User talk:Indubitably/Archive 15

Archive 10

←

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

→

Archive 20

Masterpiece2000, again!

Hello Lara. I have to say something about you. I think you are good looking lady. Please don't get offended. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 13:08, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. That picture is 7 years old, though. Lara❤Love 14:42, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Haha. You got called a wiki-MILF. Best edit of the day. the_undertow ^talk 00:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

undertow, your comment is offensive. I say "You are a good looking lady" to so many good looking ladies. There is nothing wrong to say that. It's a complement. That's it. Masterpiece2000 05:03, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm lost. It's offensive to you or her or both? That is to say, for the comment to be deemed offensive, someone has to be offended. Fortunately, there are no guidelines that stipulate editors have a right to feel un-offended. I was just adding a little humor. Perhaps a thicker skin would be a necessity for someone who is going to use talk space to tell married women they are attractive? Obviously Lara isn't concerned about your comment, as neither am I, but you're going to get shit for it eventually. the_undertow ^talk 05:22, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

How did I miss this until now. I couldn't care less on any of the comments. I endorse being called beautiful, pretty, lovely, adorable, hott, sexy, bangin', slammin', damn [any of the previous], fucking [any of the previous], bangable, gorgeous, and the like. I'm also no opposed to being called a MILF. It's all good times. Lara❤Love 06:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Awesome stuff!

For helping out with the Elvis Assessment Drive! Spawn Man (talk) 06:52, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Just something to say thanks for helping out with the Elvis Assessment Drive and assessing loads of articles - you really did help and it couldn't have been done without you. Keep up the excellent work! :) Regards from Spawn Man (talk) 06:52, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Spawn Man. It's done already. And it's not even December yet! Lara❤Love 15:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry about the mistaken re-deletion. :( We're trying to do the same thing at the same time, so I'll step back and let you continue. --Ed (Edgar181) 14:56, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I think we about shut the system down, however, lol. Lara❤Love 15:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Delete 6000+ edits, restore them, delete them, restore them... Hopefully it didn't cause too much trouble. --Ed (Edgar181) 15:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I think it's okay now. But it did put the system in lock down to allow the slave servers to catch up. Damn vandals. Glad you indef blocked him, I was on my way. Lara❤Love 15:09, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Qadhafi-clark-koechler.jpg

NEW COMMENTS BY WIKIFLIER

P.S.: Just saw your note on my own talk page - will get back later. WikiFlier 08:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting the delete. I have now added a Non-Replaceability Rationale with Links on the image page. I have also re-edited the Hans Köchler page with the new image - my last version of the page is here. Now watch for the Köchler-bots to move in once again to obliterate any trace of Köchler's real political persona (which I personally think may have a useful role in the political ecosystem). WikiFlier 05:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, you recently speed-deleted the image Qadhafi-clark-koechler.jpg which I had uploaded, accompanied by a detailed fair-use statement, on the grounds that it had been unused in any article for more than 7 days (the picture was used on the talk page accompanying the Hans_Köchler article).

In fact, the upload log shows an upload time and date of 06:01, 27 November 2007. Thus, the file clearly had not remained unused for more than 7 days as stated in the delete rationale and the policy. In fact, the file was used on the talk page in preparation for inclusion in the Hans_Köchler article. The article itself was "temporarily protected" throughout most of the few days the picture was uploaded. Obviously, the picture could not be included in the article during that period. WikiFlier 22:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

P.S.: As I indicated on the talk page, the entire Köchler article has become a paean to Köchler, with a gaggle of Köchler-bots immediately deleting any subject matter that is mildly critical of him, such as the fact (proven by the picture) that Köchler has since the 1970s made it his vocation (for whatever reason) to cultivate contacts with third-world rulers including Muammar Gaddhafi. WikiFlier 22:32, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I clicked the wrong option. Should have been I7, invalid fair use claim. I've restored the image to allow someone else to look at it. Regards, Lara❤Love 07:05, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

After consulting another admin who specializes in images, it has been confirmed that the fair use rationale is not sufficient. Therefore, the image has been deleted. Regards, Lara❤Love 20:24, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

The speed-deletion is procedurally incorrect. Under the policy (below), you must give 48 hours advance notice (and thus a chance to respond) to the uploader before deleting an image under this rationale. This did not happen. Since you - very properly - felt it necessary to consult another (unnamed) administrator, this is not a case of an image "with a clearly invalid fair-use tag" as contemplated in the policy.

7. Invalid fair-use claim. Non-free images or media that fail any part of the non-free content criteria and were uploaded after 13 July 2006 may be deleted forty-eight hours after notification of the uploader. For media uploaded before 13 July 2006 or tagged with the {{Replaceable fair use}} template, the uploader will be given seven days to comply with this policy after being notified. Invalid fair-use claims may be tagged with {{subst:dfu}} for review after a seven-day period, and the uploader may be notified with {{subst:no fair|Image:image name}}. Such images can be found in the dated subcategories of Category:All disputed non-free images. Non-free images or media with a clearly invalid fair-use tag (such as a {{logo}} tag on a photograph of a mascot) may be deleted at any time. (Emphasis added.)

To determine whether "fair use" applies, one needs to look at the entire situation in which the subject work (image) is used. For the present article, this version of the talk page is a good start. Can you articulate what it is in this situation that is "not sufficient" in light of a full understanding of the fair use doctrine as enunciated in Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises and later cases? I believe this is a very strong case of "altered use" - i.e. use for a purpose radically at odds with the original usage by the Köchler-bots. I would be grateful if you could restore the image for now in line with the policy. Thank you!

Incidentally, the Köchler-bots have again deleted all mention of Köchler's contacts with numerous third world politicians which go back to the 1970s. The entire page has gone back to being an unseemly paean to an individual by himself and his proxies. Your assistance in looking into this would be appreciated. WikiFlier 17:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Smile!

Here's a Manx cat for you! Manx cats somehow promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing! Húsönd 00:44, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Please chime in at AN/I

Please chime in at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Misuse of administrative powers: Physchim62. The actions you and he took on two sides of an edit war are rather different, and either the difference merits explanation or the two should be made more consistent. GRBerry 00:55, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello!

Hello LaraLove. How are you? I read your user page and I must say, you are an interesting person. You are older than me. Would you like to adopt me? I have made over 3000 edits and created more than 70 articles. However, I am still new! You are an admin. I would also like to be an admin. I also want to take part in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Perhaps you can guide me. Regards, Masterpiece2000 04:53, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Forget about adoption. Now, I am thinking about Wikipedia:Admin coaching. Regards, Masterpiece2000 03:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

You know what you need? A barnstar!

		The Barnstar of Perv Humor
		Lara, you are awesome. Comments like this and this make WP so much more fun to be around. For a while, I was afraid that I was the only one with a dirty mind around here, but I'm glad I'm not alone. :) GlassCobra 16:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

ROFL. Thanks. :D I like User:R/EFD. That's a good page. Read Jayron32's, if you haven't already. Funniest EFD of all time! Lara❤Love 18:40, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for some minor, but appreciated, work on my user page. :-) Best regards, Húsönd 00:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Here's a flying squirrel for you! Flying squirrels somehow promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing! Húsönd 00:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for December 2007

The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the January 2008 issue. Dr. Cash 01:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

FA sweeps

Hi, It's written in the newsletter that you've proposed and created GA sweeps to review GA article. I believe similar issue should be done for FA articles. I proposed it in July but they didn't accept it and I didn't have enough time to follow the issue.(here). Now you have a good experience and you can persuade them to do similar work.--Seyyed(t-c) 03:22, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't get involved in FA behind-the-scenes issues. I'm sorry. Feel free to post links and cite the project, but I don't attempt to persuade FA participants of things dealing with their project since I don't participate in it much myself. Lara❤Love 03:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

New straw poll at content review workshop

LaraLove, I just wanted to update you on the current situation with the content review workshop, which you contributed to for a while. We have a proposal for automation of peer review, and it seems Gimmetrow is going to try to find time to write the bot code for that. Once he has something to show people we'll post more notifications so people can see what they think of the idea.

Since it will be some time before Gimmetrow gets to that, we're currently running another straw poll to identify the next topic, and I thought that you might be interested in participating in that, even if you decide not to get involved with the subsequent topic discussion. Please drop by to take a look if you have the time; the section is here. Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 03:26, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Por Vous

Joy

Jmlk17 has given you a kitten! Kittens promote Wikilove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Share the WikiLove and civility with everyone and keep up the excellent editing! Send kittens to others by adding {{subst:Joy message}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Jmlk17 05:44, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Elvis

As I see 4 months as excessive, I see no reason that a compromise can not be reached, and reviewed in 8 weeks time. I didn't ask for complete unprotection, although I do like seeing my name in edit summaries - it was a nice touch. the_undertow ^talk 06:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Credit where credit is due. Lara❤Love 06:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the barnstar. I do however unfortunately note that assessments are one of the few things I am really very good at. The main Elvis article is a very important one, though, so I can try to add some content to it, even though I probably won't be able to until at least the weekend. John Carter 15:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah, we don't need any content added. We need to trim it. Feel free to join us at Talk:Elvis Presley and weigh in with your input, if you like. We're rewriting the article one section at a time. Lara❤Love 19:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Who is we? the_undertow ^talk 19:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

We being Wikipedians working on Elvis, Chip. Lara❤Love 20:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Amending above. Wikipedia doesn't need that article to be any longer. It's already ridiculous. The Elvis article does not need anymore information. Everything is covered. If there are areas that can be expanded, it needs to be done in the main article of that topic rather than in the Elvis article. And if you'd like to participate, take it to Talk:Elvis Presley to maintain transparency. Lara❤Love 20:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, Lara, to my mind, some critical material has been removed from the article that should not have been removed. Furthermore, on Talk:Elvis Presley you said that my "comments regarding Steve Pastor are not productive. Assume good faith. We're all here to improve the article. Just because some of us don't agree with you does not mean we're acting in bath faith." Just for your information. In the past, User:Steve Pastor frequently removed critical, well-sourced material from the Elvis page. See [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11]. And he repeatedly placed hyperlinks to fan sites in the main text of the Wikipedia article. See [12], [13], [14], [15]. I do not think that this is in line with Wikipedia policies. That's why I said that Elvis fans such as Steve Pastor frequently try to remove critical content from the Elvis page. Onefortyone (talk) 00:40, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the removal of 1, 2, 3, 6, 10 and 11. As I stated on the talk page, there's too much to Elvis' life to support every claim with multiple examples. Quotes from non-notable people, for example, aren't necessary when you've already got sources to back something up. When a point has already been explained, it's not necessary to further explain it. Extended details on "Hound Dog" can be moved into the article for the song. It's not necessary to go in depth about songs in the article on him. That's my opinion. Lara❤Love 04:37, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Why would I take it to the talk page of the article? I've no interest in contributing. I just think that when a user expresses an interest in additions, you can't tell him that it's closed to new content. It's discouraging. You mention a rewrite, and I assume that it means you are open to revisions: removals and additions. The guinea pig article is huge, but if there is good information out there, I can't let size take precedent over content. If the general consensus on the article talk is that it's too large, that's one thing, but consensus changes. the_undertow ^talk 00:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

How many main articles branch off of Guinea pig? Elvis has 15. Guinea pig is 60kb, Elvis is 99, and that's down from the 120-ish it was in August. So trust that it covers all bases and, with 234 references and footnotes, it's all appropriately sourced. There is nothing left to add. There's no new information. He's been dead for 30 years. Everything is covered in the article. Certainly, it can be reworked, rewritten, tweaked, different examples or supporting facts placed in. But there's no need to go find more biographical information to add to the article. If some editors had their way, this article would be 300kb long. No one wants to read that. This isn't a biography. It's an encyclopedia. If you want to write a book, then write a book. But encyclopedic articles do not need to contain massive amounts of descriptive and editorial information. We educate, not entertain. Lara❤Love 04:37, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Well I certainly see now how this article could cover everything, when numerous books cannot. Seems logical. I think it's fair to say it covers everything you'd like to be covered. I, myself, have not read the article. Then again, I do not care for The King, but I'll rest easy knowing that everything I need to know is a wikilink away. Everything. ;) the_undertow ^talk 05:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I take your assessment of the contents of this article for which you haven't read very seriously and will certainly consider all your points. I will also address all of the content-related issues regarding missing information in the order in which you so thoughtfully listed above. Hopefully the article will read better for you the first time you read it compared to the un-first time you didn't read it. Lara❤Love 05:37, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I didn't make a single suggestion about the article and I agree with you telling users to refrain from adding content because that's the spirit here at Veropedia. O, damn, having multiple tabs open really makes me forget where I am. the_undertow ^talk 05:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, shit. You didn't offer examples of what's missing in the content of the article that you haven't read but feel inclined to comment on the content of? Damn. I need a better prescription. The screen gets fuzzy past midnight. XD Lara❤Love 06:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't need to drive my neighbor's car to find out who owns it - I can tell by the registration. the_undertow ^talk 06:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Well damn, dude, that's a mighty fine analogy. Too bad it appears that it's actually you that needs a better prescription because my name ain't on the registration for Elvis. Lara❤Love 06:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 3rd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 49	3 December 2007	About the Signpost

Signpost interview: New Executive Director Sue Gardner	Arbitration Committee elections: Elections open
Possible license migration sparks debate	Featured articles director names deputy
Software bug fixed, overuse of parser function curtailed	WikiWorld comic: "Wordplay"
News and notes: Wikipedian honored, fundraiser, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
WikiProject Report: LGBT studies	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

adoption request

Hi LaraLove - I request to be adopted. I am very new here, but I would like to do a lot of things, including write FAs and DYKs, but I don't want to cause any problems and I want to understand the policies here. If you have the time, please do consider my request. Btw, I did ask user:Gnangarra first, but in terms of respect, you are by no means a second choice. V i s n a v a 16:22, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

My apologies, but due to some urgent work I must do right away, I must withdraw my request for now. Thank you for your indulgence, V i s n a v a 16:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hi, I was wondering if you could help me out with something, no one seems to be any help around here. Thank you and have a wonderful day...... (Even the one that adopted me doesn't seem to be around......)

Rianon Burnet 20:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually it's more of I would like it if you could do something for me if that is ok?????? If that is not aloud than ok......

Rianon Burnet 21:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm about to go to work. What did you need? Lara❤Love 21:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Um, Actually I figured out my problem through a different approach, but I do have a new question that maybe you might have the answere too.. I was going through the articles that need help and I stumbled upon Coffee and Tea,, But when I click it, nothing showed up but an empty box to where I could type. Does that mean that the page was yet to be made and if so is it a comparison between Coffee and Tea? Sorry lots of questions so little time..... But if you can get back to me then I can get started on making that page......!!!! thank you and have a wonderful day,,, God Bless.....

P.S. Sorry about yesterday, I was having a bad day and I may have been a little rud or sarcastic, very sorry....... :(

Rianon Burnet 16:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you are right, that would of been my next question, and why it was empty..... I searched both and found both.... Thank you for getting back to me so quickly.. I really apreciate it. I was wondering the same thing you where about it.... By the way, how does my page look??? (out of subject)

Rianon Burnet 16:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, The green I did not do but pretty much everything else. I was wondering do you know how to fix my title, it seems to move almost everytime I log on!! ???? Thank you and have a wonderful day,, God Bless....

Rianon Burnet 17:09, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Rianon Burnet 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.

Hi, How are you, ok about my header, I don't truly understand how to get it, and it also seems that the person who adopted me fell off of the face of the earth. So I'm afraid that I'll loose all of my information... What can I do? Thanks and I hope that you have a wonderful day, be safe and God Bless........

Rianon Burnet 14:34, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I posted a comment So we will see if he gets back to me......... thank you and God bless...

Rianon Burnet 15:47, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Check this out..

Read the Dec 3rd signpost. The articles on the United States Senate and the British House of Commons were defeatured on the same day. Theres some irony in there somewhere. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 06:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

ROFL!! Lara❤Love 07:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Gaddafi Clark Köchler Photograph - AGAIN

Resolved

LaraLove, you will recall that you you recently speed-deleted the image Qadhafi-clark-koechler.jpg which I had uploaded, under a mistaken statement of reason. You later restored the image with a comment that someone had disagreed with my original fair use rationale. In response, I provided an updated, different and detailed fair use rationale, as well as a copyright tag, as you had suggested. Less than 48 hours after your restoration of the image, it was again "speed-deleted" by a trigger-happy 19-year-old without any comment who clearly hadn't taken the trouble to understand fair use, and offered no comments invalidating my reasons. Unfortunately, the current Wikipedia software is set up such that obliterating the image also obliterates the painstaking documentation of its relevance etc.

I would be grateful if you could restore the image, in light of a thorough and robust understanding of the fair use doctrine. As I stated earlier, the whole point of fair use - as stated in the federal cases announcing this legal doctrine - is precisely that we MUST NOT allow a mechanical understanding of copyright to swallow up our freedom of speech. For this reason, a robust and considered understanding of fair use, rather than reflective "speed-deletion", is required.

I would appreciate it if you could restore the image again. Thank you. WikiFlier (talk) 19:34, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

No. Sorry. There's probably a reason that different people keep tagging it and deleting it. And it's not a conspiracy. Your image depicts three living individuals. It does not add any context that cannot be expressed in text, therefore it fails fair use guidelines. I'm not restoring it again. And please add new posts to the bottom of the page. Lara❤Love 14:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

(1) I didn't say this is a conspiracy - on the contrary, I appealed to you in the hope that you would exercise independent judgment.

(2) You are confusing "fair use" with replaceability. Since you came out and deleted the image (which you correctly later restored), and then came out claiming that the fair use rationale was invalid, it is incumbent on you to at least read and UNDERSTAND the entire fair use article, NOT merely some one-paragraph short-cut illustration. As I have explained before, fair use is an OVERLAY over what you think of as "copyright".

(3) No doubt you are tired of this debate, and I don't expect you to change your mind (and get other admins mad at you). But please do us all a favor and read and understand what fair use really means before you "speed-delete" any more images on grounds of "insufficient" fair use. Blue-eyed "good will" is no excuse when you are in fact doing the dirty work of on-line censors. There are people hard at work (look at the page history!) trying to silence criticism and destroy evidence of their ties with murderous dictators like Muammar Gaddafi. Will you help them? (You do know about the Bulgarian nurses, right? Your disappointed correspondent, WikiFlier (talk) 06:04, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't believe the image has a lot of relevance on the article. Just as I stated (I believe) in the edit summary, the image does not illustrate anything that cannot be expressed in words. The image is copyrighted. It should not be used under fair use unless doing so explicitly improves the article in a way that words cannot. I don't believe it satisfies that. Lara❤Love 06:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

RE: User talk pages

Resolved

Hello, thank you for your comments. I realize this, but could you please clarify who that was? I remember there was one user I reverted, but he was blocked. Another one was an IP address, and I heard they cannot do that. Thanks for telling me. Happy editing! Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 21:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

OK. Thanks for letting me know! Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 03:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

Resolved

I apologize for causing you so much trouble with the space related images that were moved to commons under a different name. I only realized after a couple of days that this was not an automated replacement process such as Commonsdelinker is capable of. If I had realized earlier, i would have fixed the inclusions myself when adding ncd. A proces to automatically fix all inclusions to the new name after review by an admin is definitely something that should be considered though I think. It has really alleviated much of the workload on the commons admins. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 04:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

It's not a problem. It's quite, uncontroversial work. :) I have thought about asking for a bot to do it. Perhaps that's something I should get on. Thanks for your message, though. :) Lara❤Love 04:07, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I think Metsbot could easily do it with some code taken from Commonsdelinker if needed. If you want to do it, that's fine of course but it seems like such a repetitive task. I'd go crazy myself --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 04:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

TheDJ 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! I leave you this smile to keep you going !!! We need more people like you.
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Labour India Publications

Resolved

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Labour India Publications. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review.

protection

Resolved

I've added the retired notice and redirected my user page to my talk page. Since you're apparently active, would you mind protecing my user and talk page?--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk) 04:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Already did it. Look forward to a request to undo it. Lara❤Love 04:33, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, and would you please also protected the redirect page (My userpage)? It's not a big deal if it's left unprotected.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk) 04:35, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow! You're fast! Thanks a lot!--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk) 04:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm speedy like Gonzales. Enjoy your retirement... or, better yet, break. Lara❤Love 04:41, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I let Redux know that it's already been done.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk) 21:26, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

User:Godsnotreal

Resolved

May I ask why user:Godsnotreal was blocked indefinitely for having an inappropriate username? If the name user:Godisreal would also receive a block, I would have less of a problem - but I think both sides of the argument are equally inflammatory and equally impossible to prove 100 per cent. If not, then I am concerned that the name has been blocked. Thanks Whitstable (talk) 20:58, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I notice user:Godisreal appeared to be blocked at some stage. Perhaps I should have used the more apt comparison of a user name relating to the existence of Santa! Whitstable (talk) 21:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

A favor

Hey, I see you're taking something of a break for now (you okay?) but I was wondering if you might want to work your copyediting magic on Domestic sheep for me? Hope you're well, VanTucky ^talk 20:56, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't know. I'm not sure how much I'm going to be around. I'll look at it. Lara_Love ^Talk 03:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Resp

Yeah, I don't know. I'm concerned, is there anything we can do? Where's the motive? It could just be a freak-out, that's his style. Or... Hmmm. Dfrg_msc 22:49, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Why?

I've reverted your edits to User talk:Blueboar. Please read Wikipedia:Don't restore removed comments. Regards, Lara_Love ^Talk 05:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

That is a three line essay, not a policy or guideline. The editor has always done this to avoid criticism, this is in contrast to the best practice - archiving. The page is 'not his personal page, but deleting it forces every new editor to reinvent the wheel - and remain oblivious to an entrenched pattern of behaviour on the project. Then try to explain COI and OWN. The good cop/bad cop routine of the user, and MSJapan, is an embarrasment to the community. I read the short essay, now go and lecture on AGF here please. Regards, cygnis insignis 06:20, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I've worked on the article, I've worked with Blueboar. He is not required to archive. It's the preferred practice, but not required. Anyone can look at the history as easy as they can look at archives. Reverting an editors changes to their own talk page is not acceptable. Lara_Love ^Talk 06:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Ta for the reply. I was getting too aggravated to be editing or contributing to process, but I think that we may be advantaged by a short discussion. I do not regard edit histories to be transparent and open, especially to newer users. It also rests on the premise that user space is for private use, rather than facilitating the improvement of the encylopedia. Every user who does not practice archiving may gain some advantage from deleting others comments. It is highly questionable, except in the case of contraventions of NPA et al, whether the encyclopedia is improved and pretty easy to see where it would not be. Am I overlooking something? cygnis insignis 07:11, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay, you're right that WP:DRRC is a three line essay, not a guideline. Here's a guideline, WP:TALK#User talk pages. I see your point, really. But users are not required to archive, and it's not your place to attempt to force it. He's an established editor, this is his chosen way to manage his talk page. Nothing constructive will come from such behavior, in my opinion. Lara_Love ^Talk 07:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

You are probably right. My zealous action was a response to my contributions - to an ongoing discussion - being zapped. It makes it very difficult for anyone following the discussion from my talk page, for example, where his somewhat patronising and inaccurate replies remain. My statements and critique were not redundant, IMHO. Deleting other peoples comments can be construed as a hostile action. Do you take the view that it is his talk page, or is that a reference to the page title? I appreciate it is a difficult definition. Thanks for replies, cygnis insignis 08:14, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

It is his talk page. While it's still a community page and all the same rules—for the most part—apply, he's not breaking policy by removing comments. While it may be rude and a less than constructive practice, the act itself it not wrong. And while anyone can edit anyone else's user space just as they can project space, it's good practice to respect the user and their wishes. Lara_Love ^Talk 17:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Sunset Marquis revisited

Hello. You wanted to know how it worked. I brought up the full history for Nobody's Daughter, Sunset Marquis (album), and Exile in Blonde in three windows. Then deleted Nobody's, moved Exile to Nobody's, deleted it again, undeleted Sunset, moved that to Nobody's and deleted that too. That puts the three histories together. There was a bit of overlap in the histories, so I selected all edits and then unselected the overlapping edits with reference to the three open windows of history. This is important, or the diffs in the merged page won't reflect what the editors really did. Gimmetrow 04:31, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Thought you could use this:

Jayron32 has sent you a goatfucking owl! Goatfucking owls promote good humor and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the love by passing the goatfucking owl on to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Have a hoot!

--Jayron32|talk|contribs 07:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

XD Haha... that helped. Thanks, Jayron. :) Lara❤Love 18:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

IRC & Bathrobes

Hey Lara! Sorry that I missed you yesterday; did you still need help with whatever it was? Let me know. :) Oh, and nice bathrobe picture. :P GlassCobra 21:12, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

i got removed from evulas page but i thought i would stop by and say you are pretty here. 64.147.0.70 (talk) 22:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Chip. You could have just stated that it was you. Sorry I didn't get it taken before all this. Would have been a nice one-on-one conversation, I'm sure. And I wouldn't have reverted your IP comments, btw. Lara❤Love 17:54, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I actually thought it would be kind of fun to drop a note from the other side. You know what? It really wasn't fun. It really turned messy. It actually turned into a lesson in who can edit, what is funny and how long can I really refrain from making a single edit. Not very long, apparently. SHIT. I just made my quota. I'd love to stay and chat but I have a few items to clean up (3 ANIs and 38 personal attacks), and then I can resume listening to Hawthorne Heights and cutting myself, seeing as how I ran out of Effexor. I just want to reassure you that although my IP stated that you are pretty, my interest in solely having man-sex, should put minds at ease. I never thought coming out would be so easy, but the words simply spilled onto the page. I must call my parents and tell them the good news. the_undertow ^talk 23:13, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

You know, I never read that whole message until just now. I got pinged or something, the first time I read it, at the "cutting" part. Aahhaha... you're an idiot. I love it. XD Lara❤Love 06:06, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 10th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 50	10 December 2007	About the Signpost

Wikipedia dragged into German politics over Nazi images	Wales comments on citing Wikipedia produce BBC correction
WikiWorld comic: "Kilroy was here"	News and notes: Elections, Wikimania 2009, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	WikiProject Report: Greater Manchester
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

The Undertow

Lara, I know we've had serious disagreements in the past, and I'm involved at the moment with The Undertow, but I feel it very important that I drop a note to you expressing my support to you, regarding the deleted edits on his talk page. Very best wishes. Pedro :  Chat  17:06, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Pedro. I appreciate it. Really. I'm kind of out of words right now. It's been a long morning. Lara❤Love 17:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Untitled

Hello LaraLove! I have a question... I want to cuztomize my main userpage by removing the wikipedia sphere... Is there any way that i can do that? --HotAbs (talk) 18:55, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Quixotic

Well, isn't this sweet? Hey, did you know about [16]? Was I supposed to? Was anyone supposed to? O yeah, and I deleted my dramatic masterpiece so even the link in your history won't go to it. It really was nicely dubbed tho. I really think I should spend more time on film noir. chip ^talk 00:05, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Haha... that's not me. I am not a porn star! Nice to know you've been googling me tho, lol. Lara❤Love 01:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

I could fill it right now. You know that right? Consider yourself Gas Station Pwned. I'm so happy we are bffs again! the_undertow ^talk 01:48, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Did you just fill my quota? Oh, snap. You're confusing me with the name changes, tho. Lara❤Love 01:56, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

I didn't usurp 'Chip.' I registered it. I decided that as much as I like "Chip," which is the coolest name ever, I feel like I would be leaving a bit of drama behind and users could see the usurpation as a way to escape. I'm not a runner, I'm a deletioner, but we all know that. So in the interest of continuity, I decided to keep the name which has caused so many people, including myself, so much pain and suffering. Well, and good times, too. But mostly not. DYK that 'The_undertow' comes from a college nickname, given to Chip by an ex-girlfriend? Apparently he drags people down, sucks them in, and occasionally spits them out. I'm so glad so much has changed. You make that phone call yet? the_undertow ^talk 02:05, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay, but you submitted the request before our drama, although I do like the name "the_undertow". So whatever you want... I like them both. And yes, yes, we're deletionists.. and I'm an unblocker, but this is about you, not me. Uhm, no. I'm going to call tomorrow. I've had enough pain this week, and this morning. I wanted to enjoy some calm, the bit of happiness, before I plunge into more pain and drama. 2000 revisited and such. Seven and a half years... I need a day to pump myself up for this one. Lara❤Love 02:34, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

The only reason I came back was because I was tired of watching you freaks use the underscore in your names. 'Chip' doesn't have the same intensity as the_undertow. the_undertow is someone who you don't want to argue with, someone who will fly into a controlled rage, and burn bridges to light his way. Chip is a dorky cracker who drinks vitamin water, and may or may not own a Soloflex. the_undertow has cool tacks and brings home random chicks. Chip listens to Rush Limbaugh and thinks it might be time to settle down. Do you SEE the difference? Can I have more obvious psychological issues? Are you reading this like you're Chandler Bing? Can I find a way to end this? the_undertow ^talk 02:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

You totally missed an opportunity to double your quota with my last comment. Also, after I posted that (and after catching what I thought I'd asked for ;)) I thought how much more "in your face" the_undertow is. And if you hate the underscore so much, why do you use it? But whatev, that's not why you came back, cork your face. And if you want to end this, get your ass on yahoo or IRC. Lara❤Love 02:56, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

The underscore looks good on me. And I didn't miss the opportunity, but there was no way I was going to expose that one in public. Is everything I say loaded? God, looks like it. the_undertow ^talk 03:00, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Honourary Children's Bathrobe Cabal Youth Squad

Your Jason is a right cutie! :) Pedro :  Chat  15:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. :D I create the honorary children's BRC here in a few. Lara❤Love 15:40, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

We could have the Bathrobe Cabal Youth Squad? Dfrg_msc 22:49, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

And so shall it be renamed! Lara❤Love 04:58, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Looks like you've left the building

and let slip the dogs of war (that being a certain 141 and anyone else). So, is there really no mechanism for managing articles other than a great food fight, which in the end wears down the most dedicated and conscientious individuals? Has there never been a discussion about unmanagable articles, etc, etc...? Steve Pastor (talk) 18:20, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm back. Had to deal with some personal issues. Kind of took me out of the 'pedia for a few. I'll check it out tonight. Lara❤Love 21:45, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to the Jungle

Please accept your honorary Bathrobe Cabal Slippers..... Of Doom!

Welcome brother sister, to our Bathrobe Cabal. You will find the necessary information at the Holy Love Shack and such. Stay Frosty! Dfrg_msc 23:03, 13 December 2007 (UTC) - TRANSMISSION ENDS -

Thanks! :D Oh the feelings of pride and awesomeness are overwhelming. I have arrived! Lara❤Love 00:32, 14 December 2007 (UTC) - TRANSMISSION ENDS -

Haha.. OMG, you're crazy, lol. Lara❤Love 00:30, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

LOLZOR$!That GIF is one of the most awesome things on the entire Wikipedia. Featured pic. Featured pic now! Dfrg_msc 00:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC) - TRANSMISSION ENDS -

Thanks! No problem my friend! Don't thank me, thank sleep deprivation! Stay Frosty, Dfrg_msc 01:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, hahaa. I just saw you have your image up on Bathrobe. That's awesome!! Haha. Lara❤Love 01:07, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

That gif is awesome, and User:LaraLove/Bathrobe Cabal is just to damn brilliant. I've been giggling for five minutes here - people in the office are starting to look at me in a funny way :). No change there! Pure class chaps!! Pedro :  Chat  08:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Best. Pic. Ever. EVula // talk // ☯ // 08:28, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

The page is the best thing ever. Better than WP:NCR :)! Very, very nice. I put a personal gallery bit - I just need a single pic of chip. LaraLove, you are a great asset to the cabal. Cheers! Dfrg_msc 10:30, 14 December 2007 (UTC) - TRANSMISSION ENDS -

I'm definitely expediting my bathrobe purchasing plans. EVula // talk // ☯ // 10:33, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Adoption?

Hello, my name is David, and I was wondering if you would be willing to adopt me. I'm not a total newbie, so I've been looking for a more experienced adopter. I was also particularly drawn to the personal attention you've paid your previous adoptees. Let me know. DavidJ710| talk 18:09, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Great! Where do we begin, boss?  DavidJ710  talk  19:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)