This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hey Nishkid, I noticed you had removed references to Big Hunna Entertainment a bunch of times in the past couple of days and then reverted yourself. I have gone back and removed all references, because they are a giant hoax propagated by Josh Gotti and his huge arsenal of range IP sockpuppets (see here for most of them). A bunch of his articles have already been deleted (see this, this, this, this, this and this for reference). In any case, I just wanted to let you know that any reference to Dolla Billz or Big Hunna should be deleted outright as they don't exist. I wish we could do a range block but I don't have the time right now to put together a huge case with diffs about it. :) Rockstar (^T/_C) 22:11, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note! —JerryFriedman 05:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:56, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can I ask why you thought this was a username violation? I don't see it. Mangojuice^talk 14:14, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to find the discussion. It's probably people being overly legalistic again - no way does this really constitute promotion, and there can't be any other good reason to disallow it. I found it because I was looking through the UAA bot logs for names that match "Myspace," because it seems to be a pretty dubious blacklist entry. Would you have opened the discussion on this name if you hadn't seen it reported by the bot, do you think? Mangojuice^talk 14:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Could I ask you to review the situation on the 3RR board, regarding the revert wars between User:Paki.tv and User:Prester John. It's not a 3RR violation, but you recently warned them to stop the edit wars, but both editors have resumed reverts of each others' content on Penal transportation. The trouble is, the same 2 editors are waring on 3 different articles. On of those other articles (Pacific solution) has just been locked down because of them. I fear other articles will go into lock-down because of them. Considering both editors were warned, but continued reverting regardless, wouldn't that be enough reason to block the editors as an alternative to locking the whole article? Thanks, --Lester 05:00, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We have accepted(and a known fact) the fact that language Malayalam developed with maximum influence from Tamil. The issue here is with two words Mala and aali from whcih the word Malayalee developed. All South indians know that these words are there in their own languages(Since they are similar). These two words are also found in many other foriegn languages like Sinhala, dhivehi etc. The meaning of word in all language are exactly same. Mala means Hill and aali means person or citizen. The Problem here is we dont know from which language its developed. However since Malayalee means a person speaks malayalam, I have replaced existing content that is these words orginated from Tamil and its meaning Hill country in Tamil' with these words orginated from Malayalam and its meaning Hill country in Malayalam . Since a dispute is raised by one editor User:Vivin, however as a solution, we have removed the language part and rewritten the content as the word Malayalee orginated from words mala and aali and its meaning is Hill country in local language. Again dispute is raised and we have removed local language phrase from the content in order to achieve a peaceful solution. Now the content is The word Malayali originates from Mala meaning Hill and Aali meaning person. Malayalee literally means a person hailing from a Hill Country.. In Malayalam language article its clearly mentions its relationship Tamil language. So whats the pupuse of adding that this developed from Tamil. Malayalee means a person who speaks Malayalam. Anything else look like moth-eaten theories about race/language.

Other cites

• Thirumala a hill where a famous temple of Lord Venkateshwara (local language Telugu)
• Malanad a region in Kerala
• Malanad[1] a region in Karnataka Local language is Kannada
• ethirali a Kannada, Tamil and Malayalam word. Here it means oppnent

(developed from ethiru means opposite and aali means person)

• Sinhala developed from Sinha/simha(Lion) and aal(person). We can assumethat these words come from Tamil or Sanskrit. Whats the need of such things in Sinhala Article. Sinhala means a language or people who speaks the language simhala. Same thing is applicable here in Malayalee article too.

Other related issues

We are main contibutor the aricle of Hindu sainr Sree Narayana Guru and His community Ezhava. Enraged over the issues he started removing content from the referenced article Ezhava. For example the article had refrenced content which says 'Prophet, Saint sree narayan Guru. He has removed the Prophet and saint part when the its referenced in many books including one here [[2]]

Daya Anjali (talk / contribs) 06:06, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really need your help. They've asked for references, I've given them references. Now they claim there are no references. We're at an impasse here... What's the next step for dispute resolution? Thanks a bunch. --vi5in^[talk] 16:45, 18 October 2007 (UTC) Thanks! I really appreciate your help! --vi5in^[talk] 17:05, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No reference has been given to validateUser:vivin's edits.Tulu war

Please look into Ezhava Article as there is constant vandalism from User:Vivin and User:B Nambiar. please loom into this article.Tulu war 07:42, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It has been noted that there is constant vandalism of Ezhava article By User:Vivin and User:B Nambiar.The User:B Nambiar has been blocked for the violation of 3RR. User:Vivin have been removing sourced content from the article. User:Nishkid64 have put protected tag to the version which has removed many content by the User:Vivin. please find the same here [3] and [4] please find the editprotected tag in discussion page Talk:Ezhava so that you can revert this last edit to version which full content.Vvmundakkal 17:07, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I commented on my talk page that I accept your criticism--I should have looked harder to find a valid reason to speedy. DGG (talk) 14:19, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I had a few questions about adminship, and I was hoping you could help me. As one of my userboxes states, I'm interested in becoming an admin someday. However, I don't exactly know when the best time to apply would be. Also, is there something specific that I might need to get more involved with, or other stuff of that sort? Any advice would be appreciated! Icestorm815 00:25, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Nishkid,

Thanks for uploading Archaeopteryx to Veropedia! That was quite a pleasant surprise. Good luck on the project! :) Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Nishkid64 ...

I've stayed below your radar (out of your hair?) for a while, but I could really use a favor ... I've been doing some housecleaning of legacy sandboxes, and found that one had been deleted before I could make an archived copy of it ... it's linked to a few AfD discussions, and I might have occasion to use it again. :-)

Would you please take a few minutes from your busy schedule to wave your Wand of Gygax (it does anything He wants it to do) so as to zap the inoperative legacy versions, and restore another one for archiving? Thnx, beau coup in advance!

Happy Editing! —72.75.79.128 (talk · contribs) 22:18, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for deleting those legacy sandboxes ... and chance that I can get this one restored temporarily so that I can archive it? —72.75.79.128 12:52, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thnx for restoring that sandbox (twice!) ... I've made my archive copy & tagged it for deletion again. :-) —72.75.79.128 14:48, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Nishkid64.
For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award originated by User:Pedia-I. Ce n'est pas un parapluie.
(Explanation and Disclaimer). -Susanlesch 00:41, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Koenraad Elst has been fully protected for nearly 2 months. Can we risk changing that to semi-protecting, now that people's tempers have simmered down? Anthony Appleyard 05:30, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great job with the work you've done on the List of Minnesota Vikings draft picks! Hopefully it will make featured list! RyguyMN 05:44, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch protecting the talk page of MalfunctioningRobot! The name was definitely honest, at least part of it. ;-) Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 06:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for unblocking me! Izzy007 Talk 22:37, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK has a red warning! It's boiling over! Needs update! Mrs.EasterBunny 20:24, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for minding the stove!Mrs.EasterBunny 21:29, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps some Pirates of the Caribbean expert (see Brethren Court) can produce a Behind the Scenes documentary or newspaper article to back it up... - Mgm|^(talk) 20:29, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's from The Pirates' Code Guidelines, an official Disney source. Therequiembellishere 23:44, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I don't, look at the talk page, one of them do. Therequiembellishere 23:49, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Look under the section heading "Feng's flag" or something of the like, they'll shorten it to The Pirates' Code, I believe, sorry. Therequiembellishere 23:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the next baseball FA I'm working on, beat that :p Jbeach ^sup 02:09, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He's considered to be the stereotype of "what could have been", has arenas, streets, etc named him. He was probaly the most famous baseball player ever who had a two year career or less. Rather hard to write about though. Lets see who can get an FA first CONTEST!!!!!!!! :p :p Jbeach ^sup 02:17, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For a wonderful source of information on Agganis (or any other prominent baseball figure whose last name starts with "A"), get hold of the volume of Bill James' The Baseball Book that contains his bio. I believe it was either 1990 or 1991. Newyorkbrad 02:22, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, would try to get a hold of that, I also found a whole book written on the subject himself, but I don't want to waste 20 dollars on a paperback book. Jbeach ^sup 02:24, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This project needs a bigger research budget. Meanwhile, I'm sure a library you can access has or can borrow the book you found. Newyorkbrad 02:27, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks NishKid. I am taking it slow, not editing a lot, though I have just posted my first new articles in days. I plan to leave myself out of areas like DYK that have caused me stress but another Illinois project member intends to nominate my articles. :)IvoShandor 04:16, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--Count Mall 01:52, 23 October 2007 (UTC)The picture is on one of the first pages, the big world map. --Count Mall 01:52, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PG 10. It has Bonnet's flag with a "Captaine Chevalle" captaion.--Count Mall 02:01, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its Bonnet's flag straight off.--Count Mall 02:58, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I could get you a screenshot from the movie, if that would help? Neil ☎ 10:07, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Things are getting out of control. It appears that certain individuals involved in the Ezhava article (some of which who were also involved in Malayalee) have taken personal offense to the changes in the article. Now they have migrated over to Nair and have started up a content dispute/edit war there (see all topics after this). I have discussions going on in both Malayalee and Ezhava and none of them have bothered to get involved. In fact, it seems that if they are not able to edit/revert the page, then they stay out. The only thing I can conclude from this is that they don't actually care about discussion. I have filed a request at WP:MEDCAB at Malayalee because no one wants to answer my questions in the discussion. I haven't received a response to my WP:MEDCAB request yet though. It looks like I might have to do the same at Ezhava and eventually at Nair. What do I do? Dispute resolution seems ineffective because no one wants to actually participate in the discussion! Any ideas? Thanks! --vi5in^[talk] 06:24, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The User:Vivin falied to give any reference to support his arguement and this is clear from Talk:Malayalee. I do not have specific interest to the article listed out by the user here.Tulu war 08:43, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I just wanted to drop you a line, and let you know that I'm going to disable the autoblock on this block, as it's causing collateral damage. Re-block, and let me know, if you feel I've done this in error :) Thanks! SQL^{(Query Me!)} 02:23, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Nishkid. Sorry to disturb you; I just wanted to know how to get that status template (the one at the top of your page) to work. That's all. Cheers, Zacharycrimsonwolf 13:18, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you, I get it now. However, do you mind if I were to nab it straight from you? --Zacharycrimsonwolf 13:12, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for stepping in here. I'm hopeful this will help Sabliss lean how to work better in Wikipedia. I'd tried appealing to her, and to other editors for advice in managing the process. I think we now have a respit where she can work towards a consensus approach, rather than her own OR with suspect POV writing. Bruno23 17:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Templates Hello, Nishkid. Sorry to disturb you; I just wanted to know how to get that status template (the one at the top of your page) to work. That's all. Cheers, Zacharycrimsonwolf 13:18, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Temporary Block on Get (conflict) Thanks for stepping in here. I'm hopeful this will help Sabliss lean how to work better in Wikipedia. I'd tried appealing to her, and to other editors for advice in managing the process. I think we now have a respit where she can work towards a consensus approach, rather than her own OR with suspect POV writing. Bruno23 17:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

THE EDITORS ARE OFFENSIVE AND THE EMOTIONALLY CHARGED COMMENTS OF SINEBOT AND BRUNO HAVE BEEN PRINTED AND SAVED. IT IS SUGGGESTED THAT YOU CHECK THE LAWS ON SLANDER AND LIBEL AND THE ARTICLE REFERRED TO ABOVE. NO EDITOR ON WIKIPEDIA IS IMMUNE FROM SUIT. YOUR BEHAVIOUR IS VINDICTIVE. INTERNET LAW IS EMERGING TRUTH AND ETHICS HOWEVER DO PREVAIL. AND IT IS ALSO NOTED THAT IT IS DISCRIMINATORY TO BLOCK SOMEONE FROM USING THIS SITE SINCE IT IS CONTRARY TO POLICY TO BLOCK ADDITION OF INFORMATION

THERE IS NO CONSENSUS ON FALSE INFORMATION AND FRAUD. THE ARTICLE ON THE GET IS TOTALLY INAPPOPRIATE, WRONG IN LAW AND ALSO SHOWS MENS INCORRECT ATTITUDES TO WOMEN ON THE ABUSIVE ISSUE OF WITHHOLDING REBARRIERS TO REMARRIAGE

THIS IS A LEGAL ARTICLE ON WHICH RELATES TO EMERGING SECULAR LAW AND UNLESS ANY OF THESE PEOPLE ARE LAWYERS, AS I HAVE A FEELING THEY ARE NOT, THEY HAVE NO BUSINESS WRITING THIS ARTICLE. FURTHER, WHAT I WROTE IS CITED. I HAVE NO INTENTION OF DEALING WITH VINDICTIVENESS AND EDITORS WHO WRITE SLURS SUCH AS THE USAGES OF THE JEWS. SAGBLISS

Well, we didn't get the result we hoped for. Instead of concilliation, Sagbliss has copy and pasted variations of this screed in several places. The misuse of wikimarkup and somewhat random copying and pasting locations creates quite the visual impact. It's almost like a what a bull in china shop would look like in text. I really don't know if this editor will ever work well in a wikipedia environment -- these threats to sue various editiors (including Sinebot of all things), is quite amazing. Bruno23 11:55, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not too long ago I complained to you about an incident last fall when you took the side of sock puppets against me. I now see that you are an excellent and professional admin and I respect you. To explain, what bothered me most about the incident last fall was a note you sent to User:BostonMA to stay away from me. I was hurt by your doing that even though he disregarded what you said. BostonMA was my very best friend, a consistently uplifting and beautiful person who daily sent me wonderful words of calmness. I still miss him greatly now that he is gone. Wikipedia is not the same without him. Sincerely, --Mattisse 15:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I have copied parts of your page formatting (hope that is O.K.) and I am trying to figure out how to copy other parts. --Mattisse 15:34, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know you were an inexperienced administrator and I understand. We both were inexperienced in our own ways. And you have evolved admirably. As I said, I respect how you handle being an administrator now. You are one of the best. I hope that you do not continue to have a poor opinion of me, even though I frequently make a mess of things. I know my judgment is not always the best in dealing with others here. Perhaps it is because this is the first time I have used the Internet and did not know about trolls and sock puppets and proper ways of dealing with people. I am still learning and trying to improve - although I frequently blow it. Thanks for answering. Sincerely, --Mattisse 15:50, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I'm just asking a wiki user who has just "retired" from wiki, 'patstuart'. He wrote a article about my best friend.. It was really rather scary because he had written her whole name and her nickname from last year and two of her friends were included with there first name and initial. The article was about her finding a diamond mine or something at age 8 which is completely stupid but. Could you please possibly provide me with a little more info on him. Whether he lives in NZ or age etc. Thanks, G. P.S. This is the article: File:Picture 28

hopefully it comes through —Preceding unsigned comment added by BandG (talk • contribs) 19:52, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Nishkid64. The reason I reverted your edit is the extra break, which you removed, is needed to make the dates line up with the positions held. Without the break, the years 1963-1965 line up with "(asst.)" which is just wrapped text from the Cuyahoga Falls High School line. And, the rest of the list fails to line up as well. Hope that clears it up. If not, please let me know. Thanks for your work on Wikipedia! →Wordbuilder 14:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see now what was happing. In my browser, the extra break was required for proper alignment. I opened the page in Firefox and it looked different. I changed it a bit and removed the extra break. It looks good in both browsers now. Let me know if it's lining up for you as well. Thank you for the help. →Wordbuilder 16:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have not received a response to my last message to you. The article on the get is incorrect. This is an expert article. For instance, the vindictive editor who incorrectly edited the section on the fact that transcripts were submitted December 27, 2006 forgot to mention that the Supreme Court is hearing the case and that argument was heard on December 5, 2006.The transcripts are of oral argument which comes before mentioning that transcripts have been submitted.

I await your immediate response and the releasing of the article so that the correct information can be posted on Wikipedia. Please ask the person who changed this incorrect information what their logical reason was to change the information? --Sagbliss 00:25, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have to answer my question. First of all this is an expert page. Second of all there is already a page on the web relating to the religious issue of the agunah. This page relates to the conflict of secular law versus religious law and only experts in law and the issue should be writing on the page. There are many organizations which deal with the abuse of women by their husbands which relate to the agunah issue. That you as an editor refuse to have a factually correct article on the evolving secular law to combat the religious issues of the agunah is discriminatory. Further all the informatino that I posted on the page was 100% correct both in fact and in law. The information that you are leaving on the get page currently as of 10/27/2007 -11:26 p.m. is false. Further, it is to be noted that this page as it stands has not been edited in a few days. The only people who were editing this page were Bruno now is a dead issue, not currently being changed to reflect the truth. The history of the editing of the page reflects that you (Nishkid, Bruno, 198.23.5.11, 24.225.137.164 reverted back to pre Sagbliss without any reasons for doing so, without checking the cites that Sagbliss posted. The substance of an encyclopaedia and even Wikipedia is that everything needs cites. Do answer me as to whether you have had the decency to read the Amicus Curaie brief from the CCLA and whether you have checked my version versus the vandalizers of the truth. If you have not and do not reconsider opening up the site to others, then you together with Bruno,198.23.5.11, 24.225.137.164 join in an issue which condones the abuse of women by former husbands who want to not only hurt an exspouses life but also hurt the children of the marriage as well. I strongly suggest you go to http://www.icar.org.il and read the site. And oh yes, the article that is currently posted has a whole diatribe about the issue of a get being international law. A get is Jewish religious law which has no bearing on secular international law. Just continue the discrimination which is also contrary to the WIkipedia policies. In law, fraud vitiates everything. Look it up! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sagbliss (talk • contribs) 03:33, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nishkid: You have failed to answer my question as to whether as an administrator who is supposed to be capable of adjudicating disputes you have read the substantive cites that I have referred you to. Further you illustrate to me that you have done absolutely nothing about the issue. Had you investigated this issue you would see that each time I made a change I substantiated the change. Look back at the first discussions. These men who I imagine condone the behaviour of these men to women immediately without any rhyme or reason changed the facts back to their original writing irrespective of the falsehoods they were writing, either on factual issues or the law. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sagbliss (talk • contribs) 03:46, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am an extremely successful businesswomen which involves collaboration with many other people. I will not however colaborate with people who are unethical or write falsehoods which is what you are condoning without any introsepection. Your last four messages to me prove that you have not read the issue and allow inaccurate information onto Wikipedia. This I am sure is contrary to the policies of Wikipedia. It is up to you to read the issues in this article and the cites and get up the correct information. All you have done to date is cowtwo to the Bruno and the other editors I last mentioned and indiscriminately blocked me from the cite and also the truthful factual information to which the public is entitled.

--Sagbliss 04:22, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great news! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 33 has been released!

.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/10/26/wikipedia-weeekly-30/, and, as always, you can download past episodes and leave comments at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.

For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP ^(?) 07:40, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery.
If you do not wish to receive such notifications, please remove yourself from the list.

Nishkid, since you protected Ezhava, how long would consider going on before removing the protection? Now, I've been the only admin working substantively on the page and as you can see on Talk:Ezhava, I'm getting a lot of discussions started; nothing has really moved forward though. However, I cannot seem to drag in the users who were the most disruptive (I've warned one basically that if he edit wars once protection is lifted, I will look unfavorably on his lack of talk-page involvement and block him harder). Would you go to a semi-protection or simply keep it locked down for a little while longer? My plan was to the left the article stay locked for a few days (I mean, it's not like there is a ton of complaints on the talk page) and then go and wipe out every single unsourced remotely controversial statement. Then, go to semi-protection and see if people can calmly build the article back up. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:31, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, user BSReddys has violated 3RR many times over in the recent edit wars on the India page. His violation is especially flagrant in view of the edit wars over the same issue which locked down the page for a month this past summer. Those edit wars, led to a decision, painstakingly recorded here, in favor of the language currently employed. User:BSReddys has been told about the archival records, but refuses to listen. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 08:41, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your Response: This is Wikipedia. We have our own rules and policies. Your interpretation of internet law does not apply here. We can block whoever we please, permitted they are violating Wikipedia rules, or are disrupting the environment. If you continue these rants and attacks against other editors, you will be blocked. Nishkid64 (talk) 13:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC) Also, if you issue legal threats, you will be blocked per WP:NLT. It's an encyclopedia for everyone, for goodness sake! Sending e-mails to OTRS to get your way is unprofessional, and goes against the philosophy of this website. Nishkid64 (talk) 13:35, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia's policy is that everyone can edit and as long as everything is cited properly which is done here, it should be left. Instead Bruno and 194 and 224 who I imagine don't have too much life experience and think they know everything have vandalized the truth. You have never been on the site and you now unilaterally have blocked the truth from the world viewing. WIkipedia are known for fraudulent articles and from the link that I sent you which I certainly hope you read, some university kids unfortunately do their research from the WIkipedia articles.

Your blocking the truth is discrimination. Your reading the correct, factual and substantive issues might inform you on what is emerging law on the issue. And Bruno and 194 and 224 the know it alls on law have a case quoted in Rhodesia. This case is very old and not as valuable as recent American Law or Australian law which is added in the article. And do research who wrote the passage on Brett on the usage of the Jews. That Wikipedia and Wikimedia who collect money from the public on false pretenses do not police this site is problematic. I also have this on record.

Sagbliss

Hi Nishkid, be careful with this one. Check out this article [5]. Once you read that, look up the Pinel Institute in Montreal. I'm being circumspect here cuz of WP:BLP Bruno23 12:53, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just rechecked the link. Over the weekend, the publication exceeded their limit on bandwidth - I think this is a paper that's on its last legs! Here's a columnist from the Montreal Mirror commenting on the above article. Check the top of the second section (after the three "•••") 2/3rd of the way down the page. It refers to a key litigant mentioned in the get article who's possibly our active wikipedian. [[6]] Bruno23 05:51, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, the original link (#1) is back online. Bruno23 13:18, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nishkid: You admit you have read nothing. THIS IS AN EXPERT ARTICLE AND none of the editors can qualify as an expert on the issue. When the Supreme Court weighs in on the issue will Bruno who has no understanding of law and the issue decipher the Supreme Court case? How can you make an informed decision without reading what the issue is. Why was Rianna's comment about replacing a line on the Canadian case ignored by Bruno? This is vindictiveness. And in case you stubbornly refuse to read, the agunah issue involves men who abuse women emotionally after the divorce by preventing them joy and happiness in their lives to share in a marriage sanctioned by a Rabbi. You have not responded intelligently to one question that I asked of you? Please respond to why Rianna was ignored? --Sagbliss 18:01, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a suggestion in the Malayalee article talk page to remove the sentence regarding the etymology of Malayalam from the intro altogether. I haven't heard back from anyone yet. I think this might be an acceptable solution? --vi5in^[talk] 06:27, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:35, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This DRV mentions you in the nomination. -- Jreferee t/c 18:34, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since the comments was made almost 6 days ago I don't know if I should warn them, but what kind if warning should I give someone who makes a comment like the IP does at Talk:Melina Perez#Is Melina Half white(Caucasian) and half Mexican or is she full mexican and born in the U.S.??. TJ Spyke 02:13, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are an anal-retentive, ignorant piece of shit. I really hope that you're a miserable virgin slob. If this were an argument in real life you would have had your face smashed in long ago by a group of angry anarchists. Consider yourself lucky.--Apples99 09:30, 29 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Apples99 (talk An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ottawa Panhandlers Union. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review.--Apples99 09:38, 29 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Miguelemejia (talk 21:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work getting List of Minnesota Vikings first-round draft picks up to featured list status! Take care. RyguyMN 05:27, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:59, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]