Thanks for your message

Hey Ryan, thank you for your message, I really appreciated your very kind comments. However, I then saw your conversation with Allison on Acalamari's talk page and I realised that you're just a charmer and you're on a roll with charming the Wiki-ladies! ;-D LOL

Seriously, though, I know that you won't abuse the tools. I would never have come back around to support if I'd thought that was a possibility. I have been impressed with you and your work for ages now and when I saw your name on the nom list I went straight to the RfA page with the full intention of offering my strong support. If the diffs had all been from your early days, it really wouldn't have been such a concern to me. But it was the recent incident that really threw me. I didn't feel let down, though, so don't worry about that. I do understand that happened was a mistake and not some malicious thing you deliberately set out to do.

I hope your first days of adminship have been all you hoped for. Please feel free to give me a yell anytime if you ever need any help or support. All the best, Ryan, Sarah 13:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Co-Nomination.

You've known Alison longer than I have. Would you be interested in being the co-nominator on her RfA? (Sorry if I beat you to being the nominator.) Acalamari 18:11, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Excellent co-nomination; you wrote about some things that I missed/didn't know about. I don't know about you, but I'll give my support as the nominator if she accepts. Acalamari 19:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, we have to wait anyway. Acalamari 19:07, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

What?! She hasn't accepted?! Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 19:19, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Not yet; don't forget she could actually be answering the questions. Acalamari 19:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not to hopefull then, I asked her a couple of weeks ago and she said no! Lets just keep our fingers crossed, she'd make a great admin Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 19:26, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for doing those additions with the edit counts; I thought they had to be put in when the candidate accepted. Obviously not. Acalamari 20:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, they do, but nevermind, it shouldn't be a problem :P Majorly _{(o rly?)} 20:11, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Cheers Majorly, I'll update them if she excepts (didn't realise) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 20:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Your User talk vandalism

Hi there, I just noticed as I was patrolling the changes using VandalProof that you were having problems on your user page (or user talk page - I can't remember lol) anyway I'm glad to see you have sorted it out! Tellyaddict 19:03, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Your welcome! The IP address blanked the warnings on there talk page so I reverted it, I'll keep an eye out there too incase he does it again. Again - your welcome! Tellyaddict 19:05, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to keep leaving messages but he she is requesting unblock but has also removed there vandalism warns in the process, you may wish to review it and posibly revert it so his/her warnings appear to other editors! Tellyaddict 19:07, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah cheers, I've just noticed that, I've asked User:Majorly to review it for me because he's neutral in it all Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 19:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Yamla's already declined the request. Acalamari 19:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

(reduce indent); thanks, once again, for helping out. That IP had no business in posting business like that to the public, and I thank you for speedily reverting it. I'd give you a barnstar, but consider the original seconded! anthonycfc 19:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

hehe, yeh no probs, wikipedia isn't the place for the stuff maria was putting - shes got a 24 hour cooling off period, and if she wants to contribute constructivly, she can do so after that. Hope everythings ok Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 19:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Good evening (GMT time); everything is relatively okay, but (as Maria kindly pointed out) I've got some stuff to sort out, so see you after the WikiBreak. Again, a thousand thank you messages! anthonycfc 19:35, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

... :) see you around. anthonycfc 19:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

PUA.

1 Acalamari 21:29, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Late on the RfA.

I can't believe it; neither of us were the first to give out support to Alison, and we're the ones to nominate her! :) Not only that, but it seems some joker has vandalized the RfA already. --sigh-- How nice of that person to do that; at least it shows that the vandals know they'll have one more vandal-fighter to worry about. Acalamari 16:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Glad to support your RfA

Ho ho ho! Go ahead, copper, run me through WP:RFCN. You'll never find my hundred socks, a majority of which are now part of the Cabal! De-sysoping will be the least of your worries. (although I must stress I am not threatening you with legal action. because that would be wrong.) Anyways, be of good cheer and try to not get bogged down. --Pig_dialogue 18:08, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Hehe! That one certainly made me laugh, still considering an NPA warning...... actually I'll let you off on this one since you did support my Rfa ;) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 18:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Another Place.

Look at this. Both Gamaliel and I show up there. Acalamari 22:35, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

It's nice when people off-wiki talk about you. :) Acalamari 03:03, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Ryan

Apologies for calling you a wikinazi. However, please leave my user page alone. You're only proving my point by reverting it.

--PeterMarkSmith 02:19, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Appology accepted, if you wish I will put your userpage through Mfd if you want to keep it in its wikipedia offensive state, its entirely upto you Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 02:25, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Requesting an opinion on a username

Hi there, I know you're a regular at RFC/U. I warned a user today about his username, Filiusdei (talk • contribs), as in Son of God. What do you think? My original post to him is here and his reply and mine are here. Regards, Flyguy649_contribs 02:55, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your input. As you saw, I also asked Kukini for input and got essentially the same response. I also don't have a problem with his name. I guess I was more concerned about how others might react, since there seems to have been a bit of that lately at RFCU. I'll let the user be. Thanks again. Regards, Flyguy649_contribs 13:31, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

A couple of things I noticed...

Hey, Ryan. I know you're still a baby administrator, so I'm going to try not to bite.  :) In handling the User:PeterMarkSmith page, I think that blanking it probably wasn't the best idea--the objection was to the whole page, not just one personal attack that could be removed. CSD under G10 might have worked; going straight to MfD would have been better. And when the user retaliated by vandalising your page, I think you may have wanted to give a lower-level warning than the one you gave. It's one thing if he did that and I gave the warning, but given this user's disposition, I think he would have interpreted your warning as more posturing/wikinazi-ing/whatever. It's just something to think about when the next unpleasantness hits. At any rate, you did fine overall, and I think you kept calm and solicited others' opinions, which is always good. And it's good that you didn't hit delete and then block, like I might have done when I was first an admin.  ;) I've MFD'd the page now, so we'll see what happens. Keep up your very good work. -- Merope 03:48, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok you may help

Do you now anything about Fudokan? If you do write everything that is missing? Remember that is fourth school of karate in the world -- snake_bgd

Can you redert me to the templarate: major styles of karate

Heian Oi Kumi, Taiji Shodan, Kaminari, Kaminari i wrote again.

No, no you don't understand i what to edit this article just as i edit templarate:karate schools Snake bgd 12:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Alison's RfA

Sorry, you'll have to excuse me, i thought the RfA was a request for adminship with regards to server monitoring and soforth; i got the impression that from her contributions and soforth that she may not have been suitable, but i see it's for the sysop flag on mediawiki. I'll vote in the reciprocal; put me down for Support instead. J O R D A N  15:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeh no problem at all, I thought there may have been a misunderstanding, by all means keep it as oppose if you wish or I'm more than happy to help you change it (although you'll have to actually put the support bit on yourself! Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 16:04, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Party Up

Enjoy the partying! I did my share this weekend (and last, and wait, the one before that too). lol. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 16:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Ha, cheers Chris - lets just hope I don't come on later to edit (actually, I'll probably by too hammered!) Just finishing a few things up - then Kendal won't know whats hit it! Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 16:51, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, you poor thing (in advance)! Here - let me help ;) - Alison 17:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

@

I thought about that as I sent that welcome. I am not sure why that is a rule across the board. I have seen many exceptions to this rule out there. My thoughts, delete my welcome and put it into the process. If the name should be blocked, we should run a search for all other names with @'s and ask them to change usernames. I gotta go, but if you have time to deal with it...I would appreciate it. Best, Kukini 19:27, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

A belated congratulations

Ryan -- I was away from the wiki during midterms and somehow your RfA completely escaped my notice. I'm sorry I missed the chance to support you, and I have no doubt that you will be a responsible admin and continue to be a credit to the project. Rock on - A Train 19:48, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Please stop this guy

This guy User:RogueNinja is acting vandlism in my article please block it so that he or she can't delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snake bgd (talk • contribs)

• Hmmm - looks like a revert war. Also note Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Fudokan - Alison 15:16, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Our usual song-and-dance

Hey Ryan, once you've got some water and aspirin in your system to moderate that hangover, want to give mentoring another shot? Here's the gouge. If and when you make the approach, make it clear to WikiLoco that you're approaching on the behalf of a concerned group of editors, and that a community ban is on the table if his overall editing doesn't improve. Let me know what you think. A Train 15:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

User Page Design

Good evening (GMT time); as requested, I've drew up a quick something in the form of a possible new user page design. It's located at User:Anthony cfc/Sandbox/A; let me know what you think!

Kind regards,
anthonycfc 22:30, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

• Wow - niiiice! - Alison 22:42, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Anthony, you should credit the person who originally had that layout, FireFox. I think he was the first one to have that design (see his userpage history around September 2006), but it was "stolen" by others afterwards. By the way, you basically copied Arjun01's userpage and substituted it with Ryan's information. Try to be original? It gets boring when everyone has the same userpage. Nishkid64 22:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

* Looks good. Acalamari 23:01, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

• Reverted already. Looks like your new layout lasted ... oh ... 15 minutes? :) - Alison 23:05, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

  Yeah, didn't realise it was just copied across so I've removed it completely and I'll speak to Anthony about it tomorrow, thanks for the revert by the way :) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 23:08, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

  Mine's reasonably unique, Ryan. So feel free to steal away on any/all of it if you like - Alison 23:10, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

• I didn't realize it was someone else's, so I crossed out my message. As for my own user page/user talk designs, I'm going to keep them as they are; even If other users' think they look boring. Acalamari 23:14, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I owe you a thanks.

Thank you for dealing with the vandal of my userpage. TheBlazikenMaster 23:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Next time some vandal vandalisms my page, I will report that vandal to your talkpage. TheBlazikenMaster 23:07, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah no problem, don't forget though, in cases where the user should obviously be blocked, it can be reported to WP:AIV but by all means if you want a second opinion, you know where I am Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 23:10, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

KFed08 evading block/ban?

Kfed08 is somehow blanking his talk page again after you banned him. Any idea how this happens? JohnCub 01:20, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Ombudsman

I have removed your User:Ombudsman section from Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User names because I had already posted such a section a couple hours ago. It was removed by User:Neil on the (false or mistaken) grounds that User:Ombudsman had not been given advance warning about the potential problems with his username. I have restored the original discussion and invite you to contribute to it. —Psychonaut 19:27, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Cheers, I've been at work all day and I missed it, if it had already been discussed, I may not have readded it. Sorry for the confusion, I'll comment on your version now Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 19:29, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Checkuser request

Oh, wow. That seems like the sort of situation checkuser might be able to shed some light on, you could submit a request. As to whether the CUs would make the check, I couldn't (and, in the interest of neutrality, really shouldn't) say. I guess, if we're trying to see if Ed = the other account, then you could try and apply code letter F (community block evasion). – Luna Santin (talk) 02:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah sorry for asking your opinion about it as I know you should stay neutral, thanks for the advice, I'm going to submit one with code letter F as I think it should be done before any blocks or unblocks are made Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 02:34, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Of course. Looking around to make sure the preload case input is okay, and such. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 02:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Re Idiot

Hey Ry...go take a look at my comments. If you think I am off-base, let me know and help me see why in the discussion. Thanks, Kukini 03:02, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Wow, good research! Can't believe I'm not leanin towards disallow on this one now! Still, not striking my allow comments out until theres greater reaction! (I've commented all the same) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 03:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

You know me...I just want us to be consistent and careful. It shows the most respect to each other and the project at large. --Kukini 03:13, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Blah Blah Blah Got your lovey-dovey sad and lonely

Long enough for ya? Kukini 08:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

50 characters - but it is coherent, might I suggest WP:RFCN? We can't block this one on sight, the policies just too ambiguous. Would certainlt say disallow though others may have a different opinion Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 08:33, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

As this remains an interesting shared issue for us, I thought I would pass it along. I am heading to bed. If you want to run it up the flagpole, let me know what happened...as it could effect the wording of policy, no? Kukini 08:38, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Arrrrggghhh, I havn't got time to do it now, I'm going to work! If it hasn't been blocked already (for name or vandalism) we'll put it through later on - although it seams likely theres going to be a vandalism block on the cards! Nighty night Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 08:41, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Me either...I need sleeeeeeeep....and see, there is a part of me loves names like this: User:The Fat Man Who Never Came Back, but it might be the part of me that is growing up slowly. --Kukini 08:42, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I be an editor

I make small needed grammatical changes to pages. Nothing serious. That is who I am. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.107.227.68 (talk) 03:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

Guess who is back.

Here ya go...same user with a slight change to the name. Go here to learn how it happened....Kukini 16:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

That one isn't acceptable either! I actually thought you might have gone through a minor username change at first! would you like me to bring it up at WP:RFCN for you? (Think there might be a conflict of interest if you do it!) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 16:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I leave that up to you. Hey I have an idea...what about we create an "institutional memory" page for RFCN? On it, we would list historically blocked words, such as "retard," under various categories, based on policy. That way, we might have something to refer to quickly when it comes to usernames. --Kukini 16:55, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah thats a really good idea, although there shouldn't be precedents on wikipedia, we definately need some kind of continuity, I remember those jesusfreak usernames from last week, the first one got disallowed, and then the second one, which just had a different number on the end nearly got allowed. The catogaries section would definately be a better idea than the currecnt archive, although we could use the archive links to help us set it up. Any suggestions on where to put it? Userspace or a subsection of WP:RFCN? Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 17:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:RfC/User names/Institutional memory

I would suggest that as the page...then we link it to the RfC itself and use it as a reference in these decisions. Kukini 00:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah thats a good call, theres no problems with random article clicking or anything. Going to bed soon so I'm not going to have chance to work on it tonight, but definately will do tomorrow. How far back do you want to go? As an immediate response, I'd say 4 weeks just to get it off the ground, then we can look at going further back. It's going to need manual entry, but I think there will be enough support to encourage people to archive there upon closing (an if not, it's easy to do once for just a few of us once its been created). I think we should archive all names that come to RFCN (including obvious allows) otherwise there could be bias. Would you like to get the ball rolling? Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 00:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

That sounds like a good start, although we have some problems...see below. Kukini 00:56, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I really think it would be best to link to the archive as well as linking to the user, it would give clearly the reasons for allowing or disallowing the name. Think consistency may be an issue as we go through this and it may be an idea to comment on it on RFCN talk. Not sure on this one, but do you think it would be better to have seperate pages for each category? Might mean the page size is more accessible Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 01:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I prefer one clean and simple page that would be easy to refer to. --Kukini 01:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd suggest naming it "Index_by_reason" (as distinct from "Index_by_name"), because "Institutional memory" is too general (and could even refer to the Archive). I'd also suggest that the date given after "Blocked"* or "Allowed" should link to the archive oldid and section of the decision. *And "Blocked" should read "Disallowed", which is the actual decision; sometimes it results in a name change rather than a block. -- Ben /_HIST 02:33, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Let's talk about the name for it in a bit...first let's make it shine. Kukini 02:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

So, what do you think? Kukini 16:56, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm very impressed! How about I add usernames from between Feb 20th - March 6th and you do from March 7th - today? Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 17:00, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Please keep in mind that policy changes over time. Second of all, feel free to check out the username policy discussion at WP:U that is discussing a new policy related to religios figures. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 17:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah thats a good point, but it will be a good reference tool, and obvious new policy comes first Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 17:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I believe it can and should be monitored and updated as policy develops. I also think it is time to make this resource available to all reviewers. Should we reference it on the main RFCN page now? Kukini 17:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I think we should get a few more names on first, just so its not biased, also, theres a few groups that haven't been mentioned, like long names, random names, promotional names, think we should try and get all different headings of usernames that come to RFCN and then add it, might take a few days but it will be worth it Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 17:21, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

←Has this been brought up on the RFCN talk page? I think that might be a good place to start (Im my humble opinion). -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 17:22, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. I will likely use this tool in reference for blocking purposes on usernames regardless. I think this really improves consistency and transparency in our process. A good example of outcomes of this sort of study is the current rewrite of the religion portion of policy going on right now. --Kukini 17:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Problem with consistency

Houston...we have significant problems with consistency. Look at User:Wikipediatrix which was ruled on last year. If we are ruling out all that use "wikipedia" as a user name, we need to go back and clean house. We cannot just treat newbies differently than all of us. --Kukini 00:56, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Policy states that its only an issue if names were created after Jimbo's email (late feb I think) when he stated that names with wikipedia should only be disallowed from now on - problem solved (hopefully!!) maverick Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 00:58, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Good point. Thanks. I began our little project. I think we don't bother introducing it until we have it formed somewhat. Talk at ya later. Kukini 01:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Rollback

Hi. Thanks for offering. Hope you get some consensus at ANI. If you do, are the admin tools clever enough to deal with cases where others have responded to the about-to-vanish posts? How would you handle that? Hope you don't mind the question; I'm hoping to stand for adminship one day (undergoing coaching with The Transhumanist currently) and explanations like this can only help prepare me. --Dweller 11:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

As a new admin, Im still getting used to the rollback button! You can't rollback after someone else has edited, but you can rollback to any previous revision of the page; i.e. John made a couple of typo's so I'll have to go back a couple of revisions with it. For the ones where someone else has edited it, if its unrelated to the canvassing, I'll remove it manually, if it is related to the canvassing, I'm going to have to leave it as I don't want to be removing other peoples comments, does that sound fair? Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 11:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Erm, while you were kindly replying to me, Radiant's done it. Lol. Thanks! (Sorry) --Dweller 11:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Ha, I've just seen, my watchlists full of reversions. I wanted some practice :-(! Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 11:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

lol, I'm sure a linkspam bot will be along presently. --Dweller 11:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

John

Absolutely. >Radiant< 12:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Some people just won't take advice. --Dweller 12:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Its just a pitty that he didnt understand, I hope when his block expires he can come back and start being more productive Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 12:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Since it appears to be a SPA, I somehow doubt that. >Radiant< 12:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Is this now "Resolved" so far as ANI is concerned? I'm just dying to slap a tag on it, lol --Dweller 16:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Yep - I'd say so, the guys blocked so unlikely to cause any more disruption, I'll keep an eye on him after the block expires and wap another one on if he carries on. I'm quite dissapointed really - it seams that due to John's spamming efforts, CLawtons Rfa's now going to fail when it looked set to pass Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 16:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I !voted oppose. I have to say I was determined to support after I saw the canvassing(!), but my customary perusal of talk page + edit history gave me enough concerns apart from the Red Baron edit conflict. --Dweller 16:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

RfAs

Well, no argumentation could ever prove that a user will abuse the tools. Call it a hunch, if you will. :) —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 18:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I do fully understand all the concerns, but I don't get that hunch with this one (thats more what I meant to say) - I guess it doesn't matter really as its not going to pass. Anyway - I think the candidates had a rough time today - the canvassing by User:JohnHistory was way out of line and has completely discredited the Rfa. Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 18:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it was a real mess. Actually, I think he really meant well, as he explained on his talk page. Maybe the block can do something to cool him down a tad. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 19:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I think he meant well too, but there does seam to be some harrasment involved - as you say hopefully the block will cool him down, in 16 hours time hopefully we may have a reformed user!! :-) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 19:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm totally confident as to that... call it a hunch. :) —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 19:21, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Darkest Hour/monobook.js

Darkest Hour will need to purge the page cache to get it to work anyway; I left instructions to the IP on what to do. It is best to never touch someone else's js files, since it is code that is executed on their system. You should not do so unless you can confim the user, and are positive as to what you are doing. Since DH can do it himself, this shouldn't be needed. Prodego 19:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Cheers for the reply, and again sorry, will certainly think ahead next time - thanks for the advice Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 19:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Working!

Its all working. I know what the issue was, all you had to do was purge the cache of the page. Thanks for all the help. And yes because I'm now paranoid because of this I have OvrLoad - sockpuppet to test scripts before putting them in my monobook. Again, thank you for your assistance. -- Darkest Hour 20:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007.

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 07:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)