User talk:Luna Santin

Talk – Sandbox – Blog

Welcome to my talk page! I'll sometimes reply on your talk, but will frequently (increasingly often) reply here. When leaving messages, please remember these easy steps: • Use a ==descriptive heading== • Use [[wikilinks]] when mentioning users and pages • Sign your post with four tildes ~~~~ to leave your name and date If you're new to Wikipedia, please see Welcome to Wikipedia or frequently asked questions. Click here to leave me a message

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28.

Note: If you leave me a message and don't get a reply, it's probably because (a) I'm working on it, or (b) I honestly missed your message, which unfortunately happens fairly often when this page gets busy. Don't be shy about reminding me here or via email, if it's been awhile with no reply.

Luna Santin 06:09, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

thanks for protecting my page and all the sailor moon pages :} ♥Eternal Pink-ready for love♥ 22:10, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Untitled message

why is the atheism thing not NPOV ? belief in god or other supenatural phenomena is a belief that rests on shaky evidence; this is self obvious and npov. That it should need to be defended is clear evidence of the unwillingness of the god people to be neutral; they start with the assumption that atheism is somehow aberrent, as, apparenlty, do you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cinnamon colbert (talk • contribs) 25 February 2007.

reply - exactly. It is not contestable that there is no evidence for supernatural phenomena. That is why they are supernatural. Thus, the assertion I made is a strict logical inference from this, and, as such, it is up to you to say why the logical, scientific view - god does not exist and atheism is there fore a natural logical state - is not correct. I think you, like most atheists, are scared of them (for good reason to, look at Salman Rushdie) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cinnamon colbert (talk • contribs) 25 February 2007.

not saying it is the best - saying, (1) there is not one, repeat NOT ONE piece of evidence that god exists; (2) therefore, belief in god is alogical, and atheism should be the logical default state, just exactly as a belief that the moon is NOT made of green cheese is the logical default state, and people who believe otherwise need to justify themselves (In theUSA, at least in the 60s, it was common, for some strange reason, to tell young children that the moon was made of green cheese.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cinnamon colbert (talk • contribs) 25 February 2007.

no,no,no I don't argue the merits or demerits of anything; I merely ask why is precedence given to something for which there is no evidence. surely, you would not call it npov to say that people who believe in lunar green cheese are unusual ?

Why did you delete the article "antiwindows"

Why did you delete the article "antiwindows" http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=&page=antiwindows —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jonwikijonwiki (talk • contribs) 05:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC).

Funnily enough, I asked Luna to delete that article, it doesn't demonstrate a Neutral point of view, and is a borderline attack page. I suggest next time you write an article, you might like to take a read through our guide to Writing your first article. Take care, — Deon555^talk_desk^{sign here!} 06:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

re: your comments on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:208.57.149.253

That ain't right, man, to treat us this way and make assumptions. You block a range but can unblock a specific IP within that range -ours is fixed and does not change. we have done no wrong. now whenever someone here at the office visits your site, we get an unwarranted block message. it ain't right. we have accounts. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jacquese (talk • contribs) 26 February 2007.

antiwindows

I agree the article "antiwindows" was not for wikipedia I will be more carefull creating articles in the future. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.34.130.247 (talk) 02:55, 27 February 2007 (UTC).

3RR by anon on Armenian Genocide

I tried to submit a 3RR on user:85.99.64.9 who did more than 20 edits on that article. I think I screwed it up. Can you help me? Thanks, Morenooso 05:00, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I think I see it now on the bottom of the page. Too bad it not higher up in the instructions saying copy this and insert at bottom to complete report. Think I should tag the vandal with a level 4 template? That would make it easier for the block. Morenooso 05:11, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. You probably know way more than this humble padawan. Morenooso 05:16, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind me meddling with it, but I thought it would help to warn/explain him about Wikipedia not being censored, and I have placed a not-censored tag on the user's tp. As I expected, seeing his edits, the user is from Turkey, so I tried to explain how Wikipedia is still neutral in it. JackSparrow Ninja 06:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Possible username prob

Hi, I notice that you've acted as clerk in relation to this usurpation request: [1]. I'm concerned that the requested username may be incompatible with username policy which presently prohibits "Usernames mentioning or referring to illnesses, disabilities, or conditions". Ebola seems to qualify within that bracket. I wasn't sure where best to raise this question so thought I'd ask you. Do you think its worth having the name discussed at WP:RFCN? Thanks, WjBscribe 09:21, 27 February 2007 (UTC)