User talk:GreenJoe

If you leave me a message on this page, I will reply on your page as soon as I can.
If I left a message on your talk page, please reply here, thank you.
Don't forget to sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.
Wikipedia isn't censored, but my talk page is. Please be polite if you would like a response.
Please be signed in to leave a message.

LOTD proposal

You either voted on the original list of the day proposal or the revised version. A more modest experimental proposal is now at issue at WP:LOTDP. Feel free to voice your opinion.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 17:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

UofP

I assume you are in the process of writing a detailed message to place on the article's Talk page explaining your concerns with the references... --ElKevbo 23:15, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:BQ_Canada.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:BQ_Canada.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. OsamaK 18:37, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Liberal_Canada.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Liberal_Canada.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. OsamaK 18:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:GP_Canada.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:GP_Canada.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. OsamaK 18:40, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment on my talk page

I replied there and would appreciate clarification. Thanks. Rray 00:23, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I just realized you're probably talking about my contribution to that deletion discussion. I did not assume bad faith, but I do think reviewing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_policy#Reasons_for_deletion would be helpful. (You'll notice that "lacking citations" isn't one of the reasons on the list.) Thanks. Rray 00:26, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GPC provincial counterparts

You shouldn't be deleting content that should be on the page. The provincial counterparts (if you didn't know) are closely associated with the Green Party of Canada. These provincial parties coordinate with the GPC, for instance, the GPC agreed not to fundraise in Ontario during the Ontario provincial election. I'm not interested in arguing with you, and I don't know what sort or experience you have with the party. However I have planty, and when contributing to the GPC, I think I know what I'm talking about Political junky 01:01, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Political junky (talk) 04:30, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you really need to read WP:OWN This is just so aweful that your deleting content "just because" Have you actually done work with the Green Party or is Wikipedia your passion? Political junky (talk) 04:36, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your user page

Why? We are in the free encyclopedia ;), and these images don't use but in your user page, please remove or replace them, to be able to deleteing them. Thanks very much..--OsamaK 02:41, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please read WP:AGF--OsamaK 02:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Featured List of the Day Experiment

There have been a series of proposals to initiate a Featured List of the Day on the main page. Numerous proposals have been put forth. After the third one failed, I audited all WP:FL's in order to begin an experiment in my own user space that will hopefully get it going. Today, it commences at WP:LOTD. Afterwards I created my experimental page, a new proposal was set forth to do a featured list that is strikingly similar to my own which is to do a user page experimental featured list, but no format has been confirmed and mechanism set in place. I continue to be willing to do the experiment myself and with this posting it commences. Please submit any list that you would like to have considered for list of the day in the month of January 2008 by the end of this month to WP:LOTD and its subpages. You may submit multiple lists for consideration.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 17:26, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of McGill University people

So far you have not produced a valid reason for deleting this article — lacking citations does not mean deletion is warranted. An {{unreferenced}} tag is placed, which accords with this alternative. BlueAg09 (Talk) 00:41, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alberta Greens

I suggest you look at my source, and then look what I had written. There is a clear difference between the two. That certainly is not copy & paste. 74.14.128.26 (talk) 17:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Communications

I see that you deleted a comment that was left on this page by User:Political junky. You are within your rights when you delete content from your talk page, but communications among users generally go more smoothly (and you will earn more credibility with other users) when you retain the full communications record. --Orlady (talk) 04:31, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interac (Japan)

Hey there. The vote so far is: 7 (keep) - 1 (unsure) - 7 (delete). We're almost there.DDD DDD (talk) 11:11, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do I ever regret writing the above...DDD DDD (talk) 08:41, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interac (Japan)

Please assume good faith when dealing with other editors. See Wikipedia:Assume good faith for the guidelines on this. J 12:00, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been here long enough to be familiar with the guideline. I deliberately chose what I did. Chris (talk) 17:33, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, this Wikipedia:Deletion review#Interac (Japan) totally illustrates your bad faith. Chris (talk) 09:30, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Modifying posted AfD results

Please stop modifying the results of closed AfD notices. If you have an issue with the closing editor's decision, take it up with that editor or request a deletion review (as you have done.) It is *not* acceptable to rewrite the closing editor's statement to suit your opinion, and repeated manipulation of such messages is likely to be considered disruptive. --Ckatz^chat_spy 01:05, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More to the point, tampering with the editor's decision is tampering with discussion contributed by another, so it's in the same league as talk page vandalism. —C.Fred (talk) 06:01, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the above problem, as discussed in Deletion Review at [1] your edit [2] of the result of a closed AfD. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interac (Japan), (which was, of course, properly reverted by another editor) is indefensible. I warn you that such conduct appears to be an attempt to interfere with the proper operation of WP. Please never do such a thing again. If any other admin than myself should want to block you for this one, I would have no objection. DGG (talk) 20:49, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Modifying GPO page

When giving your input DON'T DELETE THE WHOLE ARTICLE. alert me, but when you delete an article all your doing is standing in the way of creating a better article. put an alert up, but don't delete the entire material when its valid. 74.14.147.245 (talk) 05:10, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A) All three sections have references B) Election wise, those references are perfectly fine. They aren't from Wikipedia, they show accurate information and there is no reason not to use them. C) The AGM is very relevent (I'll be at the AGM will you? didn't think so) Where they will be electing a new executive, President, and CFO. If the GPO AGM isn't relevant in G-P-O article I don't know what is. D) There are eight references in the history article. Each section provides the facts, and after skimming through the criteria for references I don't see any faults. Your making it really difficult to better this page, and I want you to know that. Next time you've found a mistake (or think you've found a mistake) put an alert on the page. Its SO unnessecary to delete the whole thing. Political junky (talk) 05:34, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

a) Thats your opinion, its meets expectations and if you want new ones do it on your time. b) Did you go to the reference pages? Not a single one is elections ontario and all three connect to the results for that election. (The same used for the election results section) c) The article as a whole yes- that section (recent history) is about recent events, after I get back from the AGM I'll be updating the results. d) I don't see what you want me to look at, but as far as I'm concerned all of these reasons are just your opinions- not wikipedia criteria. If you don't like the work I'm doing- redo it yourself, if you don't want to do that fine- put up a warning. but you can't just go around deleting everything with no or VERY silly reasons! Political junky (talk) 05:50, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

STOP deleting. put up tags- don't delete, give me time to work on the article- point out flaws. You can't just delete everything- its so frusterating- you have no idea how much grief your causing me, all I want is a better article. Political junky (talk) 05:53, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll remove AGM part, but we're keeping policy part, unless you want to tell me its wrong info, put up a "it doesn't cit sources tag" for now. Political junky (talk) 05:55, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your starting an edit war- but blaming me for it- inbelievable. I'm trying to work with you, your being impossible. Political junky (talk) 05:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Damn it Greenjoe, i was going to do it tomorrow, but I'll do it tonight, I'm putting it back for now and I'll find a reference. Wait and stop being difficult- when will you start doing some work of your own? practice what you preach alright. Political junky (talk) 05:59, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't discuss because I know the info- I know where to get the references like I will the policy thing. I'm putting it back up so I can look at what to search for. 10 minutes. Political junky (talk) 06:01, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did four references (two were silly, the one about Elio (who is a friend of mine) that I might remove because hes not involved as much with the GPO as he is GPC and the one about Greens benefiting from MMP (obvious) Political junky (talk) 06:15, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Be careful not to get caught up in edit warring yourself, GreenJoe. You haven't reverted as much as Political junky, so I don't think this needs action yet, but it could if you let it go on. Try to involve more editors in this if necessary. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 06:39, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I replied to you on my talk page. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 06:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you revert the page Green Party of Ontario once more without any explanation in the article talk page, you will be blocked from editing. `'Míkka >t 07:22, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not going to be gentler here: you effectively forced a person to be blocked by your unexplained (hence blatantly disrespectful) reversals and I am seriously warning you that this way of dealing with opponents will not be tolerated regardless the number of reverts. You still didn't provide any minimal explanation of your reverts in the article talk page. `'Míkka >t 07:31, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GPO AGM

Just got back from the AGM! miss me? I'm updating the page , we elected a new president "Lawson Hunter" Ron Yurick is now Northerm rep (male) and I'm going to do a paragraph in recent history on some of the stuff that happened since nobody else here was there. :) P.S: please listen to mikkalai's comments because its so true, its like dealing with a Wiki-bully or something. 74.14.147.245 (talk) 02:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Green Party of Prince Edward Island

Um, what I've been doing is trying to replace a deprecated banner with the banner which has been selected to be the deprecated banner's replacement. The new banner includes all the data of the old banner, and additional data as well. Please inform me how replacing a banner as per the new instructions on the deprecated Template:PPAP itself qualifies as being in an edit war. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 19:31, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry that you have decided your own opinion about the banner is more important than that of apparently both the Canada and Political parties in Canada projects themselves. If you seriously believe that you arer correct, however, then take it up with the project itself. Your reversions also by the way constitute edit warrning. I am in the process of requesting some input from admins on this matter at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Template weirdness. I imagine you would agree with whatever decision is made there, particularly considering that you would yourself be violating 3RR if you were to remove it again. John Carter (talk) 19:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, don't forget that by your own definition, you are engaged in an edit war at said talk page, since you have made the same change twice. —C.Fred (talk) 20:02, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Green obsession

I think you should start focusing a little more on some of the other political parties. NOT A SINGLE OTHER Ontario provincial political party page cites more then a few sources. Its disgusting that you put me through all of this heartache when nobody else is doing anything. Its sickening, I'm so upset. Political junky (talk) 02:14, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature

Hello, you probably are not aware of this, but your signature is impersonating another user. User:J is a long-time and current user and your signature is impersonating him. I am sure you probably were not even aware a user existed with that username. Might I gently prod you to change your signature ASAP? This is rather a serious matter, mind you. Regards. --12 Noon 06:54, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unforunately, now you are impersonating a different user, User:GJ. To prevent this from happening, double check Special:Listusers to make sure your signature is not already taken as someone's userid. If the account is available, you need to sign in and create that account and either mark it as a {{Doppleganger}} account or redirect it to this account.

I apologize if this appears as nitpicking to you, but this is grounds for immediate action by the Arbitration Committee, which I am trying to steer you clear of. Regards.--12 Noon 16:14, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:PPAP

Template:PPAP has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 16:23, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Monastery

Ah, but I do have direct proof of the identity behind the person who removed my post.

Message-ID: <BAY102-DAV10D7D8016EB52ACCDB087F87FA0@phx.gbl> Received: from 71.231.106.253 by BAY102-DAV10.phx.gbl with DAV; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 21:51:36 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [71.231.106.253] <---- Same IP that removed my post. X-Originating-Email: [george_xxxxx@hotmail.com] X-Sender: george_xxxxx@hotmail.com

Those would be the IP headers from the last e-mail I received from The Monastery. This e-mail came specifically from George Freeman the CEO/President of TheMonastery.org I placed xxxxx's to protect the parties e-mail from spam/harassment.

I would be more than happy to forward you the e-mail for your inspection if you feel so desired.

Sincerely yours,

Brad.

Brdennis 23:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You do not own the article Universal Life Church

Please stop assuming ownership of articles. Doing so may lead to disruptive behavior such as edit wars and is a violation of policy, which may lead to a block from editing.