I deleted the one you authored, that can be speedy deleted under WP:CSD#G7. The other one cannot because you are not the author. Unless you can have the author post a request (if he adds {{db-author}} to the page any admin will delete it - not just me as I may not be available from time to time), or you can nominate for WP:IFD - just follow the instructions on that page. Carlossuarez46 21:59, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Moe, im glad we worked things out on a cival matter, lol! I respect your viewpoints and I hope you do mine as well. we can all work together to make the wwe roster page as accurate as can be.
We know 11 superstars got suspended, and wwe was going to write them out quickly as possible, so would you be open to adding those names say next week or the week after if they dont reapear, and at least give their kayfabe reasoning since their suspension was never confirmed?
I do for sure morrison has been one of them suspended, as that was a quick title change and given to punk, thats what i meant by putting one and one together!
Also, I 100% agree on where king booker gets placed, i get so angry seeing king booker placed with the "b's" instead of the "k's". Thats like big show with the "s's", lol!
Again, can we put all disagreements aside, and if we run into a situation like, discuss in a manner like this!
Actually, they need to be listed on their own since the MfD has already been going on for a while. -- Jreferee(Talk) 06:16, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I realised what I'd done, wasn't what I intended. I was going to put his failed appeal back, to disuade him from appealing again. To me, sockpuppetry is unacceptable, and him trying to use the situation between Sherzo and myself as an excuse for his actions is equally unacceptable. Hope you can see my reasoning. TorstenGuise 08:51, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've been decreasing the image sizes for several of my prior uploads and have been stumbling on to some random ones. I only increased this one since it was so small that it was distorted within the infobox. Do you believe this size is too big? Because I have decreased most images that I have uploaded that were initially around 500px to 299-315px to meet fair use requirements. Thanks for letting me know, I appreciate your assistance. --Nehrams2020 23:52, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not going to ask you to get involved, since I wouldn’t feel right about asking a friend to get into such a violent dispute, but I'm curious as to whether or not you have any thoughts on the spoilers dispute going on right now. TheHybrid 09:56, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'm at the point now that I'm just going to propose compromises which allow the verifiable information into the articles, though I think I could have gotten spoilers banned entirely if I was persistent enough. Thanks for your comments. Sigh, I didn't wabt to get into a dispute like this, but now that I'm in it I feel a responsibility to see it through. Why am I getting a bad feeling about this? *Shivers* TheHybrid 10:34, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have to say, I find the behavior of reverting vandalism and then proceeding to welcome the vandal without the mention of what he did was wrong, is highly questionable. Please tell editors why vandalism was wrong instead of greeting them like it should be encouraged. — Moeε 08:56, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I had put inside the welcome template that (s)he needs to not delete anything without strong reasoning. I had looked at another one of his/her edits and it looked to be constructive, so I assumed good-faith. --Kingofslackrs (TalkEdits) 09:01, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I honestly didn't see the comment, and I'm wondering if he did either, the purple-templated background seemed to restrict me seeing it somewhat. Maybe moving you're message to the bottom should be attempted with that welcoming template. — Moeε 09:05, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I believe you're refering to this? The content seemed somewhat irrelevant to what the disambiguation is for. I would expain that to the user, and encourage him to edit the concrete article, or a disambiguation of concrete, and to add information on 'durable concrete' there (with sources of course). Was it proper to revert him, yes. Disambiguation is supposed to be used for things of the same name, and to help identify which article you really want to be pointed to, and that entry didn't make since to add there. — Moeε 09:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There is no article there currently, and it was an IP address, so I didn't know if the user talk page would be relevant in this case. Thank you--Kingofslackrs (TalkEdits) 09:23, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Policy does not prohibit users from removing comments from their own talk pages, although archiving is preferred. The removal of a warning is taken as evidence that the warning has been read by the user. Deleted warnings can still be found in the page history.
This goes for any comment left by any user. Comments can be found in the history of talk pages if you wish to bring that up to an editor. If this user doesn't want you commenting there, you should respect that and not comment there. You are also likely to be blocked for WP:3RR for revert warring there as well. Reverting to readd you're comment has no benefit and makes it look like harrassment. Refran from revert warring please. Regards — Moeε 05:15, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I re-added the comment once, in the course of responding to his/her demand. It was not a simple revert. That is not edit-warring. I never had any intention of revert-warring on that page; if s/he wishes to delete it again there's nothing I can do about it. But I will not refrain from making further comments as the occasion demands, and I see no policy, guideline, or anything else that would require me to do so. I know what harassment is, and this ain't it. I do wonder at a scale of priorities under which making the same comment twice is a significant offense, while playing fast and loose with the truth (i.e. the false statement I made the re-added comment about) is not. -- Zsero 06:20, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that you haven't readded more than once, all I'm saying is that you have reinserted it and it could lead to those things if you weren't careful. Hopefully that won't be a issue. Regards, — Moeε 23:36, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, you hate me, and I hate you! We have two seperate opinions on what should be placed on the roster page, so lets comprimise!
All the superstars that "are" suspended, they havnt appeared in over a week, and guys like Flair who is going through contract negotiations, hasnt been seen for 3 weeks!
I apoligize for being a smart @$$, just when people post wrong info, and it comes back on me, they ask, well how come it says Flair is active, but I havnt seen him, what am I supposed to say then, as I have close to my whole senior class goes here for updated rosters. Us Ohioans love our wrestling, lol!
But now, we both have a problem with someone else! Im nto sure who it is, but he has Booker in the B's again, and queen sharmell as an active wrestler, I will be out fo town for 2 days, so if you can take care of that idiot, that would be awesome!
He also screwed up everything on the inactive side for sd! and ecw, when the tapings spoilers have been posted, and it shows who is inactive!
Again, I know neither one of us wont be sending the other a christmas card this year, but I feel we can still do business together!
Ok, the first thing you need to realize is that I don't hate you and you don't need to hate me.
For the most part, I agree with you. Although nothing is confirmed about the suspensions, they are inactive, and no one can deny inactivity, it's a fact, and that can be the basis of a move even without the real, or non-kayfabe, reason being confirmed. It's alright that you feel the need to make it as accurate as you can, I feel the same way since I started this article a couple of years ago, and sorry if I came onto you strongly about it. As for the other editor, I'll try and communicate with him about his content changes (I see he failed at reporting me for a 3RR violation as well), and I'll try to keep it accurate in your absense. — Moeε 22:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please attempt to ignore this. I have had major troubles with Caleb in the past so I just wouldn't bother with him. Looking at the diffs, it seems like he was in the wrong. Davnel03 19:24, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Like I was ever worried about Caleb before, but unfortunantly for Caleb, I tend to not let things go that easily. It's not a matter of if I should deal with this editor, it's a matter of how. — Moeε 22:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Take a look at this. He's done that many times in the past few weeks. Davnel03 07:04, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't trying to say anything to you or about you, if Nick was sniping at you, that's on him, but I'm not.
All I did was point out that all of these guys might come back just in time for me to go to Raw (since they'll be in Cleveland--my hometown) on Oct 1 and it would just be interesting to see all these guys come back at the same time.
We all know why they're gone, but I agree with you that we can't put it in until we get official word.
No malice was meant by me towards you, I was just B.S.-ing with Nick, that's all.
Ohgltxg 17:11 September 11 (always remember) 2007 (UTC)
I understand you're position. I was actually refering to Nick in the edit summary, not you. No malice was on you're part, and I recognize that. Regards, — Moeε 22:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Moe I was blocked by someone on the Pro wrestling wikia and have no idea why. It is probably because Hybrid blocked the Big Boss 0 account and considered me a vandal because of making that. However my edits have been constructive and would ask that you correct the mistake. Could you please help me. Thank you for your time. User: Big Boss Version 0 -- 198.88.216.104 (talk) 22:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have unblocked your account there and provided a reason on your talk page at the Wikia. Regards, — Moeε 23:41, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The use of images in this article do not appear to be in compliance with fair-use criteria or the policy on nonfree content - I have tried to make corrections but they have been reverted several times - am I correct? Dan arndt 01:56, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what either of you were intending to do, but the use of non-free images in this manner violates WP:NFCC, yes. — Moeε 02:39, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So what are the templates that need to be placed on the images & notices to the user? Dan arndt 02:53, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've already tagged both the images for deletion since they are unused non-free images. As for notices to the user, and I assume you mean User:Darkside05, I left a message at the article talk page about the image removals, and if he reverts please point him to my talk page. — Moeε 02:58, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that Dan arndt 03:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
May i ask why were the videos for the Calerway songs removed? I personally know the band, in fact i uploaded one of the clips myself. If want more information, message JP at the Calerway MySpace page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkside05 (talk • contribs) 08:15, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:YOUTUBE or more specifically Wikipedia:Copyrights. Nothing that may contain copyrighted material may not be linked to like that. Songs and music videos contain copyrights to the band and to the record label, it doesn't matter who made the upload. — Moeε 08:18, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Point is, that i know the band personally and through the whole process of the article, the singer gave me ideas to add to the article. Therefore i'm not going against any copyright laws or anything, unless there's another way of adding the videos to come with agreement to your policy, please tell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkside05 (talk • contribs) 09:55, 12 September 2007 (UTC) Darkside05 10:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Unless you can either prove:
1) That Boomtown Records or Calerway doesn't own a copyright on thier music or music videos
Or 2) See that YouTube (not the user on YouTube, the website itself) got permission to use the videos from the owners of the copyrighted material (which they generally don't)
The links won't be restored. Claiming you know them doesn't quite keep copyright vios away. — Moeε 10:11, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I gots your welcome/back! El_C 11:46, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
TheHybrid has given you the blank stare and no longer cares what you say. Possibly due to Hanlon's razor, which states "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.", or because this user knows he is correct no matter what you say. Spread the indifference by ignoring someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. TheHybrid 06:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That is the most awesome thing I've ever seen! I also found this:
TheHybrid 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! TheHybrid 06:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I love it! Don't worry, though. You know I love you Moe, in a non-gay, internet kind of way. I respect you as a friend, let's put it that way :P. Cheers, TheHybrid 06:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hahahahahahah ok those are great. --Naha|(talk) 15:00, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, I love these templates :) I'll have to give this out to a lot of people :) — Moeε 11:21, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OMGz Moe gave me the finger! :P --Naha|(talk) 13:12, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
LOL, I wish people were really that excited when I give them the finger! — Moeε 13:15, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh God, this is going to be fun. TheHybrid 23:56, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think there needs to be a page on the great Mexican Donkey Shows that are held south of Juarez. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EatMorePu55y (talk • contribs) 22:01, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to delete this comment, but I thought that you might get a good laugh out of it. Peace, TheHybrid 23:19, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Would you mind having a look over December to Dismember (2006), as the article is currently up for peer review. I'd be grateful for any thoughts you might have on the article, and that you leave your thoughts on the article here. Many thanks in advance, Davnel03 18:32, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
TheHybrid 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! TheHybrid 19:37, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Gasp, the finger! Now thats promoting WikiHate! :P — Moeε 19:38, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
lol, welcome back Moe ;). I've put those things on a couple of my user subpages so we don't have to copy and paste them anymore. User:The Hybrid/Blank, and User:The Hybrid/Finger. Sooooo, how's life? TheHybrid 19:44, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Life, well, lets say life is changing as I know it, or at least mine that is :P and I needed to keep up (thank goodness for wikibreaks).. — Moeε 19:48, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why don't you grow some eyes and see who's putting the returns on the WWE Superstars or are you going to allow it now? —Noarules 17:10, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have time to check every article, telling me to "grow eyes" or let you return them is incivil. You can remove them yourself whenever you see one. — Moeε 17:18, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A certain User:Blofeld of SPECTRE just called you an arse on my talk page. What exactly is going on here? TheHybrid 19:34, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
He's sour because I called Wikipedia:Main Page of Blofeld vanity. And yes, it is vanity to promote that in the project space. Or maybe I should create 'Main Page of Moe'. — Moeε 19:42, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
He put that into project space? WTF!?! He should know better than that, TheHybrid 19:43, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I put it rather bluntly, asking him what the hell was with that when it was already in his userspace. He replied as stating that it wasn't vanity (despite it plastering his name in the project namespace) and now finding out he calls me an arse for saying so? Geez, I can't even say 'hell' without someone taking offense and making an attack anymore. — Moeε 19:49, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You did come across angrily, but nothing warranting an attack (or trying to drag me into this - *grumble*). I don't even know this guy. While he was under his old username I nominated a page he created about a painting for speedy deletion since it didn't have any real content, and he did the hangon thing and was a bit upset that I nominated it, but nothing really happened. The page stayed, I apologized since I accidentally used the wrong tag though the page did deserve to be speedied, he expanded it, and we never spoke again since we really had no reason to. Why he came to me just to call you an arse is beyond what I can imagine :P TheHybrid 21:58, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I didn't mean to come across angrily, more shocked at the page really, but I guess that's nothing new compared to how people usually react to me (I have a natural talent to press the wrong button?). All I can say is I never intended on you getting dragged into that, and I really can't understand why you were anyways. — Moeε 00:24, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, don't worry about me; I'm not going to get involved unless he chooses to target me with attacks. I know that you never intended to get me involved, since there's really no way you could have predicted anything that random happening :P. I'll just assume Hanlon's razor with him, if you get what I'm saying ;). Cheers, TheHybrid 01:57, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I could have known, sometimes I have some wierd ESPN.. wait.. — Moeε 05:51, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It was me who blanked this user's talk page (from my mobile as I was on the way to work); when the police called me back to tell me it was a hoax I said I'd get the administrators to delete it; they said "please do", so I figured I'd blank it at least as a temporary measure lest they receive more calls about the same hoax. I reported this to the mailing list, though I suspect it may have been only to the UK chapter list?
If you have any other queries or criticisms of the way I handled this distressing incident, feel free to leave them on my talk page. LondonStatto 20:08, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for replying. The page has been deleted so the personal information was deleted. Thank you for your message. Regards, — Moeε 20:09, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So all is well with this kid? I was one of the first to see it and did contact my local police (am in the US) and they contacted the G-Men! So they were looking into it (God, am I now embarrassed) but understood I just wanted to help, so that was cool. But, if the kid is OK, I can let them know and crawl under a small rock somewhere. - NeutralHomerT:C 22:29, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I contacted the police in London, not the local police. Your local police are just going to look at you weird :) It was a seventeen year old, pulling a hoax. Little did he know Wikipedia would actually call the police. — Moeε 22:41, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually they took me seriously. I live near DC (in Virginia) so police departments take online stuff, even stuff like this, seriously. That's why they had the G-Men...yes, the bloody FBI *embarrassed beyond belief*...call me. But since he is fine and it was a joke, I told them and they were cool with it. I guess they get this alot with people playing jokes and people calling their police departments concerned for the other's well-being. But they were actually really nice and didn't think I was completely nuts, which was good :) Anywho, glad the person is OK. I am going to crawl back under my rock now :) Take Care....NeutralHomerT:C 20:43, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm guessing they called in the FBI because they you were already in D.C. :p I didn't even bother telling my local police, because they would have just gotten to responding to me, and they would have interogated me. Trust me, the Florida police aren't the most timely or fair individuals. Lucky your in in a nice city like Washington D.C., lol. — Moeε 20:57, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I live in Virginia (about 75 miles east of DC), but close enough I can be considered Northern Virginia. Either way, I am still a little embarrassed, but I am glad the kid is OK. Take Care....NeutralHomerT:C 05:40, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm never quite sure where to post questions. It makes me feel like an idiot. Help me from feeling like an idiot! =) - Looking for a mentor for mechanical stuff, hopefully in the direction of pointers rather than having it done for me (I could have used some help trying to find the list of template messages), but I have an article that brings up content questions, also - facts, sources/false sources, NPOV, weasel words, just off the top of my head.
Consider yourself adopted! If you ever have any questions, feel free to ask on my talk page. Make sure to check back on my talk page for answers to your questions, as thats where I tend to respond to someone :) — Moeε 23:40, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
hey i'm new at this but how is it a crystal violation if wwe has said that cena will be out 6-12 months?SpeedyC1 05:14, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CRYSTAL clearly states "Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation.". It is unclear that he will be out for 6 months, 3 months, 1 year, or forever, thus a CRYSTAL violation. It is unknown, he's injured, and it should be left at that. — Moeε 05:24, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
ok don't bit my head off i just wanted to know because i'm new at this.i didn't even try to edit the wwe roster page.SpeedyC1 05:33, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think that you misunderstood the tone of his comment. He isn't upset, or angry, or in any way trying to be rude. He was just explaining it, and the text can be deceiving since it can't convey emotion. Moe's really a nice little kitten once you get to know him ;). TheHybrid 05:42, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer to be a friendly cheetah, but yes, I wasn't angry or upset *sighs* — Moeε 16:31, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank guys i'll remember if i have any question to ask you two.SpeedyC1 19:03, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Your welcome! — Moeε 19:27, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any way to figure out who is removing the inline tags I'm putting in an article? The "citequote" tags I put in show up as my editing, but the "fact" and "verify source" tags do not - and those are the ones that are going missing. Elanna-Rose 07:10, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Are you refering to this? Indeed, you did add the tags {{citecheck}}, {{Request quote}} and {{fact}}. Nobody removed them. I'll show you what the templates look like so you know what to look for:
When you add {{citecheck}}, it should look like this:
{{Request quote}} - visible, right after the sentence "He teaches more classes than any other professor at the school".
{{fact}} - visible, right after "and is beloved", which is right after the above mentioned sentence tagged with the requested quote.
A second fact tag you added is visible right after the sentence: "As a result of this interdisciplinary approach, Birmingham continues to offer a wide range of classes including Contracts, Admiralty Law, Energy Law, Feminist Legal Theories, Federal Courts, Imperium, The Nuremberg Trials, Jackson, Galileo, Remedies, Law and Economics and Law and Science."
Every tag you added is still visible in the article. Hope this helped. — Moeε 17:16, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is the second time I've put them in, and no one has edited them out yet. I have put both {{fact}} and {{Verifysource}} in previously - they showed up in the article, but the History does not show who put them in (or took them out). The {{citequote}}, however, shows that I was the one who put them in. My current use of both {{fact}} and {{Request quote}} both show up in the editing history.
I would think that I did not, in fact, save those additions - except that I checked back a few hours later (offline, from a bookmark) and both "citation needed", "verify source" and the three ""cite this quote" were still embedded in the article. Elanna-Rose 21:56, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think your problem is the fact that you bookmark it. When you bookmark an entry on Wikipedia without saving the change, Wikipedia reopens to the current formatting and doesn't save your changes. If you're adding things earlier, and bookmarking, they won't come back, you have to re-type it in (no one is removing it). Also if you preview the change (i.e. when you edit, you have the option of saving your edit or previewing it) the preview does not show up in the history, only saved edits are shown (i.e. it may look like it's in the article, but you have to click save for it to appear in the history and for it to be visible. — Moeε 22:08, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed just now that it was you who had an MfD to delete my "Keepers" funpage a long while back. Like I told Radiant after he deleted it, I don't have any hard feelings over losing it, and shortly before it was deleted I was starting to realize some of it was inappropriate. (The fact I was never made aware of any MfD on that page before it was deleted wasn't so hot, though...) I just want to make it clear that it was never my intention to personally attack a single individual on the site or be disruptive with that page, so if you thought I was making some sort of thinly veiled personal attack against you, I apologize if that's how I somehow came across. Thanks and good editing. :) Erik Jensen(Appreciate or Laugh At) 18:46, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I just didn't think it was the most appropriate use of the userspace in accordance with WP:UP. I thought I warned you of the impending MFD, but I guess I didn't, sorry about that. I called it a 'thinly veiled personal attack' because it wasn't the kind of message that was directly and attack (it wasn't), but just meant to make me look bad, and it did. The thing in question was a series of reverts on this talk page between me and Konstable, which at the time were angry with each other, and it seemed to me at the time, your comment wasn't productive for the userpage (I believe you linked to the log of reverts and stated 'see a how Wikipedians get along' or something along those lines, and I really did take offense at the time. Something about the Essjay comment really struck me bad as well. Anyways, as long as you admit your fault, my fault as well for assuming you were intentionally trying to be disruptive (which you weren't I suppose), then everything is fine. Happy editing, — Moeε 19:52, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Could you point me to the image size discussion? I don't follow what was being compromised over. Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 04:43, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think AllStar Echo explained it fairly well in his reply on your talk. — Moeε 23:32, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That is the right thing to shut down my aminship.
Well i'll stay as a non admin for the time being.
And here is a funny emoticon to cheer you up. He's pissed!Beko120 18:59, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
LOL, well, let me know if you have any question about adminship requests and I'll try to be of assistance, but the minimum time that should elapse before you try again is in 3 months. — Moeε 23:34, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Upholder of Wiki award Well, it was good to have you on Wikipedia. You were very good help, both on the mainspace and userpage. We just hope you come back to edit Wikipedia soon (once your real-life conflicts are taken care of). TheChronicfka. MITB LS 01:15, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hope you reconsider, but you really are retiring from Wikipedia, I appericate your help and appericate you answering my goofy questions. Take Care, Dude. - NeutralHomerT:C 10:04, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was close :), but thanks! - NeutralHomerT:C 03:34, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Bye Moe, I hope that this is just a temporary thing. The HybridT/C 03:37, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why? :( Davnel03 16:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info fix Moe, ;). Hope to see you back in the saddle again soon. Peace, The HybridT/C 23:45, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. I assumed that you were permanently leaving (retiring) Wikipedia. TheChronic 00:03, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, now I'm really confused :). Are you leaving Wikipedia for good (never coming back to edit), or is this the so-clled "retirement"? TheChronic 00:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. Just needed to get the facts straight. TheChronic 00:13, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think so Chronic, Moe has requested his talk page archives and subpages be deleted. Moe left a good mark on Wikipedia and he is moving onto something else. Take Care...NeutralHomerT:C 00:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, everyone. — Moeε 00:18, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Aww man, no :( Sorry to see you go Moe. /salute --Naha|(talk) 00:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image restored, thanks for your dedicated contributions. --Nehrams2020 07:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
*Sigh*, I hate to see you leaving for good, Moe. This is really depressing. You will be missed. I hope to see you again someday, even if I don't know that it's you. You've been a great editor, and a great friend. Even if you don't have time for full out editing, it would be great if you could stop in and say hi now and again. I just can't believe that you're actually leaving. Goodbye Moe, The HybridT/C 01:03, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"I wish I knew you more, because this is a little awkward" - Chris Farley, Tommy Boy. Good luck in the world of tommorow. Atomic Religione 01:09, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Re: this edit of yours. Koavf has since moved the article back to J. C. Monahan, again without consensus. Don't suppose you could override the redirect could you? - Dudesleeper · Talk 16:39, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Save Us 229. Just a note as I saw your serial supports at Requests for Adminship and then thought I'd just have a nose as I'm rude like that! You seem to have an incredible level of knowledge of Wikipedia gained in just a few days. To put it more bluntly I suspect you are a sockpuppet of another user. Of course there are many legitimate reasons why established users may wish to have another account, but serial voting at WP:RFA is possibly not one of them. Please feel free to leave a note on my talk page or e-mail me if you wish. Best. Pedro : Chat 20:46, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I've previously had an account before, unfortunantly, I no longer have access to the account as I changed the password and logged out and I am making a fresh start. Your concerns are normal, but nothing to worry about. — Save_Us_229 20:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, no worries. Thanks for clarifying. Pedro : Chat 21:23, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No problem :) — Save_Us_229 21:24, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I noticed that you like to fight vandalism and I thought that I might be able to help. I have complied the best vandalism fighting tools into a single javascript file that I call "Hodgepodge" and I thought you might be interested in it. The file, once added to your monobook, can help you fight vandalism much much easier and quicker than without the scripts. The tool can be found here: User:Wikidudeman/Hodgepodge. Read the page for information on how to install as well as compatibility issues. If you have any questions then please leave me a note on my talkpage. Thanks.Wikidudeman(talk) 17:34, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Wikidudeman. Unfortuantly reading over your Hodgepodge script it seems that Internet Explorer doesn't work on it and that is the brower I use. Thank you for the note though =] — Save_Us_229 17:37, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You could try to download firefox. Wikidudeman(talk) 18:54, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I'll give that a try. — Save_Us_229 20:14, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, FireFox is my browser now, so I'll try your hodgepodge now =] — Save_Us_229 20:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You reverted my change to "aptronym," saying that it was a test or experiment. It was not. Robert Stubbs actually is a urologist in Toronto who does penis enlargement. He's been quoted numerous times in the media about his techniques and there have been a number of articles written about him. It is a legitimate aptonym. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.52.123.235 (talk) 21:53, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Robert Stubbs does not have an article entry on Wikipedia, thus the information you provided has no verifibility. Please provide reliable sources when making these kinds of edits. Thank you. — Save_Us_229 21:57, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Howdy Save Us 229, thanks for participating in my request for adminship. I am happy to say it was successful, 55/0/0, and I am looking forward to getting to work. Thanks for your vote of confidence. By all means, feel free to check in on my work to come. Suggestions and advice are always appreciated.
Hi. Just some friendly advice. When warning accounts who have vandalized, and they haven't committed blatant vandalism, its best not to threaten blocking if they've never received any other warnings. I am specifically talking about this warning that you left. The edit you warned the user for, (this one) was the users first edit. There is a possibility that the user is new, so please try to assume good faith and try not to Bite the newcomers. Thanks, Rjd0060 (talk) 23:09, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
From looking at the history of the article, this appears to be the same user who created the account to start that article, the same user who removed the PROD deletion tag, remove the cleanup tags and removed the AFD notice which explicity stated to not be removed. While this is a fairly new editor, it is not new to that article in all likelyhood. — Save_Us_229 23:24, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I know. But we always have to AGF. - Rjd0060 (talk) 23:37, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Meh, I'll leave a better suited message next time then. — Save_Us_229 23:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That would be nice. Otherwise, good work on the vandal-fighting! - Rjd0060 (talk) 23:41, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you =] — Save_Us_229 23:42, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't trying to delete all that stuff. All I was trying to do was remove a duplicate link. The catch was that I tried to do it on a PSP. Next time I'll use a computer instead.
Yeh, I thought it was a weird case. Just make sure not to remove all the templates, categories and stuff again :) — Save_Us_229 18:55, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Four years ago this day, a foreigner was voted by the community to serve a land that he loved. Today, a new foreigner humbly accepts the charge and support of serving a community that he loves. Hopefully, he won't disappoint.
Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed with a vote of (47/0/1). The trust bestowed upon me by the community is one of the most touching honours that I have ever received, and I vow not to let you down. Whether you have suggestions for ways in which I could improve, a request for assistance or just need someone to listen, my talk page and my email are always open. I pledge to do what I can to help this project, in the words of a man who needs no introduction, "make the internet not suck." A special thank you goes out to Tim Vickers for nominating me. Cheers, CP 23:03, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi; thanks for your support to my RfA, which closed successfully at (51/1/2). I'll keep this brief since I don't like spamming anyone: I'll work hard to deserve the trust you placed in me. Thanks again. — Coren(talk) 23:33, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Save Us 229, for participating in my RFA, which passed 35/1/0. I look forward to helping out. If you have any concerns or suggestions/advice, my talk page is always open.—Random832 14:13, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How do I actually make a PERMANENT ARTICLE??[edit]
Listen, I'm just a kid doing schoolwork, OK??
AND I'm only human, so, do you think you can help me out making a permanent Wikipedia article?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darth Chyrsaor (talk • contribs) 19:57, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you're actually serious about editing then I would review the welcome you received at the top of your discussion page. Alternatively you can review Wikipedia:Your first article to get some idea of what you should do first. — Save_Us_229 20:02, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For supporting the continued protection of the Auschwitz article. Mushy headed WP:AGF will be the death of Wikipedia. Jeffpw (talk) 21:10, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well I tend to call a spade a spade. A Holocaust denier editing under an IP address requesting that a article related to the Holocaust be unprotected so he can edit it, is just asking for the protection to be readded a few days later. — Save_Us_229 21:14, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your support in my request for adminship, which succeeded with a final tally of 38/1/0! I hope I can live up to the standards of adminship, and I will try my best to make Wikipedia a better place. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 18:40, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
