User talk:Joopercoopers: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 14:51, 21 October 2009 editMattisse (talk \| contribs)78,542 edits →Reply: new section← Previous edit		Revision as of 14:56, 21 October 2009 edit undoJoopercoopers (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers8,604 edits →Reply: That sounds like a sincere and honest account. Well done.Next edit →
Line 285:		Line 285:

	I think that I misremembered and thought that Malleus did not sign up on the arbcom page after he offered to be a mentor, and I was wrong there as he had. But even though I thought that he had not signed up, I put him on the mentor/adviser list anyway, to satisfy SandyGeorgia. I had a falling out with Malleus way before that occurred though, when he made me disclose during my RFC the one and only email I sent to him, expressing my personal feeling of hurt at the time. I never understood why he did that. I disclosed the email at the RFC, but from then on I could never trust him. I agreed to his being a mentor/adviser, but to be honest, I was relieved when he requested to be removed as I lack a feeling of trust toward him, and the obscene and aggressive language on his talk page, as well as the joke blocks by admins and such, it was a relief not to have to watchlist his page. He was not a good model for me, as he could get away with language and and phrasing that I could not. He and I are just not a good fit. I prefer not to have anything to do with him. Regards, —] (]) 14:51, 21 October 2009 (UTC)		I think that I misremembered and thought that Malleus did not sign up on the arbcom page after he offered to be a mentor, and I was wrong there as he had. But even though I thought that he had not signed up, I put him on the mentor/adviser list anyway, to satisfy SandyGeorgia. I had a falling out with Malleus way before that occurred though, when he made me disclose during my RFC the one and only email I sent to him, expressing my personal feeling of hurt at the time. I never understood why he did that. I disclosed the email at the RFC, but from then on I could never trust him. I agreed to his being a mentor/adviser, but to be honest, I was relieved when he requested to be removed as I lack a feeling of trust toward him, and the obscene and aggressive language on his talk page, as well as the joke blocks by admins and such, it was a relief not to have to watchlist his page. He was not a good model for me, as he could get away with language and and phrasing that I could not. He and I are just not a good fit. I prefer not to have anything to do with him. Regards, —] (]) 14:51, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
			:That sounds like a sincere and honest account. Well done. --] (]) 14:55, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:56, 21 October 2009

Pull up a seat. Have a chat

Huh?

Mine was the last comment on Peter Damien's talk page before he pulled out his own plug. Do you think it was something I said? --nemonoman (talk) 02:31, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Beats me - I'm pretty hacked off with Peter about this. The idea had some legs - not as the radical agro group I think Peter alluded to, but as place for editors to gather and compare notes and think about or advocate improvements. Twitchy people didn't like the idea so it was plagued by an MfD an appeal to Arbcom and then an RfC - unfortunately they only saw Peter's radical proclamations, rather than the moderates calling for something quite benign, so he did nothing to help there - but I'm mostly hacked off about him marching a bunch of good editors onto the playing field, only to storm off with the ball in a huff. He's a good editor, but that's no way to behave. Was it something you said? erm no, fairly sure about that. --Joopercoopers (talk) 12:29, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I think most of us were put in an awkward position - given Peter's apparently underlying agenda; which in retrospect seems to have been some sort of payback. I just wanted to have a forum in which to consult with and work through problems in league with others in varying fields of expertise. Although I'm a little relieved that he split. Peter's comments about admins was totally out of line...Modernist (talk) 12:54, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

No it was the comments at the RfC that did it. I really could not believe what was going on. I badly misjudged the mood of Misplaced Pages, where there clearly is no possibility of change. I deeply apologise. I am doing my best to give this up for good. It is entirely futile. Sorry to have dragged you all through this. Peter Damian (talk) 13:21, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Accepted. It would have been a courtesy to have explained that on your talk before blanking all the pages, but ok. --Joopercoopers (talk) 15:13, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Do we want change?

I've started a ball rolling here User:Giano/The future all comments welcome - whatever their view! Giano (talk) 07:39, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Antiziganism

The issue you raised at Roma (Romani subgroup) has been extensively covered at the above article. If you would like to contribute, please do. However, Yahoo newsgroups might not be the most authoritative of references. Regards. RashersTierney (talk) 14:29, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Joop. Love the new 'upholstery job' on Beeblebrox's chart.;-) RashersTierney (talk) 22:51, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Saw it on your page - a nice addition to the decor I think. Any idea what happened to Mae West's Lips?--Joopercoopers (talk) 23:25, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, you've lost me. You mean the actual Girona sofa? RashersTierney (talk) 23:55, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

No - this was a glorious picture of my furnishings until some those brigand stole it this evening. I've alerted the authorities and the best they can do is tell me they'll look out for suspicious wikipedians with lip shaped swag bags. It's all very distressing......--Joopercoopers (talk) 23:58, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Aha - clues Msr Poirot. --Joopercoopers (talk) 00:00, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Sincere condolences! Real bummer when the repo man calls. RashersTierney (talk) 00:09, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK Newsletter - June 2009 Issue

Summary: This month, we have details on our response to HMRC, updates on our Initiatives and Membership drives, as well as our regular sections on Press Coverage, Upcoming Meetups, and activities from the other WMF Chapters around the globe. We're also pleased to announce that we now have a Paypal account! We also want your input on the future of this newsletter - get involved! We are hoping to get the July issue out very early in July in order to fit with our new distribution schedule, so don't be surprised to see two newsletters in quick succession.

In this month's newsletter:

Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.

Re: Jean-Philippe Illanes

Thanks for your message. The article Jean-Philippe Illanes was pretty much written like a blurb you would find on an art gallery's web page. There wasn't actually anything there that claimed notability, so I felt that it was eligible for speedy deletion. In my opinion the current deleted version is not salvageable, but I'm willing to restore it to the user's subpage if requested. ... discospinster _talk 18:07, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Joopercoopers. You have new messages at John Vandenberg's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

John Vandenberg 14:38, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: RfC

Thanks to the pointer to this page. I obviously had lost track of where this conversation had gone. -- llywrch (talk) 18:11, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Joops, is this ok? Tony (talk) 15:44, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

FYI test discussion system

Thought you might be interested in this, you mentioned in the past how you feel about the inadequate talk page system: http://techblog.wikimedia.org/2009/07/improving-wikimedias-discussion-system/. Sswonk (talk) 03:50, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Jesus College, Oxford

Fantastic, thanks for offering! I've put in a request for a plan here with some links; let me know if you need more. Ideally, it'd mark the streets, chapel, hall, lodgings, fellows' library, fellows' garden and the Old Members' Building, since these are mentioned in the text. Best wishes, Bencherlite 12:14, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

This image isn't of great quality but has a scale at the top. I have a hard copy that I can scan and let you have on Monday if a better version would help. Bencherlite 14:30, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:CiterSquad

Up an running :) Jeepday (talk) 11:18, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

ACPD pages created

I've created two initial pages for the ACPD:

Please add them to your watchlist, stop by, and so forth. The latter page has a couple of logistical issues that we should discuss sooner rather than later, so I'd appreciate if you could find some time to comment on them.

Thanks! Kirill 13:33, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

If the ArbCom continues to support this council now that it's going, we can get to work without worrying about the bickering going on about it's existence. Cla68 (talk) 00:35, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

ACPD

I was responding to the person above me, who did not sign their post. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 21:44, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Query

Do you care to explain how a common civility warning is baiting? Is asking someone to treat other people with respect some form of provocation in your mind? It is the careless tossing around of the term "baiting" that makes it sound so hollow when somebody is actually doing it. Chillum 23:01, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Has it ever worked? Have you ever given a civility warning to an established editor and they've responded "Gee, yeah, now you come to mention it I'm being a complete arse, thank you for pointing that out"? No, it's a prelude to your liberal use of the block button for something entirely undefined, I just wish you'd drop the pretence. --Joopercoopers (talk) 23:21, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

It has worked two ways. One ways is that the person stops being uncivil, yes warnings do work sometimes. The other way is the person gets blocked. Both ways prevent Wikipedians from being subjected to abusive behavior, I prefer the first but either will do in the end. Chillum 05:09, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, with the rider, Chillum, that there's the obvious potential for blocking to bounce back at the people we're trying to protect, because it can enrage, cause resentment, especially in an experienced editor. May I suggest that while we need civility warnings, admins have the potential to protect us far more effectively by trying to engage with the root of the problem at the same time? I know it's not always possible, but don't you think it's worth encouraging? BTW, your heading here might have been just a little softer? Tony (talk) 15:49, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Dom't forget - editors here are supposed to have some useful level of intelligence (at least enough to bw able to pull themselves up when someone else says that you're misbehaving. Funny how many people cam't pick that up--212.74.26.3 (talk) 12:59, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Cleaning up for my socks.

Hi Joopercoopers, thanks, I missed that. I must be tired or perhaps a bit drunk, Gentlemen was my first sock accusation by the now one month banned User talk:Rebroad . I personally think there are so many sock farms here that we will never need to wash our socks again. I have at times when faced with a probable sock attack, have thought to myself.. I should get a sock farm and a couple of meat mates as admins and one as a crat, this is actually one of the things that I want to talk through here, users need only one account, all users in any position here need to declare and to be checked. Thanks. I like your introduction tonight and declare to you that I am Off2riorob...that is more than enough as you will know if you check my contributions..as it is I am occasionally kept awake by my involvment here. Best regards to you. (Off2riorob (talk) 00:19, 13 July 2009 (UTC))

The gentleman doth protest too much, methinks - but you're welcome, well met. --Joopercoopers (talk) 00:28, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

The gentleman has quite clearly had, or still has another account, but he seems friendly enough to me? Not like a crazy nut sock. (Off2riorob (talk) 00:36, 13 July 2009 (UTC))

re: From Joopercoopers

Hi Roger, now you're in the chair, can I remind you of this regarding setting an agenda. Can we still expect a coherent list? Cheers --Joopercoopers (talk) 23:33, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

That rather depends on how everything plays out :) Roger Davies 06:22, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Reliable Sources Noticeboard

I apparently did not autowatch the talk page for changes after my posting. I just saw the maelstrom of the past month.

I saw you posted on the talk page -- Have you looked in on the actual Noticeboard? The vocal editors there seem to me to be very lacking in insight or clear logic. They appear to Utter Judgments first, and on demand will followup with reasons, often hokey and completely cooked up. You don't need to forum shop if you don't get the answer you like on that noticeboard: Just push back and the opinion will be reversed. Push back again if you don't like the reversal. If these are the watchdogs, god help us. They are petty bureaucrats only: actula intelligence about RS appears to reside only in the individual committed editors who bird-dog certain Big Topic articles. Unfortunately there SHOULD be an intelligent area for RS guidelines and specific opinions. As more and more reliable research becomes self-published and sometimes online only, it will become harder to distinguish what's reliable. What's required is some bright-eyed leadership.

But you seem to have noticed that. --Nemonoman (talk) 16:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

No, I hadn't got that far and probably don't have the expertise to comment unless they ask about architecture. How disappointing. --Joopercoopers (talk) 16:36, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

RfC

I have closed the RfC you co-proposed. Please see Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Role_of_Jimmy_Wales_in_the_English_Wikipedia#Notes and the subsequent section. I am sorry to say that I did not find consensus for the proposals. Please review my closure and let me know if you think I have made any errors, either in interpretation or administration. --Dweller (talk) 17:44, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(infoboxes)#Dispute over single articles having multiple infoboxes - VOTE!!!

Hi! You might be interested in the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(infoboxes)#Dispute over single articles having multiple infoboxes - VOTE!!!. Thank you. Sswonk (talk) 19:48, 15 July 2009 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})

By all means, delete this thread if not concerned, just an FYI. Sswonk (talk) 19:56, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK Newsletter - July 2009 Issue

Summary: This month, we bring exciting news about our Wikimedia Foundation Grant, as well as news on our chapter Initiatives (get involved!) and our opt-out of Phorm. We also talk about Business Cards, a recent interview of our Secretary for use in university courses and Wikimania 2013 - which seems a long way off! We also include our regular features of chapter activities from around the globe, press coverage, and meetups!

In this month's newsletter:

Delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 20:13, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Your user page

I'm checking out the members of this new/proposed advisory committee (whatever it's called) to try to ascertain its makeup, and I came across your user page. Phenomenal photography. You have a great eye. If you're not a professional photog, you certainly should be. deeceevoice (talk) 18:00, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, glad you like them, it's just a hobby. More here if you are inclined. --Joopercoopers (talk) 19:19, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Furniture

Yeah, I mean "shelve". I'm pretty sure "table" works too, though :) --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs 13:32, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Help

{{adminhelp}} Would someone be a love and move File:Jesus-Model.jpg to something like File:Jesus College, Oxford - plan? Thanks --Joopercoopers (talk) 17:02, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Image moving is currently disabled - the easiest way to move a file is to download it, and re-upload it under the new name. Stwalkerster 17:06, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Really? What an unholy pain in the ........ Ok. Will you delete that one then? Thanks--Joopercoopers (talk) 17:09, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Doing... Chzz ► 17:13, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

thx --Joopercoopers (talk) 17:14, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Heh; I actually uploaded it as ], but then noticed you had re-uploaded it as well :-)

No problem;

File:Jesus-Model.jpg (original name) is now flagged for speedy deletion
File:Jesus College Oxford, plan view.jpg (uploaded by me)is now flagged for speedy deletion as duplicate
File:Jesus College, Oxford - plan.jpg is the one that you should use.

Done

If you need anything else, please eave a message on my own talk pageOR talk to us live, with this or this.

Best wishes, Chzz ► 17:29, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I've deleted the tagged images. Nev1 (talk) 17:37, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Thx all. --Joopercoopers (talk) 17:38, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

The Seven Lamps of Architecture

{{adminhelp}} Seems this article The Seven Lamps of Architecture was previously deleted - would someone restore it to my userspace, so I can have a look at it? I can't find the AfD either - perhaps you could restore the talk page somewhere too, so I can resolve whatever the problems were. Cheers. --Joopercoopers (talk) 14:19, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

The article consisted of 11 meaningless consonants so a fresh start might be more appropriate. It was CSD hence the lack of an AFD. Hope that helps. Ϣere SpielChequers 14:30, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Yep, thanks. --Joopercoopers (talk) 14:31, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I asked another person to check (at the same time) - and they assured me that there is nothing worth restoring. Sorry couldn't help more. Cheers, Chzz ► 14:34, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Jooperscoopers: You asked for my thoughts on this. Personally, I think the "seven lamps" is a little esoteric as a framework for a Misplaced Pages article on architecture. I don't think anyone has ever really improved on Sir Henry Wotton's 1624 paraphrase of Vitruvius: firmness, commodity, and delight. Everything I can think of appropriate to a Misplaced Pages article would fit in that framework quite well. Newell Post (talk) 03:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Jesus College map

Wow, looks great! Thanks for all your hard work. (Sorry not to reply earlier - had a few days off). Can I now be really, really fussy?!

The top left corner of the college ought to stretch to Cornmarket – see page 2 on this map
There shouldn't be a patch of green above the words "Market Street" (last time I was there, it was concreted over and used for rubbish bins from the kitchen - it might have been a garden years ago, but not now!)
Just to the side of that, the gap in the wall adjoining Market Street ought to be filled
Could you mark the back entrance from Ship Street, which I think would be the bulge to the left of letter C?
Could you label the stretch of building immediately above letter A as the Principal's lodgings?
Could you perhaps move letter G slightly to the left, perhaps under the nearest tree?
Could you label the building to the left of the Habbukak Room as the Old Members' Buildings?
Could you also label the Fellows' Garden (say between the 2nd and 3rd of the four vertical trees on the left-hand side) and the Fellows' Library (bottom left corner, west side, of 2nd quad)?

You'll have to teach me how to do this because my plan is to write a few more similar articles and you won't want me bugging you all the time for maps. What software do you use?

Many thanks once again, Bencherlite 14:51, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Of course you can - give me 24hrs..... --Joopercoopers (talk) 15:18, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

That is a great plan. Giano (talk) 11:48, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks G. Fancy casting your eyes over The Seven Lamps of Architecture? I'm nearly out of sources.--Joopercoopers (talk) 11:54, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

DYK for The Seven Lamps of Architecture

On July 29, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Seven Lamps of Architecture, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page _{(here's how)} and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:07, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

The American church

Sorry, but I can't do curves . Giano (talk) 21:30, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

What's pushing your buttons??

Just saw your revised user page. Need a stress pill?? Que pasa, brother?? --Nemonoman (talk) 22:53, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh just another appalling WP day. . Headline "Good editor, philospher and gentleman, hauled over coals for minor infractions, pecked apart by wikipolitical venom from years back". Not pretty. --Joopercoopers (talk) 23:04, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Rewriting

I rewrote my statement for better civility. Could you re-read it and sign if you like the new one? I IAR'ed your vote since I rewrote and didn't want to make a mess with strike throughs. Sorry for any inconvenience. Jehochman 12:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

No probs. --Joopercoopers (talk) 12:52, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Portrait

Hey Joopercoopers, what do you think about this...? DVD 19:33, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK Newsletter - August 2009 Issue

Summary: Our Initiatives are starting to be developed - please get involved! In this newsletter, we also announce the results and prizes for Misplaced Pages Loves Art, and we bring you the latest on our Charity status application, in addition to our regular features on Other Chapters' Activities, recent Press Coverage and recent and upcoming Meet-ups.

In this month's newsletter:

Delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 08:30, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Bauhaus

Hi Jooperscoopers, Perhaps you can resolve this: An editor included this line about Hannes Meyer back in 2007. It looks bogus, any opinion as to whether it should remain or be deleted from the article would be helpful...Meyer was also compromised by a sexual scandal involving one of his students, and Gropius fired him in 1930. An IP has claimed that the edit has no merit...Modernist (talk) 16:40, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Actually I have some clarification here now if you can add something please do. Thanks...Modernist (talk) 17:54, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:The Seven Lamps of Architecture.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Seven Lamps of Architecture.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 05:53, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

No problems here - I've requested a speedy delete - we found better images. --Joopercoopers (talk) 10:34, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Ponte Vecchio

Please see Talk:Ponte_Vecchio#Undoing_the_compromise? ... it has been suggested that the article be returned to a more standard format, as it has been a year since the compromise. Your participation may be helpful. ++Lar: t/c 12:12, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

A question

Hi Joopercoopers, thanks for the encouraging words the other day. I have a question, and was wondering if you knew the answer. I'm not sure the best way to write about English currency in the 30s, how do I write 14,832 pounds 80 pence in the most succinct way? 14,832 pounds 80 pence, £14,832.80d, £14,832 and 80d or £14,832.80 or some other variant? It's for this article I'm working on. Many thanks, DVD 23:35, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

PS. omg I just noticed that your last message to me was at 00:09 9/9/09!!! DVD 07:09, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

RfA

AgentB1 would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact AgentB1 to accept or decline the nomination. A page will then be created for your nomination at Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Joopercoopers . If you accept the nomination, you must state and sign your acceptance. You may also choose to make a statement and/or answer the optional questions to supplement the information your nominator has given. Once you are satisfied with the page, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

Feel free to decline. AgentB1 (talk) 01:16, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

That's very sweet of you, but no thanks. --Joopercoopers (talk) 23:35, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK Newsletter - September 2009 Issue

Summary: This month, our Initiatives Director explains our Initiatives, we update you on our Membership (including some new benefits for members!), keep you informed on our Charity Status application, and update you with our regular sections regarding Other Chapters' Activities, Press Coverage, and UK Meet-ups!

In this month's newsletter:

Delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 12:35, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Reply

I think that I misremembered and thought that Malleus did not sign up on the arbcom page after he offered to be a mentor, and I was wrong there as he had. But even though I thought that he had not signed up, I put him on the mentor/adviser list anyway, to satisfy SandyGeorgia. I had a falling out with Malleus way before that occurred though, when he made me disclose during my RFC the one and only email I sent to him, expressing my personal feeling of hurt at the time. I never understood why he did that. I disclosed the email at the RFC, but from then on I could never trust him. I agreed to his being a mentor/adviser, but to be honest, I was relieved when he requested to be removed as I lack a feeling of trust toward him, and the obscene and aggressive language on his talk page, as well as the joke blocks by admins and such, it was a relief not to have to watchlist his page. He was not a good model for me, as he could get away with language and and phrasing that I could not. He and I are just not a good fit. I prefer not to have anything to do with him. Regards, —mattisse (Talk) 14:51, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

That sounds like a sincere and honest account. Well done. --Joopercoopers (talk) 14:55, 21 October 2009 (UTC)