User talk:SirFozzie/Archive 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5

Hooters critics

What was wrong with me identifying most of Hooters' critics who accuse it being "sexist" as feminist? It is mostly feminist activists who advance these claims, not guns rights activists or abortion rights activists or human rights activists. Gerkinstock 01:36, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Dear Fozzie!


A beautiful flower to cheer up a beautiful person's talk page... and him in the process! :) Have a wonderful weekend, dear Fozzie! Love, Phaedriel - 00:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your blanking on Juventus

The information is heavily sourced and even featured in the 2006_Serie_A_scandal article, with sources from, Channel 4, La Repubblica (Italian newspaper),, etc... this adds both sides of the argument and makes the section on the case NPOV rather than just having the Inter POV. It belongs in the article, and unless you think there is some mass conspiracy by those media forums mentioned, then it is reliably sourced too. - The Daddy 21:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Still grumpy...? ;)

5p pwy pansies.jpg Rosa sp.163.jpg Small Red Rose.JPG Close up yellow rose.jpg Liliumbulbiferumflowertop.jpg

In case you're still feeling a little grumpy... here's a cascade of flowers to cheer you up! :) Love, Phaedriel - 22:21, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Clivia miniata1.jpg Tulip01.jpg Stargazer Lily.jpg Paeonia 19.jpg Hibiscus india.JPG Hydrangea macrophylla - Hortensia hydrangea.jpg

Userpage annoyance

Want me to semiprotect it for a while? Riana 03:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, JB won't give up till it is.. I actually made a request over on ANI if you want to mark it resolved. I think it's already semi-protected, just need to get his latest open proxies plugged. SirFozzie 03:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Aye, that he is! I've got all your pages watchlisted now, and his favourite hits, so I'll do my best to stop his fun. Cheers, Riana 03:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

William Welch

Can you keep an eye on this as well please? After a lengthy argument on the talk page, it was eventually confirmed by checkuser it was Barber on open proxies, and if you check the history he's been adding the disputed information back for months. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 21:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

That was quicker than I expected! One Night In Hackney303 22:07, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
You have to laugh really.... One Night In Hackney303 22:15, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Mr Z-Man

Why is Barber harassing him of all people? –– Lid(Talk) 04:00, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

He locked Extreme Associates and that seems to be the reason. –– Lid(Talk) 04:08, 5 June 2007 (UTC)


I say Efnet, you say ..? Lsi john 18:05, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Just curious.. I say diney, you say ..? Lsi john 18:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I was on efnet, 10 yrs ago (or so), and thought I recognized your nick. Peace in God. Lsi john 18:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I think sai1or was another person who was around then too. (or some such spelling) Lsi john 18:17, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Nomination for Adminship

I am very honored that you think I would be a good and responsible user of the mop and what it entails, but I have my doubts that I would pass the bar, so to speak. I've already dedicated the next couple months to getting my edit counts up, as well as my vandal-fighting work, and hopefully, by the end of summer, we can certainly go for the mop then. SirFozzie 17:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Check your email ;) One Night In Hackney303 23:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Go for it! You're already a credit to Wikipedia. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹Speak 23:16, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
L Ok then, I guess that with the amount of support I have, I'll go for it! SirFozzie 23:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
If myself and ONIH agree on something then you know it's correct... ;-) ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹Speak 23:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
If you haven't already, you should really accept this. I don't usually vote in RfAs but I'd certainly turn up for yours - Suriel's right about you being a credit to the project. Good luck :-) --YFB ¿ 23:44, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Ok then, I've answered my questions and waiting for the formal nomination by Blueboy. I welcome anyone who wants to co-nominate me. And thank you all!
Done and double-done ... --Blueboy96 23:52, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I get the feeling we may be able to mop up some more JB sockpuppets when his ego drives him to comment on the nomination page... ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹Speak 00:10, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Good grief, you have even fewer edits than me! Whoever would have thought it :-) --YFB ¿ 00:11, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

2 Stupid Foxes is only the beginning :(

There are a lot more where that one came from. See this one, this one, and this one. This has become a near daily thing with whoever this is. DarkAudit 03:28, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


SirFozzie, I have with great reluctance changed my recommendation from support to oppose, based upon this thread. Of course obviously problematic material is that much worse, but one cannot know merely by looking at text whether the subject of an article might find unsourced material contentious, or whether it might not negatively affect their lives. To take a humorous (but quite true) example, to state that someone spends a lot of time editting Wikipedia might seem to us admirable, but depending on their edit times might cost them their job. To state that so-and-so has a relationship with Keira Knightly might sound entirely unobjectionable to us, but might threaten or destroy someone's marriage. Etc. On top of all that, not everyone wants every aspect of their life covered in detail - we should never be trailblazers in this respect, for it is an invasion of privacy. Please reconsider your stance here, so that I can proudly restore my support for your candidacy. It will probably succeed anyhow, but I want to be onboard.Proabivouac 06:38, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Removal of episode guides from The Ultimate Fighter

I disagree with your decision to remove this content, but wanted to discuss it rather than simply reverting your edits. There is plenty of precedent on wikipedia for episode guides, albeit often at a separate page. (examples: List of Lost episodes, List_of_Supernatural_episodes, just to use two currently popular TV shows.) What would you think of making a similar page? -- Metahacker 01:01, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

You wrote, "Thanks for not blindly reverting. Here's my rationale.. the episode guides get undue weight (they're basically 80% of the article) and I don't believe that they would live as seperate episode articles. I kept the Ultimate Finale in there, because it's well established that THEY are notable, however the fights in the Ultimate Fighter show itself are not notable per se, since they are not officially sanctioned (they are considered exhibition bouts, they are not added to a fighter's record, etcetera). Perhaps just a listing of who fought whom, in chronological order would be ok? SirFozzie 01:05, 10 June 2007 (UTC)"
I get your point about an apparent lack of notability. Of course, fighters consider every fight notable; in a sport where you may only have a dozen aired fights in your professional career, each one is significant. I could see a summary: a simple list of victories, perhaps with technique used (as appears in Season 1, precedent also exists in e.g. American Idol, a roughly comparable show). But -- I'm lazy, and don't feel like constructing those summaries. ;) In a case like that I tend to default to more (verifiable, free) content as opposed to less -- why do extra work to make wikipedia less useful? However, this may a place where our philosophies on what wikipedia is differs. -- Metahacker 01:14, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
There was a discussion already on Talk:The Ultimate Fighter 5 about the appropriate length of episode summaries, and I am disappointed you did not chime in before you took action. While in a discussion I'd probably be closer toward your side on the matter, I'm very tempted to revert your edits just because of the work we're doing toward a compromise is basically undone by your boldness. hateless 20:33, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
I believe consensus > boldness is where WP's policies stand however. Nevertheless, I do believe your edits were in good faith and explaining your edits on Talk:The Ultimate Fighter 5 will be useful and welcomed. Thanks. hateless 01:00, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Quick query

Hi, don't know if you can advise me on the vandalism carried out to Harley Owners Group? It's been going on for a while on a regular basis from what appears to be the same vandal using 4 different IP addresses. AIV probably wouldn't look at it due to the culprit always leaving at least a day before reoffending. What would your approach be? ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹Speak 17:53, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Responded on your talk page, but semi-protection's not likely to happen either, I have put it on my watch list to try to catch and revert. SirFozzie 17:59, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Guess it's a case of putting up with it for now. The vandal doesn't seem committed to anything more than reverting to his witless edits every couple of days so I guess there's a good chance s/he will get bored soon. I've had the page on my radar for a bit and would be happy to tidy and source it but with my current commitments (not this) it's probably going to be Thursday or Friday before I make much difference. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹Speak 18:10, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Vote stacking?

While I agree that you have a point of contention with me regarding the other issues, I'm surprised that you think that I'm vote-stacking with WP:PW, considering that A) I'm not a formal member of the project (I was somewhat pulled in to deal with the constant JB puppets), I have independently come to my vote in each and every AfD I've participated in, and have gone against the WP:PW grain on several occasions [1] and [2] are just two examples. I hope you would strike that portion of your oppose vote, as it is not true. Anyway, have a good day. SirFozzie 22:54, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

My comment could have been communicated better, so I've revised it slightly. My primary concern is that there is a strong groupthink mentality amongst Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling participants which has led to vote stacking on AFDs, RFAs, and a very real bullying of other contributors to the project despite what is written in actual policy, WP:BLP in particular. I see that you will most likely be promoted but still felt the need to voice this concern regardless of the outcome. Burntsauce 23:14, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
It's nice to know you're concerned about Wikipedia. Despite the fact you have never meaningfully contributed to a single article, have repeatedly ignored WP:AGF, have repeatedly ignored other user's attempts to discuss matters with you and have kissed admin arse to try and get them to bully other users when you're on to a loser. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹Speak 22:19, 12 June 2007 (UTC)


There's plenty of fun articles, but I lack the enthusiasm. One Night In Hackney303 14:06, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Maybe this will help

It looks like the only bone of contention in that RFA is the BLP thing. Maybe if you make a statement of some sort on there that you'll enforce BLP with no reservation ... that'll probably help. At least it'll lessen the likelihood that it'll fall on the cusp of there not being enough consensus.Blueboy96 22:14, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Double check

Hi SirFozzie, I was just wondering if you could double check something for me. I warned User:Lost Angel for personal attacks on another user this morning. They have told me that I'm biased and they want the warning checked would you mind having a quick look at their talk page. This is the diff of what I consider to be a personal attack by Lost Angel on User:Edgarde [3]--Cailil talk 13:53, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Beat-the'crat-congratulations! :)

I know it's not official yet, Sire, but let me beat the 'crat and congratulate you in advance for your well deserved adminship! :) Now, party time.... beer for everybody - Fozzie's paying! ;) Congrats! Love, Phaedriel - 19:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


With your RFA only hours away from closing, it looks like you will be a new admin. I would like to tell you that I voted for you, and that I believe you will be a good admin! I will be intouch soon to congratulate you!

Good Job, Politics rule 00:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Since I'm off to bed, I'll offer my premature congratulations as well, and will, at the risk of muddying further other editors' conceptions of your sense of BLP, welcome another admin who well appreciates for what understanding of BLP a consensus exists and appears resolved to act deliberatively and exclusively in furtherance of the wishes of the community, rather than in furtherance of that which he believes the community ought in spirit to want (at least I'm decorous to the exclusion of clarity rather than the reverse; I mean, I guess, if nothing else, to suggest that any editor who evidences a deliberative temperament and avers an intention to act qua admin with discretion and circumspection will surely serve the project well—you have seemed and continue to seem to be such an editor). Cheers, Joe 06:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you both, and I appreciate the good words. I hope to be able to live up to all the folks faith in me. 06:18, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

You're an Admin!

Your mop, Sir. ~ Wikihermit 18:28, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

It is my pleasure to inform you that you are now an admin. Congratulations. You can feel free to do everything you're supposed to do and nothing you're not supposed to do. If you haven't already, now is the time look through the Wikipedia:Administrators' how-to guide and Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me, or at the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. -- Cecropia 17:37, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Well Done SirFozzie..Congrats.. SCongratulate.gif..--Cometstyles 17:41, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Wow, I'm stunned. I thought to the last hours that something might happen and my request would fail.. Thank you to everyone who voted for me.. I will try to thank you all personally for supporting me (or even opposing me, because it gives me things to work on), but it is so appreciated. SirFozzie 17:45, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations, indeed. Excellent news!! You deserve an award for the most-vandalised RfA, though. Looks like JB196 has another block-hound :) - Alison 17:54, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Pah, it was never in doubt! This lot are just happy they will have less work to do, you're the dedicated JB196 mopper-up now ;) One Night In Hackney303 17:56, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations! Mop wisely! - KrakatoaKatie 18:03, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Proof that quantity of edits really doesn't count around here--and probably shouldn't. Use the mop well ... ;)--Blueboy96 18:04, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Congrats on the mop! If you have any questions dont hesitate to ask! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:05, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, yes, congratulations.... now where's the beer??? J/k! Way to go my friend - now let your evil side loose on this! ;) Love, Phaedriel - 18:06, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Or quality of edits for that matter! One Night In Hackney303 18:06, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
See if Hack gets any beer from me now! :D Oh.. and I thought us evil admins were supposed to do things like block Jimbo Wales and Delete the main page? I'm so confused.. (grins, teasing) SirFozzie 18:09, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Congrats,Glad you're an Admin now and hope for the best!Arnon Chaffin (I'm listening!) 18:08, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, deleting the main page is a rite of initiantion for new admins. That and blocking everybody in the en-admins irc channel indef. Good luck! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:17, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey congratulations on becoming our newest admin. I hope you enjoy the ole mop & bucket. BH (T|C) (Go Red Sox!) 18:34, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome! I was wondering when you'd finally get round to my talk page... One Night In Hackney303 18:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Congrats - no hunting around for people to play whack-a-mole anymore, eh? Cheers! Tony Fox (arf!) review? 19:32, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

A something else.

Put this on your user page {{Administrator}}. :) --Arnon Chaffin (I'm listening!) 19:17, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

And Category:Rouge admins ;) One Night In Hackney303 19:27, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Done and Done. SirFozzie 19:32, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
I was joking! One Night In Hackney303 19:34, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm not (grins and hefts the banhammer and grins evilly). SirFozzie 19:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Uh-Oh run for you life we got anthor Rouge admin ;) hehe,watch out with the banhammer:).Arnon Chaffin (I'm listening!) 19:41, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
At this point in my "illustrious" admin career (ha!) I'm more likely to bonk MYSELF with the banhammer than anyone else. SirFozzie 19:44, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations. Here are what pass for words of wisdom from the puppy:
  1. Remember you will always protect the wrong version.
  2. Remember you must always follow the rules, except for when you ignore them. You will always pick the wrong one to do. (See #5)
  3. Remember to assume good faith and not bite. Remember that when you are applying these principles most diligently, you are probably dealing with a troll.
  4. Use the block ability sparingly. Enjoy the insults you receive when you do block.
  5. Remember when you make these errors, someone will be more than happy to point them out to you in dazzling clarity and descriptive terminology.
  6. and finally, Remember to contact me if you ever need assistance, and I will do what I am able.
DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales. All rights released under GFDL.


CONGRATS! I had faith in you. When the Wikipedia Signpost comes out, I have a suprise for you. But you'll have to wait till then!

Politics rule 20:02, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

To All my Supporters

Thank you.

For all you did, these beers are for you!
And for those of you who can't or won't drink (age or choice).. Have a coke and a smile! The best kind, still made with cane sugar!

SirFozzie 20:20, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Can I have one of those beers?! Congratulations! Certainly well deserved, if you need any help, give us a shout :-) Ryan Postlethwaite 20:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
If I need any help, I'll give you a shout, and if not, I'll give you a stout instead! Help yourself! Happy friday! SirFozzie 21:03, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Hmm.Coke is good but green tea is better let the party begin!Arnon Chaffin (I'm listening!) 00:04, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Huzzuh for all. –– Lid(Talk) 01:50, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey Foz, congratulations! Enjoy the bit and try not to go on block rampages while helping yourself to that stuff ---> ;) Riana 04:38, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey Fozzie, belated congrats from me too (and a "you're very welcome" to your message at my talk). Thanks for the beer, mine's a Peroni if you've got it :-) --YFB ¿ 04:25, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


That's a sockpuppet of a banned editor if you want to issue a short block, he uses public computers so nothing lengthy. One Night In Hackney303 16:42, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Also Shipdrink (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) can be blocked for much longer. One Night In Hackney303 16:44, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Got them. SirFozzie 16:50, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Thankies. Sockpuppets of for future reference, if you check the categories there are plenty of them... One Night In Hackney303 16:52, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Close plz. One Night In Hackney303 17:15, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Remind me why I ran for admin again? Closed ;) SirFozzie 17:22, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
So you wouldn't have to find an admin to run round clearing up after Barber. Now you've realised that you are that admin ;) One Night In Hackney303 17:23, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
*laughs* SirFozzie 17:24, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't think you remove closed AfDs from the log page, I could be wrong on that though. One Night In Hackney303 17:27, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, you're right (for once *grins and ducks*) SirFozzie 17:38, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
But remember I only have to be right once. You will have to be right always. One Night In Hackney303 17:45, 17 June 2007 (UTC)*

(Outdenting) *Snerks* :D SirFozzie 17:46, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

That'll stop you and your "lackwit" comments! One Night In Hackney303 17:59, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I've upgraded you to halfwit! (laughs) SirFozzie 18:00, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

[4] - I should note I had made sure to check his user page bio just after he was banned to see if he had been active recently (he hadn't been active since the first) and then out of the blue he shows up after not having even been active for two and a half weeks. –– Lid(Talk) 03:34, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

As I know Barber is watching this I am referring to your socaluncendored account. –– Lid(Talk) 04:12, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
He's been around, he vandalized my RfA a few times. I should tell him about some of the info that the admins at SoCal are feeding me, I hear there's some folks at his ISP very interested in Mr. Barber. Wouldn't that be the ultimate kicker? SirFozzie 04:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC) (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • edit filter log • block user • block log) proxy. –– Lid(Talk) 04:27, 18 June 2007 (UTC) (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • edit filter log • block user • block log) –– Lid(Talk) 04:36, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
It confuses me as to how everyone is ignoring that LPYC had a sock account thats only edit was to get an article speedy deleted, that's a pretty fucking suspect thing in the first place. –– Lid(Talk) 04:51, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
I hadn't forgotten... SirFozzie 04:53, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Suspect, but not sufficient in itself in the absence of confirmed open proxy use. One Night In Hackney303 05:03, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
I like how his narcissistic complex means that in the same posts where he talks about the unreliability of wikipedia he adds an unpublished, unverified book he wrote as a reliable source that has been undermined by other wrestling articles. Oh how I love hypocricy. –– Lid(Talk) 05:14, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
But don't forget, as part of it got published in a letter he sent to Meltzer it's a RELIABLE SOURCE! One Night In Hackney303 05:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
We have to concede that XPW existed I'm afraid, score one for him. –– Lid(Talk) 05:19, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Well it won't exist on here for much longer, I'm AfDing it today. One Night In Hackney303 05:20, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Ah we will unfortunately be on opposite dsides of that debate - despite the situation it was the second largest indy in post-ECW times (after CZW) and had a TV deal. –– Lid(Talk) 05:23, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh and the various controversies gave it significant out of wrestling notability. –– Lid(Talk) 05:24, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Sadly that means little. It's being nominated for failing WP:V, not WP:N. There are no reliable sources for an enyclopedic article to be written. One Night In Hackney303 05:25, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Most of the article can be confirmed just through notes, the article itself doesn't include anything really controversial, save the ECW incident which was on a PPV and thus was pretty clear. The rest can be verified along with it. –– Lid(Talk) 05:27, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Links please. And I'm not talking about title histories or ring results either. One Night In Hackney303 05:28, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
What are you looking to verify? –– Lid(Talk) 05:34, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Everything in the article, seeing as it's completely unsourced. One Night In Hackney303 05:37, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
So you want sources for an article consisting largely of title histories and ring results but not using any title histories or ring results? –– Lid(Talk) 05:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Well no. The point I was making that it's possible to create an article about most promotions consisting of that sort of rubbish, but it's unencyclopedic trivia. You'd need articles that talk about the history of the promotion, so something encyclopedic can be created. And those don't seem to exist. One Night In Hackney303 05:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

(outdenting) Nice of you guys to have an argument on my page.. (grins, just kidding). The only time I want to see mentions of angles and that kind of thing in a promotion article is stuff like DX and nWo.. stuff that changed the face of the business, so to speak.. I think a lot of it, like talking about "Kid Kaos turning on his family, Supreme" shouldn't be in there, but I try not to go over the top on such things, because I know that it'd be touching off a war, and I honestly do not know that much about XPW, and what I do know, I've had to learn cuz of this stuff constantly happening. SirFozzie 05:43, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Here's an idea. The current history of the XPW article is a complete joke, full of Barber's vanity spamming. So how about....the current version gets deleted per WP:V, then a new improved sourced version gets put back where it used to be? One Night In Hackney303 05:47, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
either that, or you guys and the PW folks build an article in the sandbox, and when done, just paste it in over the article.. you can do that.. I honestly think, however, that the "Sources have to be out there folks" would make any AfD a keep right now. SirFozzie 05:49, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Want to bet on that? One Night In Hackney303 05:52, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
(edit conflict) We should add the sourced version first and keep the history as per the GFDL, not delete it as a get back at JB196. Let's not be vindictive for the sake of being vindictive. –– Lid(Talk) 05:54, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm talking about re-writing it from scratch. Articles are much better when they are written from sources, rather than trying to fit sources to an existing article. One Night In Hackney303 05:57, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Which we can do in a sandbox, right? SirFozzie 05:57, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, but then you'll have to do a history merge (which you don't want to do at this point of your admin career). Far better to start with a nice blank page :) One Night In Hackney303 06:00, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
No history merge needed, do it on the talk page. –– Lid(Talk) 06:03, 18 June 2007 (UTC) (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • edit filter log • block user • block log) –– Lid(Talk) 06:02, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Some active ProWrestling Users

Could you use your new powers to check out these guys [5], [6], [7], I can't say for sure but they seem to bare the hallmarks of JB, and it took a couple of weeks to route out his last sock, [8], I just thought we could get the jump on him, of course if these are legit users then they need watching anyway because they seem intent on disruption. Cheers. Darrenhusted 18:11, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I'll take a look, the vincent kennedy mann one does not look like him, from a quick look, though. SirFozzie 18:14, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Cheers. Darrenhusted 18:21, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Professional Championship Wrestling

I don't want to bother you but one user [User:Cwmoneybags] is creating and editing pages for one federation, one notably lacking any notability. He has 382 edits [9] all within pages related to Professional Championship Wrestling. A few editors PRODed articles by him but he removed the PRODs and so I have AfD the main article here [10]. However I was wondering if there was anyway to block him for a short period of time so that other editors could get around to PRODding or AfD-ing the related articles without [User:Cwmoneybags] interfering, he is clearly intent on creating pages for every aspect of the federation page and given his current rate we may not be able to catch up with im if he goes unchecked. If a block is not possible then could you suggest some kind of other appropriate action. Darrenhusted 01:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Deprodding articles isn't disruptive, unless it's 1000s of them for no discernible reason. I would hope Fozzie wouldn't block under those circumstances. One Night In Hackney303 05:18, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Would de-PRODding 23 articles count as disruptive, Hack? I've added all the articles to the AfD, the creator is only ususally active late at night my time (afternoon in the States) and so if he disrupts the AfD I may not notice until hours later, all I'm asking is that is he comes online today and attempts to disrupt the AfD that he could have a short block placed on him, or a protect placed on the 25 AfD articles, just something to keep the process under control. Of course he may do nothing but vote in the AfD, but this is just a pre-emptive request. Darrenhusted 13:50, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Not really, as the creator of an article wants to keep it obviously. What I'd consider disruptive would be systematically going through the prod categories and deprodding all the articles regardless of what they were about. One Night In Hackney303 13:55, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Removing a prod is in itself not disruptive, nor 23 really - annoying yes, especially with no improvements made. an AFD is different, he's not allowed to remove that or disrupt it by deleting it, I got the AFD on my watch list and will check the various pages to see if the AFD has been removed on a daily basis, it's not going to be that big a problem now that it's an AFD discussion instead of Prod'ing MPJ-DK 14:06, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Yup, you can remove a PROD without any problem. I'd like to see all of the articles gone, but he has the right to remove the PRODs .. just like we have the right to then thtow the whole lot on AfD. If he disrupts THAT... we'll see what needs to happen. SirFozzie 14:46, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Cheers, I just wanted to know there was more than just my eyes on those pages. Darrenhusted 15:00, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

A possible favor?

Technically I should ask this of User:Mailer diablo but his page says he's on an "enforced wikibreak" since he's conscripted so maybe you could do me a tiny favor instead? MD deleted the page for Heart of America Sports Attractions after an uncontested prod, fair enough that's how it goes - no one noticed that the "Central States" territory article had been prodded I guess. Anyway since it is a long time NWA territory I thought I'd take a shot at recreating the article, I'm looking into references to prove WP:N and WP:V currently. - Could you maybe give me a copy of the article text on this userpage link user:MPJ-DK/Heart of America Sports Attractions? MPJ-DK 13:39, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

done. SirFozzie 14:51, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
You need to restore the full history for GFDL purposes. One Night In Hackney303 14:53, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
I thought you're allowed to restore the last version for improvement. Let me ask Guy real quick. SirFozzie 14:54, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Well no, because by restoring it you've just attributed the entire history to yourself, not who wrote it. One Night In Hackney303 14:59, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Cool.. ok Guy gave me some suggestions on what to do with it next time, but he said that the article could be restored as a disputed prod as long as it got worked on. Deleted the subpage. SirFozzie 15:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
If someone asks for it in userspace you're better off restoring it there, as people tend to keep track of deleted articles to stop people reposting them. Plus I've seen prods that shouldn't really have been restored (see the history of Politically Incorrect Wrestling) so I need to make sure articles are gone for good. One Night In Hackney303 15:14, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Well that solution works for me too ;) I was mainly interested in what was in the article originally, I had not even given a second thought to edit history and what not. I'll probably end up re-writing quite a bit from sources etc. I don't see the harm in the user page, now I'll just get on my bike a bit quicker to get enough sources to establish notability pretty quickly. Thank you for the help, it saved me some work MPJ-DK 17:37, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


Another question (sorry, beginner). I would say newspaper articles are verifiable enough and they certainly make a person notable. In the Julian Dobrowolski article I created there were 3 links to online versions of newspaper articles in which he was often discussed. If that's not notable and verifiable what is? Benek69 18:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC) Thank again.


Way to get right into whacking the moles! Sorry I accidentrly blocked you when I meant to block the JB196 sock. I have as you ahve guessed by now unblocked you thought! Good luck whacking the moles. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 21:17, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

So much for the clean block log! One Night In Hackney303 05:11, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Fozzie, looks like he has another IP (he admits it is him on WP:PW): User: . No edits yet other than the one on the project, but he did post an offensive comment there and all JB IP's are supposed to be blocked. BTW, congrats on becoming an admint, something I probably never will do because I have been blocked a few times for 3RR violations. TJ Spyke 06:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
And the winner of "Understatement of the Week" goes to TJ for "blocked a few times for 3RR violations" ;) One Night In Hackney303 06:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


I hadn't even realized you had stood for adminship! If I had, I certainly would have given my support vote! congrats! Bmg916Speak 03:14, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

All sorted?

If not I have just a handly solution.... One Night In Hackney303 17:10, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Go back in August, so not hardly :P But thanks. :P
Sure you'll be able to cope in August? And as an admin you're supposed to set an example by signing your posts ;) One Night In Hackney303 17:16, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
I have a prescription to take before I go in for the surgery in August.. hopefully that'll help. SirFozzie 17:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Type before{{-}}. Honestly, admins these days..... One Night In Hackney303 17:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Right! Removed the image of the pliers, I'm not gonna edit the section to make that bloody big graphic not move all my posts down every time I post! SirFozzie 17:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
It wouldn't, if you paid attention. One Night In Hackney303 17:21, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh dear

See here. I guess I shouldn't have bothered to be generous and just removed it straight away? One Night In Hackney303 17:41, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

David Beckham

Thankyou for removing LA Galaxy from his clubs. I constantly have to remove it from his clubs, as he does not join them till 1st july. i put a message in this time, so it reminds editors not to put LA Galaxy in his clubs until 1st july. Thanks. Jackrm 18:06, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Open Proxies

Thanks for the help! As for our prior discussion, I don't know what got into Govvy, he's usually very civil, but it is a very frustrating situation all around, as you know. Bmg916Speak 18:32, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the semi-protect :-) Bmg916Speak 18:34, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
It seems to me as if Hack and Nikki have worked out some sort of agreement. We'll see how it goes. Bmg916Speak 18:38, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
In theory, but a spanner has been thrown in the works. One Night In Hackney303 18:40, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


I would strongly recommend that any such warning not assume guilt, given his comments; even if the other accounts are his friends, the assumption would make the whole process counterproductive. "Whatever the truth may be, do remember..." He looks to have the making of a good editor; but I may be biased. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:12, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Sourcing at WP:PW

Sir, obviously the bane of the project is the lack of good sources, other than, and obviously having to deal with the bizarre situation of real (re:Owen Hart) and the fake (re:Vince K McMahon) being blurred. However in an effort to treat a lot of WWE for what it is for 50% of the time I have sourced the Hell in a Cell article (ignore the crufty language of the actual article) using a TV template but adapting it for a PPV format (treating each year as a season and each PPV as an episode) and I wouldn't mind you opinion on what you think, such as whether this method could be adopted by the project and kind of sort out some of the BLP issues. Thanks for your time. Darrenhusted 21:58, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I will run it by CITE then. Darrenhusted 22:42, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

AfD close refactored

I changed the closing you did on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boeing VC-137C from {{discussion top}} to {{afdtop}} and bottom tags, too. (Note that the {{afdtop}} tag goes above the header.) I also moved your closing reasoning. Cheers! Flyguy649talkcontribs 06:46, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem! And congrats on your recent successful RFA! Flyguy649talkcontribs 07:04, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Scott Buffington

Thanks for letting me know. I've listed it at AfD. Corvus cornix 17:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of films by gory death scene (3rd nomination)

An oddity happewnd here. I was in the process of workign on a close of this. it seems that you were also. I saved my clsoe edit, and had an edit conflict with your cloe. I then refreshed to add my closer's commetn as a note, and found that the AfD was open. So i resaved my close. It seems that after your close User:Kizor edited, and in the process undid your close. i presume that this was a mistake, since his edit summary didn't mention undoing the clsoe. Anyway i wanted to let you know what happend, so you didn't think I just put my clsoe over yours. Since we both concluded "delete" the details don't matter too much, but people's feelings do matter. DES (talk) 18:50, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


I wouldn't have moved for a community ban, except it looks like that Nationalist is currently unblocked. See the block log--his last block was a two-month block by FloNight that expired on May 22. Since it's clear that he's the sockmaster behind TingMing, that was my reasoning. Blueboy96 20:03, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I wonder, though--is it safe to say Nationalist/TingMing is community banned? Given past precedent, no one who has engaged in this type of sockpuppetry has ever been unblocked. I went ahead and listed him at WP:LOBU under Nationalist, with a note that they're both indefblocked and the one-year ban won't start until the indef is lifted. Since a ban applies to the person, not the account, it should be listed under Nationalist (the main account, per the creation logs).Blueboy96 20:45, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

No Worries

Wiki'ing at work, eh? :o) No worries, but thanks for messaging back. Take Care and Have a Good Friday and a Good Weekend....NeutralHomer T:C 16:50, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

User talk:One Night In Hackney

Hi. I was interested to see you say I was involved in a dispute at Northern Ireland, and that this would affect the neutrality of my unblock decline there. I really wouldn't have characterised that as a dispute, more of a civil conversation. I certainly don't think it would have affected my neutrality in declining the unblock; I see multiple instances of incivility, edit-warring and (a particular bugbear of mine) the characterisation of a content dispute as vandalism. I therefore think ONiH's block is well-deserved. You are right of course that he has been provoked, but that is a separate issue and is no excuse for breaking the rules after a warning. What do you think we should do now? --John 18:47, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

That's unfortunate. I feel bad as I always do when we lose someone; could we have done more to help him? It would have had to be before he got into the habit of calling everybody he disagreed with a vandal or a troll. Perhaps he will come back, under this identity or a new one. --John 19:41, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

User:Pigsonthewing and block extensions

Thank you for your comments at my talkpage regarding the above. I'm quite happy for the block I placed to be extended, or reduced, or overturned. I had simply came across this discussion on AN/I, looked at a few (less than I would have liked, in truth) diffs, and saw that the debate was turning into much of what had been complained of; an editor, with a little support, refusing to counternance the consensus of a group. While many agreed that action should be taken there was no-one willing to provide it and the appeals were getting a mite desperate/despairing. I took the decision to block to give the parties an opportunity to de-escalate the matter, and to consider their positions. That is why I chose 24hours, long enough for people to sleep on it but not too long as to be considered at all punitive, in essence a purely preventative measure.

I really would now like to withdraw if possible. I am no longer uninvolved, but without any knowledge of events (I do not even know what a microformat is, let alone what it might do), so any further input from me is likely to be considered prejudiced. If asked I will again perform an admin function such as blocking in this matter, but will necessarily limit it to the minimum degree possible. I would prefer that the entire situation is resolved by persons better experienced in both procedure and the case in hand. Cheers. LessHeard vanU 19:47, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

2 JB IPs and The second he admits to, the first is informing Burntsauce of two long unsourced articles, which he has done in the past. Darrenhusted 01:19, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

You'd already caught the first one, and thanks for getting the second. Darrenhusted 02:00, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Hakka Palle! (look it up if you can) SirFozzie 02:52, 23 June 2007 (UTC) (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · edit filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) –– Lid(Talk) 12:58, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Es Muerte SirFozzie 17:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC) could be another? Has only posted on my page, but warned about a removed PROD, much like he alerts BS to lack of BLP. I'm hoping JB is not my new friend. Darrenhusted 23:31, 24 June 2007 (UTC) (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · edit filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) –– Lid(Talk) 08:59, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Chad Patton

[11], I thought you salted it? Darrenhusted 03:03, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

actually said if it gets recreated again, I can salt it :) which is now done. SirFozzie 03:08, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

One Night In Hackney

SirFozzie, I see you deleted One Night In Hackney's talk page citing the "right to vanish". As you may be aware, the right to vanish does not generally includes the deletion of one's talk page except under extreme circumstances. I am concerned with the administrative actions that lead up to One Night In Hackney's decision to leave, as I feel they are repeating elsewhere, and would like to review the situation on One Night In Hackney's talk page. Would you please consider undeleting it? Thank you. --Iamunknown 21:31, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi, SirFozzie. I see you're not editing at the moment. Since you don't mention anything out-of-the-way about ONIH's talkpage in your deletion rationale, I've recreated it. I'd like to review it, too. I hope that's OK. Please just re-delete it if you think the recreation was a mistake. Bishonen | talk 22:21, 24 June 2007 (UTC).
Not going to redelete it, but I deleted it per the section of Right to vanish that stated that it was a Right To Vanish option, since he didn't have an active block on him. SirFozzie 22:31, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I hate to bother you...

...but I've f*cked up an AfD. Justin White had already gone through AfD, so when I tagged it the "preloaded debate" didn't appear and I'm stuck, could you delete the page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Justin White (2nd nomination, which is missing the closing bracket. I'm going to list the other Justin White debate (which does have closed brackets). Darrenhusted 00:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC) And now it's relisted the first debate on the AfD page, how do I sort it? [12] Darrenhusted 00:49, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Yep, I've thanked the guy who fixed it. Now all I have to do is watch 17 AfDs. Darrenhusted 01:16, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Last bit of pestering I promise...

...for tonight at least. One of the AfD has thrown up an editor who wants to own a page, Vanessa Kraven. And I know I'm going to hate myself for this but I copied the tactics of Burntsauce by stubbing the article, it hadn't changed in six months (between two PRODs both removed by the editor trying to save it) and the seven references are no help. Two are Japanese, two are French, one is a shop site for DVDs and the last two didn't link to a wrestler bio, just the fed. I found the bio pages [13], [14] and stubbed the article because there are no sources for it. Now before a 3RR occurs can you either lock the page as it was, or is depending, and have a word with the other editor. I am going to sleep so I will not be back for at least 12 hours, if you could just keep an eye on the AfD, the editor and article, I promise no more pestering for a week ;-). Darrenhusted 02:39, 25 June 2007 (UTC)


For the block of that loon. Darrenhusted 16:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

NP. Let me know if any further disruption occurs. SirFozzie 16:36, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, thanks. --Thespian 16:48, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

My dear Fozzie

William-Adolphe Bouguereau (1825-1905) - Not Too Much To Carry (1895).jpg

Thank you for all that you have done!
How much love resides therein!
All one's gifts are never gone:
Not seen, perhaps, but stored within.
Kindness is an inner sun.

Your unspent heart a message sends
Of grace and sacrifice hard-won
Upon which happiness depends!

Thank you so much, my dear, dear Fozzie! :)

20:01, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Hah, yeah, looks like he missed me too, even tho I promised him a Barnstar! ;) Phaedriel - 20:34, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Erin Go...

Thanks- I didn't realize we had an article on that pharse- the flag has appropiateness then for the Template:IrishR page rather than the sovereign flag of the Republic of Ireland. Astrotrain 21:15, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I would agree that Irish Republicans use the flag of the Republic of Ireland- however it is not appropiate to assign this sovereign flag to them. We could not use the Union Flag in the British National Party article as a counterexample. Astrotrain 21:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)


As long as it has a second source to back it up, it's just as reliable. — Moe ε 23:50, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

BLP? He's dead. BLP stands for Biographies of Living People. — Moe ε 04:30, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Hmm.. guess it stands to reason. — Moe ε 04:55, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

IRC Confirmation

This is confirmation that I am the owner of the Freenode nickname SirFozzie and I wish access to the IRC Channel. SirFozzie 04:32, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


I just found 2007 wrestling murder this redirect and I think it is highly unneeded, so I was wondering if you could please delete it. Thanks, Scorpion0422 20:10, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


This guy is blocked on a 3RR [15] for reverting edits by this guy [16], which may be a sock of our favourite editor in the whole world [17]. I think the 3RR should be lifted. Could you post info on how to report socks, because JB seems to like posting on my page and BS's page and I watching both I don't want to have to bother you to lock him down. Darrenhusted 23:08, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Belated congratulations

Congratulations on becoming an admin! That's good news for Wikipedia. I'm sorry it's taken so long to reply. Personal and professional commitments have cut my Wikitime down to zero recently. I'm going to try to fit in some proper wikiwork when I can, although I must admit the events of the last 2 days have temporarily destroyed my interest in anything WP:PW related. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹Speak 00:12, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


Thank you for updating the Benoit article, and I'm sorry if I offended you. Cheers, The Hybrid 17:27, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, really I agree with the stance that the admins have taken. The biography articles do need to be sourced, and so on. While the project as a whole may not like it, the blankers - and they are blankers - are correct in their interpretation of the policies, and have every right to do what they are doing. I think this was really a blessing for the project. However, since the non-admin opposition has taken a vigilante approach, rather than bringing it up at the project talk page first, they feel like the pages were vandalized. When the admins saw the truth due to their lack of bias, the project was left gasping for air. The last thing that I did for the project before I left was buy it some more time, more than enough time mind you, to solve the problems without the admins taking action. The project dropped the ball, so I don't feel sorry for them on that note. However, I do feel that the admins as a whole are letting their frustration carry over to other areas, such as page protection, showing bias in their G/FAC votes, ect. Peace, The Hybrid 17:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


Right now on Nancy Daus' article User:Scanadiense continues to vandalize her page, despite warnings from me and another user on both his/her talk page and the article's talk page. I checked the revision history and noticed that you yourself had reverted some of their vandalism today (not that long ago actually). Maybe a friendly warning from and admin will make him stop? Thanks. Nikki311 18:25, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Nancy Benoit

The article is not protected, becuase you moved it. I suggest you protect it ASAP in wake of the FOX news update. --Evilclown93(talk) 18:02, 28 June 2007 (UTC) :Check the logs and the history. The template is from before the move. Anyways, I think if you don't have any scripts, the protect button can also say unprotect, and compare to the Main Page, for example. --Evilclown93(talk) 18:12, 28 June 2007 (UTC) OK, I did a better test, and signed out. You're right. --Evilclown93(talk) 18:13, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Wrong page title

Could you please direct me to where I might officially raise as an issue the title of the Flag of Ireland page. Ireland is an island and this flag does not apply to the entire island. This article should be called Flag of the Republic of Ireland, or Irish Republic Flag, or Flag of Eire. It is not the flag of Ireland, as such, and this is misleading and wrong. David Lauder 19:26, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

re:Just a suggestion

And my suggestion is to not get my business right now. — Moe ε 19:41, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about earlier, I was tad stressed, if you hadn't noticed. — Moe ε 23:46, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Flag of Ireland

Could you please revert the move again until a discussion has taken place thanks. --Barryob Vigeur de dessus 20:44, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I meant could you put is back to Flag of Ireland as SqueakBox moved it to Flag of the Republic of Ireland again --Barryob Vigeur de dessus 20:54, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
That is because it is the RoI flag and not the flag of the island of Ireland, SqueakBox 20:57, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
You did it despite no discussion! --Domer48 21:04, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Explain how to "discuss" a legal fact? If a judge cited the law to you would you ask for a discussion? The question is, should Wikipedia contain fictitious title pages? David Lauder 08:53, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Removing my comments

Do not blank my comments as yopu did here. thanks, SqueakBox 20:57, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:PW To Do List PRODs

A number of PRODs expired today, if you have the time you may want to delete some articles. Darrenhusted 22:18, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I assume you're talking about Justin White? I'll watchlist it. Darrenhusted 23:41, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

By 1:15 my time (or 0:15 UTC) all the following can be deleted Alere Little Feather, Alex Porteau, Bob Hansen (wrestler), Brian Rogowski, Buck Quartermain, C.W. Bergstrom, Caprice Coleman, Caryn Mower, Chasyn Rance, Chris Samson, Chuck Taylor (wrestler), Dale Veasey, David Peterson (wrestler), David Sheldon, Dean Higuchi, Don Zalesky, Eddie Golden, Erich Sbraccia, Gary Sabaugh, George Hines, George Wells (wrestler), Greg Wojciechowski, Happy Humphrey, Harold Hoag, Icarus (wrestler), Jeff Patterson, Jeff Roth, Jon Bolen, Jon Moxley, Kurt Beyer, Lex Lovett, Lou Marconi, Lou Perez, Mark Kyle, Marty Garner, Michael Imburgia, Mike Diamond, Mike Sampson, Mora Uman, Murray Happer, Niles Young, Prince Kharis, Ric Byrne, Richard Hoff, Richard Slinger, Rick Michaels, Ricky Rice, Rorschach (wrestler), Sean Davis (wrestler), Sedrick Strong, T. Rantula, Tony Stetson (or at least the ones I checked, and some can be done now, a couple that were on the list had PRODs removed, I'm AfDing then as we speak). Darrenhusted 23:54, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

When you have finished deleting leave this list and any that aren't redlinks I'll AfD where appropriate.Darrenhusted 00:19, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


If you have a chance, could you check out to verify whether it's a proxy or not? I have no idea how to :) Cheers, Riana (talk) 03:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Could you? Am not very techy, but it seems to be handy knowledge to have... Riana (talk) 03:27, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Bob Hansen (wrestler)

You deleted the Bob Hansen (wrestler) page under the "non-important person" rule, which seems very odd, especially considering some of the other individuals allowed to remain on this site. Bob, besides winning the WXW Tag Team Titles and the most Improved Wrestler Award, has also published 3 books and is now headlining comedy clubs in San Diego. His newest book, Like A Champ, has been his biggest selling book yet and he is currently in talks with several publishers about his next project. This doesn't sound like a person who is "non-important", just a young career starting to blossom. I would like his page restored, so it can be updated with the current info. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasonjaconetti (talkcontribs)

Archived 6/29

Thank god it's friday. :) Oh.. I won't be in much the next couple days. New position at work means I be wiped out! SirFozzie 14:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)