I like this guy.

Again, welcome! DickClarkMises 14:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, this guy can send me canned messages, but not you... or that silly perl script you call a bot.Yakuman

Radio

Yakuman: Kudos to you too for knowing both the great Charles Goyette and "talk show host man" Ron Smith! I love those guys! (I never sent a personal message before to someone on Wikipedia...so hopefully you will see this...) --PHX-WIKI

Sarcasm's Greatest Hits

From my old talk page: This is a Wikipedia user page. This is not an encyclopedia article. Duh... This user does not suffer fools gladly... Yakuman is a Japanese legend, similar to our Santa Claus. On July 23, he visits every anime-addicted, Linux-obsessed, porn-downloading, pencil-necked geek, nerd and wussie in the country... and pimp-slaps them good and hard. Then all the good little boys and girls celebrate... This user is both edgy and cantankerous, like Dr. House without the Vicodin... I get angry when obsessive-compuslsive misanthropes try to push their weight around... I trust no one under the age of 30... I am not interested in sophistry contests with uncultured escapees from the IT department, bored college students, or manic OCD patients... An admin once tried to block me. I ate her liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti... Those who behave like insolent IT admins will be asked to do something useful... like change the toner in my LaserJet... and to quit using my T1 for serving up unlicensed reruns of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer." Remember, there are starving people in Carjackistan who will gladly run my help desk for a bag of Skittles and some Gatorade. --Yakuman

Masterful job on the Neoconservative - Paleoconservative Conflict page!

I just wanted to say thank you for the excellent job you've done in keeping the Neoconservative - Paleoconservative Conflict on track. It is a fascinating subject, one that I enjoy reading up on constantly. Keep up the good work.--Son of More 07:50, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You sir, are freaking insane. In a good way, that is.

611 edits to the Paleoconservatism article and 603 edits to the Pat Buchanan article? You seriously need to go outside. With your knowledge, you could cure cancer. I'll be sure to contact you if I ever start an article that needs some serious attention. Until then, keep up the good work! Floaterfluss 04:14, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Cute Puppy

On the other hand...

I can't argue with your comment, "Wikipedia's policy and administration structure is a form of anarcho-tyranny: 'law without order: a constant busybodying about behavior that does not at all derive from a shared moral consensus.'" Wikipedia could be so much better than it is. :( Wahkeenah 06:21, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Have you considered enabling an email for this account? I have a question, but I believe it is better asked off-wiki. If not, no worries. - auburnpilot talk 08:24, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've nominated Stephen M. Smith, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Stephen M. Smith satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen M. Smith and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Stephen M. Smith during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. —Wknight94 (talk) 18:45, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is part of a campaign against one user; article is notable and cited. Yakuman (数え役満) 18:58, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An article about a teacher who has no notoriety at all is notable? How? The only thing that it says is that he's dying and his degrees. This isn't notable at all. How can you question its nomination for deletion, especially since it violates Criteria for speedy deletion? --19:06, 9 April 2007 (UTC)Ksy92003

There's a notability rationale on the talk page. It isn't a WP:CSD#A7 violation. Yakuman (数え役満) 19:12, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

“An article about a teacher who has no notoriety at all is notable?”

True, the man did not rape, rob, assault, or embezzle anyone, or rob any banks, nor was he executed for his beliefs. But there is no necessary relation between being a great teacher and a notorious one, nor is there a notoriety criterion for articles on teachers. I hereby vote against the RfD.

70.23.199.239 10:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't make threats, especially when you are misrepresenting policy. Your allegation that I am engaging in "vandalism" is laughable - undoing your POV edits isn't "vandalism". You say on your user page "When people send me warnings, treats, accusations or insults, it bothers me, especially when they are false"...and yet, you seem to have no hesitation to issue false threats of your own.

It's also rather amusing that you say that you "prefer to avoid sophistry contests or dueling quotations from obscure policy documents"...while trying to claim that changing "Dominionism" to "Christian Reconstructionism" with an edit summary that says "See WP:LIVING. FYI, 3RR does not apply to poorly-sourced material about living persons." You also say "Please note that I would rather not receive canned, scripted messages without my permission" - and yet, you use "canned, scripted" edit summaries (which, by the way, are nothing but a Chewbacca defense). Try again. 72.198.121.115 04:23, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're trying to force unverified, untrue statements. Hence what I've seen saying. Yakuman (数え役満) 04:43, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting...so the fact that you call referenced information "unverified edits" is grounds for making false accusations of vandalism? And my edits somehow force you to act exactly the way that you complain about on your user page? You should really try taking responsibility for your own actions...and making accurate edit summaries. 72.198.121.115 13:13, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I came here to add my opinion about you making threats, violating 3RR, edit warring and misrepresenting policy as well but saw that you dismissed and deleted the comments of 72.198.121.115. Ever hear of don't bite the newbies?. 151.151.73.167 19:52, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see that Lquilter has now gone trolling at User_talk:Wknight94, in search of more allies to join him in his group hate at the COI board. He is whispering specious arguments in Wknight94’s ear, hoping the latter will use them to help get you banned, while keeping his own (Lquilter) hands clean. LQ is incompetent in matters of the law, but great at organizing group hates. His conduct has got to be some form of WP:HARASSMENT, for what it’s worth, in addition to his trolling for muscle at John Broughton, Will Beback, and God only knows how many other user pages. 70.23.199.239 10:29, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still waiting for an apology for your abusive threats. Calling someone a "sockpuppet" is yet another example of incivil activity. Please stop abusing your editing privileges. 72.198.121.115 14:37, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]