This is an archive of past discussions with User:X96lee15. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
It's pointless. No one is going to challenge it when they're the same colors as the logo. It should not have been added in the first place.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 15:02, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
References are never pointless. And in this case, this reference specifies the actual hex values for the three colors in the Miami logo which ensure the colors in the infobox match are those Miami specifies and that they match the colors in the university logo. — X96lee15 (talk) 17:09, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
The hexcodes aren't being stated. They're simply being used. That is something that cannot really be cited.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 17:11, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
I still contend the sourcing guarantees the hex values used in the infobox will match the actual colors used by the school. I still see no reason why that information should not be sourced. There is nothing wrong with adding more references to Wikipedia. — X96lee15 (talk) 22:45, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
But it's pointless to have a ref for that. No other university has this. We do not have to cite a primary source for the colors. This is so fucking stupid.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 06:39, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Many other universities have the hex code referenced. All universities should have the hex code referenced. It's also hard for me to take any of your arguments seriously when you're swearing. — X96lee15 (talk) 12:51, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
I have not encountered one other instance of the school's colors as displayed in a web browser sourced. Please enlighten me on this.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 15:40, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
I am begging you, please leave my talk page alone. They key point that I'm referring to in WP:TPO is: Editing—or even removing—others' comments is sometimes allowed. But you should exercise caution in doing so, and normally stop if there is any objection. I will revert any blatant trolling (which I already have). There was nothing blatant regarding the last talk page message the user left. If you would let things be, then he'd move on, which is the point of WP:DENY as far as I can tell. I'm going to restore the comment. PLEASE, do not change it again. — X96lee15 (talk) 15:19, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
The one who's supposed to be objecting is the troll I'm reverting not the "owner" of the user talk page. I am tired of this bullshit everytime this idiot comes back and pretends to be informing you of something that you should be watching out for. WP:DENY does not mean "leave it there and let it fester like a dog turd on a summer's day". It's "do not give recognition by allowing it to remain". Remove his comments now.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 15:24, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
I cannot take any argument you make seriously when you're always swearing. I also believe you're misinterpreting this point of WP:DENY, especially by having this discussion. Just let it go and the "troll" will go away. Don't worry; I will revert any blatant trolling. — X96lee15 (talk) 15:29, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Right, and he knows that by posting on here, it will annoy you. If you didn't revert the post here, then he would never have any idea that you saw it and he will stop. Maybe if you take my talk page off your watchlist that will be a good start to ignoring any trolls. — X96lee15 (talk) 15:44, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
By leaving his trolling here and reverting my removals you are annoying me. And I have never had your talk page on my watchlist. JohnInDC informed me of the new account and you linked his edit at the SPI case.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 15:49, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Stop
Would you just stop trying to protect that editor's comments? He's been indefinitely blocked since 2006 and has used sockpuppet accounts and unregistered IP addresses, and because we ban the individual and not the disparate accounts, that means per WP:BANnone of that content should be allowed on the site. Don't put it in your archive. Don't leave it on your user talk page. Just remove it and do not acknkowledge it again. This is just getting ridiculous. Unfortunately for you I will be keeping an eye on this page to make sure that any new accounts he may make and use to harass me via your talk page get recorded and blocked. If you do not want me to bother you again, do not restore the content. It's that simple.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 22:25, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
I've taken some time to cool down. How about a compromise. I will revert any posts to my talk page that reference you or are from sockpuppets related to you if you never edit my talk page again. If you see a sockpuppet post before I do, just let it go. I will get to it, I promise. If you never look at my talk page again, there will be no problems. — X96lee15 (talk) 04:54, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
If I see the sock has and posted to your talk page, I'm going to revert it. Why would anyone doing this be an issue?—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 10:43, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Ryulong, why that would be an issue is irrelevant: not your talk page, and you're not an administrator. X96 proposed a compromise; you get to say "yes". If you say "no" and post further commentary, I will block you. That any comments you remove might have been made by a suspected is irrelevant. Yes? Drmies (talk) 17:02, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
I do not have to be an administrator in order to remove comments made by the sockpuppet of a banned editor. And I can't for the life of me understand your request, Drmies.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 17:05, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
I can't understand why you are being so incredibly dense. It's a good thing that X96 seems to be a nice person: if it weren't for their patience you'd be blocked already, so what you called their "enabling" is probably just courtesy. You can't just assume that your Personal Mission to Combat Trolls overrides their desire to keep you off their talk page. The more I look at this page, the more I am struck by this incredible obnoxiousness. But if X96 is OK with your crusade on their talk page, it's fine with me. Drmies (talk) 00:48, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm definitely not OK with the reverts on my talk page. I haven't taken the time to read through the policies and procedures to take the next step at this point though. — X96lee15 (talk) 02:47, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm within policy to remove the content. I've given you an alternate option and you refuse that as well. You're allowing a banned editor to edit. That's against policy.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 08:27, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
I have a possible alternate solution that will not result in your user talk page being protected and I will not have to return (as often), but I would prefer not to state it on site per WP:BEANS. Is there a method by which I can briefly contact you regarding this, X96lee15?—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 18:58, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I do not wish to have my talk page protected in any form, especially with the caveat that you would still potentially edit this talk page. — X96lee15 (talk) 02:45, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Why not? I won't edit the page and it will prevent the banned user from appearing and I won't edit unless something slips through which I believe will be rare.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 08:27, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Tod Kowalczyk Page
Thanks for contacting me regarding Coach Kowalczyk's page. I changed it today after not hearing any response to the email I sent yesterday to a general correction link at Wikipedia.
I wanted to see if the information on the page could be corrected. Can you plese correct the information so that it correctly states that there were other people besides Coach Kowalczyk that were sued in this matter? He was then dropped from the lawsuit and Kevin Bannon later settled the case out of court.
He can provide you the legal documents to verify this.
You can contact me directly at my email - steven.easton@utoledo.edu.
Thanks for any assistance you can provide.
From: Easton, Steven
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2014 4:15 PM
To: 'info-en-q@wikimedia.org'
Cc: Kowalczyk, Tod E
Subject: Correction to Head Coach Tod Kowalczyk's Wikipedia Page
There is some missing information regarding the lawsuit regarding Coach Kowalczyk. The paragraph correctly states that Coach Kowalczyk was sued by two former players, but omits the fact that there were three other individuals - athletic director (Robert E. Mulcahy III), university president (Francis Lawrence) and former athletic director (Fred Gruninger) - on the original lawsuit in addition to Head Coach Kevin Bannon.
In addition, the paragraph also omits that EVERYONE with the exception of Head Coach Kevin Bannon was later dropped from the lawsuit. Kevin Bannon then settled the lawsuit out of court.
Coach Kowalczyk can provide the legal documents for this and it would be greatly appreciated if these changes were made to his Wikipedia page.
Please contact me if you need any additional information.
Another Wikipedia editor removed the section of the Tod Kowalczyk article that you had originally removed. He did it per the WP:BLP policy (you can see his edit summary for the complete explanation). I'm OK with his reasoning, so we can leave the paragraph out and call this issue closed I think.
For future reference, use the edit summary when making changes to Wikipedia. Had you done that originally, I probably wouldn't have reverted your change. Happy editing! — X96lee15 (talk) 21:20, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
I saw that. I don't get it. I haven't seen that user around the ANI discussions either. This whole this is crazy. — X96lee15 (talk) 18:41, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Hopefully, people will stop focusing on your Talk Page and move on to more constructive activities. And with that, I'll go back to editing! LizRead!Talk!22:03, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
to replace [[Mike Kitchen]] as head coach after a seven game losing streak.<ref>{{cite web |url=[http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=188117&hubname= |title=TSN : NHL – Canada's Sports Leader}}{{
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Rick Porcello may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
I for one am disgusted with the reasons as to why "my" comments were erased, like "Western Broncos Football Team (the SuperBowl was awful)". set them back please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.147.120.172 (talk) 20:55, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
AFL transactions
How are you going to tell me you can't find a source for an AFL transaction on Jamarko Simmons without even checking the AFL transactions page? Next time don't revert and take it as possible vandalism without really taking the time to look for facts. And Refuse to Report isn't necessarily a bad thing either. He could be on that list for maybe a day because he got delayed on his way to training camp. DMC511 16:25, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
I did take my time to look for sources. I looked for Google News related to Jamarko Simmons. I looked on Twitter for Jamarko Simmons. I looked on the Barnstormers roster and found nothing. So I did do my due diligence to find the information.
Where did I say vandalism?
"Refuse to report" is totally a bad thing. It may be for an innocent reason, but without any text to go along with it, it has a bad connotation. — X96lee15 (talk) 17:03, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
See WP:V. Changes to his playing status should be backed up by a source. The information about his family might be notable if you can find a reference. The info about his puppy and IRC bullying isn't encyclopedic and probably shouldn't be in his article. — X96lee15 (talk) 18:50, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
IRC
Hi, several people from the baseball wikiproject are getting together after Wizardman's sudden retirement to figure out a better way to organize the Wikiproject. One of the ideas we came up with is having our own IRC channel to help each other, as well as new users with collaboration and content. If you need help connecting to IRC join #wikipedia-coffeehouseconnect. The IRC channel for Wikiproject Baseball is #wiki-baseballconnect. Thanks Secretaccount23:13, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
I await your apology
When all of the good work I've done, that you have gone out of you way to delete, comes true on Sunday will you be man enough to admit that you're wrong?Bsuorangecrush (talk) 01:31, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Nope. Even if every team that is a NIT autobid is in the NIT, it's premature to list the teams as NIT participants at this time. It's a pillar of Wikipedia. — X96lee15 (talk) 01:35, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Then you are classless. You are wrong and refuse to admit when you are. You obviously know nothing about college basketball and the process for automatic bids to the NIT and should do the college basketball community a favor and go away!Bsuorangecrush (talk) 01:42, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
I'm not here to prove who's right or wrong. This isn't a game or a scoreboard. I'm just following WP policy. I'd appreciate you being civil towards me as well. — X96lee15 (talk) 01:46, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
2014 MAC Men's Basketball Tournament
I was in the process of fixing the page, however my edit didn't go the way I thought it would.
The 2nd round brackets that contain #1 Western Michigan & #2 Toledo vs bye opponents that came from 2 bye opponents needs to be eliminated due to redundancy.
Just as there are not bye vs bye opponents in the 1st round leading to #3 Buffalo & #4 Akron, there shouldn't be bye vs bye opponents in the 2nd round.
I thought that deleting the code for the 2nd round redundancies would eliminate them from the bracket, but they did not, and I was in the process of looking up how to alleviate the issue. If you could fix this, that would be greatly appreciated.
Sidelines, I agree that they're redundant. The template that's used to render the bracket doesn't blank out the games where there are byes. Well, it does in the first round, but not in later rounds. What we could probably do is add the code to the template that removes the blank games from the bracket where there is no contents to later games. It's not an easy task to do though since the mediawiki syntax is pretty confusing. — X96lee15 (talk) 15:05, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
I am curious as to why you would have changed the image on Keith Benson's page. He hired me to update the picture to show his current team (which I did and am going to do again but I see you changed it back to the previous image.)
I just wondering if there is a specific reason as to why you would be making edits.
The image you uploaded was a copyrighted image. Those are not allowed on Wikipedia. You need an image that is a "free" license. This page might help: [1]. Let me know if you have any more questions. — X96lee15 (talk) 16:52, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
I see you are a fan of Western Michigan, I'm a Bobcat fan/alum. Would you be interested in trying to expand/make team pages for MAC teams from 2000 on up? I did it with Ohio, just basic for now with Schedule/results/roster/coaches. Just basics for now to get all the information in one place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Littlekelv (talk • contribs) 23:25, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, that's a good plan. I've done WMU's past NCAA tournament seasons in detail (as much as I can when I have time). I'll try to expand the other years too. — X96lee15 (talk) 23:53, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Even though you say that you are representing a "neutral" point of view, that is not true. I wrote you and asked you to provide the statistics for Keith Benson's play for Talk N Text. You refused. You said that you didn't have to staff. I believe that you didn't add the stats because his stats did not verify his being cut form the team. Not only did he average 23 points, 15 rebounds and 2.4 blocks over 5 games, he performed better than his 3 replacements. To only provide an article stating that the coach replaced him did not convey the whole picture. You are defining what a coach says as a neutral comment.
Likewise, the post you keep cutting was written on a blog that is published. It is dated and published, so the author is identified. It is his opinion and it was very well written. He advocated for Keith Benson to be retained by the Hawks. It gives specific verifiable information on his performance during the exhibition season. If you advocate being neutral, there is no reason why an opinion of a journalist or a blog writer shouldn't being included if it is signed and if the information can be externally verified.
I had to post Keith's stats in Europe this year. You didn't. If you are going to fight to be in control of this page, you should keep it updated.
Don't you have anything else to do? Who died and left you in charge of Keith's page? You need to get a grip and ask yourself why you are being so insistent on leaving out what you want to leave out. You are calling that neutral? Rim Wrecker (talk) 21:32, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I don't recall the conversation regarding Talk N Text stats. I have no problem adding stats to the article. Regarding neutral comments, Wikipedia is based on verifiable information from reliable sources. We can only add information to articles that is from these types of references. If nobody has published it, then putting something in a WP article like that is original research.
Look at the sentence you're putting back in the article:
In September 2012, Benson joined the Atlanta Hawks. Keith Benson Should Make This Team. He was waived by the team on October 11, 2012.
That doesn't even make sense.
That being said, if you want to reword it to make it an English sentence, then the reference would probably support it. I'm not going to do your work for you. If you want to add it to the article, you need to write the statement(s). — X96lee15 (talk) 12:07, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Scott Sizemore
Hey, I saw you reverted me again at Scott Sizemore. I understand that these discussions tend to get quite repetitive, but was just wondering whether you'd like to respond to my most recent post on the talk page? The other way forward might be an RfC but it seems like a pretty small issue to go to that much trouble over. I'm not convinced that unilaterally declaring that there's a consensus is especially useful. Thanks. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 10:16, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I've added the hatnote back again in the absence of any further discussion (you probably got one of those fancy new notifications). I'd really appreciate if you could engage in discussion before reverting again. Thanks. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 10:56, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Keith Benson's Latest Photo
I have been asked to contact you again as to why Keith Benson's picture has been removed yet again. This last picture is not copyrighted. It is his picture that is owned by his mother who keeps putting it back and for some reason it keeps getting taken down. Why is that image not being allowed to stay on this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mporter213 (talk • contribs) 20:54, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
It was deleted because it didn't have permission to be used. It sounds like the creator of the picture allowed it to be used, but that needs to be spelled out on the photo's page. It's deleted, so I don't know exactly what was there, but if you follow the instructions when uploading it to Commons, I think there's an option to say, "this photo is my own work". That will be recorded on the photo and there won't be any more issues (I don't think). — X96lee15 (talk) 21:02, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Tony Clark may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
playerpages/playerbreakingnews.asp?sport=MLB&id=1270&line=262042&spln=1</ref><ref>[http://ktar.com/?sid=1152178&nid=184</ref> Clark suffered the injury during [[spring training]]
The Wikipedia article entitled "First Unitarian Church of Detroit" has been widely misinterpreted as referring to the First Unitarian Universalist Church of Detroit. The First Unitarian Church of Detroit merged 80 years ago with a Universalist congregation. The hat is needed to direct people to the information that is generally more relevant (the First Unitarian Church of Detroit in the Wikipedia article burned down and no longer exists). We will create a Wikipedia article on the existing church, but until then please leave in the reference to the current First Unitarian (Universalist) Church of Detroit.
Sorry for the double post. Please note that this "hat" was added due to widespread confusion and people contacting the church and thinking that it had burned down.
See WP:ELHAT. Hatnotes to URLs external to Wikipedia are not allowed. If you create an article on the existing church, then the hatnote can be there. Until then, it should be removed. — X96lee15 (talk) 13:29, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Please accept my apologies on the Justin verlander reference. This was a computer that was used by several individuals over a period of a few days. Clearly it was used for items other than training. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.29.236.59 (talk) 19:59, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Glenn Abbott may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
{{cquote|[[Wes Stock]], my pitching coach in Oakland, had gone up there, and I was excited about
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Jack Billingham may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
he went 2–0 with a 0.36 [[earned run average]] (ERA), allowing just one earned run in 25{[frac|1|3}} [[innings pitched]]. Billingham came to the Reds in one of baseball's biggest trades. The Reds
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
If a starter is not scheduled to start that particular day, do I still put the date I did the update through? For example, if Yu Darvish makes a start today, can I go on the page tomorrow and put through 6/18/14? Joey Gallo (talk) 02:32, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
I'd still leave it as the previous day. While there's a 99.9% chance they won't pitch, you never know. It's safer to just leave it through the player's completed games. — X96lee15 (talk) 13:10, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Updating Pictures
Try to update the websites when you find any updated pictures of Joey Gallo and/or Rougned Odor (as well as any other players) that do not violate any of Wikipedia's rules. This way, the viewers see the most recent information. Joey Gallo (talk) 02:44, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, X96lee15. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 13:47, 11 July 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Charlie Carr, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Indianapolis Hoosiers. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
"doesn't necessarily have to be last date he pitched; more than likely, if updating; date should be "yesterday""
Yes, you are correct ... more than likely. But the preferred date to place in the stat_year parameter is the date the pitcher last pitched (or the position player/designated hitter last played). The problem occurs when he pitched yesterday, and I update the stats at 8 AM today using today's date. He then pitches tonight, and the infox box states that the stats are good through today's date (but they are not because tonight's game is not included). Best practice is to use that date that he last pitched to indicate that the stats are good through that date. Happy editing! Bob305 (talk) 08:43, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
My thought on that is that if you update it at 8 AM today, then you should list the date of "yesterday". That way it wouldn't be incorrect for "today's" games and (even though a player might not have played on that day) readers would know the stats are accurate as of then. If the date was 3 days ago (when they last pitched), they might think the stats had not yet been updated. — X96lee15 (talk) 16:34, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
I understand what you are saying. The problems that I've been seeing this summer is that some editors just slap down today's date (while they are editing before today's game has been played). Typically, I edit stats for all Phillies' (and opponents') pitchers the morning after a game. I performed a cursory search in the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball tonight, looking for any previous consensus about the date, but couldn't find what I was looking for. If you can direct me to any consensus there, please show me (I'm always willing to learn). Bob305 (talk) 03:06, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
Historical significance of first CFB game played after 9/11
Seriously? "historical significance not determined?" After 9/11 every CFB game in the country was postponed, rescheduled or cancelled. There were still fears of another attack, this time with the potential for it to be during a gathering of fans in football stadiums ... and it was determined that this game, South Carolina at Mississippi State, was going to be played on a Thursday night, with the large American flag unfurled, as a show of strength to the nation that stadium security was beefed-up and precautions were being taken so that life could go-on. As a matter of fact, it is the only time since the 30s that Mississippi State fans were not allowed to carry their famous cowbells into the stadium because it would cause too many false positive responses from the metal detectors fans were passing through entering the stadium. It is one of the most historically significant college football games in the history of CFB in the United States. The entry needs to be reinstated into the article. It was well cited and you'll find no one else that will agree with you that the game does not hold a significant historical place in both the history of the country and CFB in general. It was the game that proved to the country, if not the world, that we would not cower to the attacks on the World Trade Center. Scrooster (talk) 22:48, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
If you can find references that say the game is "historically significant" as related to college football, then I'm all for adding it. I haven't seen any though. That game had no effect on college football. It might be worth mentioning on the 9/11 article though. — X96lee15 (talk) 04:14, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Oh sheeesh. You need someone else to state the obvious? I've got very limited time this afternoon ... but I'll begin here - you watch the video of the event, you listen to the words for yourself: [1] As you can see and hear, there was much pomp and circumstance associated with this game because of its historical significance. I also suggest that you actually go back and refer to the citations I included in the addition to the article that you reverted. That this was one of the more historically significant games in the history of college football, tied in with our entire country, is not debatable. But I'm going to give you a chance to argue otherwise for the time being. Just remember friend, you do not own the article. I'm hoping you'll see the light. Thank you for your consideration in advance. Scrooster (talk) 17:03, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
It's WP:Original research to include it in the list without a reliable source that calls it "historically significant". I read the references you included and neither of them do that. The article says the list is made up of games that "have historical impact to the sport of college football." This game doesn't have that. College football didn't change one way or another because of this game.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2014–15 Oakland Golden Grizzlies men's basketball team, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WADL. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello. please make sure i got it rite, as u seem 2 hav more xperience dan I in these matters. Check block log of dis user i hyperlinked. 172.56.0.191 (talk) 21:20, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
