User talk:Realist2/Archive 12

The return of Daara J

Well, after waiting awhile, doing some reorganization and copy editing, and not finding much else (or really anything else) to put in, I decided to renominate Daara J at GAN. Thought you might like to know, because I seem to recall that, after our little rift, you encouraged me to do so. Hopefully it passes! --Kakofonous (talk) 19:26, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sharp Shooter

We reverted at the same time, but I got the VW3 in. Happy Wiki-birthday, by the way. If I'd remembered, I'd have baked you a cake. --Rodhullandemu 23:44, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Birthday

Just a happy (Wiki) Birthday message to you, Realist2/Archive 12, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day!

The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 23:51, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Belated boy. --Efe (talk) 02:44, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caden

Thank you, but in return I'd like you to try to be a little gentler around Caden, since he obviously has not been brought up properly, and it's going to be very difficult for him to change his ways.

And incidentally, it's "pussy-footing" - that is, 'walking delicately like a cat does'. DS (talk) 00:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with DS here (though I would note that how "properly" one is brought up is a matter of opinion), and I would like to expand on DS's request by noting that you are veering dangerously close to making personal attacks yourself, by how you are characterizing CadenS's views. Even discussing his views as something Wikipedia should be concerned about, is missing the point. Wikipedia does not care what views - no matter how much you and I disagree with them - its editors have. Wikipedia is only concerned with its policies. So, commenting on CadenS's conservative views is not helpful. Commenting on his actual violations of policy (WP:PA and WP:CIVIL), however, is. -kotra (talk) 00:33, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have already talked about his breach of policy at the appropriate noticeboards, however you are right, i shouldnt expand on it beyond that, i just have strong principles on such things. Advise noted. --Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 00:38, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Madonna

yes still time to finish off the article

My keyboard has problems Ultra! 20:14, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you computer is faultering and you need even more time than 7 days im sure we can sort something out? --Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 20:17, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no not more than 7 days Ultra! 20:20, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, best of luck. --Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 20:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You know you love me. :) The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 01:01, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Present

Helloooo! Realist2, boy have you helped me a lot! So as promised, your present!!!

The Original Barnstar
For teaching me how to source information. Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 21:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
For always being kind and encouraging. Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 21:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Barnstar of Good Humor
For helping me so much during that ridiculous checkuser case and speaking out for me as I was busy with school. Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 21:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


The Resilient Barnstar
For never being afraid to help me or defend me or anyone else that needs it. Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 21:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


The Special Barnstar
Happy birthday!!!Thank you for being a Wikipedian for a year now! Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 21:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speechless. ;-) Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 21:46, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me about your rough day.Also, lol, I told you, 5 barnstars!Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 21:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah,I see.Don't worry I know the feeling.(It sucks!;))I didn't have the best day ever either.I have to learn to play the recorder!:|.I always have wanted to learn to play an instrument but I never thought I'd get graded on it.Anyways I'm not half-bad.And look at the bright side of things. You still have friends(I hope;)),family(I hope;)),and a passing grade(I hope really bad)Good luck!:)Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 22:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Duh!MaybeUm laterAs soon as I canOf course!:)Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 22:13, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Best selling music artists

Since you are cleaning up the article, I decided to confirm the other Japanese references. The reference for Kazuhiro Moriuchi has lots of text, but I located a citation for more than 55 million records in 1985. 220.253.19.78 (talk) 22:16, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

?

Questions:What is a global account?What is the ubx template indicating you have one?I think I have one. I created accounts on other wikis and all of a sudden there was a new option in my preferences. I then merged the accounts. See my userpage.Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 23:33, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also just a piece of info I activated a tool,refTools that allows referencing.How does it work for how you showed me for sourcing info in Teeth of the tiger?Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 23:37, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huggle

Huggle is supposed to be disabled for me but I somehow just used it.I didn't hack or anything just the normal login. I have already told iridescent.I have used it properly so far.Will I be blocked for this?:(Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 00:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reasons to stay

That's fine, you're doing OK. I don't expect Barnstars, because I just go around getting on with it. I've currently got Criminal damage in English law on GA review, and should finish it tomorrow. It's going a lot better than the last one, however, because it has actually been reviewed by an academic lawyer, and not an amateur. --Rodhullandemu 00:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, change seems to be the norm here, and once you've got an article up to scratch, it can be difficult to entrust other editors with the same level of commitment to its quality. There is an upcoming feature called "stable versions" (or something like) whereby an article which has been changed will not appear in search engines or to casual readers until it has been edited again by an "experienced" editor. OK as far as it goes, but "an encyclopedia that anyone can edit" does not mean "an encyclopedia that anyone should edit", which is why we spend so much time fighting vandalism & reverting unhelpful edits. Perhaps one day some mechanism will be found for quality control, but at present, it's lacking, and at our expense. Meanwhile, it's zzzz's time. Catch you later. --Rodhullandemu 01:10, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Leaving isn't the answer

Realist, I can see that you are abysmally frustrated with the whole XP fiasco. I fully understand. However, I've seen you around and you are a highly valued and diligent contributor. In fact, the patience you've shown in defense of said user, and your attempts at inculcating him are commendable. My only request is this. Don't let these incidents sour you to the point of an indefinite Wikibreak, or even leaving permanently. I hate to see editors leave disgruntled, honestly. You have a userbox that reads you are proud to be a Wikipedian. I believe that. Just thought I'd drop you a note and share my thoughts. Regards. Wisdom89 (T / C) 02:53, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday!

Hey, Realist2/Archive 12. Just stopping by to wish you a Happy Birthday from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day!-- RyRy5 (talk) 04:29, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and don't leave. Regards, RyRy5 (talk) 04:29, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx. --Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 16:42, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You think an album titled "Music" will give any chart result? Try it and see. Ultra! 16:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not my problem sorry, if a source is too hard to find its usually an indicater that it shouldnt be included. --Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 16:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's Been a While...

Hey Realist2. Just decided I'd pop in. How are you doing with that albums list? And, if I may ask, what's the matter <written while sadly staring at uppermost message box>? Cheers, Kodster (heLLo) (Me did that) 20:40, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:I AM MICHAEL JACKSON

The user page contains some inappropriate implications, so I made a report here. FYI. --Jaysweet (talk) 22:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ha ha, nevermind, it got speedy-deleted before I even got a chance to send this message. --Jaysweet (talk) 22:05, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note...

...but the break didn't last too long! I kept seeing things I wanted to work on, and well, who was I kidding? freshacconcispeaktome 22:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are You Okay?

You okay realist2? From what I can tell from my talkpage you had the equivalent of my whole "bad" week and more!!!Please don't leave and I appreciate the barnstar.Don't worry metros hasn't scared me off!:)Still from what I can tell you made a few mistakes that resulted in a lot of (somewhat over reactive)frowns and scoldings from other users.Don't leave. This is a mess,I admit.But any mess can be cleaned up.I don't mean wiping my block log.I'm not that new.:)I have not been scared off!!!!I'm 13 darn it!!!:)Hope you feel better,Xp54321;)Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 02:45, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Resilient Barnstar
For holding steadfast in the face of unending criticism. For almost getting in trouble defending me. (That was not needed,now I feel guilty.;) Good luck!!! Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 02:48, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers lol, im tired of this crap. Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 02:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheer up,in a few min you'll see my re to this mess.Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 03:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Janet Jackson

Sure, I definitely will. Thanks for the advice! Funk Junkie (talk) 21:33, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, thanks.

Thanks for including me. BrothaTimothy (talk · contribs) 02:44, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Awww, thanks. I think I'm getting verklempt. LOL! BrothaTimothy (talk · contribs) 02:51, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Elvis trivia

Good point you made about the awards and recognition section. Didn't hang about, I just did it. Rikstar (talk) 07:57, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks R2. Take your point about length; you should have seen the FA nomination of 2 years ago - 150kish?? This article is pretty much impeccably sourced, but we can lose some stuff - if only other editors allow (it's been difficult...). Will give it a go. BTW, Bob Dylan is Featured and 140kb... and it was long when it got the star. Rikstar (talk) 15:26, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Janet pic

The Flickr uploads are always problematic. In theory, if the photographer in question really uploaded this to Flickr under the Creative Commons license, I think it is okay.. but how do we prove the uploading user is who they say they are? I don't really understand how this policy works in regards to Flickr... I might try doing some reading and see if I can find out. --Jaysweet (talk) 14:36, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response

When it comes to such serious things I felt I had to step in and report the user my self. Regards Bit Lordy (talk) 17:28, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Bull sh*t

I will keep an eye on this editor. WP:NPOV is your friend here! --Rodhullandemu 21:42, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the Talkpage header should alert editors as to what is permitted but certainly a link to a Q&A page ("Can I put this image of MJ here?", for example) would be useful, and there's no reason why you shouldn't start one and just refer editors to it as necessary. Go for it. --Rodhullandemu 16:58, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just remember WP:AGF with anon IPs. You need to explain firmly but kindly what the policies are. --Rodhullandemu 17:03, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good Start. I'm sure more can be added as time permits. Could do with running through a spell-checker, and I love the optimism of "Alternatively you can take a picture of Jackson yourself and upload it"! Keep it up. --Rodhullandemu 01:22, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Hey, Thanks for the message. What edits are you reffering to exactly though because I haven't been editing much recently!. I see you've done some nice work too. Keep it up!. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 18:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it's always nice to have your work noticed. Your work on the Michael Jackson articles is very good. And regarding the house burning down, I don't think its significant enough unless it's put in context. So if, for example, we create a section under "Controversies" detailing the situation with his ex-girlfriend. Thanks. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 16:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, your right, if too many anons start adding unsourced material or even sourced materials which they've been told doesn't belong there, ill semi protect the page. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 16:49, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Obama

Suggest you revert your last - "retained a lead" makes more sense than "retained in the lead". Did you think it said "remained", perhaps? -- Scjessey (talk) 01:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MJ archives

The duplicate could be deleted under WP:CSD#G6 but that would leave a hole in the numbering which is undesirable since someone would wonder where it's gone. I'd make the smaller one a redirect to the larger with an edit note saying "Archive duplicated in error". This would leave the history intact if anyone wanted to check it out. Seem reasonable? --Rodhullandemu 16:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not an admin function, anyone can do it. Just blank the page to be redirected & replace content with #REDIRECT [[ other page name ]]. Let me know if you have any trouble with it. --Rodhullandemu 17:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was in the middle of fixing this but it seems that so is everyone else. I'll come back to it when the battlefield's a bit quieter. --Rodhullandemu 17:57, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Jackson/Archive 6

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Michael Jackson/Archive 6, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Talk:Michael Jackson/Archive 6. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:46, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Obama consensus debate

Thank you for your kind words on my talk page. My only desire is for a neutral article, but the sheer bloody-mindedness of the folks who don't want Obama to win anything makes it extraordinarily difficult to achieve any sort of neutrality. I am hoping this "mild" approach will cool things down and allow normal discussion. -- Scjessey (talk) 18:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

as hillary lost im guess im gonna have to support the guy
The way I see it, it 'aint over 'til the First Lady sings! -- Scjessey (talk) 18:59, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page archive censorship

Hey, I just wanted to know if there is any policy that allows comments from a talk page archive to be removed like this. You could justify that it is a BLP violation, but I could argue that being an MJ fan, you are trying to remove all traces of any even-slightly negative comments made against him and his family. Further, you don't seem to have discussed this anywhere. indopug (talk) 20:29, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I discussed it on the admin noticeboard, im to take the links to Jayron32 when I have finished to be wiped off the site. Cheers. --— Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 20:32, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you show me where you discussed it? indopug (talk) 20:33, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Besides, why are you removing gossip about Marlon Brando, James Dean and Elvis? I don't think you can commit BLP violations on dead people. indopug (talk) 20:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here, if Jayron cant handle it he wont mind passing it on the the relevant body. Im gonna AGF on your part that you didnt think i was wildly removing stuff because of my taste in music, id like to think I have a little more respect off the community than that. — Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 20:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should add a placeholder <BLP violation removed> so that somebody reading the archives realises that the page has been whitewashed, and that there may be discontinuities while reading. indopug (talk) 20:43, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I might do when im finished, at the moment im just trying to get through the 18 archives, you can help me if you like, start from 18 and work your way down. Its so much fun. Besides "Whitewash" seems like a bad word from my understanding of it. Im doing a good thing. — Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 20:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, I don't understand why you would remove "There were three famously gay Method actors in the 1950s - Marlon Brando, Montgomery Clift and James Dean." (all dead) but keep "Is that why Presley was screwing Priscilla from the time she was 14? Anyway, his "comeback" was in 1968." (bold and link mine; she's alive). And dude, "Since Michael is universally regarded as one of the most sexy and beautiful men in the world, we should add him to the sex symbol category at the end of his article. I hope you will allow me to make this necessary addition without reverting it" is not a BLP violation! And "good" and "bad" are relative terms; you think its "good" to remove BLP violations against your favourite pop-star, I think its "bad" that censorship (any kind of which I oppose) is going on. Maybe i would be a little less alarmed if a more neutral editor (you're openly pro-MJ) did the revisions. indopug (talk) 21:03, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OOPS, I opologize, but it happens to breach a number of other policies regarding wikipedia talk pages. Im sorry, i did each each archive in one edit to keep it neat and together, i was removing a number of issues with each edit, I didnt realise I had to write down each policy in the summary box. The main one was BLP but there were some others.
Im annoyed at your complete lack of faith, first you suggest I did it without asking, then you asked me to prove that I had got permission. Then you say my actions are a result of me being a fan, even though ive been cleaning out a number of things not to do with Jackson specifically. I will ask you to just drop this, if anything needs readding to the archives I will happily do it at the end. I also consider you statement that im not neutral as a personal attack, and I would ask that you judge me on the work ive done not my userpage in future. — Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 22:34, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article talk alert?

I had mentioned:

FYI: Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Kossack4Truth LotLE×talk 00:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will defer to your removal. To my mind, K4T's disruptive edits and sock-puppetry are exactly what is stopping the article from calming down to something reasonable and encyclopedic. Well... it's not like I am sure someone else wouldn't take his ideological place before too long. If other editors could add evidence to the checkuser request, I believe that would be helpful. Unfortunately, as long as K4T remains active there (under whatever account name), it will be impossible for the discussion to be about anything else, hence I think the checkuser request is (sadly) germane to article. LotLE×talk 00:27, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its very unhelpful. --— Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 00:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: User:Jossi just blocked Fovean Author as a result of the chekuser report at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Kossack4Truth. LotLE×talk 00:43, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Kossack

When you're transferring comments from Kossack's talk page to the article's talk page, just copy the applicable parts of his comments and try not to interpret his comments. While it's clear that Kossack is in favor of option 7, it's really best to just use his words and also provide the link to the diff for that comment. --Bobblehead (rants) 00:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I provided a link? Sure though i should have made it a little more indepth, frankly i wise we could all just stick to 1 easy number lol. --— Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 00:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barack Obama consensus fail

It appears that the attempt to build a consensus over the Ayers issue is failing miserably. The extreme views (on both sides) are probably going to cause this process to break down. I thought everything was going very well, but now I am uncertain how to proceed. Any advice you can give on how we might be able to restore the spirit of cooperation would be appreciated. - Scjessey (talk) 16:26, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Realist2, I just reverted your removal of the IPs opinion on what should be the preferred wording of Ayers. Aside from semi-protection, Wikipedia does not treat named editors any differently than IP editors. If you feel there is a problem of sockpuppeting or SPAs, then you can comment on the addition saying such, but it is not acceptable to outright remove their opinion. As an example, see how I flagged WorkerBee[1]. In this case, the IP address has edited quite a bit across Wikipedia, so I don't think SPA or sockpuppets are an issue. --Bobblehead (rants) 17:24, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Bobblehead on this - I don't see a problem with IPs having a say. -- Scjessey (talk) 17:26, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If he is a regular sure, however he could be anyone of us. --— Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 17:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Or it could be a completely unrelated editor. Do try and assume good faith. Unless you have actual evidence that the IP is a sockpuppet or a SPA, then it is best to assume the IP is an independent editor. Even if the IP were a sockpuppet (which needs to be confirmed by an uninvolved editor), it is preferable to just strike out their comment and to say you are striking them out because they were found to be a sock of whatever user they are a sock of. --Bobblehead (rants) 17:36, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I am confident the IP is a genuinely different editor, given its edit history. However, I am equally confident that Workerbee74 is another sock-puppet of K4T. As soon as K4T's first sock, Fovean Author, was blocked, Workerbee74 appeared to rant in the exact same voluminous tone that K4T had been doing (even hinting about "Fovean Author" soon weighing in with a #7 vote, once the block was done). I guess I'll add that user to the existing sock-puppet check request. LotLE×talk 17:57, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WorkerBee is certainly a SPA of some sort, but I'm still unconvinced Fovean and Kossack are the same editor. Kossack is more coherent than Fovean, but then so is WorkerBee. --Bobblehead (rants) 18:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am certain that this perceived coherency is just that initial glow of WP:AGF :-). After you have read a few thousand more words from the WorkerBee74 account, that illusion of coherency will fade from your mind. The writing style, in my perception, is unmistakably the same as K4T (with just a slight attempt to sound like a different person). LotLE×talk 18:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jikes, il take a look now, if they are all socks it'l make consensus of #3 a whole lot easier lol. — Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 18:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fan club vs fan site

You keep considering janetfanclub.com a "fan site" when it is not. A fan site is a website setup by fans that may or may not have accurate information. This site is not setup by fans, it was launched by Live Nation for the tour and is where you buy your tickets. This website lists Los Angeles. This is accurate information. I notice Madonna's Sticky & Sweet Tour uses the exact same type of website for its source on all of the dates. I don't see the problem in using this website for a source of the dates. Thankyoubaby (talk) 20:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The only problem is, when I click on it, it always appears as a dead link, therefore I cant see it and cannot find out its style or reliability, I can only read the link which doesnt look impartial. --— Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 20:44, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So when you type in " http://janetfanclub.com ", nothing comes up? Thankyoubaby (talk) 20:50, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:List of best-selling music artists

I see the IP guy is unhelpful and I have warned him for WP:NPA, but you shouldn't delete his comments. --Rodhullandemu 20:58, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's something you learn to live with as an admin! --Rodhullandemu 21:11, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lol. — Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 21:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Obama's mother's race

It should be in the intro of the article, perhaps along with this father's race. I think Obama's diversity is certainly one of his defining characteristics. What do you think? JackWilliams (talk) 02:38, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The color of his skin is of zero interest to me. Discuss it on the talk page. Do it again and you will likely be blocked. --— Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 02:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whether you admit it or not, his race is very relevant. It is historic that a man of his racial background has ascended so high in American politics. JackWilliams (talk) 02:42, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, not really, im really color blind, i dont find it special. Thats not the point though, the point is your edit warring and you must discuss instead. I really dont want to get into how liberal I am. --— Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 02:45, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What does you being liberal have to do with anything? Conservatives can also be "color blind." JackWilliams (talk) 02:48, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes but thats usually because they have bad eyes (joke), moving on, please just go to the talk page, my talk page is a politics free zone. — Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 02:50, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]