User talk:Orangemarlin/Amusing Vandalism

you

you da fag cuz u b h8in on jack jack Hammertime123 23:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I've referred this user to AN/V for blocking already, so you don't need to bother. -FisherQueen (Talk) 23:38, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I thought he was blocked before. I've reverted a bunch of his vandalism over the past week. I think I'm passed good faith. Orangemarlin 23:39, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

A Troll

Are you now threatening me because I don't agree with you? Good to know you don't have any interest in science or reason, beyond your personal dogmas. What are you going to do next, come to my house? Don't get "e-tough" if you don't have anything to contribute, just shut up. This is really upsetting, none of you evolution fanatics have any interest in facts. --Fm.illuminatus 17:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Threatening? No. But you are in violation of WP:3RR. I'd suggest you read WP:CIVIL too. Orangemarlin 17:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, this guy is bad. I'm wondering if he's a sockpuppet of one of our favorites. Orangemarlin 17:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Orangemarlin is an imposter

Orangemarlin is a sockpuppet of a Wikipedia administrator who pretends to know much more than he actually knows. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.108.92.189 (talk) 23:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC).

This is true, because anonymous editors always know the truth!!! So, now that I've been outed, I can breathe. It's so wonderful to not have to hide my true identity any more. Orangemarlin 23:56, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Which administrator? We have a right to know!! Tvoz |talk 07:06, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

You know, I just hate taking away from the glory of the anonymous editor. Anonymous will be announcing it on their user page tomorrow. It'll shock all of you!!!! For now, I'm going to sockpuppet away on several articles. Of course, maybe anonymous is a sockpuppet too. Hmmmmmmmm. Orangemarlin 07:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Fuck you asshole!

Go fuck yourself! Dirty fuckin' asshole! Fuckin' scum!--The Warhammer 23:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Warhammer, your vocabulary appears a bit limited for an alleged editor; perhaps I could recommend a good thesaurus for you? Doc Tropics 00:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I believe he repeated the word fuck three times. I might suggest that his vocabulary is limited. Orangemarlin 00:04, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Scum!--The Warhammer 00:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

You're repeating yourself. I might suggest something along the lines of, "you are the detritus of mankind, marginally evolved from single-celled bacteria." It uses words that indicate a higher education, it states the point clearly, it's very insulting, and incorporates knowledge that is of interest to me. Orangemarlin 00:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

SEE? Now that's a proper insult! Doc Tropics 00:16, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Fuck you scum!--The Warhammer 00:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Just what are they teaching kids today. A good sarcastic, but well written, insult can do wonders. It's kind of sad really. Orangemarlin 00:18, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Obviously the product of a public school education...you can always tell. Doc Tropics 00:20, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I went to a public school!!!! Orangemarlin 00:22, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but you graduated...that makes all the difference. Doc Tropics 00:25, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

True, and I am certain that Mr. Warhammer hasn't graduated from his parent's trailer. Orangemarlin 00:27, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

LMAO! You win this round : ) Doc Tropics 00:30, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

He's been blocked. Now what am I going to do for fun? Orangemarlin 00:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Aw dang, this was a great change of pace from RC Patrol. And I was so looking foreward to his next variation on "fuck" :( Doc Tropics 00:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I've got to admit I have many many many more variations of fuck than the two he used. I mean at least try some creativity there!!!! Orangemarlin 00:36, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Warning. You're dealing with a liar, a jerk and an imposter.

Warning. If you deal with Orangemarlin and his aliases, you're dealing with a liar, a jerk and an imposter.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.108.92.189 (talk) 02:42, May 20, 2007

evolutionist

"An evolutionist is a proponent of such a theory."

This is what the wiki article on evolutionism says the definition is. I think a person can a proponent of something by logic and not faith. ProtoCat 15:53, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Several problems. That article is POV POS. Yes you can be a proponent by logic, and in fact, I demand that (perfect reason to despise politicians even more). But "Evolutionist" is described, even that article, as a religion. And the Oxford English Dictionary, which is the best dictionary every on the English Language, states that: Nope, it's not. It is not a term that I would ascribe to any person who upholds the doctrine of evolution; an adherent of evolutionism. Adherent? Doctrine? Those are religious terms. Orangemarlin 16:30, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

So a physicist upholds the doctrine of physics. Captialist, Biologist? etc? You really think that calling someone who is a proponent of evolution an evolutionist is a slur? Then why isn't the term creationist a slur? ProtoCat 12:10, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't write the fucking freaking definitions, the body of English literature and linguistics does. The "ist" does not imply faith, just the whole word. A creationist is not a slur, because it is defined as a religious description for how everything got here. You can call me anything you damn well please. You can call me an Evolutionist all day long if that's what floats your mythical ark. I'm just telling you that I don't take Evolution on faith, it's a science, so it's one of those Creationist ploys to try to make Evolution out to be a faith-based religion too, when it isn't even close. Might I suggest several very good dictionaries before you come here making an illogical statement like Evolutionist=Physicist=Capitalist=Creationist. Orangemarlin 12:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

You are being uncivil according to the wiki guidelines. Please apologize. ProtoCat 15:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

What was uncivil about the above? I didn't call you names? I didn't tell you to take a flying leap into a lake? I even told you that you could call me names (an evolutionist) if that made you happy, even if it is highly inaccurate and pejorative. I even took you on good faith that you really believe in naming people "Evolutionist" because you believe that Evolution is a religion. However, your definitions were woefully wrong, and I asked that you read a good dictionary before you make a logical leap that was incorrect. If that was uncivil, then yes, I do apologize. But I do suggest if you're going to slur against me, that is "Evolutionist", and even compare it to Capitalist and Physicist, you should probably get your facts in order first. Orangemarlin 16:02, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

"I don't write the fucking definitions" you said that didn't you. Please review the wiki rules on 'civil" You sound unstable. ProtoCat 16:10, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

That was not uncivil. But if that offended you, I'll delete it. Orangemarlin 16:24, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Read the rules under civil. it was de jure and de facto uncivil. and immature. you are a doctor? a scientist? I am sorry I do not believe you. You sound like a high school kid. ProtoCat 17:44, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Wendyow

This one needs close watching. Doc Tropics 22:55, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

• No longer an issue. I reported this to WP:AIV and the culprit was promptly blocked - indefinitely. I feel bad now that my first Edit Summary made light of the situation. Once I tracked the editor's contribs and realized what we were dealing with, I just kinda went ballistic. I deleted-without-saving about a dozen posts to her(?) talkpage...I found myself resorting to the kind of language that we were so recently mocking as unimaginative. Fortunately, I realized that her behaviour represented a blockable offense, whereas I hadn't crossed that line yet myself. With luck she is gone for good; I might suggest though, that we keep an eye out for similar editing under a new name...this kind of scum rarely gives up so easily. Doc Tropics 23:46, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Wow, this person went ballistic over a reversion of a spam link? I watch Nazi-based articles for, well, you can imagine. I missed a lot of fun today while I was in meetings apparently. Thanks for watching my 6 Doc. Orangemarlin 01:00, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

My pleasure OM. I've now watchlisted the article that touched this off; I'll add others as I notice them (or any that you think need extra eyes). I'm mostly focused on science articles (and certain religous articles that I actually protect from vandalism) but I hadn't really considered the presence of Nazi articles and the kind of activity they might generate. Sometimes I wonder how the hell we made it out of the Dark Ages, or even if we have. (sigh) Doc Tropics 01:15, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't get me started. You have no clue how sick it makes me when I look at that SS-Waffen article. Go read the discussion page, where these individuals whine about how their fathers were treated after WWII. Much of my family died in places like Dachau, Sobibor, and Auswitcz, so my sympathy is in extreme abeyance. On the other hand, I'm enjoying the row over at the Dinosaur article on the religion section. It is a lot more sane and civil than the ones at Intelligent design. Orangemarlin 01:20, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I can hardly imagine what it's like for you at the personal level, and you have my deepest sympathies. While I'm thoroughly non-religious, the existence of Nazis seems to be a strong argument for the existence of the devil. But yes, the Dino/Religion debate is rather amusing, though somewhat lopsided. While the "opposing" editor is both civil and rational, I'm afraid he's totally outclassed : ) Doc Tropics 01:44, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

It's pretty funny to read about a couple of Gestapo talking badly about Nazi's. Does it ever dawn on you that you are the reason some people hate Jews? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.108.92.189 (talk • contribs).

Looks like it's back. I knew the block wouldn't work for long, but I'll track it's edits and start working on the next block. Doc Tropics 02:27, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

People hate Jews? I'm thoroughly shocked. Orangemarlin 06:37, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

No, people hate you. They think they hate Jews, but they actually hate you. I don't hate you. I pity you and the Jews who are the victim of your intolerant arrogant overbearing attitude. Your actions elicit a reaction in others who wrongly think you are representative of Jews. That's sad.

My question is why do you pretend to be something you are not on your user page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.207.219 (talk) 05:57, May 19, 2007

Once again, the lack of quality insults by anonymous editors is amazing. It's a waste of a Kindergarten education. Orangemarlin 14:57, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I dunno OM...it used words of more than two syllables, and most were even spelled correctly. This one probably qualifies as an intellectual giant among its kind. Possibly it is even brighter than a Flatworm. I wouldn't actually bet on it though, the comparison might be offensive to worms. Doc Tropics 16:00, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Ad hominem attacks are your trademark. Stick to name calling. It's quite amusing because no matter how long you keep up the charade, you can't fool yourself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.207.219 (talk)

OMG. Anonymous used a Latin word. Let's celebrate. LOL. Orangemarlin 16:23, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Why don't you just admit you're an imposter? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.207.219 (talk)

OM, I've reported this to the same Admin who blocked the editor yesterday (before she began hiding behind an IP), and I'm hoping that he'll have some solution, possibly blocking the IP address itself. Have I done enough yet to be initiated into the great global Jewish cabal, or is there another test to pass? If it makes a difference, I'm already circumcised, and I'd be willing to keep kosher...Doc Tropics 17:20, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Holy cow, you guys are having all the fun! Darn, I guess I missed some of it, but there probably will be more. This is a little similar to the trouble I ran into at Black people with assorted black supremacists, pan-Africans, white supremacists, Neo-Nazis, falangists, Neo-fascists, Black Muslims, Arab Africans, African American radicals etc. And part of the reason I gave up on Black people.--Filll 17:38, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I've blocked the IP for one week; this was the user's third chance, after having been previously blocked from editing. I see no need to coddle people who continue to disturb the encyclopedia with personal attacks. Also, please don't engage this IP or others with exchanges of insults. It just baits them and encourages them to continue. Firsfron of Ronchester 19:57, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Firs, your intervention is much appreciated. Also, you're right...I was feeding the troll, and I should know better. This one just really pushed my buttons : ) Doc Tropics 20:02, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Isn't the expression "Feed a troll, starve a beaver"? ;) Firsfron of Ronchester 20:08, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

So much to answer. First, thanks Firs for the help. One week just doesn't seem like enough. Don't we have executions at dawn any more? I'm disappointed at the liberal nature of Wikipedia. A good execution just does so much. Doc, again, thanks for watching my 6. However, circumcision and kosher is not enough. You have to attend three Bar mitzvahs in the next month. But none of that Reform stuff, it has to be Orthodox. We might consider your application at that time. Filll. WTF have you been? Fighting Creationists is just not fun without you. In fact Doc Tropics and Fins showed up on my talk page over from Dinosaur, which is sort of under attack by one of those "we must be NPOV and therefore half the article should describe how Dinosaurs were on the Ark" editors.  :) Orangemarlin 21:32, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I want to grow up to be Firsfron. How many of us wanted to be paleontologists when we were kids. Anyways, I appreciate your answer. I thought that the Alvarez first studied the K-T boundary (and found evidence of a meteor) in Italy? And good point on the birds, except, I was thinking maybe a T. Rex walking down the street. Orangemarlin 00:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, man. Now I feel like a total paleontologist poseur. Like you, I wanted to be a paleontologist when I grew up: I remember being 4-5 years old; my cousin had given me all his hundreds of old plastic dinosaur models, and I'd spend hours aligning them in neat, even rows like at the Field Museum in Chicago (actually, my rows were more organized: the Saurischians couldn't be next to the Ornithischians, etc). I had all sorts of dinosaur books, at a time when dinosaurs were still usually depicted in books as having green or gray skin. I was sure I'd become a paleontologist, but it never happened. Finances precluded the idea, and, although I spent years and years in college, my degree is not in Paleontology.

I did visit the excavation sites of several mammoths when they were being dug up, and also the excavation of Sonorasaurus in the late 1990s. In the late 90s/early 2000s, I did some biology-related work on Rana subaquavocalis, the Ramsey Canyon Leopard Frog [1] counting frogs and reporting data regularly. Frogs and other amphibians face a very real extinction event today, and may well become the "dinosaurs" of the immediate future.

WikiProject Dinosaurs had very few dinosaur articles, and so I have helped out where I could, expanding or improving several articles. I'm a member of the NCSE, and I believe Wikipedia's coverage of dinosaurs needs to reflect a scientific point of view, since the articles are about dinosaurs, not mythological dragons, unicorns, and other fanciful creatures. The project does have several professional paleontologists, and working with them, as well as the rest of the team, has been a real pleasure.

Regarding your question: As far as I know, the discovery of the K-T iridium layer was made in Italy.[2] As far as blocking the IP, s/he can be blocked further if s/he continues disruption. I wouldn't have blocked for that long, but this wasn't its first or even second block. Firsfron of Ronchester 02:47, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

And of course, the K-T boundary in Italy (and most other places) occurs in marine sediments, ruling out any analysis of dinosaur diversity there.  ; ) Sheep81 06:08, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with a Jewish cabal or anti-semitism. It has to do with Orangemarlin being a jerk, an imposter and a sockpuppet.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.108.92.189 (talk) 02:38, May 20, 2007

IP blocked, per your request. You really let this go on for a full week? Firsfron of Ronchester 16:02, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Not really, but I've been vandalized by various registered and anonymous editors for the past week or so. It's getting frustrating. Orangemarlin 16:31, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi

See what I mean leaving comments like that, you get the picture. Its a matter of opinion and I express my mine. Proper English, don't be such a dork at least you understood what I meant you dork--McNoddy 13:56, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

So is it alright to do so on someone elses page and leave sly remarks With regards to your comments on User:ferrylodge: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.--McNoddy 14:43, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

This is just funny... Correcting a person's english when their original phrasing forces you to read it two or three times: Rude.

Telling them to "bugger off", and repeatedly calling them a dork: Apparently courteous and polite. Bladestorm 15:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

If I make a personal attack, I'll try to do with perfect spelling. I'd hate to make you read it two or three times. LOL. Kids tend to not understand the subtleties of not making personal attacks. Well, this tirade from McNoddy will go into my archives of poorly written personal attacks. Orangemarlin 02:08, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Talk page comments

I ask that you also stay off my talk page. Thank you! 76.166.123.129 18:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

So again, I will ask that you stay off my talk page. I have filed my report with the ICC. 76.166.123.129 18:45, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

LMAO. Orangemarlin 18:54, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

football

As a Canadian, I can appreciate your desire to have a few bucks injected in to the Kings. But to suggest that "A few Europeans, Latin Americans, and kids who are forced to play soccer because their parents can't put them in a real sport like Baseball or Hockey" care about football is naive and ethnocentric in the extreme.

Football is the most popular sport in the world. Period.

It is true that it is not that popular in English North America, but elsewhere it is The Sport. If you don't enjoy the sport, then that is fine. But, to be factually wrong is just plain silly.

Could I ask, what is it about football that makes it not a real sport? For example, I could understand if you referred to bowling, curling, darts, or auto racing as "not a real sport", but football. C'mon! Silliness!

205.200.224.254 23:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)Dave

Soccer is not a real sport. Get rid of diving, up the scoring, get rid of the goons, and I'd still not be interested. Ice hockey is a real sport played by real men. Baseball is a real sport. And I don't care if it's the most popular thing around, it's my opinion. Orangemarlin 23:45, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Flood Geology

The information I posted in Flood Geology is correct. I suggest that you check the cited papers and books for yourself. The current Flood Geology entry is entirely one sided and while I do agree that YEC is nonsense, that fact does not preclude the recent occurrence of non YEC type flood. The entry should include information on other flood theories that have nothing to do with YEC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.252.154.88 (talk) 17:45, June 7, 2007

It's unsourced and POV. Orangemarlin 01:52, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Plus, it doesn't support his narrow secular progressive POV. Anything which doesn't support Orangemarlin's ACLU agenda will be deleted and purged from Wikipedia.--— Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.196.232.174 (talk • contribs) 11:08, 8 June 2007

I dispute this assertion completely. I have seen OM diligently support creationists and others that he disagrees with to create NPOV articles. If he does anything, it is that he argues for verifiable and evidence-driven science. If someone claims that is POV, then that person is living in a fantasy world.--Filll 11:19, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

ACLU agenda? That's a good one. If you mean by that, I believe in Free Speech, I want religious stuff out of our schools, and I accept Evolution as a fact, because it has been subjected to rigorous scientific analysis, because of the substantial proof, and because a lot of people smarter than I have studied and accepted it, then yes I am following the ACLU agenda. If you're going to insult me, well, you can't. Orangemarlin 20:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Let me know when these IP editors become too unruly, OM: the types of articles that you're cleaning up tend to have a trollish element to them. We can semi-protect your talk page when you get tired of dealing with anonymous insults. Just ping my talk page. Firsfron of Ronchester 21:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, you're a nice admin. There's a certain Mean Mexican Rat-Dog Admin who won't share her steak with me. And she probably would allow every anon vandal to hit my page. Thanks  :) Orangemarlin 22:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I semi-protected the Flood geology page, as requested. There's some strangeness going on over there with cited sources not backing up the claims of the text, and this could use some sorting out. I'm not clear on whether you do or do not want the semi-prot on your talk page. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:12, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate the offer for my talk page, but I can handle it. If it gets bad, I'll drop you a line. Thanks for fixing Flood geology for me. You do realize, these guys are trying to make a claim that because soft tissues were found on some T. rex fossils, that it means that T. rex was buried in a flood about 6000 years ago. I told you that there were Post-KT event dinosaurs. You just refused to believe. Orangemarlin 00:37, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Heh. Yeah, I guess I'll just have to convert to YEC now. Evolutionary theory is doomed! Firsfron of Ronchester 02:31, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

NPOV?!?

How and where did I violate NPOV?!? I think you have violated NOPV by posting your views of Creationism on Wikipedia. 76.183.213.20 08:01, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

If you don’t stop this, I will ask for you to be blocked. 76.183.213.20 08:16, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I am very sorry, but please have [some] respect. 76.183.213.20 09:06, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I wonder why you do not have a username. Hmm...--Filll 13:22, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I have not registered yet (I am still thinking about it). 76.183.213.20 20:04, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Let's try to solve this dispute. 76.183.213.20 20:18, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Please tell me, how and where did I violate NPOV? 76.183.213.20 21:41, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I thought so, I just wanted to let everyone know from which direction that commit was coming from. 76.183.213.20 23:13, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

This is a polite warning: I am requesting help from Wikipedia administrators to do something about your hate speech against Christians. 76.183.213.20 23:26, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Huh? This is silly. What hate speech? --Filll 23:58, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

…and violating NPOV on you User page and your Talk page. 76.183.213.20 01:01, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

There is a rule that an editor must maintain an NPOV User page and Talk page??--Filll 01:05, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Filll. It's right after the rule that aliens from Alpha Doofus designed Wikipedia, and they must always be obeyed. Muahhhhhhaaaaaahhhhhhaaaaaahhhhhhaaaaa. Orangemarlin 01:07, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Have you seen the venn diagram in The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster that shows the section of the population that believe in ID? Sophia 06:33, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

That Commit was outside of NPOV, and it didn’t make much sense either. Orangemarlin, rules are rules, sorry. 76.183.213.20 06:56, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

It might be nice if creationists and fundamentalists learned to spell and use grammar. However, that be a bit much to ask. I think it is one of the Commandments: "Though shalt spell like thou is a complete moron."--Filll 13:04, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I do not understand the point you are trying to make. The use of the word 'though' here does not make sense to me. Can you explain what your point is? FarFromCrowd 22:15, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for helping with a fine demonstration. Actually I do not have a point, but it is clear that you do. Just wear a hat.--Filll 23:43, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Apparently, FarFromCrowd has no sense of humor. I got it Filll, and nearly wet myself laughing. Orangemarlin 02:51, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

That's why Creationists and Fundies are so damn cranky. G_d is mad at them for their poor manners, bad grammar, and incompetent spelling. Once again the anonymous vandal, what rules? Orangemarlin 14:48, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I am retracting from my accusation of hate speech. I am dropping my accusation against Orangemarlin for hate speech and violating NPOV, however I am requesting that Orangemarlin please remove all offensive material from his/her User page and his/her Talk page. 76.183.213.20 01:00, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Like what?--Filll 01:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Offensive material? You mean how much the Ducks winning the Stanley Cup pisses me off? Orangemarlin 02:51, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

BTW anon vandal. Don't you even consider changing anything on my talk or user page. Orangemarlin 02:53, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Your User page says “I don't care about one's religion unless you try to force it upon me or my children” I would never do that; I believe that a person has that choice with his/her life. Just please do not insult me, Creationism, or Christianity. 76.183.213.20 06:50, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

…and I have never vandalized Wikipedia. 76.183.213.20 06:54, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Curious vandalism

Why did you remove my comments? It was a general response. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.244.52.244 (talk) 21:15, June 16, 2007

comments

Why did you remove my comments? It was a general response. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.244.52.244 (talk) 23:23, June 16, 2007

It also says in WP:CIVIL not to escalate an uncivil environment.. Wikipedia is not the place for discussing Evolution vs. Creation. 76.183.213.20 03:57, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Orangemarlin, please prove your accusation of vandalism against me and please stop reverting my edits because of vandalism when there is none, I am sorry, but I will be required to request assistance from an administrator if you do not stop. 76.183.213.20 07:16, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Orangemarlin, please prove your accusation of vandalism against me and please stop reverting my edits because of vandalism when there is none, I am sorry, but I will be required to request assistance from an administrator if you do not stop. 76.183.213.20 07:16, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not the place for discussing Evolution vs. Creation. 76.183.213.20 03:57, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Orangemarlin, please prove your accusation of vandalism against me and please stop reverting my edits because of vandalism when there is none, I am sorry, but I am requesting assistance from an administrator because you are not stopping. 76.183.213.20 00:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not the place for discussing Evolution vs. Creation. 76.183.213.20 03:57, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

comments

Me confused? No, go look at user Homestarmy's talk page, you removed my comments. why? it was a general response. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.244.52.244 (talk) 11:35, June 17, 2007

It also says in WP:CIVIL not to escalate an uncivil environment.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.183.213.20 (talk) 22:18, June 19, 2007

I apologize

Dear Orangemarlin,

I apologize for everything that has happened in the past, especially for my accusations in the past against you and the way I spoke against you. 76.183.213.20 04:04, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I apologize

I was formally known as IP address: “76.183.213.20”. I apologize for everything that has happened in the past, especially for my accusations in the past against you and the way I spoke against you.  Tcrow777  talk 08:49, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Leave my pages alone

I have every right to do what I want with them (as long as it's not disruptive). I've deleted my autologin information from Firefox, so I won't be logging in again. Why are you watching my pages anyway? [signed: the Wikian formerly known as Jinx McHue] 67.135.49.29 18:10, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Fatalis

I noticed you warned User:Fatalis. Please note that his edits were not vandalism, and that he was merely archiving the page (which was becoming quite significant in size). Perhaps he should have checked if there were any ongoing discussions, but please remember to assume good faith in future. Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 23:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

How about you assume good faith with me. There are very critical reasons why I think it was bad idea, the first of which, two days from now, a bunch of trolls/POV warriors/anonymous twits will come it and make all kinds of changes. And we won't be able to point them to discussion, because it's gone. So, if you spent two seconds to provide some good faith to an editor who's been creating articles, fighting these POV types for months, and looked over my extensive edits on a wide variety of articles, you'd think, "wait a minute, this guy has a point." It was vandalism. And as I said below, thanks for the lecture. Orangemarlin 23:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

When you were writing this, it was already fixed, and the page is 3 times smaller as a result. It was almost a third of a megabyte before. By the way, I'm very much from the same camp as you, so I don't understand why do you need to be so hostile. –Fatalis 00:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Good spinning there Mr. panty and penis obsessed. You deleted the whole damn thing. Several editors caught on to your behavior and fixed your vandalism. So don't dislocate your shoulder patting yourself on the back. Orangemarlin 00:21, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Nothing was deleted. Can't you wrap your head around the concept of "moving"? –Fatalis 08:57, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism warning

Please don't accuse others of edits that are obviously not vandalism. According to Wikipedia's official policy "vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia.". Also "any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism." Evil Monkey - Hello 23:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

It was vandalism, plain and simple. A POV warrior removed tons of discussion, some of which needs to be referred to keep the POV crap away. How about your providing me with good faith that I think the deletion was a very bad idea. Thanks for the lecture buddy. Orangemarlin 23:30, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Per WP:VANDAL ("any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism."), I'm afraid you're wrong. The user asked on the IRC channel #wikipedia about how to archive a talk page as this was now sitting at 280 kB. When he found out, he went ahead and did. Whether or not you agree with the edit, that one caveat means that you were incorrect. Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 23:37, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I apologize. I didn't know that the IRC channel was an appropriate way to discuss Wikipedia. Let me revert all my edits over the past few months, because I don't engage in discussions there. Now I know that the Talk pages are completely useless, and shouldn't be used for much. Thanks for the update.Orangemarlin 23:42, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Mate he didn't just cut and paste some some old expired threads into a new archive page, but moved the whole damn thing (ongoing discussions included), wiping out the history in the process. ornis 23:49, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Moving a page does not mean anything gets "wiped", it's just changing the location. –Fatalis 00:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually the history does get wiped (or rather moved over to the new location). It's generally not a good idea to archive pages this way, since it obscures the entire history. Who's going to know that they have to go to Archive 12 to find the history? Silly rabbit 00:03, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I'll keep that in mind next time, but it still doesn't make it vandalism. –Fatalis 00:10, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

It was. I stand by the accusation. If you were attempting what you claim you were

- generally incompetent and ineffectual; 'feckless attempts to repair the plumbing'; 'inept handling of the account' - not fit to assume responsibility , you would have left a message for on the discussion, and you would have selectively archived. Doesn't matter now, you are on everyone's list now. And your rude comments to me on your Talk page, that will make you a hero I'm sure. Orangemarlin 00:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I doubt it, since there are probably at least some people who understand the policies. You're also under a faulty impression that I'm a "POV warrior". And I think I've said quite little to you, considering the circumstances. Someone else might have said much stronger words, having had an unstable dolt lashing out on them. –Fatalis 08:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

There is something highly suspicious about the actions recently at the Creation Science talk page. No discussion before hand, no obvious reason to hide the history and recent discussion, just a mess created by an editor none of us was familiar with before. Hmm...--Filll 12:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I gave the obvious reason in the summary: 280 KiB. It was slow to load. I didn't discuss it because of WP:BOLD. I suppose you suspect Banno too, who did the same thing, also not asking for your permission, just with preserving the history at the same location. Or ornis, who pruned your warring with Octoplus. Two experienced editors agreed that this was not vandalism, and that you should follow WP:AGF, which is an official policy. I think I also said that anything relevant should be restored. Please lay off with any more unthinking accusations or tag-team tearing at me. –Fatalis 12:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

<undent>I am assuming GF, but it is still suspicious. And the discussions with Octoplus did reveal some interesting patterns which we might pursue. I never said it was vandalism. And I might ask you to AGF, before you get aggrieved and throw your weight around. I would have been pretty embarassed to go to an article I had never been on, and just slash and burn without any discussion as you did. But it does tell me something about you, in any case...--Filll 13:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, if you keep dishing it out, you should be prepared to take some. You are using the talk pages as a venue to bully creationist muppets. You're not following WP:DFTT, as was pointed out to you by someone else earlier. Now you're trying to denigrate a new editor, which is against WP:BITE. Yes, I admit making a mistake by following the wrong procedure in WP:ARCHIVE, but it wasn't breaking the rules, and much less warranting such a reaction. It was a good-spirited attempt to fix something. Now have a good day, I won't respond here anymore. –Fatalis 13:24, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

By the way, although calling it an article fits your rhetorical purposes, it was a talk page. –Fatalis 13:28, 4 July 2007 (UTC)