User talk:Fightingirish/Archive1 Dec 2007

AfD nomination of Go Vegan

Go Vegan, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Go Vegan satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Go Vegan and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Go Vegan during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. SLSB talk 14:12, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to update anyone reading this, the Go Vegan article, which I created primarily to eliminate a bunch of redlinks, was kept, as SLSB withdrew the AfD nomination.--Fightingirish 11:42, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

In your statement, you brought up BenBurch. I wonder if you are aware that he was the third person to support my nomination, and he reiterated it today? You also made several other charges that were not substantiated. Can you provide some examples? - Crockspot 03:55, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from RfA talk page:

I think that says more about BenBurch than it does you. If you both are getting along, more power to ya. But this little harassment thing of yours from the get-go was one of the most apalling things I've ever seen on Wikipedia. But Ben is a good guy, and has indeed turned the other cheek. I struck the 'vandalism' part from my opposition, as it is a strong statement. However, I really don't consider this to be a very mature edit, do you? I have many problems with you being an administrator on Wikipedia. You've been a member of CU for several years where one of your main objectives was to stalk and ridicule members of Democratic Underground. Via CU, you have also made some rather vulgar, violent, racist and homophobic statements, and don't really seem too regretful of them. You have also used Wikipedia talk pages to wage flame wars with other users. And to top it off, I have heard accusations of you, MONGO, et. al. trying to stuff the ballot box via outside lobbying and campaigning (I saw an image of the email MONGO sent out). Frankly, this disturbs me. Suffice it to say, there is no way in hell that I can support your RfA. Too much controversy, too much immaturity, too many flamewars, and too murky a past. The extreme controversy currently surrounding your nomination is your comeuppance. You reap what you sew. And your absolutely deplorable online behavior in the past should be a sign that it is indeed time to grow up, that is if you seek a position of responsibility such as being a Wikipedia admin. --Fightingirish 11:38, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's an immature edit (the diff above). It's also a year old. I made a mea culpa early in my RfA that my record previous to 2007 was a little spotty. I have improved a great deal since then. - Crockspot 17:52, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Radio Station Stubs

Thank you for tagging KCCQ as a U.S. radio station stub. You might be interested to know that there are separate, individual templates for all 50 states so as to further classify these stubs. Thanks! JPG-GR 06:05, 20 August 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Freeform vs. progressive rock

Please see my comments and objections in Talk:Progressive rock (radio format). Wasted Time R 19:35, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]