User talk:MONGO

Archives Archive 1 (January 2005 to June 2005) Archive 2 (July 2005 to October 2005) Archive 3 (November 2005) Archive 4 (December 2005) Archive 5 (January 2006) Archive 6 (February 2006) Archive 7 (March 2006) Archive 8 (April 2006) Archive 9 (May 2006) Archive 10 (June 2006)

---

User:C-Liberal at Capitalism

S/he's back to inserting this stuff into the lead that even Ultramarine has agreed is incorrect. Specifically, it puts in language defining capitalism by complete absence of government regulation. It's perfectly fine for a Libertarian, or whoever, to think that's an ideal, but turning the definition of capitalism into that (thereby excluding every society that has ever existed) is extremely misleading. It's not 3RR yet (twice three times in the last few minutes, with some not-quite-identical versions another 3-4 times; I think that last try was more than 24 hours ago); but it's really not something that is fit to stay. I wonder if you think this is worth short-term page protection again? LotLE×talk 01:32, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I was wondering the same, and posted a request for semi-protection, given the strong possibility of sockpuppet editing. [1] 172 | Talk 06:49, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, but who is using a sock possibly?--MONGO 06:51, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

There's nothing more than circumstantial evidence. Still, I suspect RJII. RJII made nearly 1,200 edits to the article. With that level of activity, it is probably hard to let go. (RJII was banned indefinately around a week ago after he/she/they admitted the account was shared. RJII had been on verge of a one year ban by the arbcom anyway.) 172 | Talk 06:58, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

C-Liberal (talk · contribs) has almost 50 postings, so semiprotection won't keep him/her from editing. I'll continue to monitor. Did Lulu get C-Liberal's edits cleaned up?--MONGO 07:02, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Lulu cleaned them up... I know C-Liberal's passing the threshold. Still, semi-protection may at least discourage future potnetial socks. 172 | Talk 07:04, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I see you put in a request...I'll semi-protect it then, since you guys have been doing the editing and know what's going on.--MONGO 07:07, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

"Vandalism" warning from suspected sockpuppet

Take a look at User talk:DejahThoris, there is a vandalism warning from User:Nancetlv who is apparently a suspected sock puppet of banned user User:Israelbeach. Since this is the case, and since there has already been an objection by another user on the talk page that the "vandalism" warning is not warranted can you as an administrator take off the warning from the user's talk page?--Jersey Devil 03:11, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

An odd edit

See here. :) -Zero^Talk 08:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Fidel Castro and Teemu Ruskeepä

User:Teemu Ruskeepää has ignored many, many requests that he cease promoting an extremely unpopular "talk page restructuring" on various Cuba related pages, notably Fidel Castro. Despite warnings from myself, other users and admins that his behaviour is potentially disruptive and may lead to a block, he has continued unabashed, adding confusing lengthy polls to each talkpage addition. He is materially obstructing much needed work on the page, which is a view held by all, and I believe the patience of the many has just worn out. May I suggest an editing embargo on Teemu, or even an exploding cigar?--Zleitzen 09:04, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

• No, just deport him to Cuba. Wahkeenah 12:57, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Ping

I like once in while to remind you that even tedious wiki-gnomes like myself do article work. ^_^
brenneman ^{L} 02:08, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Happy Independence Day

Hi MONGO, I know we haven't always seen eye to eye in the past but I wanted to say I enjoyed your special user page very much. Maybe one day my country (Scotland) can declare its own independence from England! I know, don't hold your breath... Enjoy the holiday, --Guinnog 05:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you...will do my best. Happy editing!--MONGO 06:19, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

RFA question

I've been away from my computer, so couldn't respond sooner. I'm glad to see that the matter seems to have sorted itself out, and I'm sure it is happy to rest in peace. Best regards, Samsara (talk • contribs) 19:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Rfa

I'm sorry if I overreacted. I understand the frustration you have with such sites, my reaction was influenced by how upset that content makes me, as I think was yours. No hard feelings. pschemp | talk 04:39, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Mongo, I need your help

Mongo, I need help from an administrator. I realize that you don't know me. I am a retired engineer who has been active in Wikipedia for the last 6 months as you can verify on my User:Mbeychok page. This will take quite a lot of explanatory background, so please bear with me.

First, the help I need concerns the Legionellosis and Legionella articles. About a week or so ago, I spent quite a bit of time re-arranging, re-writing and expanding parts of those articles ... to make them more coherent and more Wikified without changing the substance of their content at all (because I am no expert in that field). The expansion that I contributed was all related to how to maintain and control cooling towers to prevent their contamination with the Legionella bacteria that causes Legionnaires' disease.

Then a newcomer to Wikipedia, User:Noigel2000, started making revisions. He is the owner of a number of websites and Yahoo Group forums, most notable of which are [2] and [3]. They are a strange mixture of newspaper reports, excerpts from reference sources, personal opinions of User:Noigel2000, and images (some of which are quite weird). This is a direct quote of his from his own User talk:Noigel2000 page: "Some call me a Legioneela Advocate, Others a Legionella Nut or Legionella Fan some stronger than that".

If you will read items 5 and 6 on the Talk:Legionellosis page, entitled "Minor alterations" and "Minor alterations (more)", you will see that I and User:Pzavon disagreed quite strongly with some of his changes. As part of that dialogue, here is another quote from Noigel: "Same as this place its all click click click, no point really, spend a couple of hours on my pages and you will learn everything about LD", which in effect says that he doesn't value Wikipedia much and that his web pages are better than Wikipedia.

As another result of his revisions, the two articles ended up with more than ten links to various pages on his website ... so I deleted a number of them although the two articles still include multiple references to his website. Some are in the External links sections, some in the Images sections, some in the References sections, and some are imbedded in the texts of the two articles. In effect, the two articles are being used as a billboard to direct traffic to his websites.

In retaliation for my having removed some of multiple links to his site, Zoigel then deleted whole sections of the Legionella article which I had to subsequently revert.

You lie on this point, I never deleted your parts of your article in retallition of you deleting my links. I just cant see why you want a page on legionella and legionellosis when its the same, its you that admitts its not your field, so go bye byes its better that way, and me thinks your here under several other names as well, go back to your own field of work mongo take a look at both pages ..do you really need both

--Noigel2000 14:09, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't want to get involved in a revert war with Noigel, and therefore I am asking for your help to get him to modify his behavior. But before you do anything, please take the time to:

• Scan his websites at links [2] and [3] above.
• Read all of his User Talk:Noigel2000 page to get a flavor of how he behaves.
• Read items 5 and 6 on Talk:Legionellosis and also readTalk:Legionella.

Thanks in advance. - mbeychok 18:33, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Mongo, thanks for your help and I'll be sure to let you know if he keeps acting up. - mbeychok 20:26, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Well I thought I would comment on this, you are nuts mbeychok, seems you can delete things but I cant, go cry in your soup, and as for my pages every search engine brings them up in the first 10. I dont need this place to direct people to my sites, I just need the truth told here, something you fight shy of, and i will act up, what a stuffing little cry baby you are , you put wrong information on a page and then cry when its taken off. take a pill better that way - Noigel2000 13:52, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Ah shucks is he that greedy, but still theres plenty left for everyone. A whats your name again, how came your outbreaks go from 1976 then the next is 1999, you missed a few go to my sites

http://www.q-net.net.au/~legion/Legionnaires_Disease_Position_Statement.htm or http://www.q-net.net.au/~legion/Legionnaire`s_Disease_CONTENTS.htm

would put them in myself but you would have a cry as you did not do it yourself, as for only newspaper articles and alike seethis page, The whole french governments official article on the outbrak at Norox, translated into english by me so as uninformed folks like you can read about it http://members.dodo.net.au/~jamgreen/legionellose_france.index.htm

or pop along to this place on spain, fill yourself in on the outbreaks http://www.q-net.net.au/~legion/legionella.legionela.spain.htm

have a good read, and shucks rubbish my pages thats a no no, I'm a Advocate, my mouth has to be big, oh well ban me then who cares, just hate little mummies boys that have to shout for help Mbeychok opps visit this one the official report on the outbreak in 1996 in Alcala De Henares http://home.iprimus.com.au/matgreen/Legionnaires_Disease_Alcala_De_Henares_English.htm. Translated to english by me or see this one http://www.q-net.net.au/~legion/Legionnaires.Disease,Spain.alcala.htm

I even went to Alcala De Henares in 2000 to help the folks in the fight with the local council on the number one tower which caused the outbreak, I always try to visit outbreaks sites There is an exception to every rule links back to my sites should be allowed, its not a commercial site

oh well back to what i do best

--Noigel2000 15:36, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey, if someone is handing out nuts, watch MONGO closely: He'll hog all the cashews. - brenneman ^{L} 13:58, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Goethean (talk · contribs)

Now he is going to different articles I have contributed to and reverting my contributions (dostoevsky). I had to get a phd'ed editor and member of the neoplatonic community to correct his revert war on my content for plotinus (aka zeusnoos). Now he is going to other articles I have contributed to and either reverting or doing "edits". He is also complaining that I am reporting his conduct. This along side insulting other editors AKA personal attacks, this is a pattern of disruptive behavior. LoveMonkey 21:10, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Plotinus edit is [4] on the talk page he compares me to nazis. Also he just committee one edit on the Vladimir Lossky article I contributed. He removed information THAT DIRECTLY CAUSES DISTORTIONS TO THE MESSAGE OF THE AUTHORS OWN WORKS.I am worried about contributing other article because they will be revert war or put up for deletion. Here are other edits Essence-Energies distinction [5]. As for Dostoevsky I literially put the references in the edit. His books Diary of a writer and The demons. LoveMonkey 21:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

If you will not help me to stop him from reverting out almost every contribution I have made, then please refer me to someone that will. I don't have time to contribute and then fight this person over every word. LoveMonkey 21:47, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Why is this person allowed to use profanity insult multiple editors and revert war multiple editors, engage in distruptive conduct (by deleting peoples contibution and putting their articles up for deletion) STALKING editors and engaging in deragatory and inflaming conduct and you can DO NOTHING? He just showed again in the derogatory comments he left on my talkpage that there is no working out a resolve either be a doormat or leave is his message. When will something be done? LoveMonkey 22:11, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. LoveMonkey 22:13, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protect Political philosophy

Wanna? There's an addition of this weird irrelevant name over there, always by an anon, but different addresses. It had been happening for months, but infrequently (every week or two), in the last day the vandal has increased volume quite a bit. I actually just wrote 172 about the issue: User talk:172#Advice on Political philosophy; not sure if the acceleration is connected in any way. I'm pretty sure semi-protection solves it, since no named editor is so silly. LotLE×talk 02:25, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Hi MONGO! MONGO, if you are having a bad day, or think that i am troling, then don't read the rest of this message and just erase it. Otherwise, i have a honest question. Considering that you belive 100% on the government version, how do you explain news like this? peace. --Striver 08:37, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I looked over your link and the sublink from that to World Trade Center United Family Group, and nowhere on their website do they have one mention of a government coverup. Do you pay money to Alex Jones to be able to listen to his programming...just curious.--MONGO 09:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

No, actualy not. So in short, you belive his making stuff up? --Striver 19:48, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

WP:NOT a political forum and/or a soapbox.--Jersey Devil 20:42, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Striver, when people experience great trauma in their lives, they may be angry and the U.S. Government is an easy target. To be honest, I think it's awful this guy lost his son, but to think the U.S. Government would be behind it is insanity. You do realize that Alex Jones, Steven Jones and a lot of others that have websites and publish books are looking to make a profit, don't you? In all liklihood, this fellow that was on Alex Jones show did the United Family Group a disservice monetarily with such wild speculations...they should think about replacing him with someone that is in better control of their faculties.--MONGO 06:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Image gallery

I noticed that the images in your gallery don't display properly. I have a version using the same coding at User:Guinnog/gallery and wonder if we can figure out why neither of these galleries works properly, with a view to fixing them. Thanks if you can come up with any ideas. --Guinnog 11:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

They seem to be fine on my browser..(IE)...but as far as understanding the way it's coded, I wouldn't have the foggiest...my userpage design is due to the excellent work of Phaedriel, so she may have an idea on what to do. I have zero formating skills when it comes to this kind of thing.--MONGO 11:54, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I will ask her. I am using Firefox and maybe that is the problem. --Guinnog 11:57, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Could be a bug also...see if you can find anyone else with a similar setup that isn't using IE.--MONGO 12:12, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm currently in the middle of annoying all my friends by asking them to look at it and see if it works out, and what setup they're working with... Thanks for taking the time to help. I stuck a few more pics up if you're interested.

What's this about the cashews? --Guinnog 01:42, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Free iran

See my response. --CBD 12:06, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

A new userbox you might like

Hi MONGO,

I couldn't resist making the following userbox after reading the attached link. After being insulted on numerous occasions by trolls I decided to fight back the best way I know how -- with a witty userbox! Feel free to remove this from your talk page if you don't appreciate the humour. = )

Cheers,

 Netsnipe  ^(Talk)  06:08, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

WP: Policies & guidelines This Wikipedian is proud to be a “Bureaucratic F**k”.

I can appreciate that. I really don't care about their website, since they are obviously trolls. What I don't like is the fact that they aren't even funny! It is such adolescent childishness, I decided really quickly that I wasn't going to bother with them. What they don't understand is that prior legalities aside...anyone can be sued...all you need is the financial resources, a lawyer and a court that will hear the case...litigation is expensive and I doubt any of them have more than a few bucks to rub together...it doesn't matter what prior laws were decided...if a good enough lawyer decided to he could shut them down and sue the crap out of those that knowingly allow libellous misrepresentations to perpetuate...rights to privacy are other issues as well. Worse yet, some really easy digging and the major players there are easily exposed...I was amazed at how stupid they are about their own personal information in some cases.--MONGO 06:17, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

My RFA

MONGO,

Can you please cross out any comments that have been addressed as they are causing me grief to the point that I might withdraw from the nomination. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 13:10, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

ED links

I don't know why they made a whole article about you and it's not my fault. I think you're just upset because there's an article about you.

Also somebody else made a link to it on Jimbo's Talk page, which you've left up (it's the user box one). DyslexicEditor 13:49, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

It's already gone...I was going to delete myself later. I don't care if the website exists, I do care about us using key pages to mention them and Jimbo Wales page is key.--MONGO 18:31, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

If you guys are referring to my userbox, I've already removed any reference to it from Jimbo's talk page. However I'm requesting a deletion review of the Userbox but I am willing to address some outstanding concerns which I've noted here. --  Netsnipe  ^(Talk)  19:18, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Rabbit Green

Hi Mongo, I couldn't help noticing that you deleted my article on "Rabbit Green" considering that it sort of disappeared. You stated that it was "Patent Nonsense", can I ask why. All the information in it is perfectly valid and, as far as I can see, a detailed explanation of a concept which is becoming increasingly popular in Sydney, similar to "emo". I admit that some of it may appear that it was written by a two year old however it is merely stating the facts, nobody has actually seen a Rabbit Green and the article attempts to describe what one would look like based on what others have described it to be. Remember, just because you haven't been exposed to something doesn't make it nonsense.

Cheers

Mr Facts 01:15, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

You've obviously been back to this page and haven't replied to my comment. I'm assuming that your deletion was a mistake and am reposting the article

Cheerio

Mr Facts 05:53, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

No, it wasn't a mistake and wikipedia is not the place to have articles that are hoaxes, or at the very least, so completely nonnotable that they cannot even be referenced.--MONGO 11:04, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Please please please give me some time to respond before you delete something just because you haven't been exposed to it. There is no reason to doubt this article, and if you do walk into any Norwest School and ask what Rabbit Green is, I'm certain you'll find at least 3 people who know what it is in each school.

I'm going to post the article again, and I would ask that you at least go over this with me before callously deleting it.

Mr Facts 06:17, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Netscott

I believe an admin would have to make an adjustment to an editor's User Page, not an editor, particularly one that is embroiled in a debate at Category:Anti-Semitic people with the same editor. Thank you Porky Pig 13:56, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I can appreciate that...it may have been retalitory...did he ask you first on your talk page, before removing it? I mean, that's not mandatory, but it's the polite way to do it. On the other hand, when you blanked part of his userpage, and then posted a false vandal report, that was definitely retalitory. Just try to not put fair use images up on your userpage and you two stay away from each other for a bit.--MONGO 14:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

The editor User:Nescott did not suggest on my user talk page and I deemed it as an attack. The more mature way to have handled it would have been to contact an administrator, then I would not have objected. Thank you for your input. Porky Pig 14:58, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

No retaliation on my part... I just happened to become aware of this user's Fair use image violation after clicking on their user page from a discussion surrounding the propriety of adding a disclaimer to Category:Anti-Semitic people. See this talk. (→Netscott) 14:06, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I figured as much...no worries.--MONGO 14:07, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

MONGO, please be advised that User:Porky Pig is likely a sockpuppet of permanently blocked editor User:SirIsaacBrock based upon editing topics/style, editorial summary comments, etc. Please note usage of the word "Cordially" relative to a discussion involving this category here on User:Zoe's talk page as compared to here on User:TexasAndroid's talk page. Unless I can convince admins of this, I'll be opening a WP:RFCU case shortly as I build my evidence. Thanks. (→Netscott) 16:50, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

This is now on WP:ANI. Thanks. (→Netscott) 17:33, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I am not the editor User:Netscott is accusing me of being, would you please stop this person from attacking me thank you. He has posted a bunch of stuff at a webpage on wiki. You can understand the mentality of the person I am dealing with now. Thank you Porky Pig 18:02, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Discussing articles at +cat

Would you please provide me with the wiki page that has guidelines for the discussion of articles within a +cat. I believe the policy is to discuss the matter at the articles talk page, rather than the +cat talk page, but I am unable to find a reference at wiki. If there isn't one, would you consider adding one? Thank you Porky Pig 17:28, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Editing

Thanks for the reminder re: the changes I made while not logged in. I was remiss in not doing so ( I use many different computers because of my work, and sometimes forget, or don't take the time, to do so). Anyway, thanks again and I'll keep your reminder in mind. Levi P. 02:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Btw, I did not include an edit summary at the time I made the edit (I'm new, sorry) and attempted to correct that but was unable to. How would you recommend I do so? Or is it alright since I addressed the matter on the talk page? I guess I'm just wondering what would be the proper way to correct my mistake. Thanks for your help. Levi P. 02:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Need a couple of favors.

Please do the following for me: Semi protect my userpage. delete the image Image:Karrmannaustinhealey.jpg Thanks! Karrmann 07:23, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

• Done abakharev 08:44, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Polar Bear-baiting

This article was recently deleted. It should not have been deleted, as it was factually correct including citations. Is there a way to recover the deleted article ? I did not save it to my hard drive. Thank you SirIsaacBrock 14:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I can recover it, but it was brought to a vote and the vote was to delete the article, so I won't restore it. See:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Polar Bear-baiting--MONGO 14:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for looking into the matter. I do agree with some of the comments, but none of them warrant the deletion of the article. Cordially SirIsaacBrock 14:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, you are very helpful :) SirIsaacBrock 14:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Template:Baiting

Hello Mongo,

It seems User:Hipocrite has tagged the following baiting articles Lion-baiting Monkey-baiting Human-baiting and Rat-baiting with a delete tag out of spite. It there a way to remedy this type of poor behaviour ? SirIsaacBrock 17:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

You could cite reliable sources for the articles, refrain from removing cleanup tags and instead clean up articles, and focus on the encyclopedic tone required for an encyclopedia. Hipocrite - «Talk» 17:49, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Comment - With respect, the quoted information has citiations with sources and dates provided; the sources are over 100 years old. I don't believe they would be copyvio. Cordially SirIsaacBrock 18:05, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Tone which has made the articles seem less descriptive of the acts and more an exciting group of anecdotes of questionable relevence, and secondary sources. Primary sources are not generally acceptable for encyclopedias. Please see WP:RS. Thanks. Hipocrite - «Talk» 18:14, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Well, I'm glad you were able to convince yourself of my innocence.

Samsara (talk • contribs) 22:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

"Climate Change"

Fight the alarmist media! Global Warming Hoaxers and Alarmists are lying to YOU!Hoask 04:01, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

You seem kind -- can you help?

Being a new Wikipedian (May 2006}, I nominated a stub high school article for deletion on July 11: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kent-Meridian High School. Posts are still being made as of today, some attacking my motives and integrety, even though I have retracted the nomination for deletion twice.

An excerpt from the comments on the page tells be why:

Comment User:RJHall just posted a notice on at least 20 different user pages (including mine User_talk:Metros232 - " rel="nofollow"> alerting people of this discussion using the member list at WP:SCH. - Metros232 16:50, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

• Yup I did. The delete High School discussion is a recurring theme in AfD, and I was hoping to use the latest rallying cry of the deletists (the "failed" WP:SCHOOL policy) to prompt a new discussion specifically about High School notability. Thanks. — RJHall 22:21, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I can't reproduce the code of exerpt (above) here very well (the links work though), but if you could call a halt to this I would really appreciate it. The people posting continue to attack me and obviously have not read the preceding comments as the Meridian High School article has been improved considerbly since the nomimation and merged with Meridian School District according to the comments on the page.

Isn't this against WP:SPAM - Article 3? Please take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kent-Meridian High School.

It's very intimidating, violates the policies that Wikipedia states it has, and gives me dread. I had no idea that schools were a hot-button issue. I feel this whole posting is increasingly showing bad faith. What more can I do? Is there a place I can appeal to? KarenAnn 13:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

P.S. If I am being oversensitive and too wimpy, let me know. I'm trying to get tougher -- I just didn't know people could be so openly mean. KarenAnn 13:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I can post a reminder to those that have been spamming if you wish

I wish you would, as I think such experiences drive well-motivated novices away from Wikipedia. And I promised on the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kent-Meridian High School that I will never touch a school page again, and I mean it. I just was clueless, else I never would have stepped into that minefield. KarenAnn 14:41, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

P.S. I'm not going to nominate any articles for deletion again. I have withdrawn from many articles and activities that I used to enjoy (like Cuban-related articles after the Teemu episode and all the subsequent arguing that is still going on at the expense of any progress on the article). I'm too academic and over-educated, and not the right kind of person to be involved with Wikipedia, I think. KarenAnn 14:41, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

School spam

Thanks and duly noted. I'll see if I can work in the context of the Schools project talk page to work this out. — RJH (talk) 15:12, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks MONGO!

I'm a forensic psychologist -- something in common!

My profession entails having a high profile and getting the same kind of unprovoked attacks as here. Now it has happened twice in a month on Wikipedia -- just what I want to avoid! So thanks for your reassuring words and suggestions. (There should be a Wikipedia crisis intervention page for new people in shock.) KarenAnn 15:38, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

silencing dissent?

What the hell is with you removing all my comments from Talk:September 11, 2001 attacks? Is only one side of the argument allowed to be presented there?

I was only trying to suggest a little neutrality, so by removing what I said without reason you've shown that you are willing to abuse your position to push a POV. Damburger 16:08, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I understand how someone as ignorant as yourself is desperate to silence those with contrary opinions, but now you are being fucking pathetic. Every time I post something to that page you remove it and are now threatening me with a block merely for voicing my opinion. Congratulations on being a Fascist. Damburger 16:22, 14 July 2006 (UTC)