User talk:Valoem/Archive1

Playstation 2 top-selling game

It specifically says not to change the top-selling game without discussing it on the talk page. The talk page has a section abotu this, which concluded that Grand Theft Auto: Vice City actually sold quite a bit more than Gran Turismo 3. Please don't change it unless you have citations. Ace of Sevens 03:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update. So long as you had a source, no problem. That just keeps getting changed every few days, apparently by people who are just giving their best guess as to the top-selling game, so it's good to have something solid. Ace of Sevens 02:47, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Making a Raw Signature

Good questions. I actually wondered about this for a couple of months when I first came here. You need to go into the "my preferences" menu and select "raw signature". The space above is open for your sig code, using standard wiki markup (that might be, by the way, why your sig says creating is harder than deleting. Anyway, here's my sig:

[[User:Alphachimp|'''Alphachimp''']] [[User talk:Alphachimp|'''talk''']]

If you want to have the same sig (I copied it from others, btw), you can just copy that, changing it to:

[[User:Valoem|'''Valoem''']] [[User talk:Alphachimp|'''talk''']]

I actually followed a tutorial on how to do this. You can find it here. A great list of colors is here. I hope that helps. Feel free to get back to me with any further questions. Alphachimp ^talk 06:22, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. You would want:

[[User:Valoem|'''Valoem''']] [[User talk:Valoem|'''talk''']] Alphachimp ^talk 06:23, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All you have to do is type ~~~~ it'll put in the sig (if you copied it into the sig line and selected raw sig) and the time and date stamp. Now you should change the color scheme =D Alphachimp ^talk 06:34, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: I have some very important questions

Hey, I noticed that you were apart of the Esperanza community which I am very interested in join. I have an idea of creating an official Wikipedia Forum hosted by wikipedia (not the current Nabble forum which is the closest to a wikipedia forum I could find. I was hoping to suggest this at the next wikipedia convention. Unfortunately, I do not know where or when this convention is. Is it in MA sometime during August? Could you please give me some info as to when this convention is being held? I would greatly appreciate it if you send me a message on Aol Instant Messenger my screen name is "Krrzazn". If you don't have AIM, could you PM me? Thanks a lot :) Valoem ^talk 06:53, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! The link to Wikimania 2006 should be virtually included on the top right-hand side of most pages on this Wiki. I don't use AOL Instant Messenger or a PM system, preferring to keep messages on Talk pages instead. Regards, (aeropagitica) (talk) 09:41, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Valoem,

Hi. You're the only one I know how to reach of the list of deleters. I don't understand-I thought wikipedia was a way for people to share information with each other. If I'm doing something wrong, I apologize. I do love Lichido and I do want people to know about it (my friend is their marketing director and I'm helping her get the word out). The recipes I wrote are on their website and being used all over New York in many high-end restaurants and bars. I am not stealing anyone's information. Why is Galliano or Kahlua more appropriate than Lichido? They are just examples of coffee liqueurs and herbal liqueurs, just as Lichido is an example of a lychee liqueur. Who decides how well-known a product is? And how do you expect a product to become well-known if nobody lets us mention it?

And as for Red Lotus, the original recipe is found here: http://www.lycheesonline.com/recipedetail.cfm?rid=112 Both Soho and Lichido took the liberty of using their product for a well-known cocktail recipe including Lychee, Vodka, and Cranberry Juice.

Please tell me how to proceed, as I don't really know the rules of Wikipedia.

Thank you.

Courtney ilovelichido@yahoo.com—Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

Hi Valoem.

Thank you so much for writing back to me. I sincerely feel Wikipedia is picking on me unfairly. Yes, I do happen to love Lichido (thus my name).I do not work for the company or have anything whatsoever to gain from "advertising" Lichido (I have a friend who does their graphics). Nobody asked me to do it. I am just trying to help spread the word about it. How does Lichido not belong in Wikipedia? Have you seen the "list of liqueurs"? Who judges which product is noteworthy and which isn't? I thought Wikipedia was for sharing public information...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_liqueurs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hpnotiq (are you kidding me? It's the same ad, different name)

The public does deserve to know about it, and it does belong on your own legitimate list, with a hunderd other alcoholic products. You seem to be the only person that's looking at this fairly and not being a big hypocrite, so I appeal to you to let at least the Lichido page stay as is. It's got nothing but the facts.

Thank you!!

Courtney Lichidogirl

Nemu64

Hi, in regards to the edits to the Nemu64 article, I removed the information because all of the claims made were unsourced. I understand that I probably should have left an summary explaining this, but because the claims are from an unknown source I am justified in removing them as per the WP:VERIFY policy (unless you can find a source for them). I have tagged some parts of the article that need citations instead of just removing them for the time being, but I will remove the claims in question if still no sources are cited after a while.--58.169.5.53 13:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Hillary1.jpg)

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Hillary1.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 17:45, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sergio Leone Article

Hello,

Very nice work on the Sergio Leone Article.

Also: I agree with what you say on your User Page.

Be healthy,

Michael David 21:37, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection

I wanted to inform you that the use of protection tags on pages doesn't protect the page, it is only used to inform users of any page protection. If you want Uwe Boll to be protected, you can make a request at WP:RFPP. --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 19:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like to protect the page, I am relatively unfamiliar with the process. Valoem ^talk 19:21, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Only administrators can protect and unprotect pages, and I'm not one of them, sorry. You're going to have to go through WP:RFPP, or ask an admin if you know one. --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 19:22, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Notability

I nominated this for RfD because it is a redirect from the main namespace into the Wikipedia namespace. Read Wikipedia:Avoid self-references for reasons why this is inappropriate. Wikipedia doesn't have an article titled "notability," probably because it's more of a dictionary definition. Happy editing! --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 23:53, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help us save the smash boards article! Mathiastck 17:15, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Coffee's for closers

Not a problem. It was just a bit long to be considered "fair use". You seem to have fixed it well. You might visit WP:FAIR for a good explanation of "fair use". Dipics 14:25, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Ken isai.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ken isai.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 02:06, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Guiliani infobox

It's because I have all my userboxes in a floating table, which requirs you to subst them out first, and then tinker with the code. If it weren't four in the morning, I'd patch it into your page myself. Let's see how I feel in the morning. ;) Danny Lilithborne 10:42, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I added it for you. :) Danny Lilithborne 21:26, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciated your feedback.

You're obviously a serious contributor and I was pleased to see your feedback. Great user page—liked your philosophy. I'll look for your work on WIkipedia! Skål - Williamborg (Bill) 03:59, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grease Trucks (Second nomination)

It's no consensus because I don't count votes: I weigh arguments. The delete votes were also quite valid. In any case, the article is kept, so don't worry about it. --Deathphoenix ʕ 00:45, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You know what? It's not worth it to argue with you. I still think it's no consensus, but if such nit-pickery will make you happy, I'll make it a Keep. It's simply not worth my time to argue with you (and I didn't even read what you wrote). --Deathphoenix ʕ 12:36, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it's just that people often try to change a no consensus result into a keep result (believe me, I get more requests that you'd think!). I stopped closing contentious AfDs a little while back due to stress and just recently came back. I don't understand why people are so adamant about it when the end result is the same: the article is kept. --Deathphoenix ʕ 18:09, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's a fair reason, I suppose. No consensus AfDs can get renominated very quickly, while with keep AfDs, people should wait a few months before renominating. --Deathphoenix ʕ 20:27, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crips Page

Hey, it's cool about the edit comment. My contention that he wasn't a co-founder is based on direct quotes from people who knew both Washington and Williams at the time of the founding, as well as LAPD Detective Wayne Caffey, and Wes McBride, president of the California Gang Investigaors Association. Sourced in this article from the LA Weekly [1]. My problem is that, aside from this article, there is no compelling evidence ANYWHERE (i.e. from people who knew the two of them, the detectives, any knowledgable california gang historian) who will attest that Williams was a "co-founder" of the gang. Certainly he began his own off-shoot of the gang, just as thousands of other people have done since around the early 70's. Are these men ALSO co-founders of the gang? McBride, on the night of Tookie's execution was on the Rita Cosby show talking about how the whole bit about Tookie "co-founding" the gang was concocted only after he began writing childrens books, and speaking out against gang violence in order to make his supposed redemption seem more noble, in order to gain a stay of execution or a commuting of the sentence. Additionally, the article you provide does not cite a source for the co-founder claim. Certainly the article I have provided, with quotes from people who knew Washington and Tookie, as well as people who could be called experts in California gang history, should be given more credence than a writer who does not cite a source. In the end though, I'm not too concerned with what the page says, and didn't find your edit comment offensive in the least. I appreciate you sending a message as to your true intent though. Batman2005 01:08, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But like I said, your article doesn't cite a reputable source for the claim that he is a co-founder. Mine clearly demonstrates that he is not a co-founder. Viewed as a co-founder and BEING the co-founder are entirely different. He's SEEN as the co-founder, but in reality, accoreding to the detective who worked on the case and probably the most knowledgeable person about california gangs right now (McBride) he was NOT the co-founder. Perception and reality are quite different. I'm not disputing that people perceive/think he (Williams) co-founded the gang. I just choose to operate on the principle that the media sensationalizes and I go for verifiable fact, from reputable experts, in new stories that list citations or names to back up their claims. CNN has never done that in regards to Williams role as a co-founder, LA Weekly went so far as to try to verify if he was indeed a co-founder, and found that, despite popular opinion, he was not. Batman2005 01:56, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, like I said, i'm ok with it, to be honest it's not going to eat up a lot of my day and i'm certainly not losing sleep over it. Batman2005 21:38, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

JDoorjam

I applaud your efforts in recalling JDoorjam administrative abilities. I went through their deletion log and I was surprised how long it is. I think all day long she just searches Wikipedia for adult film starts to delete. Seems like some sort of silly puritanical crusade. How can I help stop their deleting rampage and abuse of power?

JDoorjam

You can search by these two links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=JDoorjam&page=

or

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page

JDoorjam is a very busy person deleting the bio I like to read. How can we Stop the maddness?

Email me a list of contested speedy deletions and I'll take a look later tonight. Take care, Can't sleep, clown will eat me 22:01, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Misspelled redirect

I noticed your question regarding Templete:Retirement, so I deleted it. :) Happy editing! --Merovingian ※ Talk 06:21, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! --Merovingian ※ Talk 06:35, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

False license

You uploaded Image:Haylie Duff.jpg and claimed this image was licensed as cc-by-2.5. This is not the case. It is licensed as cc-by-nc-nd-2.0, prohibiting commercial use. This makes the image unsuitable for use on the Wikipedia and as a result, it has been speedily deleted. Please be more careful when choosing licenses in the future. They are admittedly hard to get right but we must have exact and accurate licenses. Thanks. --Yamla 15:28, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another example was Image:Tara reid.JPG. --Yamla 15:31, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"So if you could please inform me of how this would improper use it would be appreciated. Also is Wikipedia classified as commercial use?"

The actual licenses for those images prohibited commercial use. The license you used when you uploaded the image here made no mention of this. Wikipedia itself is not classed as commercial use but Wikipedia allows the entire contents to be redistributed by someone else for commercial use. As a result, Wikipedia does not allow images licensed only for non-commercial use, as was the case for those two images. --Yamla 18:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You said: "I still dont understand how these images are prohibited. I mean it doesnt say on the page and I did get these images off of Creative Commons. Isn't Creative Common free fair use images?"

The specific license attached to that image prohibited commercial use. That's fine, it's still a free image, but it's under a license Wikipedia has chosen not to use. The license was not the default Creative Commons license, it was not the one you selected when you uploaded the image. Essentially, the license imposes terms on the image which are unacceptable for the Wikipedia. --Yamla 20:26, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:N64psxusb.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:N64psxusb.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yamla 15:36, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SSBM Tournaments

As it stands now, there isn't a single citation in that paragraph. At least cite which magazine issue it came from. If it all came from one source, just add it to the last sentence from the paragraph. Hbdragon88 07:51, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Omphalotus_olearius02.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Omphalotus_olearius02.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:47, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:N64psxusb.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:N64psxusb.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Image copyright problem with Image:Jennifer Aniston.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jennifer Aniston.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}. If you have not already done so, please also include the source of the image. In many cases this will be the website where you found it.

Please specify the copyright information and source on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yamla 15:16, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have listed this image at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents because I believe Wikipedia is violating copyright on the image. That said, it is clear that you are acting in good faith and that you have good reason to believe this is not a copyvio. The problem really lies with the person who falsely chose that license on flickr, but I am concerned that Wikipedia is now guilty of contributionary copyright infringement. Anyway, please feel free to contribute your thoughts on the ANI if you do not believe I have accurately represented your point of view, or if you have more to add. --Yamla 16:54, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Crackwhore.

Wouldn't it be better to integrate a section on that term into the Crackhead article, as it's just another deragatory reference to drug users?

Just a thought. Then Crackwhore could be a redirect. Also the two terms are practically interchangable, at least in my POV.

Logical2u 01:01, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, whatever. I'm not saying I'm right (Heck, I'm not an admin, I'm a wiki-lurker). Just a point of view on my part. Logical2u 01:08, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Emmalina

That particular AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Notable YouTube memes hasn't been closed off yet, so any new consensus hasn't yet been finalised as yet. -- Longhair\^talk 20:21, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naughty Nati

The result of that AfD as per my reading was Keep. You may wish to raise this matter at Wikipedia:Deletion review. -- Longhair\^talk 09:42, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are Fair use rational and False image licensing considered warnings?

You asked: "Hi, I initailly posted the images of Tara Ried and Haylie Duff, if you remember, under good faith because I was unaware that not all images found on Creative Commons are acceptable for Wikipedia (which is where I found those images). I think we resolved these issues and has not happened again. However, are these considered warnings?"

Note that what is acceptable has recently changed, though it would not affect images legitimately licensed under the creative commons license. See WP:FUC. I can explain in more detail if you wish. Now, as to your question, these do count as warnings but the goal of warnings is to have you stop doing whatever actions are against policy. There's no scorecard kept, for example. People aren't permitted to blank current warnings from their page because until the matter is resolved, the warnings indicate what is going on. Anyway, I'm not sure exactly what you are asking. Are you wondering if you can blank the warnings? You certainly could archive the image warnings to an archive page (I can help you with this if you like). At this point, I think it would be reasonable to simply remove those warnings from your page, though I personally don't care for simply removing warnings. All of mine are archived, for example. Does this answer your questions? --Yamla 23:50, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You said: "I guess the most direct way to ask this is: Is this going to harm me in anyways if I try to run for adminship in the future?

and could you please archive them? Thanks a lot"

It may affect some people's vote. It would not affect mine and it would surprise me if it affected many. You are asked when running for admin whether you've had any conflicts and how you resolved them. In my opinion, this would be a good thing to bring up. You had a conflict, you worked hard to understand what was going on, where the problem was, and resolved the problem. You are obviously too new at the moment to get my vote (but you aren't running yet), but the conflict you and I had would not cause me to vote against you. Archiving the page just involves creating a new subpage (for example, at User talk:Valoem/Archive1) and copy the content in there. If you still want me to do it, let me know. I can't do it right now because I'm on my laptop and it makes it harder to type. --Yamla 00:04, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sophia Rossi

I have removed tag, sorry for incorrect tag. Y control 18:01, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism tag

I think it's a userbox. Maybe in category userboxes? Kaisershatner 19:22, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re : hey you mind if i copy your User:Mailer diablo/C

Sure, go ahead. :) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 00:20, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_October_26#Emmalina

Hey Valoem, I'd appreciate it if you'd check out my comment at the above. I had no idea this process was happening until I came across it by chance just now. Deizio talk 04:14, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Devil's Tree

I added a Geolinks template to the external links section so people can go right to it on all those pages ... Google Maps, Wikimapia, whatever. Hopefully that should solve the problem. Daniel Case 16:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First, there is no political entity known as Basking Ridge. It, like Martinsville, is purely a ZIP Code. Basking Ridge is generally coterminous with the portion of Bernards Township north of I-78. The southward finger, where Pingry School and the tree are, are within the Martinsville ZIP Code. Weird NJ has always identified the tree as being in Martinsville. Daniel Case 05:28, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tourist dining

Hi there, I've nominated Category:Tourist dining for cfd discussion. please feel free to join in the discussion. thanks 21:36, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Hallo Berlin

Hi there, I've nominated Hallo Berlin for afd discussion. please feel free to join in the discussion. thanks Bwithh

Flames

Yeah, his treatment of you on his talk page was somewhat patronizing and inappropriate, along the lines of personal attacks. His vilifying you on the AfD page could be taken as bad faith, but I'd bet more that he is overlooking your attempts at politeness. If he's really giving up on this one, I wouldn't push the issue. --Merovingian ※ Talk 12:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: NYC food spots on AfD

Hey Valoem. Thanks for your comment on my talk page. Places like Joe's Shanghai and Hallo Berlin are so clearly notable, it was my honor to help. (BTW: Hallo Berlin is also one of my all time favorite places.) It vexes me to see so many editors on power trips trying to delete everything that is outside their very limited frame of reference. Anyhow, take care --Howrealisreal 18:46, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD/Stall

Purely going by consensus, Chicken and Rice will get tossed, while Hallo Berlin survives as no consensus. If I do decide to go by arguement to determine, then whether the concerns raised at AfD are addressed would be a important determing factor in making any decision. If I ever actually decide to do that, WP:V/WP:RS is usually the killer. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 10:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That will be up to the discretion of the closing admin. Yes, it may sound like roulette but the more reputable/reliable these sources are, the higher the chances. - Mailer Diablo 17:47, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, unfortunately it is original research if you act as a source for an article. But other references are generally fine (provided that they are reputable and unbiased). --Merovingian ※ Talk 00:47, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk?

No, no, it's okay! You can ask me anything you like. I usually just go back and forth to the computer throughout the day. Anyways, you can use my talk page or my internal e-mail link, whichever you prefer. I'm a bit futile when it comes to instant messaging. （ ´∀｀） I guess if MartinDK wants to be left alone, it's his thing. Regards. --Merovingian ※ Talk 09:29, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, okay. Best of luck, then, and happy editing! --Merovingian ※ Talk 10:19, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brookie note

CHAPS - enough please! Why not just try and ignore each other? as you seem to wind each other up. Fighting on my talk page is not the correct thing to do either. If you can't resolve things refer the matter to the Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee. Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! ^(Whisper...) 10:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The argument between me and MartinDK has been resolved, Thanks for your input Brookie, I'm sorry about a flame war occuring on your page I had no intention nor idea that this would happened. Anyways Best regards. Valoem ^talk 16:16, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

my article

I too agree that my article shouldn't have been deleted, but it's obvious there's a bunch of kids running this place, and they have nothing better to do than delete pages. What should i do?

P.S. - I'm new here, not sure what "don't blank page" means? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ebfilms (talk • contribs)