User talk:YellowMonkey/Archive151

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

Nangparbat[edit]

He's back again under this IP 86.158.238.107 (talk · contribs). Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 22:16, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dealt with YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 08:45, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 15:40, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

YM, can you provide a quick review of:

  • What pages does Nangaparbat usually troll, and what is his POV ?
  • What IP ranges does he usually edit from ?
  • How do you usually deal the IPs and pages i.e., how long are the blocks/protection for ?

Haven't dealt with him before, but can lend a hand at least for the cases that don't need a CU. Feel free to respond by email, if needed. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 01:04, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He goes anywhere that can be Ind v Pak or simply where he can embarrass the latter. He usually edits from 81.150s and 86.150s and similar ones. Very large range, so can;t rangeblock. Stuff in London. Sprotect all the time as he doesn't bother to create socks for some reason and his report should be on his userpage. CU is rarely needed. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 02:28, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I don't have any Indo-Pak articles on my watchlist, but at least I can address the sightings reported on your talk page while you're asleep. Abecedare (talk) 03:02, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not necessarily anything explicitly Pak-Ind like a war, but anything that can be us and them. He also joins in any China/PRC disputes on the PRC side. But in anycase, I lock any page he touches and so does Nishkid64, so looking at our list of locks will tell you everything YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 03:48, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure about if this user Nero-dave1 (talk · contribs) if he's Nangparbat. Same target area of articles and Indian POV type stuff. Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 18:41, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 00:12, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

These users? Mac-1032 (talk · contribs) and Inadghetto (talk · contribs)? Similar editing language from what I can tell and same type of articles. Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 21:52, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From the language used, these aren't NP, but do either of you have any pointers to identify these -- Mughalnz (talk · contribs) and AzanGun (talk · contribs) (From the language used, these aren't NP); both active only in the Indo-Pak space with a pro Pak POV. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff 22:21, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I usually look and see these phrases "Indian administered" or "Pakistani administered" in their edits when dealing with Kashmir (this is what I meant by language). I haven't seen any other editors use this wording when it comes to disputed territories in Kashmir articles unless anyone else knows some one. Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 22:29, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I meant the language of the two that I posted, not the two you posted, I now understand that my post wasn't exactly phrased well! Restructured now. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff 22:35, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mughalnz and AG, couldn't find any match, the others were Nangparbat. Still a Wikipedia:Edit filter might be needed. I made a request for it and apparently it exists but hasn't caught anything, maybe they set it up wrong to catch the tweaking of occupied/administered. He also blanks random things embarrassing to Pakistan. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 23:36, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Tagged both of them. Also, there's really an edit filter for Nangparbat? Didn't know that. Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 23:50, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and this user Vedas123 (talk · contribs)? Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 00:05, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, him too. Pity his range to too random for a swepp YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 04:49, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We have another one Radar1X (talk · contribs). Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 14:28, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked Radar1X‎ (talk · contribs). Semied Timeline of the Kashmir conflict. Abecedare (talk) 23:04, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Semid the rest as well YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 23:39, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ngo Dinh Diem presidential visit to Australia[edit]

The edit war continued on Ngo Dinh Diem presidential visit to Australia. Semi-protect it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by David Beals (talk • contribs) 03:58, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Suddenly got vandalised a lot for a normal day. It was never vandalised before. It wasn't the TFA as I thougt YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 04:49, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The vandalism was /b/ raiding the article. With them, virtually nothing besides protecting an article will stop it, and even then, they'll still try. This is an example of the raid they did on User talk:Jéské Couriano. They didn't stop, even after an abuse filter was made for it. This has 117 filter hits listed... They can be relentless if they have nothing else to do... [1] Luckily most of the time they seem to have a short attention span... The thing that should not be 06:29, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. When many IPs flood a page with the same vandalism, there must be some machine or organised attack YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 20:40, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 30 November 2009[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 14:39, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Block of 76.212.0.0/16[edit]

I did not notice 30-days had passed and that I had gotten logged out. I started to do an edit and was surprised by

You are currently unable to edit pages on Wikipedia.
You can still read pages, but you cannot edit, change, or create them.
Editing from 76.212.0.0/16 has been disabled by YellowMonkey for the following reason(s):
NAadapriya banned user
This block has been set to expire: 08:33, 22 December 2009.

I generally don't mind blocks of single IP addresses but 76.212.0.0/16 is one of the IP blocks used by AT&T for their DSL services meaning you potentially blocked 64K DSL customers from editing on Wikipedia. It's also extremely easy for AT&T DSL customers that know the trick to get a new IP address and usually it'll be in a new block. I was at 76.212.14.244 and it took 10 seconds to get 75.62.127.215 which is not blocked.

Could you please remove the 76.212.0.0/16 block? I assume you blocked all of 76.212.0.0/16 as NAadapriya seems to have popped up a number of times within this block. If so, the odds are s/he can move to another block and eventually you would would end up blocking all AT&T customers with dynamic IP service. That seems like overkill to deal with one indvidual. --Marc Kupper|talk 03:46, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

done YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 23:39, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Happy Thanksgiving![edit]

Happy Thanksgiving! I am thankful for you and your contributions here! Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:51, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The monkey has brought something to the table!

Happy cricket watching[edit]

It's this time again! :) Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 04:29, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like Fifelfoo celebrated by signing up to review the Invincibles YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 04:49, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent, nearly there. Next FAC? Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 07:19, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well 4th Test finally got the 2nd support, so I could add another one. Another invincible in 1948 ready, although I got Xa Loi Pagoda raids ready adn need to ce it. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 07:57, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I deserve it for having, in past summer times, said, "Not the bloody cricket again." ... though only about one day matches strangely enough. Test matches enter a meditative state of mind, like watching cycling. Fifelfoo (talk) 07:42, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think I might just delete a lot of the images to make life easier, expecially as when I added them I wasn't aware that they had to be pre-1946 to be PD in the US; most of them are 1946-1955 and so PD in Aus but not US but people only know of this subtelty at FAC YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 07:57, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why do we need the "publisher" and the "work" in refs now? Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 07:51, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Where's this? Usually one is sufficient, the publisher or the newspaper/journal titleYellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 07:57, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tim Paine for example. "... cites need both publisher= and work= information. For example, the Cricinfo ones have Cricinfo as the work and ESPN as the publisher." Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 07:58, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's annoying.....Do we have to add FAirfax/Newsltd to all the papers??? grrr YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 08:00, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hope not! Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 08:25, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Lawry again. The Monkey gets an ec, and a wicket falls YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 08:00, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great Lankan batting. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 08:25, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All the recent runs are edges, so Sreesanth should clean them up soon, or else he will loose his rags with all these edged fours and get sanctioned for sending the batsman off when their luck finally runs out YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 08:32, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of which, Sreesanth castles Herath YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 08:34, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Lol, Murali is in so he might add 20 or so annoying runs! Squirt one over gully or chip one over mid-on. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 08:36, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not today. Look like they've given up. Mahela is #1 in the batting rankings!!!! Don't agree. Too much of a home tiger. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 16:32, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't seen the rankings. Gambhir should be. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 19:18, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have a good break, I'll be rather slow on getting through the article for review anyway as I'll be mostly out of action this weekend. Fifelfoo (talk) 00:08, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the game should be over by lunch, came back early to follow this, why, I have no clue. BTW, YM, can you check on some laundry when you get online -- Arvind Arokara (talk · contribs) and Brahminated Iyers (talk · contribs), they're socks of each other, but ducking for Kalarimaster too. Also 67.161.176.99 (talk · contribs) who is block evading Satbir Singh (talk · contribs). cheers. -SpacemanSpiff 04:35, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No need for a CU on the IP, self-confirmed. -SpacemanSpiff 05:17, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The two are equal, but on the other side of an ocean compared to KM YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 23:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, ok, thx. I checked the contribution times and they seemed to match, and so did the aggressive edit summaries while removing warnings from talk pages. KM is back as an IP right now (different one), but no alarming contributions, he's just reverting another opposite view POV pusher and making life easy for me. Did you read the over-the-top reaction to India's 100th win? As if they became the first team to do so! -SpacemanSpiff 23:42, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I just came back from four days in the forest so I haven't heard anything except that Gambhir is on leave. I only noticed that it was the 100th because of the latest edit to Ojha's article. I think SRW presided over 50 by himself and Ponting might be joining him soon, so about 100 in 12-13 years maybe YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 23:45, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, only 84 since SRW's ascension YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 23:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If I'm not mistaken, about 55 of India's wins have come about since 1990 or so. -SpacemanSpiff 00:00, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indian Christianity[edit]

Thank you for your many contributions to Indian Christianity articles.

I didn't understand why you deleted Anti-Christian violence in India from the article Christianity in India. It didn't seem to be in the text and is certainly a part of their lives IMO. Student7 (talk) 16:29, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was reverting the [[WP:BAN|banned user Nangparbat (talk · contribs) YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 20:40, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Gujjar[edit]

Hi Yellowmonkey, I hope you can help at the above article. I feel I am slowly being embroiled in an edit war in an article, which I thought I was helping clean up. The problem essentially is a user who seems to be fixated on trying to prove Gujjar are Kshatriya. I have no problem with this, but readingthrough the sources, the picture seems more complex than this, and the Gujjar tribe seem to sit in all Varna's. There seems to be a lack of WP:Assume Good Faith and before I seek User:Chorra to be blocked, I hoped you maybe able to intervene and stop him from deleting references and stop the WP:Synthesis. Compounding this problem is the fact his English seems to be poor. Thanks and Best Wishes.--Sikh-History 13:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Waugh[edit]

Good to see you back. What's with the different book ref thing you have happening? Is this more common? Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 19:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the Steve Waugh one? Harvard referencing. some people use it. Another user changed the SRW article to Harv YellowMonkey (bananabucket!) 20:24, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I haven't come across it before. Thanks for digging it up. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 01:14, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lol! Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 09:35, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is an amazing amount of joke entires out there, and WP CRIC is one of hte cleaner projects :( YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 10:50, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Only one user watches AFL arts. Yes, it is a waste of time! 1,280 unknown-importance arts to go - that's just in Tasmania. Huggle and AWB are extremely boring I don't even bother with them. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 05:30, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tinu's bot does it. Not worth it even semihuman YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 05:36, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Got a good review for the main article. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 05:39, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm.. Please don't take out the pitch! Not sure how I feel about this.. :| Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 05:50, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Butchering the best cricket ground in Australia (arguably the only pure major cricket ground in Aust.) for the sake of AFL ... A disgrace and a disaster for cricket. Another soulless generic sports stadium, ho hum. It has certainly put a trip to Adelaide for the Test on the menu for next year, before it is ruined. -- Mattinbgn\talk 08:16, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The historic already has been knocked down, and stuff the AFL, it's not like anyone wants to watch Port Power....We could just play at N Sydney. We'll be like a rotten boring Indian concrete stadium YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 08:20, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can't believe is has/will been allowed to happen, especially in Adelaide. Hodge retirement a shock - been dominating. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 08:35, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Lehmann tried to launch a coup against the SACA last year, although he was rather circular and evasive about his reasoning, but it's a joke. You could fit 50k in the old days eg when Larwood hit Woodfull in the heart. As for Hodge, I can't say I blame him given that they would never pick him regardless but then again, him quitting like that will probably be taken by the selectors as a dummy spit and they would probably punish him some more YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 14:13, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Creating a web show article[edit]

Hi YellowMonkey, I was wondering if it is possible to make an article on Wiki of a web show. If so, could you give me WP:Layout link for it, as I can not find it? I wanted to create an article about a web show called The Valley Girl Show. Thanx! ATC . Talk 23:24, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can't think of any webshow that is notable, although I don't really watch any so don't know the names of anything that was exclusively an internet video. Maybe ask the people who write FAs on internet culture. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 23:31, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI[edit]

[2]. Just to make sure you're aware. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noted YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 06:10, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Spaceman's RFA[edit]

YM, If appropriate, can you add the notice for Spaceman's candidacy at the Criicket project noticeboard.

Templated notice: {{subst:Administrator candidacy notice|SpacemanSpiff}}

Abecedare (talk) 18:11, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 21:32, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Azerbaijan[edit]

There is a sentence is the opening section that is highly misleading. When I deleted it I was told I wasn't allowed to. So I replaced it with sourced material. Now you have deleted my material on the grounds that it doesn't belong there. I agree, but I can't allow the misleading sentence to stand. So what do you recommend I do with it? Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 04:58, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

4:39, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Bob Willis[edit]

Hullo. Is this near GA yet do you think? SGGH ping! 15:28, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks close. The most obvious thing is the unusual use of 2:2 to give the series result when that kind of notation is used for a ratio and is equivalent to 1:1 and the mixing of dashes as in 1976-77 and 1976/77, so you have to make a clearcut choice there. That aside having a book(s) would be good in addition in addition to contemporaneous reports written within a few days of the original event. It seems at least to the outsider to be meaty but the match reports might miss things that aren't in the straight data and so forth. I'll have more of a look but no reason to not list it as work can be done in the meantime YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 17:11, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Righto, thank you. SGGH ping! 11:37, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Iran-related IP vandal[edit]

Special:Contributions/75.53.127.189 This user has vandalized United Nations geoscheme for Asia and South Asia in ways to remove Iran from South Asia. Can this vandal be disciplined, he/she is one these single purpose editors vandalizing in regards to this topic. (a similar message has been left on Nishkid64' talk page) Thegreyanomaly (talk) 04:51, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He's only made four edits. Any specific reasoning? YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles Featured topic drive:one left) 06:10, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Closing Thierry Henry FAR[edit]

This was reckless, as I cited four reasons in requesting the review. Your view that a short term controvery shouldnt affect the status only answered two, and I think that the week long full protection which was in place on the article for about a week following the incident was time enough for contributors to come up with a mention which maintained the article at a featured article standard. Petepetepetepete (talk) 00:35, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Only the prose issue was not caused by the handball, yet I see that the prose has not changed in the last month except for the the addition of the handball. So I don't see how you are referring to it deteriorated in reference to the content dispute when it hasn't been touched YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles finally at Featured topic candidates) 00:48, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If Michael Jackson's death was not mentioned in the lead of his article, if this incident is analagous, then i would think that it should be FAR'd for not being comprehensive. Similarly, if all of Barack Obama's life was documented in simplistic in the 80s he did this, in the 90s he did this, in the 00s he did this, i'd feel that was worth review. I dont see how a featured article can, two weeks on from such an incident still so poorly reflect the situation, yet the review is closed before it begins. There are a number of users who have expressed an interest in the controversy on both the Thierry Henry page and on the page for the controversy itself, and leaving the review open would have been a great oppurtunity for numerous users to get together and improve the Thierry Henry article back to FA standard following a tumultous few weeks. Petepetepetepete (talk) 00:59, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of people who wrote or are otherwise involved in teh article are alive and kicking and will do the copyediting if necessary. At this point in time, the FAR would also attract an abnormal amount of dramamongering, from newbies and drivebys, because it is a bit of a hot topic. These types of things tend to just turn into a stampede, so it's better to keep things low profile. In lots of things on Wikipedia, people will just see a big item and jump in, and sometimes just do it to get attention. I obviously am not referring to regular sports or even soccer editors. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles finally at Featured topic candidates) 03:09, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And I was referring more to politicians, quite a lot on Wikipedia, who decide on where to make an appearance depending on how many eyes will be upon them YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles finally at Featured topic candidates) 12:12, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
YM was justified in closing the review; we don't defeature an article just because recent events temporarily destabilize, and the talk page should be used for discussion. If the article is still having problems a few months from now, that's a different story. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:14, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Membership of the Family[edit]

I see that you've reverted my inclusion of several prominent members of the Family. You may not be aware of widespread media coverage about the Family -- I suggest you begin with these sources:

  • Terry Gross (November 24, 2009). "The Secret Political Reach Of 'The Family'". Fresh Air from WHYY. The legislator that introduced the bill [imposing the death penalty on Ugandan homosexuals], a guy named David Bahati, is a member of the Family, appears to be a core member of the Family, he organizes their Ugandan National Prayer Breakfasts, and oversees an African student leadership program.
  • Ruth Gledhill (November 29, 2009). "Archbishop of Canterbury in 'intensive' efforts to combat Ugandan anti-gay death law". The Times. David Bahati, the Ugandan MP who introduced the legislation, is reported to be a member of The Family, The Children of God, The Family International, The Fellowship.
  • Sharlet, Jeff (2008). The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power. HarperCollins. p. 25. ISBN 978-0-06-055979-3.
  • Mooney, Alexander (July 17, 2009). "A third 'C Street' Republican embroiled in sex scandal". CNN. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  • Belz, Emily (August 29, 2009). "All in the Family". World Magazine. Retrieved August 14, 2009. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

A list of prominent members of the Family listed in WP:CITE sources available at The Fellowship (Christian organization)#List of prominent Family members. Also see Category talk:Members of the Family also known as the Fellowship#Rationale for category. I do not wish to engage in revert-warring with you, so I will wait a day or so for your response before I add these facts back to the appropriate pages, which I believe have been deleted in error. Zerschmettert die Schändliche (talk) 08:42, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are serious undue weight problems to say the least in chucking allegations of membership of this thing in the lead of various articles, eg, to folks who were the heads of the army/air force especially when many of hte articles are short, and an allegation of something not so notable is given such prominence compared to war decisions and strategic policy. Same for the politicians frankly. The agenda is very obvious. It's not just the existence of a source YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles finally at Featured topic candidates) 12:12, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:YellowMonkey/Archive151&oldid=1136123293"