User:VersedFenrir/ArchivedTalk03

Archives

User:Sn0wflake/ArchivedTalk01, which includes messages from 16 July 2004 to 24 July 2005. Statistics for this archive are as follows: positive interaction (30) general comments (22) cricticism (6) negative interaction (4) adminship nominations (1)

User:Sn0wflake/ArchivedTalk02, which includes messages from 26 July 2005 to 13 December 2005. Statistics for this archive are as follows: positive interaction (49) general comments (12) cricticism (2) negative interaction (3) barnstars (2) long-standing conflicts resolved (1) conflicts I was dragged into unintentionally (1)

Leyasu

Just wanted to inform you that this infamous character is back on wikipedia. Here are just some of the sockpuppets currently being used by this individual.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=81.152.216.25

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=81.153.41.223

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=81.155.146.226

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=81.157.66.36

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=81.157.91.34

Personally, I think it is clearly obvious Leyasu is behind all of these edits. Same concerns and interests, same articles and pages, same reverts and edits. Most obviously on pages like the Tiamat article. Same style of writing and approach too, such as mispelling you as yew. I do not know what can be done about this but perhaps you would. Cheers. --Anarchodin 10:51, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Nightwish/archive1

Now I feel stupid for not notifying you, damn yeah..it would have been a smart thing to do in the first place..I apoligize. However, that thorough copyedit of Nightwish was superb! Thanks a lot, and could you please consider voting? You don't want your own work to go unrecognized, now do you.SoothingR 12:53, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

You asked what is wrong with it. The answer lies in seeminly as more and more people contribute to it, with the FAC trying to be reached by some, with others trying to use crystal ball methods, and some trying to get over-factual accuracy dominative, is leading the article into a POV Warzone. I suggest, that you let people make their edits, and then ask them why. Then if it can be done, which is normally the case, reword and juggle what that person edited to keep the same implications, but with a more fluent, better fitting, and FAC type wording. Leyasu 01:20, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok, let me try to be specific, im not too good at it it seems. I tend to have this problem of i know what im talking about, and nobody else does.

First thing is the Fac. I can see why some users are desperatly trying to get it up to FAC standards. Thats all well and good, but one thing ive noticed is that in the process of it getting to FAC standards, its requiring more and more a need for core knowledge of terms used in the article, and people mentioned. This could probally be fixed with writing to bridge the gap between the UK and USA's slight differations of language, and adding links into articles. Linking things like Simone Simons would be helpfull. Also take into account that people outside of Uk and USA will read this, so using common words is also good.

Next is the Crystal Ball problem. I dont see the need for predicting the future. If albums arent out yet, dont list them as being out. If things havent happened yet, dont list them as having happened. I notice some users want to post about the new Nightwish singer, and others dont. Well if the band says something about the new singer, but it in. However, make sure that its noted to be only speculation, and not fact. It solves most problems that way.

Lastly is the Factual Accuracy people, and i suppose i fall into this. People like me always want to get things perfectly accurate, without any speculation at all. This mostly arrives in problems of what Nightwish are when it comes to music. People like me know this is this, that is that, there is there. So when someone says This is that, that is there, and there is this, we get somewhat cold about things, and try to point out every fallacy and problem with that, and show people this is this, etc etc. The problem here arises when someone writes in only specific places have claimed this is this, etc etc, when its actually a broad argument all around, from varying different people, with varying different views, most of which will of course, be wrong.

Hope that clears up what im trying to say, im not very good at explaining things in all honesty. Leyasu 03:31, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Gothic-Doom

Again read the Gothic Metal article, ive been through this argument with another user already. The differences are large and the music very different in both sound and composition. I suggest reading all the article, and all its catagories, as you seem to lack core knowledge in the subject which i specialise in. Leyasu 00:53, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

As for the links like this one (gothic-doom metal) ive started doing that as of late, as i learned better how to do it. Second, me and user Parasiti are already on the case of the catagorys Symphonic Metal, Gothic Metal and Gothic-Doom. Thirdly, check the talk history of the Gothic Metal article. After a month of arguing with another user, much like yourself, i was turned over as right not only by the bands agreeing with me, but by my expertise in the subject, and my far better knowledge of the issue than what people try to force as something, when it in fact as no relevance to that or otherwise. The revision is a consensus after over a months hard work to get to something everyone mainly involved with the subject could agree on, however, with the slew of childlike fan sites on the internet all trying to latch onto its misconceptions as a latest craze, it does make it hard to run through internet sources. The best advice i can give you is go spend a few years in the Gothic Metal scene and corely study it, and also study music, and you will realise that what i say is not wrong. Leyasu 01:16, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Grunge Music

While im here, any chance you could take a look at the user Lganon's discussion with me on the discussion page of the Grunge Article? Im having problems with this user, who is making personal attacks and exhibiting meglomanical point of view. Hes also threatening me with banning me from Wikipedia and such. IM not sure how to best deal with him as ive tried being civl, and tried warning him and apologising if i seem offensive, but he still persists in attacking me. As such i have no idea what im supposed to do in this case, so if you can take a look and possibly intervene, or give council, that would be much apprecited. Leyasu 01:23, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Dispute with Leyasu

Sn0wflake, please read the talk:Grunge music instead of taking his word for it. He has been the one making personal attacks, calling me a megalomaniac (he even did that in the above comment) for no reason other than the fact that I wanted him to cite sources. I am the only one who has cited sources in this argument; in the article, I have added Hype! in the References section (which I did long before this argument started).
As for "threatening with banning", I was warning him that if he continued to make personal attacks I was going to make a request for arbitration, which could result in a ban. I meant that as a warning, not a threat, because I assumed he did not understand what arbitration was about. Admittedly, I shouldn't have bothered to mention that, but there was no threat meant by it.
All I have asked of him is to cite sources. He has not cited so much as one, yet he continues to erase info that is cited.
I have gone through Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation, Wikipedia:Third opinion, and even Wikipedia:Requests for page protection in an attempt to deal with this problem. He instead has simply started a revert war. Trust me, I am not the one who is acting uncivil. -- LGagnon 02:01, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I did try to discuss things calmly with Leyasu early on. I even continued to as I tried to get outside help. However, outside help never showed up (except for one admin who scolded Leyasu and then left), and nothing is being done at all by anyone who can effect the problem. Yes, I did lose my cool, and I'm sorry for that. But if Wikipedia had any working system in place to stop harassment I wouldn't have. The admins have done nothing, mediation has done nothing, and none of any of the other proper steps have done nothing. There's nothing in place to stop violators of official policy. I don't think I should be blamed for my reaction when there's no other way I can defend myself from harassment. -- LGagnon 02:30, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to have to drop this in, but here is a comment from Lgangon on the Grunge Music talk page, directed at me. It somewhat exhibits the problem im having with this user.

Go ahead and lie to the admins. They did nothing about you when you were (and still are) making personal attacks, they aren't going to do anything about me telling you to stop it. -- LGagnon 00:50, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

These are the problems im having. I seriously do not wish to work with this user at all, and would like to know if there is anyway i can emmit this user from contacting me? Leyasu 03:35, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes its me again, har har. A personal favour if you will. Do you mind giving me examples of what i say that could be considered a personal attack, and why? It would work brilliant for my Social Skills class x) Leyasu 06:40, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Read it. Didnt get how i was making personal attacks from that. At a leap, my best guess is that by making any comment on anyone is deemed a personal attack. Mind giving me examples of what 'i' did, and what is personal about it, because that page was no help what so ever. Leyasu 06:40, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh i have provided sources. I provided him three websites he dissmissed because they werent 'grunge enough' for him. Aj, aka, WesleyDodds pointed out that all the refrenced books contradict what he said about Hype. I have provided 5 more links to history pages on Grunge, all of which say nothing about it being Hardcore Punk.

His argument is this, as far as i can tell:

• Grunge is Hardcore Punk, because it inherited its fan base from Hardcore Punk, Grunge bands often play with Hardcore Punk bands, and Grunge bands draw influence from Hardcore Punk Bands.

Ive said this is wrong, by using Gothic Metal as an example, if you apply the same argument.

• If Gothic Metal was the same genre as its originator, it would be Doom Metal. It it would be the same genre as bands it plays with, it would be all forms of metal. If it was the same genre as its core influences, it would be Black, Death and Doom metal.

Do you see what im trying to say now?

If you count both me and Wesley having provided sources now that contradict him, Wesley's sources being sources that Gangon himself provided, then i do honestly believe that his argument is void, and that this is all over others editing the article. Leyasu 07:08, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok i respect the banning. What i do ask however, is if you can show me what i did that was a personal attack, as i tried to be nice about things, and was trying to be nice about saying he was sounding meglomanical. I gave him the link as well, as he seems to not understand what it means to be meglomanical. So yeah. Mind showing me what i did thats a personal attack, and telling me how it is, because i dont want to get banned every five seconds for talking the way i talk. Leyasu 12:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Then without being a bitch about it, how on Earth are you supposed to tell someone that theya re acting meglomanical, when they are? Sorry i dont see this is a personal attack, and i dont see it mentioned as one, either. I suggest somebody asks the policy setters about this. If they say, 'Yeah its personal', fine, i can accept that. I just want to know how to tell somone they are being like that, when they are. Leyasu 01:32, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

If i am to concentrate on his contributions, and his contributions are meglomanical, what on Earth comes next? It is not a personal attack to state someone is being meglomanical. That comes under hiding behind a policy, and picking and chosing which ones to follow. Your action is questionable simply because its not part of official policy, and one persons view of a personal attack isnt another. He personally attacked me several times in a direct manner, and im the one scorned for trying to tell him in a nice manner that his contributions are sounding meglomanical? Folly, dear sir, absoloute folly! Again, you explain to me how im supposed to tell someone that in a nice manner, or seriously rethink your contributions as an admin in regards to what are, and are not, personal attacks. Leyasu 02:06, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I at no point said you were vicitimizing me. I said, yes, he does seem to have Behavioural problems. You blocked me on basis i made a personal attack. Id now like for you to EXPLAIN how what i said was a personal attack, other than some Users dislike being told when they are acting bang out of order. Leyasu 03:16, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Curiosity. Im not big on revising the article, simply just removing the templates, thats all, and removing claim that the genre is Hardcore Punk. Do i need to revise the whole thing, or just delete the parts in question? Leyasu 03:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Btw

Both users involved in the revert war on grunge music have been blocked for 12 hours. One had 5 reverts and the other 6. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 08:36, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Dispute resolution

I'm ok with the compromise you came up with. So long as the opposing view is backed by an outside source, I'm fine with it being included in the article. That was all I was asking for anyways (that and an end to the personal attacks, which I assume we also have now). -- LGagnon 04:04, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Without being funny Snowflake, he is at it again. 'If you want a counter argument, it shouldnt be yours'. Again, its not ok, because its not his. Which again, is meglomanical. Can you please adress this issue, and simply say this is how it is, deal with it. Because he is seriously pushing me into the path of simply ignoring him, when he is blatantly trying to start another argument. Leyasu 23:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Children of Bodom Page Protection

I dont know of the policy or regime for a page requiring page protection. The article has been under heavy and repetative vandalism from a set of anons.[1] is the page history, some of these vandalising edits including [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. This is just some of the vandalism i have had to revert. I lack knowledge of other admins, and, as you were involved with me before, i thought best to ask you for advice on this matter. Leyasu 20:13, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Nightwish

Yeah, I'm kind of glad with it, actually. Although, without your help and that of several others, I wouldn't have been able to get the article up to Featured-status. ! SoothingR 07:38, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Image:Fire Bomber (band).jpg

I'm sorry for bothering you, but are you sure that this image is in the public domain? It seems to be a picture which we can only use through the fair use-procedure.SoothingR 19:08, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Alright. {{tv-screenshot}} will do I guess ;).SoothingR 06:37, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Guitar expert needed

I pulled the following from Articles for creation. Can you verify this exists and if it does, provide sources for the article? - Mgm|^(talk) 11:18, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Pick tapping

Pick tapping is a technique wherein the side of the guitar pick is used to fret notes on the guitar neck. It is very similar to finger tapping except the pick is used, rather than the finger.

Pick tapping can give a cleaner sound than finger tapping, but it is harder to add vibrato to the tapped note than with the finger.

Generally, it is also easier to tap more rapidly with the pick than the finger. An example of this can be heard near the beginning of the Randy Rhoads guitar solo on the Blizzard of Ozz's Crazy Train where rapid taps on the G string are performed while the left hand is slowly bending and releasing a fretted note lower down on the string. This gives an effect similar to that of a whammy bar being depressed and released. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:18, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Stub sorting Barnstar

Greetings. There is a Barnstar for stub-sorting up for proposal here. If you'd like to participate in the discussion, we'd much appreciate it. Thanks, and have a great days. :) SynergeticMaggot 18:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Removing legitimate messages from your talk page

Please do not remove legitimate messages from your talk page. Talk pages exist as a record of legitimate communication, and in any case, comments are available through the page history. You're welcome to archive your talk page, but be sure to provide a link to any deleted legitimate comments. Thanks. --Abu Badali 04:16, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Replied.

Hello, Abu. My Talk page is, as everything in my User space, my property, so I'd like to ask you not to question my removal of the needlessly verbose template-generated messages you have flooded my page with. Don't question etiquette when you, yourself, appear to lack them. All of the images in question were uploaded back when there was no strict control of image tagging and sourcing, and really, I cannot trace back images which I found on Google years ago, so they will likely get auto-deleted.

Your human-written messages will never get deleted from my page, but no, I will not change my position regarding template-generated messages. --Sn0wflake 16:45, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

You may want to submmit {{wr0}}, {{wr1}}, {{wr2}} and {{wr4}} to WP:TFD (or educate me on what I have misundertood on their proper use). --Abu Badali 17:27, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I really don't mind you posting the templates, as a matter of fact, thanks for the work you are doing for the Wiki. What I mind is you cricticizing me for deleting entries which I feel I have absolutely no way of fixing... from my own talk page. --Sn0wflake 04:12, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for you appreciation for my job! :) About the "legitimate messages" issue, I think the point is that, even the pages being "our talk pages", others users may have good reasons to be interested in reading them. That is, talk pages are not like mail boxes. They are more of a recipient for open conversations. I, for one, have received all kinds of rant, criticism, sarcasm and pesonal attacks on my page, but I never delete them. Well... no harm done. Thanks for taking this so politely. Best regards, --Abu Badali 04:20, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey Sn0wflake, Abu badali is lying to you; he did actually remove two personal attacks from his talk page. Tell him to restore those before he tells you to restore your talk page. - Ivan Kricancic 13:34, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Metal

Absolutely. Just a few months ago he was permanently banned from Wikipedia after violating his ArbCom revert parole too many times (make that too, too, too many times.) Just as the temporary blocks back then didn't deter him, he continues to intercept the permanent ban with various IPs (and apparently "cold" names) doing what he did before, like removing the "gothic metal" genre from band articles and replacing it with something else, adding factual, spelling, or grammar errors to articles, abusive and libelous edit summaries, and inflammatory commentary about others on Talk pages. That pretty much explains it. --Danteferno 03:16, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Ill make it short for yew, as Danteferno is known for lying. Im banned perma from Wiki for 'abuse' of Sockpuppet ips - like this. Danteferno and Deathrocker are banned from all articles concerning Gothic Metal. Both of them run a joint sock farm (which is known about) and have been banned and warned considerably due to this. Both have also been making abusive edits to other users (User:Fred138, User:Ours18, User:Cronodevir) claiming them as sockpuppets of me, even when RFC says they arent. They have been banned and warned for this behaviour though, as they have tried claiming anyone who disagrees with them is a sockpuppet. To cut it short, im barred from editing - they are barred from metal pages. They delete information from long term users who supply sources using sockpuppets, start revert wars, claim it was all me, and then get found out days later.

Basically, they are as guilty as me. Oh, and WP:ANI already said that until they can provide sources (And lots of them that are credible_, the community and edits by the long term users who havent been in trouble are to stay. These are the versions i revert back to until i can bring attention to it with Admins and WP:HMM - the latter even having significant notes about articles that D&D are causing problems on that need special care. Leyasu 05:02, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh, to warn yew, they may attempt to delete this - so if yew get several users jump on your talk to reinstill what i have said, dont be suprised, as both are now in the habits of blanking their own, and others, talkpages of anything said against them. Leyasu 05:04, 10 October 2006 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.125.20 (talk • contribs)

Don't give up man

Hey man I'd just like to say don't give up on Wikipedia... there are a lot of idiots out there but you gotta just take some time off and not take it too seriously. I've looked over your work and you've done a sh**tload for the "online encyclopedia that strives to be the sum of human knowledge."

People like you and Bluemoose quitting make me question myself whether contributing to this thing truly is a waste of time or not... :-( PFloyd 22:40, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Note on the user page

Hey there. Maybe you've seen me somewhere else; I was once involved in an arbitration case of, uh, Leyasu's. I was kind of trying to defend his stance back then, cause I thought I was doing "the right thing". Ha ha. Anyway, I'm just posting to say that I read what you have written at the top of your user page, dated 23rd August, 2006, and funnily enough, that's exactly the reason why I stopped contributing. It's kind of weird seeing other editors come to similar conclusions. -- parasti ^(talk) 20:56, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Advice please

My article Albion (band) has been speedily deleted by User:Luigi30 for being non notable, hardly allowing any time for debate or discussion, although the band easily fulfils a good number of the criteria required in the guidelines. I had also included several references to UK newspaper articles verifying the information. When I visited his talk page to ask for an explanation I noticed that you also had experience in these matters, and wondered whether you could advise me. I have already rewritten the article once, and initiated a discussion on the talk page giving valid reasons for its non deletion, and one speedy deletion was quickly reverted by the admin involved, only for it to be culled again almost immediately by User:Luigi30, so I am doubtful whether he has actually had time to read it, or to have checked the references. I am not sure whether the band itself is considered non notable, or if I have omitted some necessary information in the article or references that would disqualify it. Jud 05:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

The reason Albion is not referred to by name in the earlier press reports, and also why there is not much on Google, is that they didn't actually have a name in the beginning (apparently they couldn't agree on one and argued about it for several months - but I don't have a citation for that info!) They played their first major gigs either billed as "Alistair Griffin" , or under a joke pseudonym. This was mentioned in the article. If it would be awkward for you to intervene then I will try to find someone else to look at it, thanks anyway Jud 06:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Blocked

Harsh.  :-( 131.215.159.161 07:33, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Stubs

Welcome back! I was wondering what happened to you... As far as stubs are concerned, other than the main Category:Stubs (which recently got a big influx), the two places worth looking at are probably The stub sorting proposal page and "to do" list, both of which give some idea of what's going on and where. Grutness...wha? 23:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Agathodaimon

I left a msg on the talk page Talk:Agathodaimon (band) Spearhead 17:08, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

MIRRO

Dear Sn0wflake. Surprised you had deleted the article "MIPRO". Please provide specific explanations. It is a well known fact to musicians and pro audio professionals that all pro audio equipment have gone to "digital" except wireless mic systems, due to the complexity of design and other inherent characteristics. And now, any manufacturer who can is deem highly worthy. Existing analog wireless systems have sound degradation problems (distortion) when playing guitars / basses. The only solution is a true digital wireless. Plus, existing analog transmission is not secured compared with digital, which has 128-bit encryption feature. In the minds of audio professionals worldwide this is an incredible achievement. Thanks for your re-consideration.

Proaudioguy 13:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

S's K

i thought i made it with a template.... but i guess it didn't really say anything Blueaster 07:12, 31 March 2007 (UTC) I do know that.... I was just lazy and didn't put anything for a header :-/ Blueaster 07:51, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

• Thanks for voting in my RfA. I've decided to withdraw my acceptance because of real WP:CIVIL concerns. I will try again later when I've proven to myself and others that my anger will no longer interfere with my abilities as a Wikipedia editor. Thanks again, and I'll see you around here shortly. :) JuJube 04:44, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

My (Soumyasch) RfA

Hi. I feel the questions by you and Ikiroid have some overlap. So I am answering both of them together. Hope that is not a problem. If you feel any way uncomfortable, just let me know. I will answer them again individually. --soum (0_o) 05:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I have replied. --soum (0_o) 20:05, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

RockMFR's RfA

Regarding your comment here: I believe you didn't address me specifically, but nevertheless you hit a weak spot and I feel a need for some justification now. For what it's worth, RockMFR, like most RfA candidates I've come across so far, beats the crap out of me contribution-wise. And I assure you that I am ready to support anyone who isn't (for the time being) disqualified by things others or I, myself could come up with. I know that after only 4 months, I'm still a newbie and largely ignorant towards many aspects of policy discussion and process, but I'm really trying not to abuse RfA as my soapbox. It's sort of a starting point for me to pick up opinions and relevant facts of the inner workings of Wikipedia. So, what I'm trying to express with my blathering is, I'm trying to approach RfA in as professional a manner as I can figure and I really think before voting. Most of the time, anyway, and whenever I oppose. Sorry for bothering you, it just had to be said. Feels better now, actually. Thanks for your time. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 07:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

But what did you mean with "perhaps not being entirely honest in their motivations"? —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 08:35, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I see. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 09:13, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you - Granoff article

Dear Sn0wflake,

Thank you very much for Wikifying and improving the Granoff article. I am new to Wikipedia and hence, as you pointed out, have to look at some of the citation rules. Thanks again, and have a great week.

Sincerely, Noremainder 17:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Home of the Underdogs

You reverted the talk page of this artile back to the version with long long long stretches of text that did not even try to pretend that they were discussing how to improve the article but which consisted ONLY of information on how to access a website and how to pirate software. This is a gross violation of Wikipedia policy, and your restoring of this text not only violates Wikipedia policy but is actively encouraging illegal activities. Please take the time to consider your actions before making such a clearly improper move. 216.165.158.7 04:22, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

How does someone who so blatantly violates Wikipedia policies in this instance have sysop rights? Were you just not paying attention to what you were doing and assumed that the removal of text was for mischevous reasons??? 216.165.158.7 04:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I'm a terrible human being. Go figure *end sarcasm* --Sn0wflake 04:44, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Flawed Rant

Response is awaiting your critique. The Kinslayer 15:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Slipknor.jpg

You recently deleted the image Slipknor.jpg, using the edit summary "Bad Filename". The image was, and is used on the page Slipknot (band) and was at the time the only free image of the subject on wikipedia. I request that you restore the image so that it can be used in the article once again. --Wildnox(talk) 04:04, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi, my RfA has been successful. Thanks a lot for your support. :) --soum (0_o) 10:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)