Jump to content

User talk:Keilana/Archive3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Deletion of your talk page

Sorry, but deleting a user talk page isn't housekeeping. I must object and strongly urge you to restore it. Snowolf How can I help? 22:47, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plenty of admins do it, I don't have a problem with it. Best, Keilanatalk 22:49, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Archive 36

How is it a valid archive? It did not come from the main talk page, and it is gibberish. It makes no sense. So what are your grounds for keeping it? MrKIA11 (talk) 22:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know that, what was it then? That strikes me as a bit odd. Best, Keilanatalk 22:57, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is. That's why I nominated it. It should definitely be deleted. Will you, since your an admin, or should I put the template back? MrKIA11 (talk) 22:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll delete it momentarily. Thanks for notifying me. Best, Keilanatalk 23:01, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. MrKIA11 (talk) 23:03, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As someone who gave your input into my initial proposal, would I be able to respectfully request your input into a secondary proposal which addresses issues related to the restrictions placed on Blow of Light specifically? Your input into gathering consensus at this discussion would be much appreciated. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 12:03, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hew Scott

You are probably right to recommend this formally for deletion - but only formally. It is pretty scanty right now and I hope to add ot it in future. His extensive work is a fairly fundamental tool for historians and genealogists - try Googling him or his work - so, yep, he matches the notability criterion. Thanks for the prompt to more work! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tony164 (talk • contribs) 15:19, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I did pick up some stuff on Google, hence the AFD. Just poke me if you need anything, administrative or otherwise. Best of luck you you! Keilanatalk 23:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

John Carter (talk) 21:58, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE

What, Ive been warned and I stopped. I havent done anything In the past...5 minutes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blue Laser (talk • contribs) 00:48, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

chain of events

Congratulations on your successful reconfirmation RFA!

I see that you are a RFCU clerk. Let me tell you about a series of events that cascaded into a bad situation. The particular names are not important. In fact, listing the names just adds to hard feelings.

Admin 1 has a dispute with a POV pusher and has blocked him for a month. The POV pusher asked others to edit WP. This is considered canvassing. However, the language that he used was open ended enough that, on the surface, it is legitimate. Should we block someone for saying something like "go to WP and see if you can improve articles, if so do it."?

When some people came to WP to express their opinion about the block, Admin 1 thought they were socks. One of the editors is an established editor that works on featured article candidates but edited using another username citing need to prevent attacks on the other articles.

The RFCU came up that the 3 users were not related.

One user pointed out that the RFCU request was deficient. It was a category F, yet no proof of block was provided (see the chart near the top of the RFCU page and the requirements). That user also mentioned that the 3 users that the RFCU listed had no common articles that they edited (they all edited different articles). That user also mentioned that all of them have stopped editing after the block (so there is no block evasion as category F requires). As the RFCU clerk, you didn't catch these difficiencies. Since this discussion is for learning, maybe you can learn from it (that it was part of a series of events that turned out badly for WP).

The RFCU results showed that the 3 users were not related but the checkuser mentioned the name of a 4th username, that of the established FA editor. That FA editor has said he/she will no longer edit in WP. This is harmful to WP. If we learn anything, it should be not to do something that has the result of chasing away good WP editors. Everything else is secondary.

I came in when I saw that Admin 1 made a 1 minute block just to create a negative record on the FA editor. This is in clear violation of WP policy. I placed a 12 hour block on Admin 1 in order to protect WP from ongoing mis-steps and possible further WP policy violations. By doing so, I did not violate WP policy. However, in retrospect, I shouldn't have done this because it doesn't follow the customs that should be observed when blocking. One of the several unwritten rules that were broken is that blocking of an admin should be carefully considered, more so than an non-admin editor.

Where do you fit in? Try to carefully do RFCU clerking duties. Whether or not this would have stopped this cascade of events is speculation. However, following WP policy and instructions carefully seems to be a good rule of thumb.

Who has gotten hurt? Many people. Is WP better now? No, except if we consider the situation and improve it. Archtransit (talk) 15:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Where do you fit in? Try to carefully do RFCU clerking duties."???? Am I reading this?? It's partly Keilana's fault here?? Sorry, but that's bogus in the extreme. BTW - your productive FA creator that does so much for Wikipedia created an account basically to "out" Keilana's previous name right in the middle of her RfA. Now *that* kind of malicious behaviour damages Wikipedia but is largely being overlooked by you here. Your FA editor created abusive socks, repeatedly broke the rules, tried to protect his main account from scrutiny ... and got caught doing so. What if Keilana had left as a result? And she's is to blame??? I don't think so - Alison ❤ 17:05, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

answering your question

If you see something on the ground, you can either pick it up or pretend you never saw it and walk away. If it's your property, you certainly pick it up. I consider this matter something I could pick up or ignore. I'm just mentioning it because I see something out of order.

It's about a RFCU request. According to the instructions, different codes require different evidence. Code C must have diffs. Code D must have a link with the closed vote. Code F must have a link to the original block. With User:Onequestion, the request was non-compliant. There was no link to the original block. I thought that a clerk was supposed to check to see that all the requirements were met before listing requests. There also was no block evasion by anyone after the block (after the block, none of the users edited). These people are probably bad anyway but if we are to block bad people, this can be done without the checkuser. My interpretation of IAR is that it is used to improve WP, not as an excuse to not to follow the rules.

This issue isn't a big issue to me. It's just a question of following rules. Archtransit (talk) 22:45, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About the currently listed requests, King of all that is cheese is a code A. But it's not in the IP section. Primetime (14th request) is a code F and DOES have the link to the original block (see link next to F). Archtransit (talk) 22:48, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right about dismissing cases. The checkuser will bite your head off for too much commentary. However, there is a non-compliant area where submitters can fix their complaint. This is not a big issue with me. I am not saying that your work is bad. Just a case of seeing something that's not quite in order. Your volunteer efforts there are commendable. Archtransit (talk) 22:54, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who knows what would have happened! Nobody can predict "what if". I can think of some possibilities but I don't want someone to think that I'm supporting any one of the bad guys. The 3 people aren't equally bad if you read the edits.Archtransit (talk) 22:59, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for January 14th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 3 14 January 2008 About the Signpost
From the editor: A new weekly feature 
Special: 2007 in Review Wikimania 2009 bidding ends, jury named 
Controversial non-administrator rollback process added Supposed advance draft of Jobs keynote surfaces on talk page 
WikiWorld comic: "The Nocebo Effect" News and notes: Fundraiser ends, $500,000 donation, milestones 
Wikipedia in the News Tutorial: Fundamentals of editing 
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News 
The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

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) 08:30, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and soooorry

Hi Keilana

Sorry I didn't answer before, I have the hands full with an inventory at work :(

If you can make some WP:KIS labels for the most active WikiProjects That will help loooots! Thanks and best regards ℒibrarian2 12:19, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you prefer doing the Life styles or Wikipedia related, that is good too! ℒibrarian2 12:28, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Admin coaching

 Done, finally. ;) Jonathan 00:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Hi

I was just leaving a message about Briglin, which I added tonight and I see you marked for deletion. Firstly I must say that I am new but I did take time to read the regulations and I do not think there should be a problem. Just to explain. Briglin pottery no longer exists. It went bust in 1990 after 42 years of producing fine erthenware hand made pottery in the west end of london. It is no different from any other collectable C20th ceramics factory. "Troika Pottery", "Poole Pottery" etc are listed. At it's height Briglin Pottery was selling 3,000 pieces a week. It deserves to be listed. Please reconsider. Thank you for your time, BR Alex.

Coaching

Hi, I was User:Academic Challenger's admin coachee for some months, but he's decided to go on a long-term wikibreak. User:Rlevse agreed yesterday to become my coach and continue the process, but now he appears to have left the project. I had approached Mr. Z-Man and Martinp23 before, but they are also apparently unavailable. Your the only other name I recgonize on the coaching page who doesn't appear to be full/inactive. Would you be willing to take me on as a student? MBisanz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) MBisanz talk 03:54, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right now I'm up to User:MBisanz/AC so I'm sort of at a "What next" situation. I know Rlevse was involved somewhat in SSP and Academic Challenger was not that much into Images, so I'll guess I'll move towards whatever area is your focus. MBisanz talk 04:14, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Considering you've been through 2 successful RfAs, I think your knowledge of the process through coaching would be really helpful to me. I've seen non-admin AfD closes, but on a philosophical level, I'm opposed to that idea. Even if its a WP:SNOW situation, I still think that having someone whose gained the community trust make the call is a good idea. That being said, if you'd like me to do some closes as part of the prep process, I am willing to. MBisanz talk 06:55, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

A barnstar from User:Solumeiras
For being one of my favourite Wikipedians, doing all around good work, being a great admin, and just generally being yourself!!, as well as making Wikipedia a great place! --Solumeiras (talk) 20:07, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Apologies for this taking up large amounts of space on your talkpage

Thanks

Thanks for the good word for Ali and myself. Much appreciated. SirFozzie (talk) 22:39, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

U2...

Thanks for your offer to help. The article is actually up for FAC so not sure what you can do to help – perhaps provide more suggestions? It’s gone one a long oppose on POV and prose grounds. I agree with some of the points and will try to fix ASAP, other points I’m not so sure about and would like to challenge them – but is that at the risk of a failed FAC? Hmm. I am going to look at their points closer tonight.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Regards --Merbabu (talk) 00:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Keilana, I haven't really worked with you before, but I saw your offer for help on Merbabu's page, and I'll echo what he said above: your support, additional comments, making improvements to the article, whatever you can do would be really helpful. I now see what Merbabu said about FACs on general topics -- they really are grueling and we can definitely use the help of a dedicated editor such as yourself. Wikipedia brown (talk) 23:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rouge non-admin category...

You can't believe how hard it was not to re-create the page with an undeletion summary of "Out of process ROUGE ADMIN!!! Wheel War time!". :P · AndonicO Hail! 02:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kekeke. · AndonicO Hail! 02:11, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The ArbCom threat on DHMO's talk. :P · AndonicO Hail! 02:15, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Of course I do, I founded the Cabal. But I have to go along with the show... you know, the press and all. :/ · AndonicO Hail! 02:21, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
WP:TIC. ;) · AndonicO Hail! 02:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SNOW

Okey, so I've parsed some AfD and picked these as clear WP:SNOW.

Maybe a SNOW

SNOW Keep

I know that WP:SNOW technically reads, an article that wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell of being kept. I'm wondering though if the definition of a Snowball rolling down a mountain and gaining mass as it rolls isn't more appropriate.

I'd like to work a bit more in content creation and/or copy editting. I've seen the League of Copyeditors and Requested Articles, so I might head over there. As far as admining goes, I've worked in deletions, have a good reading knowledge of blocks/AN, but I've wondered what exactly is the Unwatched pages list for? If any user can watch a page and take it off the list and never log in again, well isn't it rather a worthless feature? MBisanz talk 03:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of AAC Article

I understand the reasons for removal of the Another Anime Convention article under the CSD G4 restriction, but I have a few questions about the classification of noteworthy articles in Category:Anime conventions. The article was originally removed after it was not determined to be noteworthy enough. This was in early 2007. Since then, another convention has been held, and with the exception of not having a wikipedia article, the convention meets the requirements to be on List of anime conventions.

That being said, I used Eirtakon as an example of an acceptable article in this category. All citation for Eirtakon is AnimeCons.com, and with the exception of an additional sentence or two describing the event, there is no information in Eirtakon that was not present in Another Anime Convention. As such, shouldn't Eirtakon also be subject to deletion? Furthermore, the following articles within the category also pose the same or greated lack of noteworthiness based on information and/or citation: Anime_Friends, AnimeFest, AnimeIowa, Ikasucon, JACON, Japan Expo, Jump Festa, etc.

Forenholm (talk)

AN/I Post

My original comment diff will need to be included in any oversight-l request. Apologies for the stupid error on my part. Avruchtalk 18:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hereit is. Avruchtalk 18:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to include this one as well since it mentions it in the edit summary. Avruchtalk 20:27, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Returning

After much thought and deliberation I have decided to return. Many wikians contacted me by various means and I truly appreciate the support from all of them. Man, did I need that wiki break! I have learned from it and will use the experience to improve. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:11, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Twisted Outlook

You aren't really giving us much of a chance to make the changes. Any chance of having more than a few seconds? The significance of the site, for me, comes from the fact that they give bands like us a chance to have our say and make ourselves heard/known. They have interviewed many bands and people who are significant enough to have pages on this very site, and yet they still give small performers like us a chance. They promote an art at a grass roots level and, to me, that makes them significant. Added on to the fact that they write prolifically, have been referenced allover the internet, and have interviewed many significant people/groups. Sites like "X-Entertainment" are allowed to have pages here. So should ATO. There's no difference in terms of significance - it's the same subject area, but ATO gives artists a chance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tfmmushroom (talk • contribs) 19:54, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've read them. The main thing is that the site be referenced on other sites. It is, I linked to them. Another of my favourite sites, X-Entertainment, hasn't cited any references, and yet it's allowed. Can you explain the difference? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tfmmushroom (talk • contribs) 20:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, may I ask how if it "should be deleted", it's managed to stay up for years without being deleted - despite not having ANY references - and yet my article was deleted within seconds WITH references? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tfmmushroom (talk • contribs) 20:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want it deleted, it's also among my favourite sites, it just pains me as to why an article that took me some time was removed without question, or without the remotest chance to fix it, when others exist for prolonged periods of time with lesser proof of notability. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tfmmushroom (talk • contribs) 20:15, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you are needed

I saw your comments about personal information mentioned on wikipedia. You mentioned that you are inclined to block. Is there is a double standard? This is not trolling. This is fairness that we are talking about. There is also a mention that a non-admin would have already been blocked. If you agree, then you should block. If you wouldn't have blocked a regular user then don't block this user. Miesbu (talk) 21:26, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What just happened here

Has this incident just been dismissed? Spartaz just closed it. Anthon01 (talk) 22:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its been referred to ArbCom, per suggestions in the thread. I imagine Thatcher will put it to them, and you can if you wish. Avruchtalk 22:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how to do that? Anthon01 (talk) 22:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TSQUAD.

Rouge admins welcome. :P · AndonicO Hail! 23:22, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to have you. I think I'd better stop spamming talk pages... a rouge might just come along and block me (of course, I'd just unblock, block him, and start another Wheel War :P). · AndonicO Hail! 23:32, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
... · AndonicO Hail! 01:12, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wheel wars make kitteh cry. Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 01:22, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Everytime you wheel war, God kills a kitten." Of course, if that was true... we would keep wheel warring. :) · AndonicO Hail! 01:25, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Technically, she is protecting your version :-P Avruchtalk 01:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Against my will, you pedant. :P · AndonicO Hail! 01:30, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
*shoots kittens with an AK-47* Keilana|Parlez ici 01:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't need the no-wiki tags there. ;) Oh... and nukes are cooler. · AndonicO Hail! 01:30, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is too far. Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 01:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now you say it?. · AndonicO Hail! 01:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You realize this goes in your protections log? :p Avruchtalk 01:53, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yup...I've got a pretty interesting log :P Keilana|Parlez ici 01:54, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for stopping. Now please, don't EVER do that again. · AndonicO Hail! 02:00, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:MBisanz

Let's co-admin coach him. He asked you when I had my wikistress, I assumed you'd say yes, so see his talk page. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:11, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem being co-coached. You both seem very capable and have varied interests, which should help me form my editing style nicely. MBisanz talk 04:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

- For reverting the vandalism to my talk page :-) Thanks! ScarianCall me Pat 16:46, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The original one pasted that stuff every 10 seconds for 5 minutes... Wiki's servers must be crying right now :-( ScarianCall me Pat 16:49, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:HUG.

Calm down. :P · AndonicO Hail! 17:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're just jealous. :P Keilana|Parlez ici 17:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just you wait, after lunch I'll edit conflict you back to the stone age. B) · AndonicO Hail! 18:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Game on. Keilana|Parlez ici 18:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Damn, Snowolf is beating us both. :P · AndonicO Hail! 18:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. Damn it. Keilana|Parlez ici 18:49, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Might want to re-look this. · AndonicO Hail! 18:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that was a mistake on my part. :S Keilana|Parlez ici 18:59, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Damnit...you keep beating me too! this means war! hehehehe - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 19:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, I'm going so fast that Huggle keeps crashing. :( Keilana|Parlez ici 19:08, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah Triona, you're bloody annoying yourself. :P Keilana isn't a problem though... only conflicted with her once. · AndonicO Hail! 19:11, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's 'cause I'm so fast that the edits don't show up :P Keilana|Parlez ici 19:11, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wrong... I see them in the previous revisions, but you haven't clicked "Q" faster than I yet (just once). · AndonicO Hail! 19:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Q? Keilana|Parlez ici 19:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh... that's why you're slow... :P · AndonicO Hail! 19:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, do you press the q letter? I'm clicking the rollback button then the next button...am I doing it wrong? Keilana|Parlez ici 19:17, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I just saw a bunch of French vandalism, lol. Keilana|Parlez ici 19:18, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not doing it wrong, it's just that hotkeys are faster (years of real-time strategy online gaming has taught me that... lol). · AndonicO Hail! 19:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What's the hotkey for "next"? Keilana|Parlez ici 19:21, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Need to wait to click the next button until the revert takes (or fails because someone got there first). - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 19:22, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. Gotcha. Thanks, guys. *goes back to reverting* Keilana|Parlez ici 19:23, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Next hotkey = spacebar. · AndonicO Hail! 19:28, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly, that's the RTS spirit. ;) · AndonicO Hail! 19:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
RTS? (I reverted something wrong when I saw the message bar pop up...:P) Keilana|Parlez ici 19:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Please would you consider KEEPING the page Luka Rocco Magnotta, the page has been very usefull in searches, if you were to search "Luka Magnotta" and leave out his middle name thousands of articles appear on him. He is a well known adult actor and he is listed on IMBD, has his own homepage, links to his videos appear on his wikipage and numerous news articles appear. There are "gay bashers" all over the net who dislike him and want his page removed. Please would you not remove his page from wikipedia and protect it from vandalisim. Thank you kindly for your help

Missed a vandal edit by another user on Hillary Rodham Clinton. Fixed :) - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 19:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

POTC article...

Well, I see that you are also watching the POTC article! I've already posted two levels of warning to the IP that is vandalising the article today, if we reach four, we might want to consider a "slap on the wrist"... Edit Centric (talk) 19:53, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be delighted to deliver said slap on the wrist. :) Keilana|Parlez ici 19:54, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you check an edit?

Hi there, could you check the validity of this edit? The user added the context just before an already present citation. I think it may need a revert, but it is semi-protected at the moment. Thanks 74.133.9.95 (talk) 21:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking into it. Cheers. 74.133.9.95 (talk) 22:00, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:86.136.79.33

It is good practice to place a {{subst:blocked}} notice on a user talk page after you've blocked them, even if it is an anonymous user. Just food for thought. Cheers, Kingturtle (talk) 22:49, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sorry

how can i be a good editor? i just daint know what to edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Poeloq (talk • contribs) 23:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Barnstar of Reversion
For reverting so many unhelpful edits and vandalism on Wikipedia I User Swirlex award you this Barnstar.
Aww. How come you get the barnstar, and I get the complaints? :P · AndonicO Hail! 00:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Keilana/Archive3&oldid=1252478024"