User talk:Alexia Death/Archive1

Welcome! -- Camptown 21:18, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome noted and appreciated, however this template welocome message is tad boring, so ive removed it ;)--Alexia Death 13:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Estonia

You wrote: "Nothing on talk page? hen put something on talk page instead of edit waring.)" Well, as you can see, I have started the discussion on the talk page some time ago: Talk:Estonia#Removing unreferenced claims. You did not realise that, I guess. People who revert my edits do not say anything on the talk page, they just revert. So, can you please revert your revert? Lantios 16:03, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No I wont. Putting together a material for you takes time. You have given none. And edit war remains edit war. Please reach a consensus then edit. --Alexia Death 16:11, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So, you did a reasonless revert to help Digwuren in an edit war because you do not like me. Lantios 16:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't consider stopping a pointless edit war a reason then yes. I promise that I will not do this again after the topics have been DISCUSSED in a sensible time frame and a consensus is reached. I have no particular opinion of you personally, as I don't know you.--Alexia Death 16:22, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Making a revert is a part of an edit war, not a method to stop it. I am the only one who tries to discuss the topic, others just revert and do not bother writing anything about my edits at the talk page. How are we supposed to reach consensus if you and Digwuren do nothing but revert? Lantios 16:26, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you're referring to [1], as you appear to have whined about that in the summary line of [2], you're merely displaying your impatience -- again. It is very hard to maintain even a veneer of WP:CIVIL addressing you after all your demagoguery and sophistry, you really shouldn't expect thorough responses to be written in a matter of minutes. Digwuren 17:58, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How can anything be discussed if you don't even bother to list your grievances on the talk page. In one case you removed a SINGLE word. What was the claim that you associated with it? How come a SINGLE word needs a citation? --Alexia Death 16:31, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Look, I know that you will defend your position by any possible means. Just try to understand that what you do is not honest and try to avoid such actions in the future. Lantios 16:48, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly believe my actions are RIGHT(TM) and honest or I would not be engaging in them. Id like you to understand that I in turn find trying to "out run" your opponents not to be the the most honest thing to do... My respect for you can only grow when you stop screaming and actually start argumentation of your position. --Alexia Death 16:55, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

I think that because you are also mentioned there you may be interested about that User:Petri Krohn/Evidence.--Staberinde 14:21, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. Its appreciated.--Alexia Death 14:35, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted the wikilink to the page. The page is not linked from anywhere, and should not be. If you found it, it is only proof of stalking. -- Petri Krohn 20:45, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are aware that someone just needs to look at your contribution history and all these links show? I did not find it. I was pointed to it. --Alexia Death 21:31, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summary at Congress of Estonia

I have a strong suspicion, that you are communicating off-line with User:Digwuren, possibly making you a meatpuppet. The edit summary was meant as a warning, I would consider further reverts a violation of the WP:3RR, and would file a checkuser request. I have now filed the request at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Digwuren. The most relevant issues here are however Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Republic of Estonia (1990-1991) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Estonian SSR (independent). -- Petri Krohn 20:40, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently you have. I have no offline connection to User:Digwuren. Stop your ranting and trying to point the finger at anyone resisting your push for one sided from no end neutral POV into everything related to Estonia, Baltic states or tie them into something completely irrelevant... Act like an adult and discuss the subject matter with some sources in stead of endless and very tiresome edit waring..--Alexia Death 21:12, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying, that you do not know him in real life, or on other Internet forums outside Wikipedia? -- Petri Krohn 23:37, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While we're playing "Personal Inquisition", have you stopped canvassing your wife yet? Digwuren 08:39, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have noticed similar behavior before, regarding Estonia article. Lantios 21:24, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppeting

You have been blocked from editing for violating Wikipedia policy by sockpuppeting see Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Digwuren. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by replying here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}}. You may also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list instead, or mail unblock-en-l@mail.wikimedia.org. Alex Bakharev 06:50, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Alexia Death (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This jugement is unfair and incorrect. I have no connection to other three accounts. This name is a well established internet name as a quick google will reveal and I am willing to provide any proof requested. One look at the contribution histories of Erik Jesse and 3 Löwi(who is a contributing member since 2005) tells you that the only thing I have in common with them is nationality and interest in Estonian History. As for Klamber, he is the only new enough account to be someones sockpupet, but it is certainly not mine, as he joined day before me.

Please include a decline or accept reason.

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Evidence not strong enough for a block, WHOIS records report data only for the location of the ISP office, so a large number of people would show up as being at the same place. Other data records also suggest different computer setups being used.

Request handled by: Voice-of-All 15:09, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have presented a request to David Gerard and Raul654 to review this checkuser. Digwuren 09:23, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interests in case of Alex Bakharev

~~I belive that there is also a conflict of interest in the actions of admin Alex Bakharev based on ethnical grounds and disagreement with our views and actions~~.--Alexia Death 10:22, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am taking back the claims of bias above for now as seems he has supported the review of the clearly erroneous puppetering case.--Alexia Death 13:30, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry for this. The review of the checkuser case Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Digwuren has shown that you are not the sockpuppet. VoA has unblocked you already. Please accept my apologies Alex Bakharev 15:07, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And mine too. Sorry :(. Voice-of-All 15:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No offense taken, but please do take into consideration that Estonia is small and has certain publicly endorsed and enforced proxies that cover many users and making decisions based on IP only can result in great injustices...--Alexia Death 15:18, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Input request

Hi Alexia Death, there is some discussion currently going on here, and I noticed you have {{User anime}} on your userpage. If you are not too busy, I would appreciate it if you could drop some of your ideas on how to reform the portal on the aforementioned talk page. Thanks! « ANIMUM » 23:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know, but id doubt I can give much input on the current status of anime. My access to it is rather limited where I live.--Alexia Death 05:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD process

Please stop inserting comments into the nomination. This is most disruptive. If you have procedural complaints, you are welcome to air them on the appropriate talk page. Furthermore, I don't know what category you talk about. If you are unhappy about it, just remove it, rather than disrupting the nomination. --Ghirla^-трёп- 08:04, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inserted it there because it was a question about the nomination category. In starting AFD you are asked what the article is about. You had placed it among organizations and products, witch is clearly wrong. Alex Bakharev, who is more aware of how the template works has fixed it and moved it to an appropriate AFD category. Now, would you care to explain WHY you filed it to a totally inappropriate category and while you are at it mind explaining the unbalanced quotes in your search links?--Alexia Death 09:11, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is that Ghirlandajo is engaging in a systematic campaign of harassment for vote suppression purposes. See also User talk:DLX#WP:NPA. Digwuren 09:29, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pointing out that Ghirlandajo, not wanting the dots to be connected, has removed my comment above. Digwuren 09:46, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ghirla, please don't remove others statements from MY userpage. If i see something that needs removing, I will do it myself. And you still have not answered my question.--Alexia Death 09:58, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Estonian Orthodox Church

Thanks for this edit to Estonian Orthodox Church, and the edit summary: "DAB page is supposed to be NPOV. Ive said it once, and I say it agan: take it up in the articles.".

I fully agree.

Also, thanks for starting the Estonian national awakening article. -- Petri Krohn 18:03, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Petri Krohn's behaviour

Thank you for your interest in topics regarding the Baltic republics and the Soviet occupation. This interests has undoubtedly familiarised you with tactics and behaviour of Petri Krohn.

I have prepared a thorough overview of these tactics, along with references to related Wikipedia policy, and posted it to his userpage, requesting that he stop such activities, especially representing private alternative histories on Wikipedia as thought they were fact.

Unfortunately, he proceeded to delete the request mere seven minutes later, along with an inflammatory edit summary. I do not believe this to have been a proper reaction.

Please, if that will not be too inconvenient, take a look at the situation, evaluate it, and consider expressing your evaluation in the appropriate manner.

Many thanks, Digwuren 16:36, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In response to calls to this effect on the talk page, I'm moving forward with the WP:RFC/U with only the last six weeks worth of edits fully classified. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Petri Krohn, which, after minor editing and addition of the most recent 'interesting' diffs, is supposed to become the main RFC around 21:00 UTC tonight. If there are reasons barring you from endorsing the current summary, I would like to learn about them as soon as possible so the main summary can be endorsed by as wide a coalition as possible.

Thanks in advance. Digwuren 15:36, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFC/U on Petri Krohn filed

You might be interested to know that Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Petri Krohn has been filed. Digwuren 20:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"What's this ? a Ranger caught off his guard ?"

Greetings Alexia. Thank you for joining us. You appear to be the most interesting, not to say balanced and fair-minded person I have yet to encounter on Wikipedia. Welcome. Ellen sila lumen, omentielvo.

STEALTH RANGER 09:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your request on WP:AN

Alexia, your request is rather uninformative, I think you're likely to be disappointed in the amount of interest in it. A little advice from a noticeboard pro: say what the specific problem is. Tell them where to look (=the RFC talkpage, and which sections there). Mention my name, preferably in the heading. And move it from WP:AN to WP:ANI. Bishonen | talk 09:06, 21 June 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I tried to avoid being accused of "leading" the people invited in either way as unlike you Im not a neutral party and picked AN over ANI because strictly speaking its not an incident... But if you feel more is needed, feel free to move and improve.--Alexia Death 09:10, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Occupation position

Before I changed it back to "some" instead of "most" I wanted to consult you. Why do you think "most" of its NATO and EU allies support the idea of occupation rather than "some", the sources I've seen have been almost always the US asserting the "occupation", therefore I thought "some" was appropriate as rarely do other countries comment on it. The onus is on you to prove that "most" of the NATO and EU countries support the idea of occupation.--Ilya1166 04:40, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The EU has a resolution stating that it was occupation. It has been repeatedly linked. For EU that means that All members at the time(1983) hold this position. Can you name a country that does not? For NATO the membershps overlap greatly and all new baltic members hold this position so its certainly most. --Alexia Death 08:39, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a resolution of parliamentary assembly, not an official position of the EU or any of its states.--Dojarca 10:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Award for best contributors of WP-Estonia

The picture is very nice, you should use it. Yoosq 09:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images for Estonia-related stubs

I think that Estonia-related stub templates could use better images then just land flags. {{Estonia-geo-stub}} has a nice .svg flag-map of Estonia, that looks very nice - I actually used the same image for {{WikiProject Estonia}}. I tried to make an image for general Estonia stub template - Image:Estonia general stub.svg - but, alas, as you can clearly see, I am not an artist... So, perhaps if you have time and are willing to do this, could you please see about images for {{Estonia-stub}} and {{Estonia-bio-stub}}? I don't know what to use for generic stub - my version looks just flat ugly, replace it if you can - but perhaps for bio stub, image of a "generic" man in flag colors or something like this? DLX 05:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced the generic one with a flag. I think its more clear for anyone stumbling upon it. Even if a person does not know how Estonia looks on a map, they do know a flag when they see one. I also made something for the bio stub. Tell me what you think...--Alexia Death 16:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are right, flag is better for generic stub - or perhaps we could use coat of arms? As for the bio stub image - I like it a lot. Perhaps male and female heads facing each other would be even better? We don't want to be sexist here, don't we? ;) DLX 17:49, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At that size the coat of arms would look simply like noise... Ill look into trying make a female face..--Alexia Death 17:53, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I made a

but as you can see, even this is too small at that size. it would look ok at

60px but that woulld be way too big.--Alexia Death 18:16, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The faces look great, but i feel the flag looks better; it represents not only the country, but the proud spirit of its fine people. apart from that, it is internationally known and respected, and is long established. The Faces, great as they are, look like the logo for a company or special interest group. Keep the Flag flying, Estonia ! STEALTH RANGER 08:51, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your attack on me on WP:ANI

Your attack on me on ANI, ""To general public - Bishonen was the admin who rejected the RfC above so she has a little insight to the troubles of Ghirla" is unexpected and strange. I don't understand what you mean by it at all. What I did about the Petri Krohn RfC was post this warning on it, on June 20:

"Since my warnings about deleting this RFC to Digwuren on his user talk, and on the talkpage of this page, don't seem to have really penetrated, I feel I should repeat them more visibly here. This RFC will be deleted unless some real attempt at dispute resolution is made within 48 hours of posting it. Please see the instructions at the top of this page, and the discussion here. Don't post any comments in this section, please. Take it to talk. Bishonen | talk 17:56, 20 June 2007 (UTC)."[reply]

I thought I was being helpful–specifically, helpful to the posters of the RfC, who presumably would be interested in not having the RfC deleted. Then I made a few minor posts on the RfC talkpage, the last one on June 21. That's it. After that, Dr Kiernan took over and tried to use the page for mediation. But, dissatisfied with the attitude of the people involved, he deleted the RfC on Jun 27. This was a week after I'd had anything whatsoever to do with it. But in your ANI narrative, something quite different happened: I "rejected"(?) the RfC, so I must have "little insight" about Ghirla. (? What did Ghirla have to do with the RfC?) Do you have any explanation? Don't bother to tell me you didn't know, didn't remember, don't have access to the deleted RFC, etc. I'll take that as read and it doesn't impress me. Oh, or that you're not a native speaker. I'm not a native speaker either, but I don't think it entitles me to make claims at random. Bishonen | talk 17:51, 11 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Im sorry if it seemed like an an attack... It was honestly meant as a remark telling that you had had prior dealing with us and Ghrila. You were helpful in RfC and i'm grateful for that. My dissapointment is with procedure and not with you. But as you saw we were ready to compromise. He wasnt. and then the RfC disappeared while I was busy IRL... I presumed you deleted it... Sorry, if that assumption was wrong. The only reason this has died down somewhat is that both sides have avioded each other a bit and this wont last.

You honestly do not remember Ghrilas bashfest on us there? I presumed you would. the statement was just to say that you had dealings with us and thus knew more context.

As to "ended up", i used it as a non-accusatory figure of speech. Example sentence: You can end up anywhere when you go out of your door. I have nothing else to say but that I did not think someone could take offense or read into it like this. --Alexia Death 19:00, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly didn't read it as an attack. As for the mistake, I myself fell for it; after all, you were the one complaining about the RFC and threatening deletion. When I came back, having moved my house and returned from a birthday trip, and the RFC was gone, I naturally assumed it was your doing. (I had to check the log today to be sure of its fate.) If there's anything you can nag Alexia Death about, it's poor word choice — and that's exactly what falls out of not being a native speaker of a language.

As for Ghirlandajo's bashfest, that is actually his modus operandi. He routinely appears on articles he's never been at before, throws a tantrum, and accuses everybody of belonging to various cabals. All too often, this trolling does end up derailing the discussion. One of his favourites are miscontexted (and, shall we say, hypocritical) "Don't try to deflect ..." 'admonishions', such as [3]. And then, there are those lovely wild accusations.

I recall that you're a fan of "talking things over". I'm sure that once you consider the evidence in this case, you'll see it doesn't really work. When your 'partner in discussion' actively ignores you, normal conversation can not be maintained.

Then, there are the Administrator's Noteboards. We've seen all too many times what happens when Ghirlandajo gets involved in one of these reports: he goes to step 1, hurls random accusations around, accuses everybody in cabalism, perhaps leavels theatrically (as yesterday) and any requests to clarify will go unanswered. Most administrators, sadly, just try to distance themselves from such cases — but this only means that trolling has been effective.

So, what would you suggest be done to avoid the Ghirlandajo-emanated waves and waves of obstructionism? Digwuren 22:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You recall that I'm a fan of "talking things over"? Oh really, news to me. Did that come to you in a dream, do you think I'm Dr Kiernan, or what? Do you ever check any statement before it just comes out of you, Digwuren? As for me "complaining about the RFC and threatening deletion"–threatening it–remind me not to try to help you with an RfC or anything else ever again, you ungrateful sod. Talk about "waves of obstructionism"–your capacity for wild misinterpretation of my actions throws some light on your attacks on Ghirlandajo, I must say. Excuse me, Alexia, I won't use your page for any "talking things over" with Digwuren again. In fact I see it as a waste of time to use any page for it, I have better things to do. Bishonen | talk 12:13, 12 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Please don't take offense Digwurren's abruptness... I admit, that his direct and sometimes rude approach is out of place, but his heart is not. Hes just trying to stand up for me... Unfortunately he has become more and more like Ghila, because there seems to be no other way of dealing with him... As to that RfC, we put a lot of work and hopes for achieving stability into it. A bit of irritation showing through is inevitable I guess. We are all disappointed and tired and feeling to be under constant attack and thus a bit testy.--Alexia Death 16:34, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well said Sir. You have my support.

STEALTH RANGER 11:02, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. You're obviously very judicious. Bishonen | talk 12:13, 12 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Domo Arigato, Pretty Boy

STEALTH RANGER 12:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re Your statment that you would have blocked me already on AN/I

I would greatly appreciate it if now, that there has been a call for diffs for assessment for blocks, if you would provide yours about my behavior. It really need the feedback.

Expectantly, Alexia Death 16:23, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message Alexia Death. I must remind you that admins are not policemen. I have no time to check your contribs under the microscope for now but note that pointy behavior warrants a block. i've just started what i've been talking about at the ANI today. So please think twice before you revert, talk w/ others w/ who you disagree or you edit in general. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 16:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May I point out that a) it was made in my early days at Wikipedia and b) It was intended as a personal message and an honest opinion. If this warrants a block then please, by all means block me, if all my opponents get scrutinized with the same thick comb.--Alexia Death 16:56, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to think twice. This is not why I came here tho. I don't like people badmouthing others behind their back so i thought you need to know about this [4].--Alexia Death 17:35, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know about the IP. I think you have to think about "This is not why I came here tho" twice as well. Cheers. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 17:42, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Advice

Let me give you the same advice I gave to another editor recently: [5]. Short version: content editing is the way; ANI bickering rarely helps and often hurts.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 11:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to avoid reacting in stead of acting in the future. Its just that silent ignoring of blatant incivility in the past and in case of some editors have made me rather doubtful that policy is enforced at all. In witch case have strong doubt the health and outlook of the community in general and feel that by not seeking resolution it can only get worse. If you can recommend a proper way of doing this, i would welcome your advice.--Alexia Death 11:43, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! I thank you for your kind guidance. --Alexia Death 11:55, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The civility policies are significantly ignored and indeed it poses a great danger to the community :( Perhaps I should write an essay on that... As I said, there are two ways to deal with it: try your lack with slow DR, or just write articles and ignore sniping coming at you. I have tried both ways, and so far my experience with DR is 'it doesn't work', but writing content works much better. PS. Please copy your replies to my talk page, I (and many other users) don't have a habit of watching other users talk pages.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 12:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure :) One of those things one learn after years of seeing all corner and nooks of the project :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 14:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Estophilia

Hi Alexia, just letting you know that the article Estophilia has been undeleted but has been nominated for AfD. Martintg 10:03, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Idiots...

Some jackass did an edit of your page when I left the computer for a minute. I'll make sure I log out every time from now on so that it can't be repeated. Some people have nothing better to do I guess. America's Wang 20:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Simple lock will work as well. It's ok. :)--Alexia Death 04:35, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How would I do that? I'm fairly new. America's Wang 23:22, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All computer systems Ive seen have a way of locking the screen you are working on, so that a password is needed to use it. In windows you press Ctrl+Alt+Del and press enter. All your programms and things will keep running, but nobody can mess with your stuff.--Alexia Death 04:37, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WinKey+L locks the computer as well. Sander Säde 06:13, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, okay. Thanks. America's Wang 14:48, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

strange message

I got an email from our friend Gerog: "Kes te olete? Ma olen sunnitud helistama teie tegevuse asjus Floridasse, Wikipedia peakorterisse.". Thanks for your help.... Yandman 09:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its an inquiry as to who you are and a threat to call Wikipedia Headquarters due to your actions in stopping his activities.

Deskana has shortened the section per OTRS ticket, so there was some discussion behind the scenes. I quite like what he did to the article, but this person still wont stop bashing.

His blundering and self-righteousnesses have lead us to believe that he ~~is a public servant close to Lang~~ with limited English skills... He adamantly refuses to acknowledge that there was anything wrong with his actions...--Alexia Death 10:19, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ive stricken out a misinterpretable suspicion.--Alexia Death 11:21, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NB Direct translation:

"Who are you? I am forced to call Wikipedia headquarters in Florida due to you actions"

Sorry for getting you involved in this piece of political crap.--Alexia Death 10:25, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kairi Õun has apologised for the edits she did as Kairioun (talk · contribs) and said that she is not Gerog112 (talk · contribs) - but that her edits were from 195.80.96.209 (talk · contribs), indeed. As we don't have IP information about Gerog112, there is no way to be sure - but I would like to assume good faith and believe that she isn't Gerog112. Sander Säde 10:49, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lets assume that.--Alexia Death 11:21, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have read matter written by both Kairioun and Gerog112, and I also believe that they are distinct people. (I suggested that already when the sockpuppet allegations arose; further evidence appears to have confirmed that position of mine.) Digwuren 16:39, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]