User talk:Calton/Archive05

Archive
Archives

From Zarove

New to Wikipedia, forgive me if this is not hwo you wish to be contacted.

I reviewed the History of Acharya S's article, and notyiced yousaid "Dude, Articles are suppose to EVOLVE not DEVOLVE."

I think you fell intot he impression that I was dishonest or fanatical, and tried to disprove this brilliant schoalrs work. Well, SHes not a brilliant scholar,and even a cursory glance of her work reveals it as unreliable.

I do appriciateyour concern hwoever, and do think you sincerly beleives I was just out to destory soemone who disagreed with me.

But I felt I needed toexpain. I wasnt devolving the aritlce, I was just removign her grandeose self promotions.Shes not a Historian, linguist, myhtoogist, archeologist, and rleigious scholar. Shes in fact only a holder of a minor degree in classics.

Her book isbased on unsoundsecondary soruces, and her agenda is todestory CHristainity, as she states herself on her website.

Her devotees continually changed the article to sing her praises and omit all critisism. SO, I edited it to make it read as it shoudl, includigncritism of her work.

Sorry if this inconveneinced you.

Welcome

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 14:40, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC) and Pedant 17:01, 2004 Nov 13 (UTC)

New Stuff

Look, you asshole, it is official Wikipedia policy that all edits of a banned user on all pages should be deleted without discussion, irrespective of what they say. It is also Wikipedia policy that users should not reinstate them and should not be reinserted under another user. BTW Official Wikipedia Policy pages are defined as "It has wide acceptance among editors and is considered a standard that all users should follow." Try reading the rules of Wikipedia before making a complete dick of yourself. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 01:51, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It is explicitly stated in the official policy that the edits are not supposed to left in the page and no other Wikipedian is supposed to reinsert them under their name either. That is the rules. Try following them. Or is your own ego more important than mandatory Wikipedia policy on the issue. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 02:00, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

Please keep in mind WP:COOL. I know it can be hard, but it really does help in disputes if inflammatory language like "grow a skin, will you" is avoided. If nothing else, it'll look a lot nicer in your contributions list. --fvw* 02:22, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the help on my Talk page; however, I'd prefer to leave up the unexpurgated version for a little while longer before dumping it into my archive. No offense, I hope. --Calton | Talk 02:23, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

Knock yourself out, it's your talk page. --fvw* 02:24, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

Tom Walsh

Look, as far as I'm concerned, Tom Walsh should be on the August 26 page because he is in the encyclopedia. No Consensus reverts to Keep, meaning he's notable enough in enough eyes. You're always more than welcome to nominate him a second time for VFD. --OntarioQuizzer 05:20, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've removed the "notable" tag from the page. Frankly, as far as I'm concerned, an effort to remove him from August 26th should be accompanied by a re-nomination over at VFD. --OntarioQuizzer 05:58, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Nominating an article for deletion is really a simple matter -- and I will continue to revert your removal of Tom Walsh from August 26th while he still has an article in Wikipedia. --OntarioQuizzer 12:01, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

ERRR

I see you have not said nothing about my Rqesst for Comment yet what is wrong with that and are you really a achololic? its ok since i like to drink and get high also I am the "brah" you know.Wiki brah 18:41, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Zephram Stark

I have filed Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Zephram Stark. Please contribute to it. – Smyth\talk 18:52, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good Job

I'm glad to see that the admins on this site are more concerned about banning people they don't like than they are about maintaining the truth. Mackenson is a complete idiot. It says in the Wikipedia policy that no one should use this site for self promotion purposes. However, I fear that that is the only reason Mackenson is here. I've already been banned, do it some more. Sure I've made some bullshit edits, but I've also made plenty of decent ones. Which is mroe important to you, upholding the ideals of this site or following rules you don't understand? That doesn't mean that I'm here to try and make this site better, but I am testing all of you elitist drones. If it was worth it, I'd re-edit Mackenson's user page everyday because he is the type of person I hate the most in this world. You're an idiot, fix that. Mr. Reminder


Hershey's

Hello. Regarding your recent reversion of an edit I made to The Hershey Company, I did not add this section to the article. It was there previously. There was call to remove the section entirely by someone in the talk and then another message saying it should be kept with a refutation of the claims and then another message after that wanting to remove it. I just provided the debunking. It may need some NPOVing but I think because it has obviously become an urban ledgend it's ok to keep. --Deglr6328 04:07, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Care to respond on the talk page?--Deglr6328 14:59, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

You should not revert when other information is added. If you only want to change one thing about an edit, just make that edit. Do not be lazy by just reverting. 65.42.87.249 16:53, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

I see other users have had similar problems with you. I see you removed the paragraph in the opening section of Ohio Wesleyan University that states facts about the student body. Could you kindly state the Wikipedia policy that such a paragraph violates? There are no space constraints as far as I know and statistical information about the student body is important anyway. So, before you jump in and revert please leave a comment on the discussion page. I should remind you that good etiquette requires that all users follow the policies outlines in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents

Faria 16:24, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Rever

Calton:

I should also point you to the first line of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Resolving_disputes

It states Be respectful to others and their points of view. This means primarily: Do not simply revert changes in a dispute. Keep that in mind before jumping in. Faria 16:26, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Calton seems to like reverting, even on subjects in which he hasn't a clue of what he's reverting. --AI 23:08, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

Thank you for the comment. I don't know if you are associated with OWU but the section that I added is not propaganda as it is clearly referencing verifiable facts and stories. I noticed your comment on whether it represents my view or the view of a bunch of protesting students. Maybe you do not want to see the emphasis on this particular issue but activism and volunteering is a big aspect of OWU and its mission and while it may appear as propaganda to you, it also describes well the student culture there...

Faria 23:37, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Faria's recent activities

Since you are partially related to the recent events on the OWU page, I thought it would be good to seek your advice on where to proceed from here. Faria is in my opinion engaging in disruptive behavior and outright harassment. He consistently lies, makes baseless accusations, and refuses any attempt at compromise. I think he may be ripe for an RFC, but since I am too close to this matter I did not want to take such a drastic step without some guidance from elsewhere. Any help would be appreciated. Please refer to both my talk page and the OWU talk page to see the conduct I am referring too. Thanks. Indrian 16:07, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

Your input is requested

at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roflcopter (again). — Phil Welch 23:04, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Day/Month pages

OK, you caught me with the Desperate Housewives. But please don't remove the link around September 15, etc. in the first line -- that's so the user date preference display function kicks in (and consequently appears as 15 September, September 15, 15/09, etc.) –Hajor 23:50, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I take the the point about starting a paragraph with a numeral, but I was taught that that wasn't an article of faith, at least not in the case of dates. It certainly takes second place to seeing dates displayed in one's preferred format. –Hajor 00:43, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than pointless low-intensity revert wars (potentially 366 of them), I've posted a request for broader views from the community at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Days of the year. See you there, I hope. –Hajor 02:24, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mikesimpson.jpg has been listed for deletion

An image or media file you uploaded, Image:Mikesimpson.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

--Bash 18:20, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Full name of "Acharya S"

Calton: I just noticed your 01:45, 14 September 2005 edit of the Acharya S article, in which you added her full name. I would normally be in favor of such things; however, recent developments have shown this to be a highly controversial article, and so I think we need to apply very strictly the criterion that all facts must be backed up by references.

So: Do you have a reference for the full name (other than Wikipedia and its mirrors)? I first heard of Acharya S a couple of days ago, but since then I have done a fair amount of research on her. I found several references for "D. Murdock", both web and print, but none at all for the full name (other than Wikipedia and its mirrors).

By the way, I don't care in the slightest about the argument that she has been threatened and needs her privacy. She is an adult, and I figure she can fight her own battles. Public information is public information, and Wikipedia exists to disseminate it. However, especially in the case of controversial articles like this one, we need to be sure we can back up all of our facts.

So, again: Do you have a reference for the full name? Reply here if you wish; I'm watching this page.

— Nowhither 18:37, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take your non-response as a "no". No longer watching this page. Reply on my talk page, if you have anything to add. — Nowhither 00:24, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting

It's clean-up duty, mopping up after the dishonest, incompetent, and fanatical. Can't imagine why you'd have a problem with that. --Calton | Talk 23:33, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Calton, who are you calling dishonest? I hope you have proof instead of just your claim. As far as incompetence, I challenge you to provide evidence of my dishonesty for every revert you ahve done to my changes. If you cannot or will not do this, then the incompetence is on your part. Fanatical? Where are you getting this from? Provide proof of fanaticism, as obviously this is one of the criteria you have used to revert. Note, evidence of one instance is not enough. You have to justify EVERY SINGLE revert you have done. And everyone knows a sociopatch can never see why others have a problem with something, that wouldn't be you would it? --AI 23:45, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The phrase "The pot calling the kettle black" springs immediately to mind. Can't imagine why. --Calton | Talk 03:52, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cherokee Same Sex In History

  • So why exactly do you believe this article is not notable?

My RfA

Thanks for supporting my RfA. I'll work hard to try to live up to the confidence you're showing in me. Nandesuka 01:06, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Imposter

Thanks for pointing out how User:SaIsb worked. Salsb 13:26, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Iasson

Please do not delete part of Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Iasson. Thank you. Demodike 19:14, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dobby, thanks

Thanks for removing that "Dobby in Australia" section. I was uncertain if the 3RR exception would allow me to eliminate it for the fourth time today. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:22, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is it something I can do to convince you that I am not Iasson?

Please tell me. Demodike 08:32, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon?

Are you calling my professor a liar? I highly doubt this—but if you users on Wikipedia exhibit your ignorance in this unorthodox fashion, I will most certainly chew on it. But I won't swallow. I'll spit it right back out at you. Winnermario 00:23, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If I was you, I wouldn't be acting like a smart aleck. It only makes you look bold and brave. And what good is giving you my professor's name? How are you just going to contact him with such minor information? Winnermario 00:40, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I am not giving out any information. I'm also quite sick and tired of you quoting every bloody thing I say. And if you'd bother to check my "profile", perhaps you'd know where I'm from. Also, thank you for accusing me of being American. The little creeps they are. Winnermario 01:23, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
If you want me to answer, you're going to have to stop quoting me. Winnermario 19:43, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RfArb against Zephram Stark

I've requested arbitration against Zephram Stark. Please add any details or comments you feel are appropriate. Carbonite | Talk 19:20, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong map

At Vallès Oriental, you've linked a map that actually shows the Vall d'Aran, not Vallès Oriental. -- Jmabel | Talk 03:34, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

9/12 LA blackout

You cite no reason for the removal of this information. Why? Unsigned comment by User:Ridethefire3211 (Talk) 15:42, 26 September 2005

Editing Random Pages

Once upon a time I tried editing random pages. Back then, there was some sort of bug in the "random article" link that caused the same pages to come up over and over, so the experience wasn't very fruitful for me. I'm glad to hear somebody stuck it out. - O^O

Re your kind message to me regarding time/date formatting

      • SORRY ***: I AM SOMEWHAT COMPUTER ILLITERATE AND I DON'T THINK I HAVE A USER PREFERENCE FOR TIME/DATE FORMATTING. I JUST HAVE GOTTEN INTO THE HABIT OF CHANGING THE EUROPEAN STYLE TO THE U.S. STYLE--BUT I AM NOT ETHNOCENTRIC, PLEASE BELIEVE ME.

THANKS FOR YOUR ADVICE. CHEERS!! 70.19.40.53 01:33, 29 September 2005 (UTC) email: rms125a@hotmail.com (I use Internet cafes or Kinkos because I don't have a computer of my own, so the best way to reach me would be via e-mail (see address on above line) CHEERS AGAIN!![reply]

Visual Basic Classic Wikibook

I see you have contributed to the Visual Basic article on Wikipedia. Any chance you would like to join in editing the wikibook: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Programming:Visual_Basic_Classic? --Kjwhitefoot 08:13, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking out for Joseph Sobran

We seem to be having our own little history buffer here. Klonimus 03:22, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Action against Snowspinner

'Lo. I've asked Snowspinner to give up his adminship of his own accord here. I'm asking that you do the same, as one, I think that that's appropriate, and second, I'd like him to give up his sysop rights freely and without an RfC. I've also asked Zoe. If no one else thinks that this is extremely poor behavior for an admin, then I'll back down. Yours, --Blackcap | talk 04:39, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, to be honest, this ask is pointless, but thanks for reading it. There's an RfC going on here. All the best, --Blackcap | talk 01:27, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Caltons

Are you by any chance a Calton by surname? It's one of the rarest English surnames and I'm trying to collect examples. The Land 10:56, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You may add what you think, If you wish

Thanks, [1] Scott 14:17, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Blackout

First, I would like to apologize for my lack of signature previously.


Second, I would like this to remain as civil as possible. I'm just asking why you felt it necessary to remove a perfectly factual piece of information that occured on 12 September, 2005 and why I see no evidence you gave any reason for doing so. That's why it's my business.

I don't mean to sound rude, and I would appreciate a polite response in return. Thanks. Ridethefire3211 14:59, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks, that's all I was asking. Ridethefire3211 11:09, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly Clarkson singles

You might (or might not) want to weigh in at the various articles on singles by Clarkson. I have one of them at RfC, but the little cabal of reverters won't leave it alone. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:12, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CP

Hi, you've reported copyright infringements to WP:CP in the last week, a new measure was recently passed to allow the speedy deltion of new pages that are cut and paste copyvios. Please follow these instructions if you come across this type of copyvio. Thanks. --nixie 00:28, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Blatant copyright infringements may now be "speedied"

If an article and all its revisions are unquestionably copied from the website of a commercial content provider and there is no assertion of permission, ownership or fair use and none seems likely, and the article is less than 48 hours old, it may be speedily deleted. See CSD A8 for full conditions.

After notifying the uploading editor by using wording similar to:

{{nothanks-sd|pg=page name|url=url of source}} -- ~~~~

Blank the page and replace the text with

{{db-copyvio|url=url of source}}

to the article in question, leaving the content visible. An administrator will examine the article and decide whether to speedily delete it or not.

On the apparent contradiction in the box above; there is an ongoing discussion about whether the page should be blanked or not (leaving the text visible was in no way a condition of the original proposal)- I noticed the mess in the box too late. However the main goal of notifying people was to get RC patrollers using the new criteria- it doens't matter if the page is blanked or not since the edit history and so on need to be checked anyway. --nixie 02:51, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

James DeBello AfD

I didn't delete the AfD tag on James DeBello, RoyBoy (talk • contribs) did. And apparently he deleted the AfD entry, too. That is clearly administrator misconduct. --Rogerd 05:21, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

James DeBello AfD

Why not, given I originated the AfD? - RoyBoy 800 05:30, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Biting of new admin noted; and of course that is predicated upon it being valid; which I no longer thought it was. - RoyBoy 800 05:44, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I volunteered for admin, you volunteered the "little people." Buckwheat? Nice touch. - RoyBoy 800 05:58, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't it obvious? To get you to respond. You should have come to me and I would have undeleted it. The recreation of the AfD made undeletion impossible; and yes I do want a cookie, my preference is macadamia white chocolate chunk. I like to eat them while pondering ageism and how people think they can discern my age, while at the same time enjoying your irreverance. Reminds me of... me. Add on top of it the fact you're in Japan; color me jealous. I've always wanted to go since seeing Blade Runner. - RoyBoy 800 15:12, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You should have come to me and I would have undeleted it. And the point of that would be? Much simpler to relist it.
And I thought it simpler to delete it, my bad. At least we have consensus.
Nothing stopped you from doing so after I renominated it, nothing is stopping you now. It's pointless now, mind you, but perfectly within your power.
Figured it out afterward... the undeletion instructions led me to the deletion log rather than the history. Thanks!
Okay, I lied: it appears to mean that you thought the cookie reference was some sort of age referent, God knows why, but if it'll make you happy, let's try again:
You're a smart cookie; you'll figure it out.
What were you looking for from me:
A) a cookie?
B) a medal?
C) a gold star?
D) a pat on the back?
Pick a cliché you can live with.
None of the above, I'd prefer a BS! Thanks again. - RoyBoy 800 05:42, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
At least we have consensus. No we don't. But you're a smart cookie; you'll figure it out.
Already did, and I meant for the AfD. - RoyBoy 800 15:37, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

Hi Calton,

First of all, I think you've made a large number of good edits. People, like you, who copyedit the encyclopedia and improve a vast swath of articles are often underappreciated.

However, I've noticed that you often seem to make sarcastic comments on talk pages and in edit summaries. I'm not sure you're aware how negatively these can come across. Without the body language cues we're used to, text can come off more negatively than it's intended. I'm worried that you could be frightening away some of our more timid new contributors, and generally contributing to the incivil atmosphere that is spreading through parts of Wikipedia. I know that sometimes these new contributors, and even the old hands, make mistakes and do stupid things, but there are often nicer ways to get your point across. For instance, a nice note on a talk page, letting them know you disagree with the way they've acted, is one strategy. Asking them what their intentions are, while assuming ignorance rather than malice, is another.

Let me know what you think, moink 20:03, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote if Skyring doesn't like it, Skyring can lump it.. The problem is that while Skyring enjoys correcting errors, he enjoys watching supposedly clever people make fools of themselves even more, especially if they think it upsets him.

Hi again Calton. I'm sorry I haven't gotten back to you sooner; I was unable to come online for some time. I'm also sorry you didn't appreciate my comments. I made an error in judgement when asking publicly for advice, and I apologize, but I don't think that invalidates what I have to say. You asked for specific instances of newbie-biting. I was referring mostly to your sarcastic edit summaries, such as "rv - Lord, I haven't read crap this politically earnest since college" [2]. Also, I have in fact read Talk:Terri Schiavo, the second featured article nomination for that article, the adminship page, and Jimbo's talk page, and I can understand why you get frustrated with certain editors. I'm not disagreeing at all with anything you say, only how you say it. I also did think you were rude to User:RoyBoy. I tend to think that "don't bite the new admins" is not necessary in the same way that "don't bite the newbies" is, but I really don't think your sarcasm and condenscension improved that conversation. As to your suggestion to file an RfC, an RfC is absolutely not the first resort when you disagree with someone. Talking to them on their talk page is.
And I'm sorry if you found me passive aggressive or condescending. I was trying to approach you as a peer. moink 05:40, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

On that note

Skyring here. You wrote: sanctioned by ArbCom

OK. You got that right.

overweening sense of entitlement and of immunity from rules

Hmmm. I don't feel this at all. Perhaps you are trying to look inside my head and not getting a clear picture? As for "immunity from rules", in an environment where WP:IAR is official policy, I think you are laying that on a little strong.

makes proactive attempts to provoke other editors

And you don't, brother?

makes strained logical arguments, in the face of overwhelming opposition, in support of minority opinions

This is interesting. Can you give an example? WP:NPOV says that minority opinions should be included, especially as Jimbo himself says If a viewpoint is held by a significant minority, then it should be easy to name prominent adherents. I never said that the Governor-General is the head of state (assuming that's what you are referring to), merely that prominent Australians, beginning with the Prime Minister, say that the Governor-General is the head of state.

From where I sit, you are making provocative and abusive statements, and I cannot help but wonder whether you feel a tiny bit hypocritical in your expressed views?

I don't understand

why did you block me? what does this mean? caught doing what?--Archive13 23:23, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above message relates to a misunderstanding caused by a vandal. See here for more information. Thanks. --Canderson7 00:09, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Your response is all abuse and evasion. Though you say you were amused, I cannot find any trace of it in your bitter words. Just what message are you trying to send me?

My immediate response is...

...laughter. Do you realise how silly you sound? And who on earth are you trying to kid?

Look, my IP address bounces around a bit. If you really feel you need to communicate, use my talk page, please.

Heads up... I'm seeknig RfC certification support aganist you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Faria&diff=25166972&oldid=25166885#User:Calton

At least four users (one is an anon: See my user contributions here are potentially seeking an RfC against you; two definitely are -for excessive and unjustified use of reverts.

Please note that I don't act in revenge, but in prevention, the best medicine, an ounce of which is worth a pound of cure -and I'm courteous and polite to give you a heads up, because you deserve a chance to run while you have a chance. I would expect no less from my own honorable adversaries.--GordonWatts 02:10, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think you may have redeemed yourself (and shown positive intents and desires) by working hard to assist deleting many unneeded images that I uploaded (some twice I think, before I know how to upload), so I withdraw my request for a RfC against you, but do be careful and procure just justification before proceeding on something or another: While most edits can easily be undone, not all things are so easy. Such, however, is the hallmark of life.--GordonWatts 01:31, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Don Tacos AFD

Just a note that you may want to sign your comment and correct the 'Pocky' link on the Don Tacos AFD. BTW, I'm thinking of starting a proposal to merge Japanese snack foods that do not merit their own articles; perhaps you would be interested in contributing. I'm not sure the best place for that; the Japan-related topics board is likely to be biased. --Dforest 05:47, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Brain Teasers/Trivia:

Hi, I'm just posting a friendly notice stating that I have got Brain Teasers/Trivia on my user page that you're welcome to have a go at. Will post new questions one day after they have been answered. Thanks... Spawn Man 09:28, 11 October 2005 (UTC) P.S. Do you speak Japanese? I'm just learning....[reply]

Dominion of Melchizedek

Greetings Mr. Calton: Noticed that you have reverted this article before. Have a look at "just the facts" heading on Dominion of Melchizedek talk page and please let me know if this is the right approach and your thoughts, if you want to help to find a consensus for this subject. KAJ 19:54, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Please note that this user is a Johnski sockpuppet. Davidpdx 07:37, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

E-mail

Calton, I sent you an e-mail a few weeks ago and didn't hear back from you, and today another editor said he also hadn't received a response to an e-mail, so I thought I should leave you a note in case you don't often check the account you put in your preferences. (But if you do, I'm sorry to bother you about it.) Cheers, SlimVirgin (talk) 23:22, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Winter Soldier Edits

There is a talk page and golly gee it would be swell if you used it instead of your drive by's. TDC 02:16, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Find-A-Grave

"Uh huh. And the contradiction with sentence one...?" has been fixed. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-10-25 05:45

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Media, art and literature

Re Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Media, art and literature: When an editor admits he has been lying; it's not a breach of neutrality to describe his claims as false. When he threatens to report another editor to admins, it's not a breach of neutrality to report his actions as "There has also been a threat to an editor "to report you to the admins"." Please restore the text you have removed. Andy Mabbett 08:16, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

AIDS conspiracy theories

Sigh. More of the same. By the way, could you please e-mail me, or give me an address where I could e-mail you? Jayjg (talk) 01:51, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't seem like a very useful e-mail account. :-) Have you considered creating an e-mail account where people could actually reach you, say a Hotmail or Gmail account? Jayjg (talk) 05:49, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well, maybe if you got an account specifically for Wikipedia, then at least you wouldn't have to wade through lots of other stuff, or have it trapped by your spam filter. Just a thought. Jayjg (talk) 17:55, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

= 3RR Violation on DOM page

Thanks for reverting the DOM page just now. I am trying to get Wiki-Facts banned for a 3RR violation right now, we'll see if it works. I can't revert that page for awhile or I myself could get one. Please keep an eye on it today. Thanks.. Davidpdx

Hello. I've ben adding new content to the above article, but Wiki-Facts is currently on a frenzy of vandalism to delete anything he doesn't like and insert his bizarre POV into it. If you could keep an eye on things and revert to the most recent version by me it would be appreciated. --Gene_poole 07:28, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you very much for your support on my Rfa. :) --a.n.o.n.y.m t 16:35, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Plame edit warrior

It may interest you to know that the same person you are having trouble with on the Plame affair has also purged CIA leak grand jury investigation. As I'm not up on the news, I don't feel I'm the best person to go toe-to-toe, but I know you have an interest at the other article. Do with this what you will. Take care, Jacqui ★ 13:40, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

2 things to say

1. You're weird. 2. I must of just accedentley deleted it while delteting the citing sources and merge. Tcatron565