left on his talk page got the message across quite nicely. I realise you are an experienced user, but I think you may have used the wrong approach with this one. Aliasd 20:42, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

You truly believe that someone who leaves comments like this requires kid gloves? IrishGuy ^talk 20:56, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Heh! see! you offended him! :) Aliasd 20:58, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For several worthy contributions to Wikipedia.Cheers, JetLover (Talk) (Sandbox) 20:31, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

User:El redactor

What would be the process to determine whether this red-linked user, whose sole purpose appeared to be to add consensus for the baseball card link on the Shoeless Joe Jackson article (along with a handful of other random edits), has any connection to anyone else in this ongoing debate? I read that mysterious name to actually mean "External Link Red Actor".[10] In the interest of full disclosure, I was previously User:Wahkeenah, and I used an IP address to edit before that. Baseball Bugs 21:47, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm guessing you would want to create a report at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets and/or Request a checkuser report. IrishGuy ^talk 21:54, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

The checkuser sounds like the one. I suspect they would require a stronger case before spending time on it. It was a challenge just to get the administrative team to deal with User:Gravitor vs. User:Carfiend, whose behavior in tandem was much more disruptive than anything I've seen in this particular case. "Redactor" as a single word means "Remover", so it could also be interpreted as "External Link Remover". Fairly clever, ¿sí? :) Baseball Bugs 22:01, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

My mistake. A redactor isn't exactly a remover. It's a censor. [11] :) Baseball Bugs 22:29, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

• Oh this is too funny. I'm no longer going to engage you people. First off... look here. Second, redactor is a spanish word. Third, the person made a number of edits over two days (I'm guessing that between 12:30 am and 12pm, he slept - so it's two days - even though one calender day). Forth, MAKE THE CONTENT BETTER! //Tecmobowl 21:51, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Baseball bugs - where did you learn spanish? and why am i them just because I agree with them? I am in school and work as an editor for the school paper - hence the name.El redactor

• En la escuela secondaria. And FYI, amigo, "redactor" comes to both English and Spanish from a Latin root. Baseball Bugs 13:02, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Shoeless Joe Jackson

Somewhere buried in the verbiage, on one of the various talk pages, the user admitted to being acquainted with the owner of that website. It looks to me like the site's primary purpose is to sell baseball cards. Those facts by themselves don't necessarily disqualify posting the site, I reckon, but they do raise questions about neutrality. Baseball Bugs 22:20, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't see any relevant reason to include that site. It is a fan site and it doesn't add any substance to the article. IrishGuy ^talk 22:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Here's the place where he owned up to knowing its webmaster. [12] Baseball Bugs 22:26, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

In that link, Tecmobowl claimed that the owner of the site was Blacksoxfan. Blacksoxfan had his talk page blanked by 71.56.127.218 (the page was filled with warnings for constantly adding his own site to articles). 71.56.127.218 admitted to being Tecmobowl. Odd, no? It looks more like Tecmobowl is Blacksoxfan than that he simply knows Blacksoxfan. IrishGuy ^talk 22:31, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... the plot thickens. >:) Baseball Bugs 22:34, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I think Tecmobowl previously had the ID of User:Wolverinegod. I think he said that someplace, but I can't find it now. Baseball Bugs 22:45, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

71.56.127.218 appears to be a Comcast subnet based in New Jersey. Baseball Bugs 22:48, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Both Blacksoxfan and Tecmobowl (back when he was Wolverinegod) continually added the same link spam (cardpricer.com) to articles. Odd coincidence, no? IrishGuy ^talk 22:53, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Shazam! Meanwhile, I'm trying to think of a good Spanish expression for "coincidence". Possiblemente, "lo mismo y no lo mismo". >:) Baseball Bugs 22:56, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

And thanks for finding that reference to his switching users. It is not hidden, nor is my switch of user IDs hidden. That is, they are not "redacted". Baseball Bugs 23:04, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Tecmobowl even went so far as to remove references to Blacksoxfan spamming. Hmmm... IrishGuy ^talk 23:00, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

His earliest work involves baseball cards, so it's obviously a topic he's very interested in, and he has also had plenty of complaints about his approach to editing. Baseball Bugs 23:04, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

The IP Tecmobowl was using is out of Atlanta, Georgia...and the owner of Blacksoxfan.com is also from Atlanta, Georgia. Could be coincidence...but I think not. IrishGuy ^talk 23:09, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Since he has admitted to at least "knowing" the owner of that page, the fact they are on the same IP subnet might not be unexpected. I don't know if that's enough info to raise questions about sockpuppetry. I'd be really curious to know whether User:El redactor is on that same subnet. Baseball Bugs 23:12, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Although theoretically they would be different, wouldn't they? Because the 48-hour block against Tecmo would also have blocked his subnet, right? Baseball Bugs 23:14, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I want to point out one thing in a more serious vein. The complaint on the ANI page says that I want an RFC against him. I do not want an RFC. I want him to talk with us instead of lecturing us on why he's right and we're wrong, and stonewalling us. Baseball Bugs 23:07, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree. He need to realize that consensus is important and being bold isn't always the most constructive way to edit. IrishGuy ^talk 23:09, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't have e-mail set up here. I'm not even sure how to do that. Baseball Bugs 23:16, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I see a box that says "Enable e-mail from other users", which is currently unchecked. Baseball Bugs 23:24, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Done. Give it a try. Just send a quick test or something. Baseball Bugs 23:28, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I just sent a test reply. Baseball Bugs 23:40, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Why are you guys so quick to argue? Because I agree with someone I am them? IrishGuy - Why are you removing a link to a site that seems to pass almost all of the relevant parts of "links to be considered" and "what should be linked". As for links to be avoided, it says on pt11 - personal except those written by a recognized authority. Is he/she an authority? Even so, the site does pretty well in the first two sections, so should that weigh on the first part? El redactor(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links)

We The Living (Band)

This band met the guidelines for asserting themselves. They are currently on a national tour across the U.S. I'm slowly updating the main page for the band, and it was deleted. Could this please be restored so I can continue to update this as necessary. bryantms 13:37, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

According the WP:BAND the criteria you are trying to meet needs slightly more: Has gone on an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one large or medium-sized country, reported in reliable sources. You have no reliable sources at all. They are an indie band with no label and no reliable sources at all. IrishGuy ^talk 20:34, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Alesis Quadrasynth article - why deleted?

Hello, I wrote the text to the Alesis Quadrasynth and apparently you deleted it because: "it sounded like an advertisement." WHAT? I wrote the text to that article myself. I put a lot of time into it. What exactly is it that makes it different from any other synthesizer article? I simply listed its features and so forth. What makes it "an advertisement".

I would appreciate if you could please restore my article. I have no backup copy of it.

Thanks. Glen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chipcurtis (talk • contribs)

User:Ellomate

Hi; are you saying that it appears that a warning that I have given to another user has, because of this user's error, transcluded onto his talk page? Wow! --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 23:43, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Yep. Since the template Ellomate created isn't substituted (subst:) hitting the [edit] on that section takes to to the template and not the talk page you were originally on. IrishGuy ^talk 23:45, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Strongbad Email

How DARE you delete my personal page! Jc iindyysgvxc 01:13, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

You don't own articles you create. It was devoid of content and hence was deleted. IrishGuy ^talk 01:14, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Cool Blue

Thanks Irishguy. Can you please check out the report at AIV on him if it's still there, he's a sockpuppet. Cool Blue^{talk to me} 01:16, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Got them both. Thanks. IrishGuy ^talk 01:19, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a million. Happy editing. Cool Blue^{talk to me} 01:19, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem at all :) IrishGuy ^talk 01:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

He's back. Did you autoblock? At my page. Cool Blue^{talk to me} 01:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I did, actually. He must have multiple IPs. Someone else got him this time. IrishGuy ^talk 01:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Alright, that's fine. He's not coming back, it looks like but I can't be sure. Cool Blue^{talk to me} 01:24, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Pandora Records/Thoreau (band) deletion

Hi, I see that you deleted the entries for Pandora Records, Thoreau (band), and Talk:Thoreau (band). I didn't create these entries (and I found out about them after the fact), however I am a co-owner of Pandora, who manages Thoreau. As I mentioned in the Talk page for the band, I noticed that the article was lacking evidence that it was "notable", however I intended to rectify this. Similarly for Pandora Records. I would have appreciated it if you'd taken this into account instead of immediately deleting them, esp. since now someone (probably me) is going to have to re-write each of those in a very short time; Thoreau's first EP is releasing at the end of July, at which point there will likely be plenty of evidence that they are "notable". --Evanturner 10:18, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

The pandora records article was written by Pandorarecords. It was a clear promotional piece and not an encyclopedia article. Thoreau was similar. No notability or importance was outlines. IrishGuy ^talk 19:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Again, since I didn't write either page, I can't vouch for the content. However, I'm not sure that it could be considered "promotional" inasmuch as I don't recall any marketing information on either page (aside from links to the respective Myspace pages, but every band/album/label/movie/&c. has those). As I already pointed out, Thoreau is releasing their first studio album at the end of July, and I am confident that the resulting publicity will meet the notability requirements. I understand that you're attempting to be rigorous, but I don't think an extra 15 KB from two semi-relevant pages is going to shake Wikipedia to its kness. I would appreciate if you just allow the pages at this time instead of making me (us) wait an extra six weeks. --Evanturner 07:24, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Deleter on Crown Heights Riot page

I'm curious. I don't understand why the unsigned deleter is doing so on the Crown Heights Riot page. I'm happy to see you have reverted the deletions, but I'm trying to understand what this person is trying to accomplish. If there is material that requires additional sources for verification, the deleter should simply say so. What am I missing here?68.43.236.4 03:41, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry - I forgot to log in when I wrote this question. Edstat 03:42, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I think it is simply deletion vandalism. IrishGuy ^talk 03:42, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:ANI#misuse_of_admin_tools_by_Irishguy

User:Miss Mondegreen created a thread about you and User:Tecmobowl, you might want to drop by. -- lucasbfr ^talk 09:28, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Werewolf fiction

Once again, DreamGuy has snuck in the external links changes that concensus has repeatedly opposed on the werewolf fiction talk page, under the cover of making many other edits at the same time. See this edit. Making constructive changes at the same time does not give DreamGuy free license to continue his edit war! I appreciate his good changes, but he should give way on those particular changes where the other editors of the article have repeatedly opposed him and agree that policy does not support his side! Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 18:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

And, he just did it again (see this edit). I think maybe you should protect the page from editing until some real sense can be arrived at. As to me being impolite, I'm sorry, but there are good reasons why all of us opposing DreamGuy had gotten pretty upset by that time. He uses rude and misleading edit summaries all the time, lies about what was said on talk pages, and blind reverts whilst accusing others of doing all these things to him. He also likes to add lots of constructive changes whenever his work is challeneged and then try to sneak in the old changes under that cover. When editors start reverting all of his work because they are getting tired of sorting through all the good changes to weed out the bad ones, then DreamGuy's accusations of blind reverting become true. You are dealing with a very intelligent and manipulative individual here, and I ask that you not underestimate him. DreamGuy's personal attacks on me had gotten so frequent and virulent by that time that I had started being blunt with him. If you need me to show you the links that prove all this, I can. Just ask on my talk page. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 18:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Quick 'Q'

Hey, not that I want one, but I was wondering how someone manages to become an admin. What do are the prerequisites? --Bloaty's Pizza Hog 02:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:ANI#Urgent: Checkuser result unrelated, user still indef blocked by User:Irishguy

Sorry I forgot to notify you last time. Miss Mondegreen talk  07:01, June 14 2007 (UTC)

Reverting me when others aren't

Hi. I'd like to talk about why you are reverting my edits all of a sudden. Please see these talk pages...

Audi Domain Registry Support‎ List of Ford engines

Corey Salzano 13:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

"Don't ignore questions." Etiquette Corey Salzano 17:56, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I didn't ignore you, I didn't notice this entry.

I reverted your edit to Domain Registry Support because it was highly POV. Sentences like After calling Domain registry Support after receiving one of their unsolicited faxes, I was told that they are a reseller for INNERWISE. are not encyclopedic.

The other two I removed the external links you added because someone's personal VIN information isn't relevant to the article. IrishGuy ^talk 18:03, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply!

I am not personally responsible for the first person language on Domain Registry Support. I would like to edit the current version though, because you reverted to a white washed version that was likely edited by a company rep. If you wish to read the talk page I along with other users are vocal about the company's operations (which are now omitted from the article). Also, a reference on the article is a BBB report that confirms much of what the article said before the rv.

As far as the VIN decoder links go, I will stop adding them as long as your opinion is that they are not relevant. However, I encourage you to review the history for Buell Motorcycle Company. It demonstrates that editors other than myself feel this type of link is relevant. Recently, an editor wiped all external links on the article except the official home page and a VIN decoder. Corey Salzano 20:06, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Did the editor give any reason for the external link deletions of Buell Motorcycle Company. I agree that the current version of Domain Registry Support is odd. It doesn't actually say much about the company, just accusations and retorts. There is no real information about the company. It is just that your version was far too POV as well. IrishGuy ^talk 20:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi! :)

Hello, since you deleted my first Wiki page (Triumph Larp), I figured you could sink your teeth into these other ones too if you want to clean up wikipedia more. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_live_action_role-playing_groups

Manchester United

This is rather a long shot, but was it you who deleted my reference to Irish support for Man U (citing Bertie Ahern and Veronica Guerin)? I really can't understand why anyone would want to make this deletion, but someone has! Sláinte. Millbanks 09:15, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

That revert appears to have been PeeJay2K3. He gave no reason. IrishGuy ^talk 13:06, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks.

Irish language

Can you speak Irish? I wish you could and built your own national Irish roots. Aende 15:58, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Nationalism rarely leads to anything good. IrishGuy ^talk 16:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry you are not patriot and you don't defend your own Irish country. If I were you I would learn to speak Irish. Aende 16:12, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Please read WP:CIV. If you were me, you would be more polite. :) IrishGuy ^talk 16:13, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I have read WP:CIV and there is a crying need to write homosexual propaganda with a neutral point of view. Please strike the right note and pave the way for it. Don't pick it off at any rate. Are you ruling the roost? Aende 16:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

If you have read WP:CIV then you should know that attempting to insult me isn't a good strategy. As for your pet article, it is an attack article, plain and simple. Wikipedia is not a venue for you to dissmenate your personal point of view. IrishGuy ^talk 16:30, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

kerouac

lmao you win this round —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ofthatsugarcrisp (talk • contribs)

It isn't a game. Please stop. IrishGuy ^talk 21:15, 15 June 2007 (UTC)