Revision as of 17:29, 7 December 2006 editRetired username (talk | contribs)48,708 edits →article to look at...: drv note← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:36, 7 December 2006 edit undoSkrewler (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users545 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
Line 373: | Line 373: | ||
==The White Rose Society (student group) on deletion review== | ==The White Rose Society (student group) on deletion review== | ||
An editor has asked for a ] of ]. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --] 17:29, 7 December 2006 (UTC) | An editor has asked for a ] of ]. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --] 17:29, 7 December 2006 (UTC) | ||
== Deeply Saddened...== | |||
I'm deeply saddened by the indefinite banning of ], but more so I'm troubled by your obvious ] in this incident. I have nothing else to say, in fear of further abuse of power due to your personal biases towards people of color. ] 17:36, 7 December 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:36, 7 December 2006
user page // talk page admin • opining • matrix • fun • awards
This is EVula's talk page, which shouldn't be a surprise if you clicked the link... | |
---|---|
My general guidelines: | |
|
|
Archives |
|
Admin tools
The mop |
Congratulations on becoming an admin!
Enjoy your new-found powers, and remember to use them only for good, and not for evil. If you would like to try out your new mop, here are some spots that always need loving care:
All the best! - Quadell |
The flamethrower |
- Thanks for the haiku. Congratulations and good luck as an admin! Andre (talk) 07:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Just a little thing...
Just thought I'd let you know, this anonymous user has made another edit to the Shao Kahn edit, after you warned him. I tossed another warning template on there, but I thought I'd let you know what he's up to still. Cheers, The Haunted Angel 17:56, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. That's such a minor thing that I don't feel comfortable banning him over, although I'll certainly watch him closely. EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:14, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
User:69.234.102.133
Thanks for de-vandalizing my user page. You think a block is called for? I'd go with a last warning but I'm not sure if i should do it myself. ~ trialsanderrors 18:27, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
- Not a problem. I'd say go for the block (24 hours sounds about right); there's absolutely no way in hell that it could be considered a good-faith edit. :-) EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:29, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
- Done. Is there a record book for time between becoming an admin and becoming a vandal target? Although, I doubt I'd make it in the Top 100... ~ trialsanderrors 18:34, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
- Not sure, but that is pretty damn impressive. The most flak I've gotten so far was someone letting me know they'd submitted a Deletion Review for something I'd axed. So mundane... nothing nearly as exotic as being called a dumb cunt. I'm almost envious... almost. ;-) EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
- Done. Is there a record book for time between becoming an admin and becoming a vandal target? Although, I doubt I'd make it in the Top 100... ~ trialsanderrors 18:34, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Freakazoid!
I suspect the semi-protect will have to be there for a long time; as long as the Candle Jack thing is a 4chan in-joke, the people there will try to carry it over here. Jay Maynard 15:23, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, I hate to keep it protected, but I've got better things to do than clean up after morons. :-) Protection restored (thanks for the heads up, too). EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:25, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
- FWIW, I think anyone vandalizing the Candle Jack entry to put the 4chan joke in should get an immediate {{blatantvandal}} warning. It's obviously not a helpful edit tot he encyclopedia, and cannot be made in good faith. Jay Maynard 13:57, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
- Good call. I'll start using that warning instead on future vandals. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:51, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Another MK AfD
Hi. Someone has created two more articles on alleged new MK titles. There are no sources, so I've put them up for deletion (here). Just thought you'd want to know. :) RobWill80 17:05, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Yeagley
Thanks. The thing is that some editors seem to have deleted, without comment, the original David A. Yeagley article in its entirety and substituted a new one, presumably to remove political controversies that surround Yeagley. I've just found this ount, and restored the text under a hidden tag. Badagnani 20:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- Hmm, where'd you get that? I looked at the deleted version, and it didn't read like that. If you could, try to work that copy into the actual article (complete with wikiformatting) rather than just dumping it at the end; it looks quite odd as-is. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:20, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Image SD
I submitted the image for speedy deletion because it seemed to me to be an image that was rather unnecessary, however I see now ow it can be used, and please accept my formal apologies for this error. Scienceman123 talk 04:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
- No worries. It was the sort of thing that you could have easily tagged it and then it was placed on Navel (I didn't bother checking), but it doesn't really matter one way or the other. Apology accepted. :-) EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
look to the luna crap
i try'd looking for a source of its information, nothings coming up, so i'll just wait for this guy to say something, so until then it'll stay off. Lil'Layzie-One 22:32, 20 November 2006 (UTC) Lil'Layzie-One
- Groovy, thanks. EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Jubal Early
I removed your request for a citation - the citation is given. It's in Joss Whedon's commentary in the Firefly DVDs.
Now if you mean to say that Fillion's family, and thus Joss, might be WRONG, I think that's a different matter. It would be simple to rewrite it so that it was expressed as the Fillion family belief, and not as a fact.
Are they wrong? I suspect that any genealogists who are Nathan Fillion fans might be able to settle the question quickly. Zora 01:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- "The Firefly DVD commentary" isn't an exact source; the exact episode (and chapter) has never been stated. At one point, the "Objects in Space" article said that it was in that episode's commentary; after watching it, I realized that it wasn't anywhere to be found.
- I'm not pushing for a written source; I agree whole-heartedly that the DVD commentary isn't a perfectly valid source. Its the fact that it has never been anymore specific than "its in some episode" that I have a problem with. See Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Firefly#Nathan Jubal Fillion Early for additional commentary about this. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:26, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Darn. Well, there goes the weekend. Guess I have to watch all the commentaries all over again :) Zora 05:37, 21 November 2006 (UTC) (My score: recruited four Browncoats)
- Sorry to hear that your weekend is ruined. My condolences. ;-P
- My DVDs are currently loaned out to some prospective browncoats (the husband is totally hooked, having watched each episode multiple times + commentaries, whereas the wife has yet to see five minutes). I swear, if I can get a bit more paid down on my credit card, I might buy an extra set just for loaning out... EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:44, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Could You Take Care of This Please...
Hello EVula, could you please take care of this speedy delete article. The username who created it also promotes the thing mentioned in the article.¤~Persian Poet Gal 05:47, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Article deleted, user blocked for 48 hours. Quite apparent that they are only here to push that one article; if they keep it up, I'll block them indefinitely. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:51, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yep quite the case. I have another one for you unfortunately, see this. Update: Jimfbleak took care of it, thanks again.¤~Persian Poet Gal 06:10, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 20th.
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 2, Issue 47 | 20 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
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 06:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
username origin
Are you EVula as in EVula.com and the moderator in AmbrosiaSW forums? I have probably put as much time into that game series as I have into Misplaced Pages.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 12:57, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- The one and only. :-) EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:17, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
WHy are you vandalizing my page?
Please edit my user page when i give you permision! You don't have the persmission so please discuss it instead...
--Storkian 21:50, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
A few things:
- WP:USERPAGE user page does not belong to you (EVula could protect your user page and you could do nothing about it, but he's not a dick, so you wouldn't)
- WP:AGF Assume good faith
- meta:Don't be a dick
Thanks, Cbrown1023 22:03, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Storkian, you had {{user wikipedia/Administrator}} in your list of userboxes, but you aren't an administrator. Seems like all kinds of bad idea. EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:18, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
The Executioner MK Minor Characters
i can see why you removed the resident evil stuff, that pretty much didn't belong there, but why did you remove the Mace: The Dark age stuff, to most people it does seem right, sence MK & Mace are both Midway made games, but i just want to know if theres another reason to other than its source. Lil'Layzie-One 14:40, 22 November 2006 (UTC) Lil'Layzie-One
- Pretty much because its unsourced. I'm not particularly familiar with either character, so I can't verify that the two look similar at all; generally leaving stuff like that in place makes it a lightning rod for other speculation, so I tend to remove such comments. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:21, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
ok Fair enough, i guess i should remove the one from Mace then huh lol. Lil'Layzie-One 15:27, 22 November 2006 (UTC)Lil'Layzie-One
WP:UW
Hey, Glad to have you onboard, there are alot of people 'involved' in the project, but we are certainly looking for proactive people to get stuck in. If you look here and the overview page you'll start to get an idea of where we are. In the next couple of days I'll put together the 4 template models, and then we can start early next week. I'll assign a group of warnings to each of the people who have said they're interested in helping out. We, and this where you might come in handy, will need to put together a checking system to audit the new templates to make sure they meet the criteria setout before we put them into place. Also nice one with the user box, will certainly use that!!! Cheers Khukri 19:39, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Sharkface217 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!
Women in the United States Senate
You recently moved several articles about female U.S. Senators into the Category:United States Senators. However, that category should not contain articles about individual Senators. Rather, they should be in its subcategories, such as Category:United States Senators from Montana.—Markles 13:03, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry about that. I was cleaning out a category that was tagged for speedy deletion (had been recreated after being deleted by CfD). Next time I clear out a category, I'll try to pay a bit more attention to the existing standards. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:15, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, I see. I've just now looked at the CFD results and it seems strange to me that it would say that they should be moved into Cat:USSenators. It appears, then, that you were just following the CFD results, and it wasn't your fault. Thanks.—Markles 16:28, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- No worries. :-) EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:33, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, I see. I've just now looked at the CFD results and it seems strange to me that it would say that they should be moved into Cat:USSenators. It appears, then, that you were just following the CFD results, and it wasn't your fault. Thanks.—Markles 16:28, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Captions and comic book covers.
IIUC, ChrisGriswold is referring to an editorial guideline specific to the Comics Project, speciffically Uniform cover artwork crediting convention.
Just plopping in 2¢ — J Greb 19:04, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- A handy guideline, to be sure, but as this is a photo, it is largely irrelevant. Useful reading, though; thanks for the link.
- Also, what is IIUC? IIUC redirects to List of Internet slang phrases, but it isn't listed. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:13, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- Ah... I knew he was patrolling the Comics Project related articles withe this. I didn't realize it had gone beyond that scope.
- As for "IIUC" it's "If I Understand Correctly" and it's related to "IIRC", "If I Recall Correctly. — J Greb 21:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- Excellent, thanks for the double clarification. :-) EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:29, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- As for "IIUC" it's "If I Understand Correctly" and it's related to "IIRC", "If I Recall Correctly. — J Greb 21:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for the cookie (It's now in my awards section). But one problem: How am I supposed to eat it? --AAA! 22:25, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Well done. It seems you are really involved in the MK Project. I am a fan and follower of the game, but I do not have much time to participate. Anyway, congratulations and go ahead! Greetings, --Gustave - May I help you? 00:28, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Edit Count
Gosh! Are you turning into a bot? Cbrown1023 01:46, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Query does not compute. echo $cover_story:
Of course not! Why would you think that? Sillymeatbaghumanperson... EVula // talk // ☯ // 03:17, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Template
Hi Evula, and thank you for trusting me as a fair reviewer. Well, I don't think that you were uncivil, but I do think that you might be getting a bit carried away in that discussion. Your anger and disbelief are quite evident in your counterarguments, perhaps you could state your positions without using expressions that denote sharp dissatisfaction (such as "what?"). Some editors do not appreciate a defense that is too staunch or too aggressive, and may even distance themselves from your position just because of the way your arguments are stated. My recommendation is to simply say things in the calmest, most reasonable way. Don't lose your temper. Once again, I don't think that you were uncivil. But you know, some editors are just too sensitive. :-) Good luck with that discussion. Best regards.--Húsönd 06:24, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Alrighty, I'll take your recommendations to heart. Thanks! EVula // talk // ☯ // 14:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 27th.
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 2, Issue 48 | 27 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
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 01:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
"Foo eats puppies"
Good to see I was chosen as the lab rat :) Daniel.Bryant 01:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
- Heh, it just seemed to fit so well. ;-) EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:21, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
You are the first one
- Haha, thanks man. I'm glad that the project is up and rolling.
- I won't just the project officially, but I'll add it to my ever-growing list of projects that I support but aren't actually active in; I've just got too much on my plate as it is, and I have absolutely no knowledge about Uruguay, so I'm not sure I'd be much good anyway. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:29, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
TfD close
Thanks for doing the TfD close on Template: Free Speech: I should have done it myself, but I forgot (we're all human, after all!) Best wishes, Physchim62 (talk) 13:18, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
- No worries. EVula // talk // ☯ // 14:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Full Mailbox
Hi Evula, I tried emailing you but it got bounced back saying your mailbox was full so I figured I'd just leave a message here. Thanks for your thoughts on Misplaced Pages, they were very helpful. One last question I have for you is how you want to be referenced if I quote you in the article. I basically need to have at least a first name and/or username as well as a country of residence (or if you live in the United States, the state). Thanks. FFFearlesss 17:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Just cleared out a bunch of crap (I'd deleted all the spam locally, but it was still on the server). Anyway, my first name is Eric, and I'm in Tennessee. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Janicism
Not sure if you read the whole thing, but I've been following very closely. The socks of the user who created the article were vandals anyway. But, that was the most fun I've ever had in an afd. Patstuart 02:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
- I have to admit to not reading the entire thing; to be perfectly honest, I really didn't need to. Between the utterly pathetic photographic evidence (I mean come on, that was the most blatantly obvious Photoshop job that I've come across), the overwhelming "real editor" feedback calling for its deletion (and speedy deletion and snowballing), and the obvious sockpuppetry that was happening, there was just no way in hell that I could let it go on... though I will admit that it looked like hella fun. I especially liked when the puppeteer forgot which account he uploaded the file with. :D EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
- I understand that caning is out as a punishment for English secondary school students these days, but couldn't you lay some blocks on the perps and their sock accounts and IP's, just so they get the point? They've been making a habit of putting up joke articles (see AfD's for "Max cards" and "Fosh (game)") then disrupting and vandalizing AfD discussions. Tubezone 10:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
- One month bans for Mlc409 and Ichbinbored. The latter admitted to the image being fake (I tried not to shit a brick at such shocking news) , which removes any doubt that they were using Misplaced Pages for fraudulent purposes. I'll leave it to others to deal with the other puppets. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. BTW, Mlc409's sock Gordon39 nominated himself as an admin, see Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/mlc409. That didn't last long... Tubezone 17:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
- Heh, yeah, I saw that (I think that's how I made my way to the AfD, actually). Funny stuff. EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. BTW, Mlc409's sock Gordon39 nominated himself as an admin, see Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/mlc409. That didn't last long... Tubezone 17:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
- One month bans for Mlc409 and Ichbinbored. The latter admitted to the image being fake (I tried not to shit a brick at such shocking news) , which removes any doubt that they were using Misplaced Pages for fraudulent purposes. I'll leave it to others to deal with the other puppets. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
- I understand that caning is out as a punishment for English secondary school students these days, but couldn't you lay some blocks on the perps and their sock accounts and IP's, just so they get the point? They've been making a habit of putting up joke articles (see AfD's for "Max cards" and "Fosh (game)") then disrupting and vandalizing AfD discussions. Tubezone 10:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
POV tags
Hi, I have a question I was hoping you could answer as an admin. If I shouldn't be asking this here I apologise. Having read WP:NPOV and related pages through again, I see that it is expected that use of the {{POV}} tag is accompanied by a reasonably full explanation on the talk page of the article. I was wondering is there any concensus that such tags can be removed if no explanation is given (or it is only a very basic ie. "I disagree" comment is made without citing problem areas and explaining the discrepancy)? There is a huge backlog of tags which undermine articles. Many seem to just be added when someone reads the topic which does not support their own POV on the subject. Thanks. WJBscribe 01:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- If there is no apparent rationale (don't forget to check the article's history; the reason may have been included in the edit summary instead of the talk page), I'd double-check to make sure you aren't missing anything, remove the tag, and make a note on the talk page about how you couldn't find any POV in the article.
- Let me know if there's anything else I can help you with. EVula // talk // ☯ // 02:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- That makes sense and good point about checking the edit history as well. Thanks a lot. WJBscribe 02:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Template:Cite news
I think you broke it. If you use this code here I am 99.9% certain it will work perfectly. — coelacan talk — 02:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- I've reverted your edit to "cite news", as it resulted in broken syntax appearing in the very many articles which use it. An example of an article which broke with the change is 2006 Fijian coup d'état attempt. Please reapply your change only when you've thoroughly tested it.-gadfium 03:01, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- Damn, I thought I'd checked it a bit better. Sorry... EVula // talk // ☯ // 03:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- Are you willing to have another go? You can try out that template by using {{User:Coelacan/citenews}} ... actually let me just do an example right here
- I think that's right. It's the same thing I added to "cite press release" and I really just copied it from "cite book". — coelacan talk — 04:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- Edit made. So far, so good... I checked a few articles, including the one gadfium pointed out, and saw no evidence of borkage. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yep. I just tried it out and used the new parameter on an article, and I think it's working right. =) Thanks for your time and assistance! — coelacan talk — 05:20, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- No problem. Glad I was finally able to not break the template. :-) EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 4th.
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 2, Issue 49 | 4 December 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
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 05:33, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
William Sledd
William has been featured in a number of news articles. Please can you unprotect the page, I think it is time. Thanks. FrummerThanThou 16:20, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- Do you have the sources handy? It would be best if I restored the article as it was before deletion (including all contributions and edits), and then you could tack on those sources. I'll restore it when you respond. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:28, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hi EVula, below are some articles from media bodies about him. The three below are the only online pages I could source right now since the Google newsbot runs by a very complicated algorithm, one of the factors it takes into account when excluding pages is the clickrate (ups, i need to create that one, later). Anyways, there have also been a number of articles in the press, which I will try to source later, hopefully the below is enough. Please restore the original text, it was based on my renetto article as is fine. I would also like the opportunity to collaborate with you on an open discussion on a wikipedia policy page on modifying the guidelines about notability as far as YouTube and other prominent social networking sites is concerned. I think sites like YouTube are media bodies in themselves. FrummerThanThou 21:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- ]
- ]
- ]
- ]
- He is currently the 7th most subscribed memeber on YouTube (23480 subscrbrs). His videos have been viewed nealy 3 million times. FrummerThanThou 22:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by FrummerThanThou (talk • contribs) 21:28, 6 December 2006 (UTC).
- I'll take care of this later tonight when I get home.
- As for working towards revising the notability guidelines, I'll have to decline; I'm not particularly interested in that particular facet, and only got roped into the William Sledd issue because I happened to delete the article. Just luck of the draw, I suppose. EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank you for reverting vandalism to my user page, EVula. :-) Strange a registered user vandalize my page as their first contribution, I suspect it might be a user I blocked yesterday. Thanks once again. Best regards.--Húsönd 18:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- Not a problem. Two minutes from first edit to permanent ban; that was fun. :-) EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
article to look at...
the article i've created that was deleted twice was AC/DC's song Little Lover. i've recreated it just in case it deleted again. i've added some notability on the article to keep it from deleted. anyways, go ahead and check why the article was deleted. take care! Jailbreaker22 20:20, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- From what I can tell, it was deleted because it isn't a particularly notable song. Generally, individual songs don't get articles unless they've charted (or are notable in some other way). Personally, I would have replaced it with a redirect to the album rather than deleted it, but that's just me. EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
The White Rose Society (student group) on deletion review
An editor has asked for a deletion review of The White Rose Society (student group). Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --W.marsh 17:29, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Deeply Saddened...
I'm deeply saddened by the indefinite banning of user:timecop, but more so I'm troubled by your obvious racial profiling in this incident. I have nothing else to say, in fear of further abuse of power due to your personal biases towards people of color. Skrewler 17:36, 7 December 2006 (UTC)