Thanks for the barnstar. I didn't realise that I had been doing much reversion on the page. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 04:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's true. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 04:47, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't seen that. I check it out later on. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 05:02, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Marx/Engels Collected Works, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 06:18, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

• Strong keep. Ludvikus (talk) 11:44, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Standard work, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 06:19, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

• Strong keep. Ludvikus (talk) 11:44, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please return to the RfD page when you get a minute? I think the comments you made on 5 May might have been accidentally appended to the wrong discussions. (If not, then I must confess that I don't have a clue what you meant.) Thanks. Rossami (talk) 22:06, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfD means Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. You made comments in the Historical revisionism (negationism) (disambiguation) → Revisionism and Gamecruft → Cruft discussions. Rossami (talk) 22:23, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ludvikus. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion can be found under the topic User:JPG-GR. Yours, --Schwalker (talk) 07:13, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm extremely unfamiliar with this kind of page. Can you please specify exactly what part to go to? Thanks. In the mean time, I'll guess. Please infom me if I'm in the wrong place. Thanks. --Ludvikus (talk) 08:12, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly Ludvikus! Boodles is claiming Jap sex slavery is some undeniable historical fact, but there are plenty of cultural POV assumptions in his argument. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 18:11, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Historical revisionism (disambiguation), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 22:59, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Why tell me to improve it? Why don't you do that. My interest now is simply in WP:DAB and {{otheruses}}. --Ludvikus (talk) 23:04, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Historical revisionism (disambiguation) for an explanation of why I've proposed the deletion of the page. I recommend (once again) that you read and understand WP:DAB before you continue creating and expanding inappropriate disambiguation pages. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 23:08, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Try an impersonal tone with me - you'll be far more effective. Also, your condescention does not help either. --Ludvikus (talk)

I have nominated Historical revisionism (disambiguation), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Historical revisionism (disambiguation). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 23:35, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Duly noted. --Ludvikus (talk) 02:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The differentiation you are trying to make is wholly artificial. We already have two articles on the subject, Historical revisionism and Historical revisionism (negationism). You are attempting to make a third article, on the same topic as the second, using entirely non-standard naming conventions. The disambiguation link at the top of the Historical revisionism article is all that is required. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:23, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thanks. Appreciate your advice. --Ludvikus (talk) 01:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't rename an article (and an approach to historiography) when consensus is clearly against you. Thank you. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 02:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about. --Ludvikus (talk) 02:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the guidelines in "Wikipedia:Requested moves". Laudak (talk) 01:36, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Read this. You are wrong again. Boodlesthecat ^Meow? 02:43, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please be more specific as to what you want me to read. Since it's on Capitalization may I simply direct you to the following examples as to precedence:

1. Jewish question
2. Jewish Question
3. The Jewish Question
4. On The Jewish Question
5. Historical revisionism
6. Historical Revisionism
7. American Revolution
8. French Revolution

Now what is your point? --Ludvikus (talk) 02:56, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you obviously still didnt read it. You don't get the difference between "American Revolution" and "Historical revisionism"? Boodlesthecat ^Meow? 03:16, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You recently filed a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves to move the page Historical Revisionism (negationism) to a different title - however your proposal is either incomplete or has been contested as being controversial. As a result, it has been moved to the incomplete and contested proposals section. Requests that remain incomplete after five days will be removed.

Please make sure you have completed all three of the following:

1. Added {{move|NewName}} at the top of the talk page of the page you want moved, replacing "NewName" with the new name for the article. This creates the required template for you there.
2. Added {{subst:RMtalk|NewName|reason for move}} to the bottom of the talk page of the page you want to be moved, to automatically create a discussion section there.
3. Added {{subst:RMlink|PageName|NewName|reason for move}} to the top of today's section here.

If you need any further guidance, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves or contact me on my talk page. - JPG-GR (talk) 03:08, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive behavior at Talk:Revisionist Zionism. Thank you. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 16:43, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

• Please stop your personal attacks, and inflamatory language. The word "behavior" is insulting and used against a child.
• If you believe something is disruptive, then you have to tell me (1) why, and (2) how. --Ludvikus (talk) 16:51, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The issue of renaming Revisionist Zionism was discussed and your suggestion was rejected. Continuing to push the issue by starting a new section is being disruptive. Please stop. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 17:00, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If your vandalism continues, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Boodlesthecat ^Meow? 18:02, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But it's just me and him latley - you haven't participated. So what consensus are you talking about? --Ludvikus (talk) 18:05, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The editors in involved are:

• User:BoodlesthecatUser talk:Boodlesthecat
• User:Malik ShabazzUser talk:Malik Shabazz

How does discussion among between us three two on a Talk page constitute "disruption"? --Ludvikus (talk) 18:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You moved the Revisionist Zionism page against the consensus of multiple editors. Stop playing games and stop lying. You will be blocked if you don't stop. You should take this seriously if you want to constinue to participate in Wikipedia. Boodlesthecat ^Meow? 18:17, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You seem like a reasonable individual. Could you lend a hand with this user? First and foremost, his username is the name of a 1930s foreign-sponsored terrorist organization; second he's going around changing everything with a pro-Nationalist China bias. Thank you. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 18:15, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well I appreciate that the voice of reason is often drowned out by the numerous voices of chaos and anarchy, but I will be glad to patrol some areas you need a hand in if you can tone Flying Tiger's terrorism just one notch. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 18:19, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]