User talk:KnowledgeOfSelf/Archive23

DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.

This archive page covers approximately the dates between December 20 and January 3.

Re: Wow

Thanks. And shh... ;-) east.718 at 02:31, December 20, 2007

Your username

Hey, I just wanted to let you know that I like your username and Mos references on your userpage. You might be interested in the article I wrote on the Nkiru Books. Stay up. • Freechild'sup? 14:20, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, and nice article. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 14:23, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the barnstar, KOS. :-) I was actually hoping someone would fall for my lame impersonation and start writing a nom right away. Someone like me, who sometimes will let enthusiasm prevent from noticing small, important details. ;-) Best regards, Húsönd 00:55, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Protection

Beat you. ;) GlassCobra 01:09, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Ohhh man. I'm not used to being beaten! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 01:10, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

My page

Thank YOU for removing vandalism on my page. I really appreciate it. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:51, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Anytime, it was my pleasure. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 06:17, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Blessed editing, and...

Happy Holidays from Marlith ^T/C Please feel free to contribute to Wikipedia:Song/The Twelve Days of Christmas

Credits: This card was inspired by Macy's123, assistant of V's Shop

Marlith ^T/C 04:21, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Happy holidays to you as well. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 06:17, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Mark753...

... Has been active again with 142.162.180.205 (talk · contribs). Have a nice day, merry Christmas. Funeral 23:03, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Blocked, thank you for telling me. Happy holidays to you too! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 23:05, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Here he is again: 142.162.203.69 (talk · contribs). Funeral 14:39, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey, Oxymoron83 already got him. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 18:13, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For all of your commendable efforts against the endless cavalcade of vandals. Maser (Talk!) 03:50, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I thank you. It is much appreciated. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 03:59, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Seriously, you beat me to reverting vandalism all the time on RCP. :) Maser ^(Talk!) 04:02, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

For vandalism reversion on my talkpage. Cheer --Nuttycoconut (talk) 03:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

You are very welcome. Happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 03:59, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

My Edit

Thank you for being so zealous, but the edit wasn't vandalism. The glossary of terms is not spesific to that satalite or anything on the article (is there a glossary on every technical article?). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.172.31.84 (talk) 03:55, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, please post new sections at the bottom of the page. You removed a large block of text without explaining why, that typically indicates vandalism. I won't revert again, but someone else might. Happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 03:59, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Re this

The bot getting it wrong is one thing, but you should have examined the situation more carefully. And the edit you made to Smilodon didn't make any sense at all; you didn't even remove the word "pussy" - were you just looking for something to revert to so you could get a revert in? You need to be more careful, you seem to have driven off a good user. Don't bite the newbies. —Random832 04:18, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

No, you need to be more vigilant, here is the link. Yup thanks. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 04:21, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

As an aside: "Hi, one of your changes added the word "pussy" to the article hence my revert to a revision that was not vandalized. You are most welcome to edit the page, we encourage it. Just be careful! this is the diff KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 01:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)" If you call that biting the new users, then maybe you should read this page again. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 04:23, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

The word "pussy" was legitimately present in the article, was the title of the cited source, and was _removed_ as part of vandalism. You didn't even remove it in your own revert (which seems to have been chosen solely on the basis of being before IP edits, without examining whether the IP edits in question were vandalism). This is absolutely unacceptable. You should have seen from context that the word was correctly there and that it was incorrectly removed by a vandal in the first place. While I can forgive the bot for getting it wrong, you REALLY should have known better. —Random832 04:25, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

And, yes, it is biting. Having a legitimate change reverted by someone who blindly goes through without paying attention to what he's reverting (which is the bot's job, not yours) is extremely frustrating, and it _does_ seem to have driven him away. —Random832 04:30, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about my tone. But it was a bit insulting for you to suggest that i'm not vigilant enough, when you are the one who isn't paying attention to what you're reverting. —Random832 04:33, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

(ec x 4) Ah I see it now, I was mistaken, those do happen, my bad. But accusing me of biting a new user, is very fallacious of you. Did you even read the comment I left the user? Again if you call that biting, you need to read the policy page again. Are you also accusing me of simply reverting for the sake of reverting? Have you ever heard of this? I've been fighting vandalism on this project for over 2 years, I'm not going to get everything right, nor is everything I do going to be perfect. For you to accuse me of biting a new user, and of simply reverting for the sake of reverting is very laughable. An other thing, I didn't accuse the editor of vandalism, the bot left the warning. I manually reverted, what I believed to be a mistaken addition of a swear word. I saw that the user was reverting vandalism, and thought that he mistakenly reverted to a revision that had vandalism. Again for you to come here accusing me biting, and bad faith reverting is very poor form, and highly hypocritical inappropriate. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 04:39, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

The "reverting for the sake of reverting" comment was maybe a bit out of line, but it was in light of the fact that, since you obviously couldn't revert _to_ the vandalism the other user had reverted, you chose some arbitrary past version. (one which went back past three non-vandalism edits prior to the version he reverted to, incidentally) But I do apologize for characterizing it that way. And, my statement about biting was not so much in the message you left on the talk page, but in the reversion itself - and, most importantly, in the fact that he was, in fact, driven away from the site by it. Think of it this way: how would you feel, if after the bot got it wrong and you change it back, someone comes in and [seemingly] blindly follows in the bot's actions? And, I didn't start to take such a harsh tone with you until you said "No, you need to be more vigilant" which directly insulted my intelligence (what, did you think I hadn't read the diff already? for context, i arrived here after a cluebot false positive report showed up on my watchlist). But I do apologize, I think I did cross a line with my tone. —Random832 04:44, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

And, anyway - I do understand (barely) how you might have thought that he mistakenly reverted to a version that had vandalism in it. What I don't understand is how, from there, you don't (knowing it's a more complicated situation) then _look_ at the history to see _when_ that supposed vandalism was introduced, instead apparently just clicking on some version without (apparently) looking at the diffs between each version. In other words, it's a bit baffling how you go from thinking that the word "pussy" was inserted as vandalism, to reverting to a version that still has that word in it. I don't understand the process there. —Random832 04:50, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I did check the revisions by the 3 anon edits, I reverted past those because one of them changed "smilu" to "smilē" which looked wrong and looks exactly like the random ridiculousness/test edits that are made everyday, not to mention the addition of unsourced content, which while not vandalism, I was perfectly in the right to remove. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 04:54, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

You are biting.

I've edited microscopy articles as an IP for a month now. My edits have been appreciated because they are technically accurate and improve these articles. I'm interested in Ice Age mammals, another problem on Wikipedia. I didn't add the word pussy, any more than you did. I "undid" another edit. This can be seen when you compare mine with the version prior to the BREE ROCKS IP edits: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Smilodon&diff=179092614&oldid=178764940.

You are now protecting your ego, just like the bot owner.

Did you look at my contributions? I have to assume they are valueless, because my time is being wasted with this shit. But no one undid my contributions, they simply asked me to do more. Fuck that.

I could have rewritten the entire vacuum pump article this weekend. I checked out and downloaded technical literature from the school library to do that. The Wikipedia article about removing gas molecules from a system with a rotary pump gives water well pumps as an example and explanation. Do you know what happens if you try to suck water with a vacuum pump designed to suck air? Neither do Wikipedia readers know because they've been misinformed with a bad example.

Instead of editing an article I would like to rewrite I'm spending my off time getting pissed off at being treated like shit by some self-proclaimed administrators and a bot's owner. If this is "anybody can edit" it's bullshit. If anybody can edit, anybody should be able to remove vandalism from an article before editing it without getting attacked by a bot, its lazy owner, and an administrator for doing so. An apology would have ended this right away. Wikipedia should adopt "be polite" instead of "don't bite." Or "don't let your ego get in the way of common sense." Or "look at what people did before you gang up on them." My contributions were good. Now my account is trashed with this shit. So fuck Wikipedia and its inaccurate and misinforming microscopy articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amaltheus (talk • contribs) 05:01, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi again, please be civil, I've made a mistake, I've admitted it, it's up above. Saying things such as "Fuck Wikipedia" will get you nowhere and do not shine you in a positive light. Again I do not believe I was "biting" but if I've offended you, I do apologize. Mistakes are bound to happen, even by the best of us. I do my best to protect Wikipedia, and I sometimes shoot blanks. I can't say anymore than that. Also please sign posts on talk pages with ~~~~ KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 05:15, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

When smilē is quite clearly already in the lead of the article as the transcription of σμίλη, and σμίλη appeared right next to it as well (edit: apparently this _was_ the lead; sorry for the misunderstanding. But, anyway, the anon was right as it happens, and ē rarely appears in test/nonsense edits in my experience), I don't think that your assumption of bad faith was valid (you're not required to know the greek alphabet, but checking the lead sentence of the article would have been nice) Would you have thought it was a test/nonsense edit if I had made it? Anons are allowed to correct typos too. But anyway, since none of the (arguable) vandalism you found was by User:Amaltheus, maybe it would have been better to clarify that - that you felt the need to leave a message on his talk page could be (and was, apparently) taken to imply that you felt he had done something wrong. And there is still the fact that you reverted to a version that still had the word "pussy", and then _after_ that chastised someone for having added that word. —Random832 05:06, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I got ec'd by the above, but he's right - an apology would have settled this. There was no reason for you to leave a message on his page in the first place after determining that the insertion of the word "pussy", specifically, was not vandalism, even if you thought various other edits made well before his were problematic. —Random832 05:10, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

05:15, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure how I implied he did something wrong, I simply pointed out what I believed at the time was a mistake. I encouraged him to edit, and I've apologized. I'll endeavor to be a bit more mindful in the future, but this entire thing is getting blown out of proportion IMO. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk

You blew it out of proportion when you knocked me about something that a bot had already knocked me about. You made the same mistake I made. You reverted to a version that had the word pussy in it. The bot didn't go after you.

I followed directions to notify the bot's owner that the bot had made a mistake. That was a monumental waste of my time. The bot and his owner are too busy puking notices all over Wikipedia to notice mistakes. I'll make another mistake and probably be knocked out permanently by the bot.

This venture is a waste of time. "Fuck Wikipedia" is in line with how I have been treated. I edited articles that need major work. I edited in good faith. I made good edits. I removed serious misinformation from vacuum pump and electron microscopy articles. I removed graffiti. I got puked on twice for it. Consider my "Fuck Wikipedias" as hedged as your apology.

I see why there is too much bad information on Wikipedia. People can't edit without being engaged by shit.

Why sign? It would attach this to a trashed editor. I wouldn't trust my edits looking at my talk page history.

Why? It was a mistake, and anyone who looked would see that. I think you're overreacting. —Random832 05:32, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

If you think me saying, "Hi, one of your changes added the word "pussy" to the article hence my revert to a revision that was not vandalized. You are most welcome to edit the page, we encourage it. Just be careful!" is blowing something out of proportion and "thrashing" your name, then you need to re-evaluate the situation. If you continue on your path of incivility I will remove your posts and ignore you. I welcome and encourage constructive discussion, but uncivil commentary and borderline personal attacks will not be tolerated. Your "notification" of the bots mistaken revert was uncivil, and I'm surprised nobody has pointed this out to you until now. Your comments on your own talk page are uncivil, and your comments here are uncivil. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 05:47, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

KOS - what I meant by it appearing that you thought that he had done something wrong; and actually, something I still don't quite understand here is: your note on his talk page specifically referred to the addition of the word 'pussy', but that was after you had chosen a version which also still contained the word 'pussy' to revert the article to. Based on what you're saying now, a more appropriate notice might have been a polite "your edit was right, but you missed some other stuff from before the version you reverted to". But, based on your response to me, it seems that at that time (despite having reverted to a version that contained 'pussy') you still thought that the insertion of that word was that wrong, and that a diff showing it was inserted should have been proof enough for me to think you were right. That was also what made me think you hadn't looked at the edits you were reverting, since you didn't seem aware that the version you reverted to contained 'pussy'. —Random832 05:39, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

No no you are correct, but how many times must I admit my mistake and apologize? I saw him remove the vandalism, but when I checked the diff I saw the word "pussy" I assumed that he reverted a version that was vandalized. When I went to check the diffs, the additions by the anons caught my attention and I reverted to before those edits. No I did not follow up to see if "pussy" was removed. I assumed it was. As stated at the top of my talk page, I do a lot of RC patrol, more so than many. I will make mistakes, and I will attempt to make amends when I discover them. All I ask is that civility reigns, and Amaltheus has been blatantly uncivil, over a simple misunderstanding, and has escalated this situation. I thank you Random for starting this discussion, and again I apologize for my mistake. This issue is closed for me. My mistake has been pointed out, I've acknowledged it, and apologized. To continue on with this, is pointless. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 05:47, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Good grief, I just noticed this and read through all the history. Don't take it too hard; that was a pretty gross overreaction from Amaltheus, and I'm frankly impressed with how hard everyone tried to make it right. I left a note on ANI. Happy holidays KOS, Antandrus (talk) 03:23, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Antandrus, I saw your comment at AN/I and I really appreciate your opinion. Happy holidays to you too! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 03:30, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Matthew Spencer vandalism (again)

Matthew Spencer vandalism Hi again, could you please do something about the user who continually keeps vandalising the Matthew Spencer page. This guy is getting really frustrating, I'm continually reverting his edits. Something needs to be done. Thanks again. Allied45 (talk) 03:47, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I've reverted back to the correct version. I'll add the page to my watchlist and help keep an eye on it. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 18:11, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Time to stop

My characterisation was accurate. Here's your edit:[1] where you accused me of vandalism. Read your own words in addition to mine before getting so self-righteous.

It's time for you to stop this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amaltheus (talk • contribs) 04:35, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

• This is the last time I'll explain this, it is on you to understand now. I saw you revert vandalism. I thought that you reverted to a vandalized state, hence my edit summary of rvv. If I thought you had vandalized I would have used my rollback button. Period. Good day to you. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 16:41, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Amaltheus, you wrote: "Wikipedia must be the rudest place on the Internet". With all due respect, you can help see that it does not become that way by letting this matter drop. A lot of people have attempted to explain this to you, with considerable patience and politeness, and at this time I strongly suggest you put down your stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass. Thank you, Antandrus (talk) 04:53, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Quick Thanks

Hey i just wanted to say a quick thanks for dealing with some of the Nationalists over at the article on [Gilo] while i let my guard down. LOL. I am pretty new to wikipedia, but admins like you restore my faith in both wikipedia and humanity as a whole. Cheers. Colourinthemeaning (talk) 17:21, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

No problem, thank you for your message. I appreciate it greatly. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 18:11, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Abuse in the Aging of Europe article

Perspicacite has been reverting back to a version of the article that contains off-topic content such as Isreal, Japan and the USA, a comment by the pope (really random) and a reference to "Children of Men" in the "See also" section.

I've warned him not to vandalize back to that edit, but from reading the complaints on his talk page, he has vandalized other articles as well. Could you keep an eye out on the article? 84.26.72.127 (talk) 20:16, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

User:AgüeybanáBot

What goes with this bot adding inappropriate !votes at RfA? Is it just going crazy? Has it been stopped or whatever? Just curious really, but can help out if need be. --Bduke (talk) 21:40, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

That's an ongoing issue, Bduke. It is a sockpuppet that randomly pops up creating "bot" names, normally in some form of Agüeybaná's name, using different letters, or sometimes his alternate name, and adding "Jewish bot oppose" to RfAs. Checkuser has been done, let me see if I can dig that up. Ariel♥Gold 21:42, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Seems to have started back here, but there doesn't seem to be any requests for the subsequent accounts, or sock tags done to track the various accounts. My memory fails me so I'm not sure I remember them all, but I found that checkuser, and User:BoricuaeddieBot that one. Maybe the real Agüeybaná will remember more, but it isn't a frequent issue, one of them crops up now and then, and is swiftly dealt with, so I wouldn't think it is a huge deal. Ariel♥Gold 21:58, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

¿

hey how do u know when a page is changed so fast?ARK23 (talk) 05:03, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I watch. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 05:04, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

how many pages do u watch at a time, or is it that u get a message every time something is changed?ARK23 (talk) 05:06, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I watch too many pages to count. I watch the recent changes feed. Which is how I noticed your vandalism. Please don't make a new subject heading unless you are going to discuss a different topic, this thread will suffice. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 05:08, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

To paraphrase a Chuck Norris meme, KoS does not sleep: he waits. Acroterion _(talk) 05:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Ha, soooo true. Happy holidays, :) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 05:13, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Feb 2

hey i was wondering if u could let me put my name in the feb. 2 page under births, thats my birthdayARK23 (talk) 05:21, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

No, only people who fall within the scope of our notability policy get added to those pages. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 05:25, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Your reversion of the blanking vandalism of one of my user subpages has been noted with approval and gratitude. Good fortune upon you, your house, and all within. May all recognize your shining example and praise you excessively. Like me, now. Cheers, Pigman☿ 05:32, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow thanks for the sentiments. Happy holidays and good health to you and yours as well. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 05:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas, Steve. I hope you have a good one ;-) - Take care! Scarian^{Call me Pat} 13:20, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I thank you fine sir, the Christmas dinner and the rum is all I'm looking forward to, if I get those, it will be a fine Christmas indeed! Happy holidays to you and yours! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 16:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Random Question

Are you a Harry Potter fan or something? It sort of seemed like it when you wrote that "chocolate makes you feel better after dementor attacks." Sorry if I'm being random! By the way, Merry Christmas! :D --Daniella95 (talk) 03:18, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes I am, HP is great. Book 7 was a let down though. Happy holidays to you too. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 03:34, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

THIS MESSAGE IS TO ANYONE WHO PLANS ON READING HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS. THIS IS A BIT OF A SPOILER. I guess the Deathly Hallows was a bit of a disappointment. I can't believe Lupin, Tonks, and Fred had to die! They were some of my favorite characters! Same thing with Hedwig. --Daniella95 (talk) 04:20, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

I think you should take a well-deserved break so that I can finally revert some vandals because you deserve it. Cheers! Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 03:28, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Haha. I've been rather slow the last few days, and my relative inactiveness will continue on until the new year. Happy holidays to you too! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 03:34, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

My God You're Bloody Damned Quick!

What more can I say? Fast Reactions seem very impressive when one's drunk! I had hoped some sillines of mine on the old pachyderms what have you would last at least a minute or two. You utter spoilsport :-). Go and drink a bottle or two of port; personal recommendation... My best regards, Anon. (=82.18.197.68 (talk) 05:00, 25 December 2007 (UTC)) P.s. Merry Christmas!

Ha thank you! Merry Christmas to you as well. If you'd like to play around you can use this, just don't put anything overly obscene please. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 05:04, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

I salute you as someone with a sense of humour (or at least proportion) as well as evident competence. Let us all stand to God Save the Queen. Why are you on vandal duty on the middle of tyhe night on christmas day anyway? I'm only here because I'm rather inebriated; sorry about the elephants! It's odd how banal stuff can seem so hilarious when one's out of it. Roger over and out. 82.18.197.68 (talk) 05:20, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm actually on my way to sleep, it just turned 20 past the witching hour on my side of the States. I'm just trying to leave a friendly Christmas banner on my userpage before I truly depart for Neverland. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 05:23, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

KOS is like Santa for Wikipedia editors. ♫He sees you when you're sleeping, he knows when you're awake, he knows if you've been bad or good, so be good for goodness sake♫ --slakr^\ talk / 05:27, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

zOMG it's my favorite slakr of all time! Happy holidays! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 05:39, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, A Good night to you. It's people like you on wikipedia whose humanity gives hope against what some people see as a trend. I left wiki some years ago, but, as you see, I pop in now and then, when I'm completely wasted off my face to make a joke! You have given me some brief hope in Mencius's viewpoint, so I really do wish you a jolly nice Christmas and new year! :-) 82.18.197.68 (talk) 05:42, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

It's all right. :) I was about to tag you anyway. You're it! ;) —  $PЯINGεrαgђ  05:09 25 December, 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas, my friend. May this find you in good health, good spirits, good company, and good finances. If any of these be missing, may God see fit to restore you in good time. —  $PЯINGεrαgђ  05:09 25 December, 2007 (UTC)

File:Julkrubba.jpg

Thanks Cliff, I'll tag someone else in the morning, (most likely this guy ;)) but for now I'm going to sleep. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 05:16, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my page. Merry Christmas! --Nlu (talk) 05:12, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Always my pleasure Nlu, I was just about to leave you holiday greetings before I turned in for the night. So I'll see you at your talk page ;) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 05:16, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Have some Portuguese egg tarts!  :-) --Nlu (talk) 05:34, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Mmmm yum, thanks! I'm really off to bed this time I swear it! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 05:37, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Sleep or I'll fetch my steel baseball bat. Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 05:42, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

File:Pasteis.jpg

Portuguese egg tarts

Merry Christmas

Wishing you the very best for the season - Guettarda 14:12, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Happy holidays to you as well! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 16:13, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas or Happy holidays (or Happy <insert holiday here>). Glad to hear from you. Hope you are having a good one. Mine is great so far. Take care, and Happy New Year when it comes. Orane (talk) 17:39, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Also merry Christmas from me -- hope you're having a good time, and have lots of fun plans for next year ... and of course keep up the great work on WP!  :) Antandrus (talk) 17:46, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas, KnowledgeOfSelf/Archive23! Wishing you a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year! Best regards from myself! Post this merry message on any other user talk page you can find. -- S♦s♦e♦b♦a♦l♦l♦o♦s (Merry Christmas!)

Invite

Century Tower

As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject University of Florida, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of University of Florida. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks!

I've only reverted vandalism to that article, or an other small change such as grammar or spelling fixes. So thanks, but no thanks. :) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 16:13, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Boring...

Maybe the request needs to be accepted? -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 08:14, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Just woke up here mate, I can't take too much wit at the mo', so huh? :P I was thinking of throwing a range block on that guy, but protection works alright! ;) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 08:16, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Sleep? Never heard of it. Well, mine is done. Your page next? -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 08:19, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

I think a rangeblock is on it's way to be honest. It's being discussed in the vandalism channel. Happy holidays btw! :D KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 08:20, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I don't do IRC. 70.251.112.0/20 and 70.251.64.0/20. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 08:22, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Heh, yes sir! I think we are gonna wait and see if he does it one more time. But we'll get em!

KnowledgeOfSelf | talk

It's switched to my user page. Boring... -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 08:24, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

He's been pwned. ;) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 08:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

So I see. Toast! =D Okay, since you're awake, I'm going to wander off. =) See you later! -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 08:27, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, I figure by the 5th or so block within 30 minutes it was time to do something, so anons from Plano, TX (incidentally my home city) will just have to chill for the next 4 hours. :P --slakr^\ talk / 08:28, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for helping with that. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 08:29, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Edits not Vandalism

I've just been puttering around on the Wiki entery for the Young Communist League and was totally surprized when several hours of work just disappeared. I'm new to wikipedia as an editor, I didn't create account and I think this may have set your alarms off -- but what I was doing was not vandalism. My sources had citations, and were taken from various internet sites and a small pile of books in front of me. I'm writing also about an organization I have first-hand experience with. I thought this was what Wikipedia was all about?

Could you please restore my edits for the last several hours. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johan1917 (talk • contribs) 08:57, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

I assume you are talking of this? Your edit removed a bunch of page content that had references, and things of that nature. Perhaps you didn't mean to cut out so much text? If you have issue with the content of the article, you should take it to the article's talk page and discuss it. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 09:03, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 26th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 52	26 December 2007	About the Signpost

Wales appoints six arbitrators	Board approves expansion, up to 11 trustees possible
WikiWorld comic: "Molasses"	News and notes: Stewards, Senate testimony, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	WikiProject Report: Plants
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) 13:28, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting what is hopefully just a mistake by Randomtime (talk · contribs) to my talk page. --Nlu (talk) 13:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Remove advertising

[2] Might you please? Miami33139 (talk) 00:20, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

What Did I Do Wrong?

HELP - i'm confused..... it seems like someone thinks that i am "promoting" businesses or commerce or a soap box or something with my postings on CUPID and maybe Santa..... so i'm confused. i'm a mom and an anthropologist and i found a great site that re-examines the holiday myths and uses the characters to look at diversity and globalization and other issues. it's not a commerce site, no one is making any money anywhere, yet my posts got taken down as violating some policy that i guess i don't understand.... i was trying to take part in a discussion about these characters in pop culture, that's all. but the posts promoting movies (like the new Vince Vaughn film) remain. I'm not trying to promote anything other than a cool depiction of beloved holiday characters as a representation of how cultures use these characters throughout time.... and link to the site that created these depictions as a "source." Please let me know what policy i violated, because I am really unclear, and totally didn't mean to. There is no advertising or commerce of any sort... and the site that I was linking to as examples of how modern culture uses holiday characters has no commerce of any sort either, so it really is just more discussion of holiday characters.... i'm just new, trying to understand. Hudroy (talk) 03:21, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

- i THINK someone helped me, sounds like it was an image problem and i wasn't supposed to try and be cool and add images. i'm really sorry, i didn't mean to. i figured it was fair use since they used them on their site and i was sending people back to their site and crediting them. but i couldn't figure out how to do it right anyway. i read and re-read the WORDS i wrote and couldn't see what the problem was (i am a professional editor of a magazine, so i'm pretty clear on copyright....) but i think that my lame attempt at adding images and not tagging them right was a red-flag. is there a way to get my words back on the page without trying to add pictures (even though the pictures are really cool? hopefully people will go see them.... if they want.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hudroy (talk • contribs) 01:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

kingturtle, i think that was the name, tried to expalin some of what i THINK i did wrong in posting about Cupid and Santa as depicted on TinkerTank.org. I'm still confused, but hope that people "get" my intention was not spammy and I can figure out how to include these in the dialog on those pages. basically, there is discussion of all of those characters in popular culture and how they are used and evolve, so i linked to the TinkerTank.org site, which is not commercial in any way (there's NOTHING for sale at all) but is a purely "academic" and creative site that re-imagines all these myths in a modern way to be useful to parents and kids..... so i guess it seemed spammy because I mentioned it in each of the character postings on Wikipedia.... Personally, I've never seen anything quite like it, because it does have all the characters in one place, and it isn't selling stuff like other sites..... and the characters are totally original.... so i'm trying to figure out how to join the dialog without breaking the rules..... thanks for helping Hudroy (talk) 02:49, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, it was sort of spammy, but the issue in my mind was that it was irrelevant context. I'm glad that you received help, and I'm sorry for the delay in responding. Basically Wikipedia is not a collection of what you think belongs. We have a group of core policies on content that should be followed. Your additions to the Santa Claus article, where really not what one expects in an encyclopedia. Happy editing, and enjoy the wiki. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 06:01, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

okay, but i'd like to explore it a little..... in all of those sections, people were talking about modern interpretations of traditional characters. that's something that's pretty relevant, as mythology and characters have always provided the parables and metaphors that are used to define both mainstream thinking and the "alt" thinking that pushes the cultural envelope..... so in the cupid section people were talking about how the character is interpreted in different ways - with varying physical characteristics - but that the core was always the same. so, i cited another current example that did just that, but even more so.... likewise with Santa. in a way that seemed far more socially and academically relevant than the citation of whatever that new Vince Vaughan movie is (which was the next paragraph, and clearly an "ad" for something commercial that didn't really advance the issue....) I really do think that this advances the discussion of the role of these characters in the modern collective psyche. and it's not commercial in any way...... and it is precisely what one would expect to find in an encyclopedia: examples of the re-treatment of traditional icons to meet the needs of modern society.

thanks for getting back to me. i'm trying to learn my way around...

i'd like to try again. Hudroy (talk) 06:32, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Another Barnstar!

Hi, KnowledgeOfSelf! Well, I saw your particularly diligent efforts, so I thought I would just go ahead, be BOLD and award you this:

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For your hard work on reverting vandalism (I know, you already recieved a barnstar for that), and other such tedious edits. Great job, and keep up the good work! Mizu onna sango15 (talk) 02:39, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate it. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 06:01, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Yep, I think you needed another one, anyway (well, that and you earned it). Heh. Mizu onna sango15 (talk) 00:19, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

No problem

Stupid vandals! ><RichardΩ612 13:32, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

eBarn

Slakr's eBarn Award I dropped by to give you a barnstar, but I realized that you already have gazillions of barnstars already with no place to put them all. So, instead of just giving you another barnstar that will probably end up gathering dust in a closet somewhere, I instead decided to build you this extra special eBarn so that you'll have a place to show off all of those barnstars. Keep up the good work as always :) --slakr\ talk / 00:24, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

A very good idea, i think that barn is going to explode though. :)Tiptoety ^talk 07:48, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks slakr, I've of course corrected the situation. :) And to you Tip, I do wonder if I should make a second page, but meh if it explodes it'll make a big noise and shower shards of barnstars all over the wiki, that'll be soooo cool! ;) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 08:55, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Ooooo....I would buy tickets to see that! Tiptoety ^talk 23:39, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Woo hoo! eBarnified™. *rushes to go create EBarnification* :P --slakr^\ talk / 09:28, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Sweet. That is all. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 18:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Who?

I have no idea what you're talking about... jkjk ;) Delldot on a public computer (talk) 09:41, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Stephen Barrett <Unsourced negative assertion removed per WP:BLP>

"which means that I can prescribe for myself and my immediate family" http://www.quackwatch.com/00AboutQuackwatch/faq.html#license . Anyone who self-prescribes, or prescribes to family members should have their license revoked for failing to meet the generally accepted standards of care. [3], [4] 180-6., [5], [6]: 5-2. b), [7], [8], 502. (1), [9].

<Unsourced negative assertions removed per WP:BLP> Magnonimous (talk) 12:57, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I've no idea what you are talking about.... I have noticed that you left this message on other user's talk pages, that is highly discouraged and you may be reverted for it. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 13:20, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Barrett simply quoted the Pennsylvania State Board of Medicine FAQ which says in full: "Active Retired – A physician who wishes to continue to write prescriptions for themselves or immediate family (spouse, children, parents, and siblings who reside with you). If you choose this option, you must submit a letter to the Board and return the active license. If your license is on an active retired status, you are excused from maintaining professional liability insurance and meeting continuing education requirements." Magnonimous was reading entirely too much into this and has been blocked for "WP:BLP violations, talk page abuse, canvassing, recreating deleted content forks repeatedly, general disruption" and "Abusing sock puppet accounts". Avb 01:57, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Steve.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:142.162.181.187 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.162.207.109 (talk) 22:01, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Here if it means sooo much to you, I won't delete this lone post, and I'll give you an answer. You were banned, you where banned as Mark753 which makes your bobbybobbobdadoo account a sockpuppet. As Bobbybobbobdaoo you where trolling, and after you were warned you turned to vandalism of user pages, hence your block. We revert banned users on site, because if they are banned their edits should never have happened. Also the templates we use to inform people of blocks usually say you may make constructive edits when the block expires, so it would technically apply to you.... but you can't resist vandalizing which is what leads to your block. I wonder now, will you stay true to your word, and stop vandalizing? Hmmm. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 02:54, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

No. You're wrong. You said bobby was banned because he was mark753's sockpuppet. You found out he was a sock AFTER you banned me for 1 If that link fucked up then, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deep_Purple&diff=prev&oldid=176173070.

Then, you went to erase my other edits since I was banned, and you found out I was mark753. So Bobby wasn't banned for being the sock, he was banned for the edit which I don't understand. And, i'm positive you have banned some of my accounts for not doing anything wrong. You said you're free to make constructive edits when you're back but you vandalised. There's a few of my accounts that got banned for editing without vandalising. I'll edit this i find out k 142.162.206.144 (talk) 19:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Nah, I knew you were a sock just didn't know which one at first. At the time I used an script that automatically left warnings/tagged uses with indefblocked etc, etc. I tagged that account with the sock temp like what 4 minutes afterward? It didn't take me long to find what I was looking for. And as I said, indefinitely banned users are reverted on site. You are an indef banned user, no matter if you are using sock accounts, or IP addresses. I'll be watching, so behave yourself, because you are on thin ice. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 19:09, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I could be wrong, but I think what this user is arguing is that if he escapes from prison, then he shouldn't be arrested and sent back to prison to serve the original charge that landed him there in the first place— that is, if he's only pulled over for speeding this time around. --slakr^\ talk / 19:11, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

First of all, it doesn't matter how long it took you to find out I'm a sockpuppet of mark753. Whether its 3 minutes, 4 minutes, or 78, You DIDN'T know at first. Heres PROOF. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bobbybobbobdadoo&action=history It clearly says: Banned for vandalism on deep purple. NOT for sock of mark753. So, explain how adding "Classic Metal" to deep purple is vandalism. 142.162.206.144 (talk) 19:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

You don't listen very well do you? At the time I used an script that automatically left warnings/tagged uses with indefblocked etc, etc. I also said I knew you were a sock just wasn't sure who off the top of my head, so obviously I couldn't tag you until I looked it up, which I did. Also, banned users get reverted on site, why is that so difficult for you to understand? KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 19:41, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, that was the warning that you were given for your disruptive edits (that weren't just vandalism. The fact is KOS gave you the benefit of the doubt before blocking you. As you're no doubt finding out now, I'm not nearly as nice, especially since you keep getting KOS out of bed when he should be sleeping *stares at KOS, like his mother used to do to him*. --slakr^\ talk / 19:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Happy new year!

Hi, KnowledgeOfSelf. I wish you a successful, healthy, peaceful and happy new year. :) Best wishes from —αἰτίας

Happy new year to you as well. Keep up the good work fighting the vandals. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 18:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll try my best. :) —αἰτίας •discussion• (Happy new year!) 21:25, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Yet another happy new year!

Steve, I couldn't log on without swinging by and saying hello. I was here to clean up an article for a move to Veropedia when I thought that I'd swing by my old username and at least direct it to the new username. Thought it was silly to have a retirement notice since I have to log on here to clean up an article before moving it there. Once it's at Veropedia, it can't be edited. Wouldn't you know that an administrator has run an old article of mine up the old AfD flagpole, the same one who basically made me give up after only a month and who ran my last original article up for AfD. Here's the funny part: He left word on the talk page, right under the big black banner which said I left this site a year ago. It was a protected page, by the way. I was going to redirect it as well; that's when I found the notice. Too damned funny and not worth crying admin abuse over, although this is as abusive as I've ever seen an admin be toward another user. Anyway, shoot me an e-mail when you have a moment and say hi to Gogo Dodo, Gadfium, Bishonen, Joyous and the rest of the gang for me. I'll probably log on in another month or so once I figure out which article I next want to parse over to Veropedia. In the meantime, I'm going to turn my attention back to my paid writing duties. Happy new year! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 08:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

zOMG! Ralph, I'm sorry I know I haven't written in a while, I've been so busy with the wiki, and RL is starting to catch up, and yadda yadda yadda. I promise I'll write soon, happy holidays! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 18:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Serio3‎

Serio3‎ was using the user page for continuing the current spamming campaign for Serio, trying to add categories to the page, etc. I blanked the page for now but as you know, he will be back to revert. Since he is indef blocked, is there a way to salt the user pages of his sockpuppets? The guy just won't give up. Pharmboy (talk) 13:12, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll give the situation an other look. Happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 18:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Suspected TyrusThomas4lyf sock-puppetry

I believe that Hypebuster (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is a sock-puppet for banned user TyrusThomas4lyf. For example, note the common selection of articles in the edit history and the following diffs [10], [11], [12], [13]. I'm not sure of a good forum to post this to, so I hope you don't mind my bringing it up here on your discussion page. Thanks, and happy holidays! -- Myasuda (talk) 18:48, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll give this a look too, perhaps a request for checkuser would be in order. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 18:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Happy

- New Year Steve! I hope you're drunk right now (Or if you don't drink I at least hope that you're high on the effects of some non-alcoholic drink)! Have a great one! :-) Scarian^{Call me Pat} 01:34, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh how I wish! I'm sick, so no drink for me... Though a spot of rum in my tea might not be a bad idea.  ;) Have a wonderful New Year! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 07:25, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Happy new years! Tiptoety ^talk 08:28, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

You too Tip, have fun whacking the vandals in 2008! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 12:06, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

My userpage

NF24^{(radio me!)} 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.

Thanks for cleaning up that mess on my page. Oh yes, and thanks for blocking them (User:Crikey9) as well. NF24^{(radio me!)} 13:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Anytime, happy editing, and a wonderful New Year to you. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 13:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Just a friendly hello......or wait......

Tiptoety talk has given you the finger! Giving the finger promotes WikiHate and hopefully this one has made your day worse. Spread the WikiHate by giving the finger to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Tiptoety talk 21:31, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Tiptoety ^talk 21:31, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

The "Falsifier"

Good Day eh! Rather then post to Alf I thought I'd come directly to you. The Falsifier is back as 70.138.106.139 (talk · contribs). Very busy too. 156.34.239.197 (talk) 10:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

MAN! you're fast!!! Cheers! 156.34.239.197 (talk) 10:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Heh, thanks and well spotted Mr Anon. Always appreciated. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 10:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Mark753... what does it take to get a range ban on him. His trolling and page vandalism is non stop and he obviously has no intentions of playing by the rules. 156.34.221.33 (talk) 19:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I was discussing that very issue earlier this morning with an other admin, we are concerned about collateral damage, and that would result in a victory for him.... But at this point, I'm going to consider it even more than before. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 19:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Appears to be a dynamic IP assigned by Bell Aliant to the St. John's, Newfoundland area, and rangeblocks on 142.162.128.0/18 and 142.162.192.0/20 would shut him up, at least for a few hours at a time. There's probably a lot of people using that network ... I usually don't block that type for long. Trolls like that are just shoveling sand against the tide anyway; the tide wins.  :) Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 19:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I've got a 142.162.0.0/20 ready to go, but my hand doesn't seem willing to click the button. Oh the joy I'd get though! :P We'll see if he continues. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 19:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Being a staunch IP I know all about the potential "suck" of a range ban. I personally have never noticed any edits coming from that range other than him (I keep it on my radar).. but I only have music related articles in my watchlist did I say watchlist?... anons can't have a watchlist.. hmmm? Anyways... who knows???... perhaps that IP range is responsible for many valid edits to articles relating to puppies and duckies and bunnies??? I wouldn't know? oh who am I kidding... I watch those pages like a hawk :D 156.34.221.33 (talk) 19:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

PS I am sorry to see that our troll is a Canadian... an Atlantic Canadian at that. I would expect that sort of foolishness from an pea-brained Upper Canadian or some inbred Albertan. Our "sub-bridge-dweller" is a Newfie. I am a Maritimer. We share the Atlantic Coast with the Newfs... but we keep them stuffed over on the other side of the Gulf of St. Lawrence... just to be on the safe side. :D . Corner Brook is a nice little town. Too bad they have d*cks like Mark living there :D. Block 'em. 156.34.221.33 (talk) 19:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh Libs, I thank you ten fold for being awesome. An other admin told me he was just about to block you because you left a message with the heading "The Falsifier"... I get hit by trolls and vandals more than most and it was a fair minded assumption. Thankfully he's one of those level headed admins and he read the message, he found out you were the real deal, and I told him "Man I love that Canadian." He wants to make you an honorary member of the U.S. but I told em, "Libs is proud to be from hockey central", and that "it wouldn't go down very well." Anyhow one bad apple doesn't spoil the bunch, I mean just have a look at New York City! :P KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 19:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually if he continues I'll just talk to the technies at his ISP. Since I don't care who the person actually is, it shouldn't be a big deal. I'll just let them know that they have a choice of either putting a leash on this guy; or, alternatively, all of their customers lose access to edit wikipedia. Most of them are pretty rational at that point. --slakr^\ talk / 19:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Anyhow one bad apple doesn't spoil the bunch, I mean just have a look at New York City! :P – Well, that's because it's The Big Apple, so it simply takes longer to spoil it. I've always wondered what that smell was coming off the harbor.... :P --slakr^\ talk / 20:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

"Falsifier" is my own nickname for that individual. He's is very similar to the Toytown Vandal and, at times, edits some of TT's usual haunts. But this one has a thing for Kiss, Guns n Roses and Van Halen related articles... which is very different from TT. 156.34.221.33 (talk) 20:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

As an additional note KoS, 142.X had a sly dig at you and I gave him a warning for it. Just thought I'd let ya know you big softey ;-) [I've always wanted to call someone a "big softey"...] Scarian^{Call me Pat} 15:01, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

doesn't surprise me, he continues to claim I haven't answered his queries when I have, I'll not explain myself multiple times. He says I've "won" and that he's not going to do this anymore. We shall see. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 15:06, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

DUDE

dude, if you see his messages, you would know what happened. NOT JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS. not trying to be harsh or anything, just be a little bit more mature next time. 68.50.109.84 (talk) 22:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Huh. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 22:13, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Do you reckon it's still possible to be drunk 2 days after New Year's Eve? :-D Scarian^{Call me Pat} 23:27, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Mayhap... if you never stopped drinking... Look for red and half eaten noses. Usually a dead give-away. Anyhow, hope your New Year is a good one.KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 15:06, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I was referring to the guy above in the section... that seemed like a rather strange comment. Never mind! Scarian^{Call me Pat} 15:15, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Season Greetings

Dear KnowledgeOfSelf, on behalf of my snow-buried Canadian region of Ottawa, I would like to wish you a Safe and Happy New Year 2008.
JForget 02:33, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanky, Happy New Year to you as well! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 15:06, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Wouldn't you know it???

Yo, Steve! In order for me to be active at Veropedia, I must therefore be active here. I gotta resist the urge to do NPP, though. Out of here for now; thanks for the backup on that nonsense article just now! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)