User:Aeon1006/Archive-Zeta

Is this what you mean in defending Steve's personal attacks?

This was Steve's original personal attack, before the AMA deletion issue arose. Remember, he took over my case February 6 and became my AMA Advocate of his own free will and then did nothing.

• (copyed from Wikipedia talk:Association of Members' Advocates - emphasis added)

"I am leaving my position aside for a moment and speaking as an individual. With that out of the way, I must say Matisse, that overall you have not lent yourself to be helpful with the Starwood case, your Advocate, or anyone else within the AMA that you have interacted with. On the contrary, nearly every person who has touched your case has become almost immediately frustrated with your approach, attitude and demands. " אמר Steve Caruso _(desk/AMA) • Give Back Our Membership! 04:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[1]

Is this what you mean by justifying his public personal attacks? Please read Wikipedia:AMA Requests for Assistance/Requests/November 2006/Mattisse

• (quoted from my former AMA Advocate in response to my complaint about Steve's public comments:)

  Hi Mattisse, I think you are a good faith editor and your actions involved in the Starwood case were entirely legitimate. Also, I believe that some other editors deliberately acted in a manner to increase your stress levels and push you into making an error of judgement. Overall, I think your decision not to be directly involved in the ArbCom case was prudent and the end result was fairly reasonable. Addhoc 14:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

The fact is a sockpuppet was enabled in Starwood by the AMA Advocate. That sock puppet was harassing me among others and was part of a sock puppet ring that had been in operation since last spring and had been harassing me for six months. The sock puppet's AMA Advocate was irresponsible in that case. He has subsequently offered repeatedly to apologise to me and in other ways has been very kind to me. I appreciate his offers but I don't want an apology. All I want is for an AMA Advocate to say that the organisation will take steps to be more careful about the sock puppet issue in the future. No one has. Instead, the AMA Coordinator, who is supposed to be my AMA Advocate, has chosen to personally attack me in public although he refuses to communicate with me personally or close my case or tell me what is being "investigated".

Recently I have had several quite pleasant interactions with AMA Advocates. I do not have problems with other AMA Advocates or on Wikipedia now that the sock puppets are gone. My only problem is Steve's personal attacks.

I was not the original person to use the phrase "sockpuppet enabling service". That is someone else's phrase. Is that person being personally attacked also?

If you can give me some advice as to how to get my case closed I would appreciate that very much. Please help me on this issue or help get me released from having Steve as my AMA Advocate. This is a main reason why I continue to feel AMA is an irresponsible organisation. Cheers! Sincerely, --Mattisse 23:55, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I notice you have several talk pages and I do not know which one to respond to, so I may respond to both. Cheers! --Mattisse 23:55, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes I am

I was not the first person to use the phrase "a sockpuppet enabling service". In fact, I am not sure if I did use it, as I am not the type to use clever wording like that. Why did not someone merely say that AMA would at least address the issue? That is all I wanted. Why can he not take my statements "as a blunt statement and not a personal attack" especially as I did not single him out by using his name as he did me. Why is he taking this so personally? I was frustrated that AMA was not taking my concerns seriously and would not even say they would put my concerns under consideration. In fact, the whole AMA seems to lack AFG. So I find it strange that you accuse me of that.

You are telling me to AGF but you appear to be defending Steve's lack of AGF. Remember, he was my AMA Advocate at the time (and still is) and had refused to communicate personally with me since February. Remember also, that one sock puppet released from Arbitration by his AMA Advocate was still harassing me, and at the time had filed an AMA complaint listing me along with several others including an Arbitrator, and the case was accepted by AMA. (It is "under investigation" also as the sock puppets in the case was indefinitely blocked.) I was under a great deal of stress. He told me in February not to contact him so I have not done so and essentially had no AMA Advocate through this stressful period. I still have not heard from him regarding my case. Since Starwood essentially was decided in my favor (but the decision was recently) I have no problems except my AMA Advocate and his personal attacks on me. All I want to know is what is going on, what is being "investigated" in my case and when will it be closed. If he believes I am a nasty demanding advocee, a bad person whom nobody likes, then why does he not release my case, why did he take it to begin with? And an advocee, you are saying, should AGF when his AMA Advocate does not?

I am weighing what my options are, given his behavior and his lack of AGF, his continuing personal attacks naming my name, his refusal to contact me although he is my AMA Advocate, the fact that AMA has an opened a case for a sock puppet against me. It appear you are suggesting I go to ANI? I have not had much experience with ANI. I need an AMA Advocate to help me deal with my AMA Advocate. I just want this over with. I am not a bad person. I do not have problems with others on Wikipedia. I have good relationships with other editors. I find this whole thing bizarre. Sincerely, --Mattisse 01:13, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

P.S.

One of the Arbitrators told me a few days ago that I was an excellent contributor and that it was a pleasure to help me out of my sock puppet difficulties. I do not think I am a trouble maker on Wikipedia. I believe Addhoc summed up the situation correctly in his comments to me. Did you read them? Sincerely, Mattisse 01:24, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I do not understand your post to me.

I will give you my perspective since I do not be expressing myself well to you. You are asking me questions I have already answered on your page so please forgive the repetition.

1. I have never attacked Steve personally. He has attacked me personally by name twice. My comments on the AMA MFX page were not directed at him personally -- that was furthest from my mind. Yet, he did not AGF and saw my comments as personal attacks. I was frustrated in general that no matter what I said or diffs that I offered, no one responded by saying that AMA would at least consider the issue. I was not the only one making this complaint. Maybe I made it more forcibly as my bad experience with an AMA Advocate supporting a sock puppet was so recent and that the Advocate obviously acted only as an Advocate and did not bother to check out the obvious clues that his advocee was a sock puppet. It is inexplicable why Steve took general factual comments and assuming bad faith saw them as directed as personal attacks against him. Many AMA Advocates contacted me personally and all were supportive and none were hostile. Two tried to enlist me in helping AMA come up with better policies.

2. Steve issued a warning on my talk page, so I issued one on his. (I learned a long time ago through the six months of sock puppet harassment that if you do not take steps early after an accusation, you end up being a victim.)

3. Steve has forbidden me to contact him so (aside from warning him about personally attacking me) I do no post on his pages nor email him and have not since February). This is the situation even though he is my AMA Advocate. Out of frustration I have posted on the AMA pages I have come across to try to get information and help. AMA is very confusing about where to post, so I try to draw attention to my problems when I run across an AMA page.) I have received many personal supportive messages from other AMA Advocates both on my talk page and by email, but no one can help me get Steve off my case. Why did he take my case without asking me if he thought I was such a bad person?

4.' I have had no response from Steve since February (this is April). He has been my AMA Advocate since he arbitrarily took over my case in February, just when I needed help the most. He then told me he was busy having a baby, moving, etc. and did not have time for me at the present, that he would get back to me when he had time. He has not contacted me since, except posting a warning on my page a few days ago.

5. Once again I say the "sockpuppet enabling service" was not originally my phrase. Further, many made similar charges on that page. One of those persons probably made the "sockpuppet enabling service" comment first. As I said before, I am not the type that comes up with clever wording like that.

6. You again say that Steve has not attacked my personally. I again repeat the following which are quotes (emphasis added by me:

"I am leaving my position aside for a moment and speaking as an individual. With that out of the way, I must say Matisse, that overall you have not lent yourself to be helpful with the Starwood case, your Advocate, or anyone else within the AMA that you have interacted with. On the contrary, nearly every person who has touched your case has become almost immediately frustrated with your approach, attitude and demands. " אמר Steve Caruso _(desk/AMA) • Give Back Our Membership! 04:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[2]

"Another large complaint is, keeping tabs on the quality of Advocacy cases. This is the source of all historical criticism (which, I may add, came from the period of time where the AMA was not functional and completely "ad hoc") and some recent criticism with a few disgruntled advocees (but I do not wish to discuss in detail how I was harassed by Mattisse here)." אמר Steve Caruso _(desk/AMA) • Give Back Our Membership! 16:07, 6 April 2007 (UTC) [3]

Again I quote from another AMA Advocate:

• Hi Mattisse, I think you are a good faith editor and your actions involved in the Starwood case were entirely legitimate. Also, I believe that some other editors deliberately acted in a manner to increase your stress levels and push you into making an error of judgement. Overall, I think your decision not to be directly involved in the ArbCom case was prudent and the end result was fairly reasonable. Addhoc 14:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Again I ask, if Steve thinks I am such an awful person, why did he take my case, why will he not get off my case, what is he investigating, when will this all end?

7. I am in no danger of being blocked. I have not attacked anyone personally. I contribute greatly to Wikipedia. I have something like 17,000 mainspace edits and specialise in getting Feature Articles through the copy editting process and into Feature Article status. Any attempt to block me would be stopped or ended shortly I am confident. No one else sees any problems with my behavior except Steve (and perhaps you). The Arbitrators and others have made it clear they do not see me as a problem but rather as an excellent contributor.

8. The sock puppets have not all been blocked as one of the sock puppet's AMA Advocates got him off the hook in Arbitration, as I explained before. He 'left' voluntarily because of Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Jefferson Anderson as he saw the writing on the wall. Since he had 'left' he was not blocked. His AMA Advocate was warned in Arbitration that this was common behavior on the part of sock puppets. That sock puppet continued to harrass me and others after he was "sprung" from Arbitration by his AMA Advocate. Hence the opening of Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Jefferson Anderson. Although he 'left' Wikipedia on February 15 before he could by blocked on Wikipedia; none the less his AMA Advocate sent him a congratulatory note upon the closing of the Starwood Arbitration on March 24. [4]

This is my experience of the matter. The Arbitrators went through a great deal of effort to shut down the sockpuppet ring operating at least since Spring of 2006. See User:999, the user the AMA Advocate wantedto email personal information about me to. I can provide you with much more evidence if you need it.

So, do you have any suggestions as to what to do? Steve has forbidden me to contact him directly so that is out. (I only realised recently that Steve and The Thadman were the same person.)

The only avenue I can think of at the moment is to go to ANI and as for help to get Steve to resign as my AMA Advocate in view of his personal attacks on me, his refusal to contact me, his refusal to do anything for my case, including refusing to resign. Can you think of another recourse? Sincerely, Mattisse 12:12, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Please recommend that he refrain from making personal attacks other places .

I have not been allowed to contact Steve since February. His first post on my page in the last few months was in the last few days. The problem is not that we post on each other's pages. Neither of us have any desire to do this.

My request is that he stop making personal attacks around Wikipedia, now having mobilised the AMA Advocacy communication against me. He has made me a target of hate with his remarks, so that the AMA Advocacy focus of dissatisfaction is now on me as the problem. I have been effective ostracized from the AMA Advocacy program by his public personal attacks on me. I need to get help for this. Where can I go? Sincerely, Mattisse 17:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

P.S. He asked for the comments but you have archived you pages and I could not copy my comments to you. I made no personal attacks or harassing remarks targeting him as he did me. Please explain that to him. My comments on the MFD pages were general, and I received positive feedback from other AMA Advocates on them. They did not see them as targeted at Steve/The Thadman. I need to get help for his hate of me. Sincerely, Mattisse 17:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Please show me

Please show me where I have made personal attacks on Steve/The Thadman. There was no need for him to mention me by name repeatedly, "blunt" statements or otherwise. Where was I to get help over these last months since February? Sincerely, Mattisse 17:25, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

AMA case

Hi, thanks for your note. I am not sure what you mean when you say that: "The case you have filled lists a indefently blocked user." Does this refer to me? If so, I have had no indication that I have been blocked - this is the first I have heard about it (and I have had not trouble editing anything - yet, at least). I can't remember all the details I filled in when I applied but I don't remember mentioning any one else's name (????). Please let me know what this all refers to. If you wish, feel free to email me direct (my email address is on my user page, or leave another note on my Talk page. Sorry, I am really confused about this and am wondering what is happening? John Hill 04:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your almost immediate and informative replies! I will follow up getting assistance as you have suggested. Cheers, John Hill 04:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

copied from Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates/Message board

(copied from above page. Emphasis mine.)

I completely agree with what Neigel has said above me, and would also add (as I've already said at WT:AMA) that, when new guidelines for advocates are drawn up, communication off-wiki (by e-mail or IRC) between advocate and advocee should be discouraged. The MfD demonstrated that the AMA suffers from a poor image among the wider community, who think of it as wikilawyerish and prepared to fight the corner of trolls and sockpuppets.

So it was not just me who was critical. I assume Steve The Thadman also accused the other critics of personal attacks. More importantly, I am sure he does not usually single out his own AMA Advocee for such treatment without communicating at all with that Advocee first and counseling and educating that Advocee if he felt his Advocee's behavior was out of line. Isn't that AMA procedure?

Do you think it odd for an AMA Advocate to forbid the Advocee to contact him for two months, not contact the Advocee himself for two months, and then disparage his Advocee publicly more than once (including stating several other Advocates felt the same disparaging way) without counseling and advising the Advocee first? Is it really normal to publicly attack your own AMA Advocee in such a way when never having tried to work with the Advocee at all? Sincerely, Mattisse 10:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Why did my AMA Advocate help me with harassment?

While I was being harassed by User:Jefferson Anderson and Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Jefferson Anderson with no help whatsoever from my AMA Advocate. Is that proper AMA Advocacy? --Mattisse 11:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

(User:Thatcher131 quote copied from Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Jefferson Anderson)

"The bad news is that while I was analyzing the case I became convinced that Frater and Anderson are the same editor. It may not be proveable in a court, but the evidence is much stronger than is normally required on Wikipedia..." Diff

Why was my AMA Advocate missing in action here? Sincerely --Mattisse 11:26, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Reply about AMA case

Hi! Thanks for accepting my AMA case. I am sure that there are a lot more examples of incivility I could find, especially with respect to MSJapan. An excellent example is on the talk page of the AMA case now. He is continually portraying me as anti-Masonic (I am not), only interested in "exposing Masonic secrets" (I am not), and otherwise projecting motivations upon me which are simply not true. He also continuously misrepresents my past almost involvment in Arbitration - I was actually NOT involved: somebody tried to drag me into the Starwood arbitration when I actually had nothing to do with any of the Starwood articles. The Arbitrators decided that I was not actually a party to the arbitration. Similarly, he keeps referring to a sockpuppet accusation which was disproven by checkuser, and even opened a sockpuppet case, in my opinion, simply to silence me during an AfD in which he was invested in making sure the article got deleted, when I was for keeping it. These continual attacks on my character I feel are harassment. I simply want them to stop. Aren't editors supposed to discuss the article and edits, and refrain from discussing personality issues? I will respond point-by-point showing the negative spin and misrepresentation on that talk page post.

As for other disputes, I am rather afraid to bring this up, but I am also concerned about Mattisse's frequent attacks on me which he is using to attempt to discredit the AMA system. These are also full of misrepresentation and negative spin. I would like these attacks to be stopped as well. I also think that he should remove or redact them. Jefferson Anderson 14:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

My, that was quick. I was still searching for this link to give you where I was found not to be the same as Xyzzy. I personally don't believe the Xyzzy is the same as the person he was identified with. It was not done by checkuser, despite what the template on his user page says. Note that the tag on Xyzzy's user page was actually put there by Mattisse and not by the blocking admin. Should he be doing that? Jefferson Anderson 19:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Reply

I feel there no need for a Check User as it will not show a similar IP. One was already done very recently so in my mind there is no need to repeat, as you can see from reading the recent Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Jefferson Anderson. Do you think there is a need? But of course if you see a need, please do so.

My postings pertained to what I saw as personal attacks from Steve, The Thadman, whom you were defending at the time. I will say no more on that subject at all. I have done nothing to Jefferson Anderson so he has no need to include me in any dispute he is having now. My sincere apologies to all concerned if my intentions have been misread. Please forgive me. Sincerely, --Mattisse 19:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Jefferson Anderson AMA

Jefferson wants to be vindicated regarding his editing habits - WP:CIVIL is just the way he thinks he's going to do it this time. His editing record is terrible, and despite what he claims, he never entered into any useful dialogue with anyone for months, and talk pages will reflect that. There's only so many times you can ask a person to discuss before they revert and support their statements before you need to wash your hands of the situation.

When Jefferson came back to WP, the first thing he did after editing his talk page (to state that he was going to report any and all WP:CIVIL violations and undo an admin's redaction of polemics on his user page), was provoke me in the Obligations in Freemasonry AFD. He then redacted the comment and filed the AMA based on my response. This is an abuse of the process, just like the time he filed an AfD for a different user (which AMA policy states is not allowed). He's also clearly hung up on edits from, months ago from other users (whom he also included in the AMA) until he was shown that it was inappropriate. The claim is spurious, and I will make no further comment on nor have any further participation in this AMA.

Your time is better spent helping users who genuinely want to use the process to resolve a legitimate issue than it is spent on a user who created a situation in order to pursue an agenda. MSJapan 20:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

The above assertions are simply not true. I can point to the talk pages where I attempted to discuss. Let MSJapan provide an example of what he claims. I assert that he will be unable to. Jefferson Anderson 21:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

As I read the policy, striking the comment is consider a retraction. It's been done. I will not apologize to someone who continues to misrepresent me, inaccurately projects motives on me, and won't admit to the misreprentation. Now Vidkun is "quoting" things I didn't say. They are engaged in a deliberate effort to discredit me. Please read through the AMA request talk page. MSJapan makes believe I have some long history of disrupting Masonic articles, when I have touched exactly two articles on only 3 different days back in February. This misrepresentation has to stop. Jefferson Anderson 21:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Continuing, the dates involved were: Feb 1, voted in AfD; Feb 2, edited Obligations in Freemasonry; Feb 5, worked on both Jahbulon and Obligations in Freemasonry and Feb 12 on Obligations again. I did nothing wrong in those edits, and I discussed or attempted to discuss on the talk pages [5], [6], [7]. (These diffs include both sides of discussions, as I made a number of posts each day). Perhaps MSJapan is conflating me with someone else. I can't tell. It feels to me like he is engaging in character assassination, because what he is claiming about me simply isn't true. Jefferson Anderson 22:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Follow up

No problem. If I remember correctly, one of them had a talk page. Do you want that deleted too? --HappyCamper 18:14, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Looks like someone got to it before me! Anyway, feel free to come by if I can help you with anything. See you around. --HappyCamper 18:19, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Aeon1006/Sandbox

Hi, I've cleared User:Aeon1006/Sandbox. It appeared to be a copy of Wikipedia:Esperanza as it used to exist; problem with that is that most of the transclusions on that page are now protected redirects, and so the page was being mis-categorized into Category:Protected redirects (when it's not a redirect at all). Since the project is now inactive, the layout no longer exists and you haven't edited the page for seven months, I have assumed it's no longer needed; feel free to restore anything you do need, but check it's not being categorized somewhere it shouldn't. Thanks – Gurch 19:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Mattisse

He continues to refer to me as a sockpuppet, though not by name. I thought he had agreed to stop. Please ask him to stop again. I cannot have someone continue to attack me in this way. Here are some examples: [8], [9]. [10]. In short, she is still trying to use the disproven "fact" that she thinks I am a sockpuppet of someone to attack the AMA. I do not want this lie used in this manner. Please explain to her again that referring to me in such a way is a personal attack. Jefferson Anderson 17:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Are you still an AMA member?

Are you still an AMAmember? --CyclePat 03:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Request that you not post on my talk page again without going through my Advocate first -- that was the agreement.

Please do not post on my talk page again. The agreement was that you would work through my Advocate before you begin accusing and threatening me. I am asking you to honor that agreement. Sincerely, Mattisse 13:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Email

I've replied to your email. Walton ^{Vivat Regina!} 08:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Request that you stop hostile, threatening , accusing posts on my page

I am asking that you stop posting hostile, accusing posts on my page threatening to turn me to the authorities. That is my request. I cannot force you to stop threatening me, but it is just as stressful and ugly for me to be accused and threatened by you in an hostile way as it is to be so by your Advocee, in fact more so.

If you want to specifically outline exactly what you are objecting to in the links your Advocee sent you then do it as that would be constructive and helpful. The links he sent you that prompted you to accuse me and threaten me implied that if I use the words "sock puppet" then you will turn me in to the authorities, because your Advocee will be stressed. (By the way, your Advocee should decide whether I am a "he" or a "she" as he changes my sex midway through his post.)

If I cannot use the words "sock puppet" without stressing your client, then turn me in for using the words "sock puppet" in this post. Sincerely, --Mattisse 11:03, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I believe you were the one who defended the AMA Coordinator for gratuitously defaming me twice on public talk pages under the justification that he was just being "blunt" (when what he was saying was untrue and unnecessary). You did so even though his accusations were extremely stressful for me.

Please explain why you are not concerned if I am stressed and will defend the person defaming me to a large audience, when I cannot use the words "sock puppet" in personal posts to persons I am working out problems with and to whom I am trying to explain my actions.

Very few persons would have read my personal posts in your Advocee's links as they concerned my personal interactions with the persons I was posting to.

• One was to a friend asking advice about posting on ANI. I am sure neither you nor your Advocee have a posting relationship with him or are even interested in anything about him,

• one was to my former AMA Advocate and concerned his questions to me involving sock puppets,

• and one was to my current AMA Advocate regarding the same issue.

I certainly will never post to anyone again, except over specifically editing issues on pages I am copy editing. If you look at my talk page you will see how people in general regard me. Therefore, this is my last post to you. In any event I am sure I will be turned in to the authorities over this post. Sincerely, Mattisse 11:54, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Email

I've sent you another email. Please check your inbox. Walton ^{Vivat Regina!} 12:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

A very Californian RfA thanks from Luna Santin

Thanks for your support in my not-so-recent RfA, which succeeded with a final tally of (97/4/4)! I've never been able to accept compliments gracefully, and the heavy support from this outstanding community left me at a complete loss for words -- so, a very belated thank you for all of your kind words. I have done and will continue to do the utmost to serve the community in this new capacity, wherever it may take me, and to set an example others might wish to follow in. With a little luck and a lot of advice, this may be enough. Maybe someday the enwiki admins of the future will look back and say, "Yeah, that guy was an admin." Hopefully then they don't start talking about the explosive ArbComm case I got tied into and oh what a drama that was, but we'll see, won't we? Surely some of you have seen me in action by now; with that in mind, I openly invite and welcome any feedback here or here -- help me become the best editor and sysop I can be. Again, thank you. –Luna Santin

A little late, but I still think it's important to thank those who supported my candidacy. I appreciate your trust, and I hope I haven't let you down. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:08, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the barnstar!

It give me faith which I need desperately. not just in myelf but in humans in general. Thank you so much! Sincerely, Mattisse 17:34, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Leaving again

Please close my AMA case. I no longer need any assistance. I see there is only one way to get away from a manic obsessive. Jefferson Anderson 21:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:EAnew.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:EAnew.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. BigrTex 20:25, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Doomsday-clock.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Doomsday-clock.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 20:58, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Defender_of_the_Wiki_Ribbon.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Defender_of_the_Wiki_Ribbon.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 21:36, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Call for AMA Coordination election

("Automated" message) User:CyclePat has proposed to call for a new AMA Coordination election [11]. Independently of your supporting or oppossing to this call, I ask you to contact other 5 active members in order to get a reasonable quorum. Thanks in advance. --Neigel von Teighen 08:43, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Your nice userpage

Hi, I randomly clicking on users and I found you. I like you userpage, did you design yourself? If so could you design a userpage for me? Thanks. --(You rang?) 00:38, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

AMA

Given the lack of changes as promised in the first MFD, it would certainly be appropriate to put it on MFD again. Esperanza followed the same pattern - an MFD with promises, lack of substantial changes afterwards, a second MFD to conclude the matter. >Radiant< 14:47, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

• Kim is incorrect. MFD is not a forum for revoking policy, but has in the past proven quite effective at halting processes (as precedented with Esperanza and PAIN, among others). >Radiant< 16:14, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Just a head's up, you listed the MfD for AMA on the AfD page (wow that was a lot of acronyms...). I removed the link and moved it to the MfD listing. Just an FYI. -Cquan (talk, AMA Desk) 17:12, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:AMA

FYI please check WP:ANI#WP:AMA. --CyclePat 02:24, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Given up

Well it was fun with the AMA, building it back up from ruins and all. Now, however, it's too much. I don't have the time, effort or zeal that I had when I started, and given how things are going down with Wikipolitics as of late (on the global scale, not the AMA in particular), I'm getting fed up with a lot more. If you ever need me, hit me via email, as I'm going to be a fly on the wall with Wikipedia for now. אמר Steve Caruso _(desk/AMA) • Give Back Our Membership! 03:01, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Please stop

Please stop changing the AMA pages. It's disruptive and we are trying to have a conversation on those pages. I will revert your re-directs. Thank you for you understanding and leaving the discussion boards. --CyclePat 07:19, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

AMA

Wow, I was away for a few days and this turns into a controversial mess... is it resolved by now or do you still need help? >Radiant< 08:21, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Well Thank you very much for your comments on my talk page. Actually, I don't agree with you. I believe you did do something. According to Wikipedia's Policies it is agree upon by many wikipedians that prior to making big changes one should build a WP:CONCENSUS. I don't agree with the historical status which you have placed upon the AMA because 1) It was done on a short notice without allowing for comments from the community (Assides from a few biased Administrators that regularly patrol such issues). 2) It was not for the good of wikipedia when it clearly violates the consensus building 3) As argued in my essay on the village pumps policy proposal page and stipulated in wikipedia's policies and guidelines : proposals should be used to solicit feedback and to reach a consensus. Nowhere have you or anyone demonstrated to me that there is a consensus to close AMA.

Thanks to that same rule, as per Wikipedia's policies on Historical pages, I invoke my right revive the AMA by advertising. Thank you and I trust you will respect my rights to advertise the AMA. You are welcome to also do the same by recruiting new members that are interested to help form and fix up AMA. Thank you again and please feel free to message me anytime. --CyclePat 22:40, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• The above is a misunderstanding of the term "historical", which is not a "status" (Wikipedia doesn't do status) but a simple statement of fact. >Radiant< 12:27, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

RFC

I don't think that RFC is necessary, but I will keep an eye out. >Radiant< 12:27, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

A minor correction: I'm not involved but the link you provided on the RFC, WP:EA, links to Editor Assistance. I think you meant WP:Esperanza? Ripberger 20:25, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you meant WP:EA, my mistake if you did (I didn't really look at the whole thing). Ripberger 20:29, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

RfC me!

I saw your RfC. What I think you are pointing to is the fact that I am being constant. I apologize if this causes anxiety for you. I also apologize my essay on historical pages specifically mentioned you in an offensive way. I don't believe it did. I had based it on facts and it was well cited. Not only that I clearly stated that the section which may have been offensive needed work! I think the essay was a just essay a shouldn't have been deleted. For that reason I believe, if you felt it was offensive you should have discussed that with me prior to gaining support to delete the page. As for the AMA, I don't believe an RfC on me will be the proper venue. --CyclePat 21:04, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Cookies

Cookies!

Hello! I just wanted to give you a plate of cookies for being a Wikipedian. Good luck recovering from Wikistress! Peace, Neranei 19:03, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome! Cookies make lots of people feel better. I'm on a Wikihappiness mission; do you know where else you could find stressed or unheppy people besides Wikipedians with stress level _ ? Thanks. Spread the love! Neranei 23:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:CVU status

The Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to {{inactive}} and/or {{historical}} status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU#Inactive.3F and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 15:23, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day

Happy First Edit Day, Aeon1006', from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! User:Shadowbot3 (talk) 06:44, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

• FROM YOUR FRIEND:

 ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:18, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Happy first edit anniversary!

	HAPPY FIRST EDIT DAY!	from the BIRTHDAYCOMMITTEE
	Wishing Aeon1006/Archive-Zeta a very Happy First Edit Day! Have a fantastic day! From the Wikipedia Birthday Committee

Happy first edit anniversary! umdrums 11:10, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Block conversion

Thanks for the note, I will convert this to anon-only in a moment. By the way, nice user page! Can't sleep, clown will eat me 22:13, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

The Chain Barnstar of Recognition

		The Chain Barnstar of Recognition
		For making a difference! This Barnstar isn't free, this is a chain barnstar, as payment please give this star to at least 3-5 others with 500+ edits but no barnstar. So that everyone who deserves one will get one. Hpfan9374 00:59, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

The Chain Barnstar of Merit

		The Chain Barnstar of Merit
		For your hard work! This Barnstar isn't free, this is a chain barnstar, as payment please give this star to at least 4 others with 1500+ edits but no barnstar or has few barnstars. So that everyone who deserves one will get one. Hpfan9374 00:59, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

The Chain Barnstar of Diligence

		The Chain Barnstar of Diligence
		For shaping Wikipedia! This Barnstar isn't free, this is a chain barnstar, as payment please give this star to at least 3 others with 2500+ edits but no barnstar or has few barnstars. So that everyone who deserves one will get one. Hpfan9374 00:59, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

The Wikipedian's Chain Barnstar of Honour

		The Wikipedian's Chain Barnstar of Honour
		For building Wikipedia! This Barnstar isn't free, this is a chain barnstar, as payment please give this star to at least 2 others with 5000+ edits but no barnstar or has few barnstars. So that everyone who deserves one will get one. Hpfan9374 00:59, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Tax protester mediation.

I'm still up for it. Given the bias concerns that have been raised, I welcome the neutral approach of a mediator. Cheers! bd2412 T 17:52, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I would like mediation. Thank you for participating. Mpublius 17:27, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Winter storms

There is a discussion started by User:Juliancolton at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Meteorology about a proposed/possible new WikiProject called WikiProject Winter storms. Feel free to voice your opinion on the proposal.JForget 01:10, 23 December 2007 (UTC)