Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:00, 22 March 2008

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Brian D Foy/brian d foy

Hi Elonka, would you care to join us or at least have an eye on the current discussion at Talk:brian d foy? The whole thing is probably just another routine quarrel on formatting, but I do get a little tense once opposing editors feel the need to point out their admin status, so having another sysops wielder around for checks and balances might considerably improve the climate over there. – Cyrus XIII 07:14, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

PWNO

Elonka, I don't wish to distrub thee too much from the time-sucking thing that is the ], but I fear your moderating voice is needed for the WP:PWNB. Things had gotten good for a while, but there are signs that it may go back to its old ways. I refer you to comments such as this and this. As Piotrus has let such comments go, I'm requesting you to put in a word. All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 22:35, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I'd love to help, but I'm currently traveling, and just snatching a few minutes here and there for Misplaced Pages, while perched in my hotel room. If you think things are bad enough, you could try taking it to ANI. Or if not, I'll try to take a look when I'm back home again. Good luck, Elonka 22:45, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Just don't want things to return to their old ways. Enjoy your trip! Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 22:50, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Kaaba

Hi, You had previously voted to support a Kaaba picture at FPC. An edit has been made to that picture and is up for voting again. I would be pleased if you could please vote for it. Regards, Muhammad(talk) 14:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

KT

I wondered why your recent edit to this article has a misleading edit summary suggesting it was merely MoS:DP cleanup. The addition of Template:Tocright could be considered as such, but you also added alternative capitalisations to the lede as expressly forbidden in the start of MoS:DP, re-ordered many entries without explanation (not that I actually wish to dispute that), removed redlinks and their most relevant wikilinks for reasons I can't fathom, added entries and increased the length of some entries by re-writing them into WP:DICDEFs describing the words rather than the concepts (as is expected in an encyclopedia).

Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley _{talk contrib} 12:08, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Well first, WP:MOSDAB is a guideline, not a policy. I reviewed my changes but don't see exactly which problems that you're referring to. In any case, on Misplaced Pages, if you see something you would like to change, the best way to deal with things is usually to just change it, not to chase after the previous editor who was on the page. There are preferred methods of doing things, but that doesn't mean that they're required. Either way, your change seems fine, it could really be done either way. --Elonka 19:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Battle of Baghdad (1258)

I imagine you're already aware of the baloney going on around this article, but I thought I'd alert you just in case. I've already deleted some of the dreck on the talk page per WP:TALK but it's been reinstated. Several good quality editors now have an eye on this article so there's a limit to how far the nonsense will be allowed to go. Cheers. --Folantin (talk) 13:21, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up, and I'm glad to hear that others are keeping an eye on it. I'm still going to be traveling off and on for the next week or two, and my wiki-time is severely curtailed. Looks like I'll have lots of !entertaining reading to do when I get back! :) --Elonka 18:57, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

That certainly sounds like our old friend Dr B. (I'm not the only one to think so either ). --Folantin (talk) 19:52, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Update: blocked indefinitely by Moreschi . Dr. B and his possible imitators are already indef. blocked so their socks can be instantly blocked too. --Folantin (talk) 20:03, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Request for Mediation

Hi Elonka, I was sent here by Jehochmen because I had a dispute about an edit at the quantum cryptography page ( here is a link to the diff). He deleted a large amount of text that I feel didn't need to be deleted. I explain my stance in the talk page. I already undid his edit, then he redid it, and I dont' want to get into an "undo" war, so if you could help me it would be much appreciated! Thanks!--MaizeAndBlue86 (talk) 14:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

In theory...

My ISP has fixed my issues. Note I said in theory. Things seem to be working for now... we'll see what happens. Ealdgyth | Talk 21:33, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words

I appreciate the kind words. Honestly, I'm just a kid playing with a new toy, User:AWeenieMan/furme -- RoninBK _{T C} 05:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppet hunt

(This relates to your question to DarkoNeko)

Howdy,

If you're looking for user:Geir Smith, yes he's the creator of the French version of the Boubouleix article. IP 86.207.56.195 also intervened, as well as the 4 IP and users below. No other contributor of significance.

FYI: fr:user:Lord Hearntown, fr:user:D A A Boubouleix and fr:user:D Boubouleix are all sockpuppets of one another (+IP 86.207.121.187), but seem to be distinct from G.S. (we ran a Check User on them names, see here).

Hope this helps! Cheers, Popo le Dog 10:14, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

what he said :) DarkoNeko x 11:34, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! :) --Elonka 16:15, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

G. Smith incident

It was a very strange incident. Both the main perpetrators, Geir Smith and Dominique Boubouleix (plus his various socks), have been banned from Misplaced Pages. They posted some bizarre conspiracy theory rants about you here and on the French Misplaced Pages. You can see the unfolding saga at WP:FTN. We concluded that Smith was a crank who was trolling for hits for his website(s). He was desperate to get PHG on his side but we haven't found evidence that PHG was involved in any way. As Dbachmann said: "it transpires that is embraced as a brother in arms by the Warriors of Shambhala because he is in dispute with Elonka. I am sure he will be nonplussed to learn of his popularity among the Immortals". Cheers. --Folantin (talk) 10:29, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

"My CIA handlers will be pleased". Boubouleix's sock puppet "Lord Hearntown" also alleged you were really Jewish and a Mossad agent on French Misplaced Pages (since blanked). I haven't kept track of PHG's editing history in detail but we found no on-wiki evidence of collaboration between him and Smith, so I have no idea whether he's been inducted into the Warrior Cult of Shambhala, knowingly or unknowingly. This whole episode has been the strangest I have encountered on Misplaced Pages and has left me wondering about the quality of mental health care in France. --Folantin (talk) 16:43, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Dirty Dancing

Let me know if you want me to look at the article. I'm certainly not the greatest FAC reveiwer, but I can usually see where something is unclear. Normally I don't do "modern" stuff much, things past the Reformation bore me usually. Ealdgyth | Talk 04:02, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

ah, and I keep forgetting about this resource, you can dig around at WP:PRV. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:48, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll try to get to it tomorrow. I do most of my reviewing in the morning while my eyes are still fresh and I can face the task of being utterly picky. (grins). Ealdgyth | Talk 04:53, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

There, later than I hoped (stupid Daylight savings time change always annoys me) but got it done. I put a few questions/concerns/suggestions up on the talk page. Hopefully it helps. Ealdgyth | Talk 01:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

RE: Request for review

Thanks for the message Elonka. Arabo-Norman civilization did not exist... and a quick Google search for the term shows the Misplaced Pages article as the only result. It should be speedy redirected to Norman conquest of southern Italy... because that is the time period in which Sicily went from been a Muslim country, to once against a Christian country (under the Normans). I'll redirect it myself due to it been a completely invented term. - Gennarous (talk) 09:04, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Priory of Sion

Hello Elonka! Congratulations on becoming a Misplaced Pages administrator! Would you have the time and interest in collaborating with me to improve the Priory of Sion article enough to meet Featured article criteria? --Loremaster (talk) 10:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I recently did some tweaking of the Charges of heresy section of the History of the Knights Templar article. Did you have any comments? --Loremaster (talk) 10:23, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I saw that you'd been working on it, yes. Though I didn't review the edits in detail, because I know that you know what you're talking about, so I trust you to put in good material.  :) When I get a chance, I'll go in and look in more detail. The Priory of Sion project sounds like a good one too, I'll definitely help as I can, though right now my time is a bit crunched. I've been sick with the flu for a couple weeks, and when I do have time (and health) for Misplaced Pages, my attention has mainly been on an ArbCom case. It's in voting phase now, but even after it's done, there are a a lot of articles (some of them Templar-related) that are going to need complex cleanup. I am also trying to get Dirty Dancing to FA, and will be submitting it for another Peer Review soon, and probably FA again next week. But if you still need help on Priory of Sion after I get those projects off my plate, yes, I'll definitely help out! :) --Elonka 19:22, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm currently satisfied with the current content of the Priory of Sion. The help I need is with standardizing the citing of sources. Anyway, take care of yourself. --Loremaster (talk) 03:24, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Dated sub-cats

Essentially the templates need to be tweaked, and the sub cats created. There's a few bits of admin too, but that's the crux. I'll have a look at it. Rich Farmbrough, 21:29 11 March 2008 (GMT).

Basically done. Rich Farmbrough, 22:41 12 March 2008 (GMT).

Sorkhagtni bekh

Dear Elonka and Friends,

I read the secret history of mongols 3 times. Because I am mongol. Although I am a financer, i love medieval history especially mongolian.

I think the right spell for her name is Sorkhagtni but not Sorgaghtni. I think mongols did not use K instead of Kh or H in early times. K is foreign letter for us. For example, people call some names such as Kublai, Kaidu (or Qaidu)and more. Mongols call them Khubilai and Khaidu in mongolian.

Thank you!

Enerelt —Preceding unsigned comment added by Enerelt (talk • contribs) 01:34, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

longissimam agnoscere veritatis viam

Elonka: your recommendation at Talk:Viam agnoscere veritatis seems sound. Would you mind, however, proposing the redirects cognoscere and agnoscere for speedy deletion by way of {{db-author}}? These are ordinary Latin infinitives with many other uses. Aramgar (talk) 14:31, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. The solution for cognoscere and agnoscere is good. Aramgar (talk) 18:24, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Franco-Mongol alliance

This Arbitration case is closed and the final decision has been published at the link above. PHG (talk · contribs) is prohibited from editing articles relating to medieval or ancient history for a period of one year. He is permitted to make suggestions on talk pages, provided that he interacts with other editors in a civil fashion. PHG is reminded that in contributing to Misplaced Pages (including his talkpage contributions, contributions in other subject-matter areas, and contributions after the one-year editing restriction has expired), it is important that all sourced edits must fairly and accurately reflect the content of the cited work taken as a whole. PHG is also reminded that Misplaced Pages is a collaborative project and it is essential that all editors work towards compromise and a neutral point of view in a good-faith fashion. When one editor finds themselves at odds with most other editors on a topic, it can be disruptive to continue repeating the same argument. After suggestions have been properly considered and debated, and possible options considered, if a consensus is clear, the collegial and cooperative thing to do is to acknowledge the consensus, and move on to other debates.

PHG is encouraged to continue contributing to Misplaced Pages and Wikimedia projects in other ways, including by suggesting topics for articles, making well-sourced suggestions on talkpages, and continuing to contribute free-content images to Wikimedia Commons.

For the Arbitration committee, Thatcher 01:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow, while my mind was on other things, somebody just quietly got on with a very careful and well researched job, and got a result that will help raise the quality of Misplaced Pages's medieval studies articles. Well done, Elonka. --Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The 17:22, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

User:KellyAna

Hi, don't want to bother you, but you're an Admin now — with that and your vast experience (and participation in WP:SOAPS), I'd like your advice on how to deal with KellyAna. I have just hit my limit with her behavior and misguided edits. As you may know, she does not accept criticism or advice, but I am hoping there is an official way to get through to her. Her edit summaries and history and behavior on her own talk page (she ignores or deletes critical comments because they're placed "in the wrong place" on her page) should prove my case alone, but there are also several editors I feel she has terrorized and steamrolled lately and their interaction would also be illuminating. Please advise. — TAnthony 03:41, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Elonka. I have previously warned this user several times for her edit-warring, falsely labelling good-faith edits as vandalism, a technical problem with her user talk page, etc. Because of the idiosyncratic way she 'archives' her user talk, you may want to read the history, from about here on to get a picture. Best wishes, and I hope adminship is suiting you. --John (talk) 04:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

This may also be of interest. --John (talk) 04:47, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Elonka, as always ... I have never felt the need to intervene with an editor like this before, so I appreciate your advice. I of course don't wish to get KellyAna "in trouble" or even blocked, but hope to somehow get her to listen to reason. I do plan to post a detailed comment on her talk page, and amass links to the various recent situations I feel have been a problem (like John's, above). I may even ask you to look it over before I post it, so expect me to get back in touch ;). Thanks again. — TAnthony 05:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar of Diligence

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your work in ensuring historical accuracy across a wide range of articles, I award you this Barnstar of Diligence. Horologium (talk) 17:21, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Nonsensical

A comment that makes no sense is nonsensical and I have a right to remove anything from my page that I don't understand the wording of. It is not "uncivil" it is fact. Have people speak in normal English and I'll not remove their comments. Comments that makes no sense will be removed as "nonsensical." KellyAna (talk) 03:46, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

And how is it I can be called INSANE and that editor doesn't get a warning but I remove a nonsensical comment and I get a civility warning? Double standard much? KellyAna (talk) 03:50, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Apparently your warning to TAnthony went unheeded. I removed it from my talk page because you told us to stop but you can see his personal attack within my history. KellyAna (talk) 16:21, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

The Real G-Unit BarnStar!

		The Fraternity/Sorority Barnstar
		For being apart of WikiProject Freemasonry! InvisibleDiplomat66 05:37, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Erm, thanks, but I'm not comfortable accepting a barnstar just for belonging to a WikiProject. I'd rather know that I actually did something to deserve it. --Elonka 05:39, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Crusades task force

Hi Elonka, I've created a Crusades task force as part of the Middle Ages WikiProject, which I thought you might be interested in. Adam Bishop (talk) 09:46, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Request to amend Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Franco-Mongol alliance

Hi Elonka. I hope you've been keeping well and enjoying your new shiny buttons :)

Just letting you know that I've filed a request to amend the Franco-Mongol alliance case, mainly the restriction on PHG and medieval or ancient history. Your comments at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration#Request to amend prior case: Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Franco-Mongol alliance would be much appreciated. Cheers, Daniel (talk) 10:03, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Your new, er, friend

Ok noted. Do you have a policy here on :en that allows you to ban people whose username translates into asshole and clearly state that they're not coming to help? I guess that'd save you a loooot of time :-)

Cheers, Popo le Dog 20:33, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Rude people

. Basically I told him to get off my page if he was going to be rude "clean your glasses" but you've asked me to play nice with others. How is this possible when people attack you just for questioning an uploaded picture. Seriously, I asked TAnthony and he even agreed the picture was not Lorenzo Lamas. KellyAna (talk) 01:24, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hey Elonka. Thanks for blocking 98.194.118.152, I just found out they blanked my user page earlier. Mad Props!--InvisibleDiplomat₆₆ 16:02, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

RE - Do it. That would be peachy. --InvisibleDiplomat₆₆ 17:25, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

List of supercouples

This article has unfortunately taken up far too much of my time at Misplaced Pages as of late, and I have no time these days to give to it. As it is, I'm limiting myself to one edit a day here since I've got a ridiculous amount of drawing to do in the next week and don't want to overuse my moneymakers typing unless I absolutely have to. Significant progress has been made on this article, but it's come at the price of hurt feelings and more than one editor deciding to leave the article. The current debate centers on an article from "Mount Holyoke News" independent student publication (which is the schools official newspaper I believe) and whether or not it is a reliable source. I've removed it from the List of supercouples article but it is still currently in the Supercouple article.

Anyway, I'd really appreciate it if you could take a look at the current debate and maybe give some feedback on the source and the direction of the article. I've contacted you because I know that Flyer22 and KellyAna (who has all but left the article) both hold you in high regards, and would rather solicit the advice of a friendly and familiar admin that take a crap shoot with the reliable sources noticeboard or filing an RFC. Thanks, Animate

I'm breaking my own rule about posting once a day, but I'm dealing with a little insomnia and am hoping briefly dealing with this will get my mind off work and ready to shut down. Anyway, you should know that this isn't a huge conflict and none of the editing relationships are beyond repair. There are clear "sides" for lack of a better term, but I think (for the most part) everyone has been relatively civil, refactored uncivil comments, and apologized when necessary. The reason I contacted you, is because I think we just need an new set of uninvolved eyes. Right now, there are three or four editors going round and round in circles and it's not productive. I guess this is my own bastardized version of the third opinion option in the dispute resolution process, and what better opinion than that of a fellow editor I know the other editors on the page trust implicitly. AniMate 10:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:USER rationale

Hello. Thank you for stating a rationale at .

As wikipedia is a consensus system, it helps to record the rationale behind each decision and best practice, since people are required to supply such a rationale when asked for one. (else negotiation becomes rather difficult ;-) )

Could you please update WP:USER with your information as well?

Thank you very much! :-)

--Kim Bruning (talk) 19:57, 20 March 2008 (UTC) Meh, why does that sound like a template? Think of it this way: Update the page, and you might avoid having to answer that question again ;-)

re: Advice

The thing is, aside from being an utter ], I am not sure which of his ArbCom sanctions he would be violating. The same edit, offered over and over again wth naught but edit summaries to provide his reasoning is disruptive, sure. And yes, he is the ony one being disruptive in the article. And yes, he has chased away at least one editor. I am not sure how - aside from being a disruptive lout - this is anything more than an AN/I complaint. I welcome your thoughts on how to proceed, though. People are getting fed up in the article, and I don't want more to walk away, afraid to comment. - Arcayne () 03:55, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Supercouples

Hello Elonka, Thank you so much for agreeing to help out on the list of supercouples. Trouble is brewing again down to a conflict of views - as evidenced on AniMate's talk page. You expert guidance skills would be appreciated here! And yes, I need to control my temper....Paul75 (talk) 21:02, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

No, Elonka, trouble's not brewing, I'm too busy pulling my head out of my ass and trying to figure out how to deal with people in the real world to cause trouble on the article. Not that I need to tell you, but please view my talk page. KellyAna (talk) 21:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

If my comment about how KellyAna dealing with people outside of Misplaced Pages crossed a line, I apologize, but I've noticed what seems to be a pattern of immediate incivility with people who she doesn't agree with. You say she's getting better, than I'll believe you. Still I think a reminder of what you said here might be in order. AniMate 00:26, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't "immediately incivil," I said I just couldn't go back to the page after Paul's insistence the lists must go. That's not uncivil, it's fact. You attacked me, my real life existence, my job, my personal interactions. I wasn't even talking to you and you attacked me. That's a fact that can't be swept under a rug by apologizing to a third party. And those conditions were to be upheld only if Elonka and I were to participate in the article. I gave a waiver and said I couldn't adhere because of Paul's comments and I wouldn't be participating. KellyAna (talk) 00:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

(ec)KellyAna you were immediately uncivil with me in our first interaction. You misinterpreted something I said and refused to accept my apology. I see multiple instances on your talk page of confrontations with other users. If I offended you I apologize, but your interactions with people at Misplaced Pages are problematic and I was merely wondering if you are so quick to fight in your "real" life. I'm guessing no. The thing about being anonymous on the 'net is that we say things we might not normally say in everyday life. I do it. You do it. Elonka and Paul both do it. It was a roundabout way of saying we should interact with each other as if we are sitting across from one another at a table. It was done inartfully, but it was not an attack and I again apologize for offending you. Please accept it.

Also, those conditions Elonka set out are conditions every single Wikipedian should follow no matter what is going on. AniMate 00:39, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

That's an apology? KellyAna (talk) 00:44, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Again, I apologize if I offended you. AniMate 00:46, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't accept what my mother called "back handed apologies" and that's what that was. I never attacked your personal life or being and you can't say the same. I left the article because you and Paul made it your mission to ruin it. I wanted out and you not only tried to pull me back you insulted me in the process. Paul did everything he could to bring me to tears. Your back handed whatever isn't enough. KellyAna (talk) 00:50, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

You have misinterpreted what I said. I never meant to insult your personal life. I am sorry for what I said. AniMate 01:02, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Kelly, I can't speak for Paul, but AniMate sounds sincere. If AniMate isn't using words which properly convey that to you though, then the thing to do (per that Transactional analysis thing I told you about), is for you to decide for yourself, "What would I need to hear from AniMate, to help improve our ability to communicate?" Instead of just saying, "You're not meeting my needs" (which is the "C" in the PAC at TA), the more adult way to handle things is to take the responsibility for communication of just what your needs are. Another way of describing it, is with a mother and a baby. If a baby has a wet diaper, the baby just cries, and it's up to the mother to try and deduce what the baby wants, and fix it. But what I'm trying to encourage you to do, is to deal with things in a different way. So instead of just "crying" (not saying that you are, I'm just using that as an analogy), imagine that you were a baby and you could say, "Um, mom, the diaper's wet again. I'd change it but I obviously don't have motor control (or reach past the crib walls here) to do it. Think you could take care of this for me? Thanks so much, I really appreciate it."  :) --Elonka 01:03, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Indeed I am sincere. I never want to hurt anyone's feelings. I do think you misinterpreted what I said, and I really am sorry. That being said, I still think all of the principles Elonka laid out on your talk page are things every single Wikipedian should follow every time they post. Paul certainly did not do that on my talk page, and Elonka correctly warned him. However, I do think incivility and not assuming good faith are real problems with you. We're discussing it here, and it's being discussed on your page by another admin. My mission has never been to ruin anything. All I've wanted is to collaborate with all sides in this and improve the article. AniMate 01:10, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Here's what "pisses" me off. I asked weeks ago to get away from the article. I was happy, content to be away and some how someone tried to suck me back in and this happens. Do you see why I wanted out? I wanted nothing to do with any of it. Why did you do this to me? I wanted out, done, gone, bye, over, not to touch again because I can't deal with people like Paul. I don't appreciate this escalation over an article I stepped away from weeks ago. It's very unfair. KellyAna (talk) 01:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

The reason I asked you back is because I was unhappy that you left the article. I wanted to work with you and thought it possible that two people like us with vastly different opinions could work something out. It's as simple as that. No one should feel they have to flee an article. I was simply reaching out to see if maybe you would want to participate in something I knew you had cared about in the past. AniMate 01:35, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Kelly, this is the internet, no one can force you to do anything you don't want to do.  :) If you think someone is "coercing" you to do something, close the browser. :) Unplug the computer, walk away. You have complete control over what you do or don't do online. If you don't want to work on the article, don't. It's as simple as that. You don't need to justify, or explain, or react... Just go work on something you do want to work on.  :) --Elonka 01:49, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

(ec)Yeah, I cared about it but according to Paul's accusations I claimed to own it. I guarantee you I don't own that article and NEVER claimed to. I've always said that was Flyer's article and I just a contributor. I don't even know that it is you that would be "to blame" but rather Paul. I think maybe, but not necessarily likely, you, Flyer, and I might be able to work things through but Paul is the one I can't work with which is what I was replying to on your page. I just think it's better for me to not be involved because, quite honestly, the removal of the "notable wave" section infuriates me. I know me, I know when it's better to walk away. It was what was best for me and all involved for me to walk away. Look what happened tonight. I've made more enemies than friends tonight and it's all because of that stupid Supercouple list set me off. Just let me walk away. PLEASE. It's what I wanted weeks ago, it's what I still want. And what else I want is for Elonka to help me and this article isn't part of that agenda when the talk about it includes comments like "what planet" and "pull your head out." I just don't need that abuse, I have a teenager, I get enough abuse at home =)KellyAna (talk) 01:51, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, I also apologise to KellyAna for my comments if it is any use. In defending myself in probably an undefenbisble situation is thyat you are increasing difficult to work with KellyAna. From the moment myself and AniMate came across this article, if you have been aggressive and uncivil. All i did was stumble across an article by sheer mistake that I thought needed some help. Correctly or incorrectly, I thought it didn't adhere to Misplaced Pages guidelines and thought it could be improved - AniMate obviously felt the same. I feel incredibly frustrated that every time we attempt to do something, you turn on us and cry foul. This is the reason why I suggested you behave as if you own the article. When I made one of my first edits to the article you left me a message saying something along the lines of "Thank you for experimenting on the List Of Supercouples article - please don't do it again, next time use the sandbox". That is not a very helpful attitude. It is this frustration of being able to get anywhere with you that lead me to lash out yesterday with some unkind language. I am sorry, it shouldn't have been said and yes I have problems control my temper. My apologies go out to you, AniMate, Elonka and everyone else involved. It was a stupid thing to do and did not advance the case any further. But KellyAna, please, no matter what I have said in the past can you try and be a little more flexible with us, and not shout us down everytime we say something? We are NOT trying to ruin this article, despite what you think. We are not the Wicked Witches of the West patrolling Misplaced Pages in an attempt to destroy things. We both just happened to see an article we thought needed help. OUR thoughts. No-one elses. Misplaced Pages is there to be read, used, edited and changed by everyone and we have the right to our own opinion. From day one both myself and AniMate have been confronted with rudeness and uncivility, but we have weathered the storm. If you could please accept that we have differing views and then we can all move on. And yes, I don't like lists - so what? Do you really think that means I will be a one man army that will destroy every list on the site? I really don;t have the time or inclination. By walking away from this list now, you are effectively giving control to the evil twins leaving us free to do whatever we want to the article, and I don't think you want that.  :) Why don't you stick around, I don't care if you hate me, internet snipings don't bother me. Just please please try and accept that we all have different views and are not insidiously evil out to ruin things. Paul75 (talk) 11:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

No, Paul, anything and everything you say only makes things worse, as you've done here AGAIN. The message, Hello, I'm AniMate. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. is just a default message used by Misplaced Pages, it's a template not my words. If you'd been around as long as you claim, you should know that and not have taken it personally. What absolutely gauls me is I haven't even touched the article but to add one reference in a long time and when I repeated WHY I won't touch it, because of you and what you've done, you immediately attacked. You should have celebrated because I was stating I wasn't coming back and you could continue ruining the article to your hearts content. Why when I'm saying "I'll leave you to your destruction and won't interfere" are you still attacking me? I really think you need to look at the past conversations and stop attacking me for NOT PARTICIPATING. Stop dwelling and stop attacking me. And what "walking away now"??? I walked away WEEKS AGO see here where my last comment was February 28 so LEAVE ME ALONE and move on and go back to destroying the Supercouple list but LEAVE ME OUT OF IT. Your apology is not accepted as it is backhanded and lacks knowledge of my lack of involvement and lack of desire to be involved. KellyAna (talk) 15:13, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

What the?

Any thoughts on this one? ?? IRC? Banned? Blocked because I'm pissy tonight but banned and what is IRC? Is this a joke? KellyAna (talk) 01:56, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

DreamGuy at AE

Not sure if you were aware of it, but I submitted a report on DreamGuy at AE. I am also not sure if you want to be involved with it, but perhaps you could tell me how long it takes for investigation/action to be taken on a submitted enforcement complaint. Either way, thanks for pointing me int he right direction with your comment on my User Talk page. - Arcayne () 17:48, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Heh, GMTA, I actually just posted. As for how long it takes to get action, it really depends who's watching the page. It might be worth posting a note at ANI, reminding the admins there to check the enforcement board since no one else seems to be watching it at the moment. If you do post at ANI, let me know and I'll weigh in too. --Elonka 17:55, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Considering your long history of wikistalking me, Elonka, you know you shouldn't be getting involved here. But then you never seem to care. DreamGuy (talk) 21:47, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for trying

		The Barnstar of Peace
		For grace under fire and for effortless diplomacy in tense situations. AniMate 23:00, 22 March 2008 (UTC)