User talk:Newyorkbrad

Archives

If you have come to bid User:Newyorkbrad goodbye, please see User talk:Newyorkbrad/Tribute.

Statement by Newyorkbrad

For once I'll be brief. Due to some external events, which have the potential to affect not just me but many uninvolved people, I will not be able to continue editing.

I would like to thank everyone I have worked with here. The community has extended me extraordinary kindness and support. I am sorry for the pages that never got written and the FA that never got done. I apologize to the 552 people who voted for me for breaking my commitment to them, and to anyone whose case I never had the chance to review.

My thanks in advance for what any of you may write here. I request that no explicit reference be made here or elsewhere to the incidents prompting my departure.

The first available steward is requested to desysop this account without requiring any further postings or formalities. The Arbitration Clerks will remove my name from the list of arbitrators and per precedent will strike any votes I have cast on pending cases or matters.

Goodbye.

Newyorkbrad (talk) 14:01, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Userrights changes are done. :( Thank you very much for your work and efforts. --Thogo (Talk) 14:37, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arb stuff is done, I think. Thatcher 15:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please take time to think of all the good that is here for you and all the good that you have done

Moved to User talk:Newyorkbrad/Tribute

Newyorkbrad's FA

Copied to Talk:Learned Hand

More secrecy, more anonymity

Moved to Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). If this gets moved elsewhere, like a centralized discussion, please update the link.

Those who don't learn from history...

Moved to Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). If this gets moved elsewhere, like a centralized discussion, please update the link.

Please help!

I posted this on the Talk:Homeopathy Page:- TenOfAllTrades, Shoemaker......How can Homeopathy be the 'Fringe view' on the Homeopathy article? If that was the case, the article on 'Islam' should also be considered 'Fringe view' and the Criticism of Islam should be on the article on Islam rather than on the 'Criticism of Islam' Page. At WP:FRINGE, there is a section, titled, "Sufficiently notable for devoted articles", which mentions, 'Creation science', 'Apollo moon landing hoax', 'Time Cube' and 'Paul is dead' which are false allegations/rumours, so the allegations made by references 16 to 19 are not acceptable and so the whole of Para 2 must be removed from the 'Lead'. In fact, Para 1 is more than enough for an introduction.

Is there something wrong with it? Shouldn't Para 1 alone suffice for the 'Lead'?—Homoeopath (talk) 12:09, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]