Misplaced Pages

Err you have a template that says "will be deleted", Ah jolly good, but after that... ahhhh nothing actually gets deleted? So that's not a deletion method then? *kerblink*

Hmm, div syle="hidden" would do a sort of "deletion" though, I thought you were going to implement that? :-) Kim Bruning 15:08, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Tony Sidaway

Maybe it's time for an RfA. Zoe 23:13, August 27, 2005 (UTC)

• I'd like to see the desired outcome spelled out. The RfC I initiated might have gone differently I'd stated a goal.
  brenneman 03:42, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
  • With that in mind, please feel free to contribute to User:Aaron Brenneman/Scratch/Requests for comment/Tony Sidaway. No need to jump the gun. If nothing else, it will force some in rigour into the mess: what exactly is the problem?
    brenneman 07:52, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

VfD and breaking of policy

I may not have a good method for dealing with Tony, as, ultimately, he simply won't listen to anything anyone says, including Theresa. It doesn't help that some people, like Kim Bruning, are cheering him on or attributing it to high spirits in the pursuit of a noble goal. My solution was simply to delete all his undeletes every time until they had gone through process. This was stupid and a waste of everyone's time, but it was, in fact, the answer to his philosophy. Since he maintains that VfU is for non-admins and that admins can just do things as they feel fit, then, well, I felt fit to insist on policy. I hated being involved in anything that moronic, but there was no other way, since Tony refused to amend his ways in any fashion. Frankly, though, that is the way. If he feels that it's within the rights of any user (as he says) to "close" VfD's, then it's within the rights of any user to re-list, de-list, etc. I.e. he licenses revert wars with policy pages. By his rules, that's the way forward.

Until he loses his ability to undelete and delete, and that would take ArbCom doing something it has so far been far too nervous about doing, there's no way forward except cataloging every abuse, storing them in a wharehouse, and making yet another RfC. I would be happy to endorse any new RfC. Until I hear from Tony that he has some interest in listening to the voices of consensus (instead of inaudible voices that tell him that anything but a scream of protest is "no consensus, and Tony should decide for us"), I remain convinced that this particular user ought to be nowhere near VfD.

If anyone is in the process of formulating a new RfC, I think it's important to be as precise as possible. The last RfC's failure has been used by Tony as a sign that everyone agrees with what he's doing (which requires some seriously willful misreading of the votes). I'd be happy to lend advice there, too. Geogre 23:27, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

One of the reasons that I ended up going 12 rounds over this, and the reason I remain upset, is that I felt like there had been an exam-date conversion when Tony was up for RFA initially and because of how baldly he stated his position that the voices of others simply didn't matter, that it was up to him, and him alone, to decide. That was such an obvious breach of all procedures, not just VfU or VfD, that I thought it warranted loss of administrator priviledges. Not blocking, banning, etc., but rather those particular and peculiar powers that come with administrator status. The reason that adminship is a big deal is that de-adminning is a huge deal, and I do not support the Divine Right of Admins.

Yes, I delete speedies. I delete some that others might not. If there is protest, or even a question about it, I will personally take the article to VfU (if I'm unconvinced) or undelete it and take it to VfD (if I am). Most people are timid in the unilateral powers because they believe in Misplaced Pages being democratic. It is curious that the "deletionists" like me have, in the Tony Sidaway case, been the more interested in the voices of the "rabble" than the "inclusionists" like Tony, who deny that votes are needed or binding on their decision to put back junk.

I'm delighted if Tony is laying off the personal attacks. I always thought that his expansions were a good thing (provided that the topic itself was not trivial or otherwise in violation of the deletion guidelines (an expanded article on a high school senior who has done nothing but create a vanity website is still bad)), and he's a great editor. That's why I think that ArbCom needs to realize that not all editors need to be administrators, and not all violations of rules mean blocking. To me, blocking or prohibiting editing of X or Y topic is considerably worse than saying, "You're a great editor, but your philosophy is such that you misuse administrative powers." The fact that ArbCom is shy of doing that reveals, I'm afraid, that administrator status is being used, inevitably and irrevocably, as a sign of prestige. Also, of course, I'm afraid of the civility being the aberration rather than the incivility and a resumption of renegade calls and unilateral actions as soon as the spotlight is off.

Still, I hope that things really are better, and I suppose I'm willing to be trusting, but I can't help but be also wary.

Finally, I thought that the failure to act forcefully in Tony's case is tied, in my mind at least, to the failure to act in the case of Ed Poor. A person may perform valuable work as a developer, or editor, but that doesn't mean that he is going to be similarly valuable, or even sane, when it comes to issues of treating policy proposals, (un)deleting pages, or speaking to newbies, and we ought to be able to pare the nails and curb the misbehavior of people who act out, no matter how well they perform some other task, and no appeal to "I've been here since Misplaced Pages was two Dixie cups and a dictionary" or "But look how I made this one-line B Movie stub into a long article about a B Movie" should excuse trashing procedure or other editors or project pages. Geogre 03:21, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

I agree with the above. For a short-term response, see my comemnts at Misplaced Pages talk:Votes for deletion#Failure to close VfDs properly. DES 04:02, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

In the above, Geogre repeatedly reasserts his erroneous belief that all undeletions must go through VFU (which is fine, except he's wrong), and repeatedly makes unspecified accusations of egregious incivility. --Tony Sidaway 03:16, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

The diffs of your "egregious incivility" (gosh, that's a formulation I'd never use) are both in your RfC, in the VFD talk, on your talk page, on Theresa's talk page, inter al. It's now, in fact, so well demonstrated as to be a commonplace. Secondly, you haven't once found a policy that you can cite to show that undeletion out of process is just up to Tony. Further, when a procedure is underway at VfU, you have repeatedly said that you will not listen to its deliberative conclusions. Further, you have said, on my talk page, that you actually don't care about policy and procedure, that, if it gets in your way, it gets trashed. If no one has proven to you that you're behaving offensively, that's not a surprise, but it's not the same thing as not having established it to pretty much everyone else. Finally, let's stop with the pretence of "bad speedies." An administrator can undelete an improperly tagged speedy delete. "Improperly tagged" has to do solely with the criteria for speedy deletion. If the article fits the criteria of speedy deletion, then it is legitimately speedy deleted, and no one gets to undelete it. Improper speedy tagging has absolutely nothing to do with your preference or you desire, or even the fact that a topic could conceivably be improved. It has to do with the article at the time of the tagging and deletion. That is all. Do not, yet again, confuse "Tony doesn't think so" with "improper speedy." Impropriety in speedy deletes is about the criteria, not about your fantasies or desires. Geogre 11:13, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Deletion

Thanks for your comments on my talk page, I love the stuff on mergism - I think that I am probably more of a mergist than I am an inclusionist - much of what I vote to keep, I wouldn't at all mind being mercilessly edited and merged up into higher category articles, I just don't feel that deletion is appropriate. It seems to me that most of the vfds could be resolved by users merging boldly, without ever coming to vfd. I feel like vfd tends to split people into camps, rather than help to build concensus. See you around, Trollderella 00:52, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Category:Women composers

Not sure how I missed this, I must have been out of town or something. I wrote a similar message to RHaworth to answer his question posted on the recently closed cfd, and since he showed and interest when you attempted to get it deleted after its third recreation. Here is the original Cfd discussion here. If/when it comes back to Cfd, which I personally feel it should, just figured I would let you know that I am closing the current Cfd as no consensus (no change)/keep. It sort of bothers me that no one does anything about the users who recreate items after there was a lengthy discussion and consensus to remove or change something, but they complain to us for making the change that was requested. Salut. ∞Who?¿? 00:50, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

When I saw this on my watchlist, I nearly reverted you! (yes, I saw a diff once that implied he's a guy.)-Splash 00:57, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Hehe, I was just on his userpage and saw his picture, otherwise I'm normally really careful about using pronouns :) ∞Who?¿? 01:31, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

• Well, I haven't done anything close to a RFC yet, I just figured I would notify the parties involved/interested in the discussion, since questions were raised and unanswered. ∞Who?¿? 15:19, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

I wish I did

I wish I had a suggestion. Taking it to Theresa was a failure. She didn't take it seriously and he was just as disrespectful and against any consensus decision or discussion in progress there on her page.

No one has the authority to extend a VfD discussion. You can always close it when the time expires. - Tεxτurε 14:22, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Do you think that my extension of VFDs with no votes apart from the nomination is OK? Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:08, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Y'know, thinking about it that's a reasonable course of action. With four delete votes (and no keep) many will pass it by thinking it's getting deleted and doesn't need their vote. But a nomination with no votes doesn't have any votes and can't really be called anything. I'd agree with that approach. - Tεxτurε 16:29, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Template:vfd

was only unprotected for rewording — Please note that it didn't actually get re-worded. User:Duncharris has been altering both links to point to the same place. Uncle G 14:40:05, 2005-08-29 (UTC)

Yes, if one's going to say "Articles" it should point to Articles, but right now they both just point to "Votes". Ëvilphoenix 08:32, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

Right, I'm saying they both shouldn't have been pointing to Votes. Thanks for fixing it. Cheers. Ëvilphoenix 08:40, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

A somewhat important question

I've noticed that you have removed the "proposed policy" tag on Misplaced Pages:Naming conflict. I've been waiting for that for about 2 and a half months, and as far as I am concerned, it hasn't received serious neutrality objections. Does this mean that it is adopted as official and can be applied? I'm amazed that the policy applies everywhere except on the Macedonian Slavs article, even if it directly violates the NPOV policy. I have examined the NPOV and the Naming conflict aspect intensively here and find no reasons for the use of the Macedonian Slavs term (which they, um.. we find quite offensive). This is a matter of great concern to me (as an admin of the Macedonian Misplaced Pages) so I would very much appreciate your answer. --FlavrSavr 14:55, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I would suggest it to be moved. I hate ethnically driven polls, that is why I am abstaining on the Disclaimer thing. I'm having troubles with the question why Misplaced Pages chooses to use a disambiguating name such as "Macedonian Slavs" instead of "Macedonians" (nation), "Macedonians (people)" or something simillar, especially when all international organisations, every encyclopedia (except MSN Encarta), and most media outlets refer to them as "Macedonians". (let alone they identify themselves as such). I mean, to some people, the mere fact that I actually declare myself as a Macedonian (not that I care if I have much in common with Alexander the Great, though) and try to elaborate it from a NPOV is a nationalist act. Of course, mine's a POV, but according to Misplaced Pages:Naming conflict: Misplaced Pages should not attempt to say which side is right or wrong. However, the fact that the Cabindans call themselves Cabindans is objectively true – both sides can agree that this does in fact happen – whereas the claim that the Cabindans have no moral right to that name is purely subjective and is not a question that Misplaced Pages can, or should, decide.. Anyways, thank you, again. --FlavrSavr 15:50, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Cool beans

Okay, that's a terrible article but from here it's an American expression equivalent to great, okay, sweet, cushty, pukka. I believed you to be American and was attempting to use an appropriate phrase. Steve block talk 10:01, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

I had no idea you could speak Dutch fluently. I apologise. Steve block talk 10:11, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

The misunderstanding that you are a native english speaker may come from your user page which declares you as such. :) Since I can not speak dutch, I had no idea what the Netherlands template proclaimed. :) Steve block talk 10:54, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Radiant, you may want to try using Template:User en-4 instead of Template:User en if you aren't a native speaker, though you had me fooled! android79 12:31, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Category titles

It would be courteous if you could refrain from editing the project page whilst we are discussing the changes on the talk page. Thank you. Steve block talk 11:43, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

• I objected to your first edit, and then you carried on editing the page rather than engage me in discussion. This seemed discourteous to my opinion. Still, have it your way. Steve block talk 11:58, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Whilst I appreciate that you removed your comments, I want to point out I saw them before they were removed and have to say I found them discourteous and objectionable. I am fully aware of what a wiki is. I also believe in courtesy and good manners. Yes I believe Rick is the best person to understand what he meant by his own proposal. I do not believe you and I are best placed to summarise it, and since we both disagree on what Rick meant and on what the consensus was for, I believe it was best to leave well enough alone. Further, I believe you should be more respectful of opinions which differ from your own. Steve block talk 12:26, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Apology

I appreciate your apology and can assure you that, on my part, this will be the end of the matter. Steve block talk 08:23, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Votes to Articles

My bot has been changed, and I have moved some of the pages in the right place. --AllyUnion (talk) 16:55, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

speedy copyvio

Thanks Radiant, I'll follow your advice, feel free to edit the proposal yourself! Martin - The non-blue non-moose 18:23, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia_category_redirects

I will look into it this weekend. It is quite possible that I can make a web form. --AllyUnion (talk) 19:07, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

FilePile VfD (the second time around)

Hey -- with the backlogs on VfD closure, I figured I'd poke my head in to see if it might be time to put the second FilePile VfD to bed? I just remember the morass the first one turned into, and there's a molecule or two of me that's always nervous what'll happen when a ban or two lets up... Jason t c 01:10, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

• Userfy. Personal in-joke. Radiant_>|< 17:36, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

"Personal in-joke" is redundant. McVonn 02:10, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

My edits to WP:RFC

Hi, Radiant! I put a heading at "User conduct" so people looking for the user RfCs could get to them more easily, without having to scroll all the way down the page and sift through the listings for content RfCs. In addition, I'm not sure we should give the impression that the user disputes should be lumped together with the content RfCs. Many of the user RfCs are primarily about behavior, not content. I hope my edits didn't go against any vast plan for the RfC page. sɪzlæk 09:33, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

Renaming OK?

I appreciated the comments of both you and Maurreen regarding how to list categories for renaming, but they didn't answer my question. I was asking whether a spelling correction qualifies for a speedy rename.

The rename I brought up was from Villareal CF players to Villarreal CF players (two R's instead of one). This isn't a British/American English issue; it's a matter of the correct spelling of the name in its native language (Spanish or possibly Valencian). The associated football (soccer) club is named after its town, which is Villarreal.

Do I need to post the category, or can I go ahead and rename it myself? — Dale Arnett 14:54, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Miscellaneous deletion

Hi, thanks for your note. Sorry, but I looked and I don't understand what problem you refer to. I had no problem bringing up the page, either with the long name or shortcut, and I compared the before and after versions. Could you be more specific? Maurreen (talk) 15:05, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

I didn't yet check for double redirects. I wanted to wait about 24 hours to see if anyone objected, to avoid doing the same work twice.

Also,I don't entirely understand what is meant by "double redirect." Does that essentially mean a redirect loop? Maurreen (talk) 16:51, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Can I answer this seeing as I'm here? It means A → B → C. When you click on A, you'll get dumped at B which won't redirect you to C, it'll just show the little redirect arrow-thing-with-target. -Splash 16:56, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. Maurreen (talk) 17:05, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Sock puppets

Hey, I saw that in WP:AN, you mentioned sock puppets and a redirect similar to WP:KAAWRGFDB2. I created that redirect. Does that mean you are calling me a sock puppet? --WikiFan04

what up homey

I saw you at templates for deletion, too, so this is a good question for you. y'know my template user:dzl I been fighting so hard for? perhaps you havn't been back to dz ish lately. are the categories that go along (or perhaps category:user dzl) also gonn be on someone's hot list to delete ya think?? no one has singled them out yet, but dzl got deleted with no review, cuz it was new and seemed like nonsense. I'm realizing now that a template's not as important as I thought. the category seems like something I could get away w/ using, and gives me the cool features I want. whatcha think? Ish Micka Vonn alla'h Vonn Schzz Nzzl Vonn aAmerikazakhstan 10:05, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Block

Hello, Radiant! User:Astrolox has been trying to contact you regarding his block; would you mind responding to him at his talk page? Also, he posting a message at WP:AN that might be relevant. Thanks! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 13:13, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Who do you think you are?!?!

If you don't like the spaghetti monster movement, it is fine by me, but blocking my account User:Larzan just because you do not think the way i do, thats just pathetic!

That is outrageous, how could you dare to do such a thing?!!?

In your defense, i assume that you were just to lazy or ignorant to really check my "contributions" and just saw in my history page that i submitted 3 times to the SM vote page. Submitted, not posted. In fact, as i am new to these things, i accidentely had the same text twice, because someone posted simultaneously with me and the page said something about, .. i don't know what, fact is, with the 3rd transmission i removed the dublicate entry, and thats that.

So, unblock my account and try to be a bit more thorough the next time, before you play master of the universe and block people!

Well, excuse my rough tone, but maybe you can IMAGINE how pissed of i am, trying for two and a half hours now to find a way to get my account unblocked, just because of you being overanxious.

User:SubstBot

I submitted a feature request for minor edits on talk pages not creating new message warnings, but my main obstacle is the fact that I don't really know much about how to set up a bot. I could use some mentoring. --Ryan Delaney 22:50, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

False 3RR block on Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters

Hi Radiant!, Basically, could you look at User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters? An admin with a bit of a grudge against me has blocked me on a non-existent 3RR (because I reported a 3RR on an anon editor). Thanks, Lulu...

Thanks.

Radiant, thank you very much for your compliment. I'm a bit overwhelmed by all the support I recieved, and I'm very grateful for your kindness. — Dan | Talk 06:28, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt, Lies, and Disinformation

You've finally managed to annoy me. I'll not pretend there is any common ground between us -- if there is, you go right ahead and demonstrate it. It's bad enough that nearly every comment of yours airs your private agenda -- that is your right, as much as I hate to say it, although it should bar you from coasting into adminship. But now I have seen you lie, outright, on several occasions. You seek to lead a faction of ignorant, lazy editors who do not bother to check your assertions and instead follow blindly. I find this intolerable.

No doubt at this point, you find me intolerable. I'm enough of a man to see that. So I'm not even going to suggest again that you stay out of my way. A showdown between Good and Evil is inevitable, and I'm calling it.

Pick your forum. — Xiong熊talk* 19:13, 2005 September 4 (UTC)

Request for Mediation

I have no idea what brought this on. Thank you for trying the reasonable approach of mediation. Robert McClenon 23:03, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

It seems that Xiong now wants to use my talk page as a forum. I am going to have to repost the Request for Mediation. Robert McClenon 20:52, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Ed Poor will mediate if both of you will agree. Please sign the request for mediation. Robert McClenon 21:46, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

WP:RFM

As I'm still have severe problems understanding what you're up to, I've filed a formal request for mediation. Let's at least try and get onto somewhere near the same wavelength. --Tony Sidaway 02:14, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

I welcome this step, and I'd be happy to assist in any way. - brenneman 02:37, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Malayalam

Tracing my way back from Tintin's user page, I found that you aren't seeing the Malayalam correctly. (the welcome template). This problem is usually present if you're using an older OS such as Win ME. You'd need to get the font to see the text correctly. This page should help you out. Regards, User:Nichalp/sg 09:11, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

Category:Misplaced Pages category redirects

Just to be completely clear, you want me to check every category in Category:Misplaced Pages category redirects that uses {{Categoryredirect}} and move the articles in the incorrect category to the correct one? --AllyUnion (talk) 05:45, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Please excuse my intrusion - I'm pretty sure user:Beland is at least thinking about this as well. -- Rick Block (talk) 14:35, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

I do it periodically too. Although I am temporarily away. ∞Who?¿? 20:09, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm done. --AllyUnion (talk) 04:02, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

CSD G4

Hi Radiant. Given your interest in the CSDs, I thought I'd let you know that G4 has had the clarification treatment at Misplaced Pages talk:Criteria for speedy deletion, and that your thoughts would be welcome (plus we need an admin to implement it through the protection). It's not a change of meaning or scope, just a clarification. -Splash 14:22, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

You and Tony Sidaway

Hello Radiant. As you can see from the heading, what I'm here about involves the rivalry between you two. You and he are two of the best editors in all of Misplaced Pages, and I can't think of many things worse than an ongoing fight between you and Tony. May I suggest you two try to stay away from eachother? Also before you notice all the bad things about eachother, think of this: you've complained about Tony closing some VfD's wrong... well Tony closes many more VfD's than the average admin, and we all mess up once in a while, don't we? In fact, I recall you closing a VfD you voted on... and you were the only keep vote vs two delete votes! I, too, have botched a VfD I'm sure in the past, when I close so many... I have already talked to Tony in IRC, so that's why you won't see a message at his talk page, but please, for the community, try to get along? Oh, and if you haven't seen if, you two are listed at WP:RFM. I wish I could mediate for you, as I know both of you, and I am neutral. However, I'm still listed as a candidate for MedCom, albeit with unanimous support, yet still not an official mediator. I wish you well Radiant! and hope we can put this all behind us ASAP. Redwolf24 (talk) 05:26, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

FilePile

You processed the VfD for FilePile last week. it has now been re-created with fresh content. I'm not sure I understand the rules on speedy deletes well enough to make a decision, so I'm bringing it to your attention. -Willmcw 20:57, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

Flying Spaghetti Things or whatever they're called...

Hello, Radiant! I just wanted to point out to you Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#HELP, User: Larzan, where another one of the users you blocked for Flying Spaghetti Monster (or something like that) sockpuppets wishes to be unblocked. If you could just take a look, that would be great. Thanks! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 22:13, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Actually, since I see you're busy, I've taken the liberty and unblocked him. If you disagree, feel free to block again. Thanks! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 22:18, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi Radiant. Thanks for your support on my RfA. I was stunned to receive such a lot of it! Having learnt no small amount from you since I started editing, I hope I can carry on learning how-to-be-an-admin from you in future. I hope that your RL stuff is good rather than bad — but you really must come back here full time soon! Thanks again. -Splash 14:16, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Wikimedia Netherlands

On 9/11 (ominous date!) there's going to be a wikimeet for to create an nl.wikimedia. OMG, that's sunday! Could you spread the word a bit? Thanks! :-)

See also: http://nl.wikimedia.org/Wikimedia:Ontmoeten#eerste_nl.wikimedia.org_ontmoeting

(and sorry for spamming this to a few folks) Kim Bruning 20:46, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject Archival

Sorry for the long wait, but your requested feature has been implemented. --AllyUnion (talk) 22:56, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Deletion reform/Proposals/Speedy delete for pages with no citations

One of our newer editors has recently jumped in at the discussion for Misplaced Pages:Deletion reform, and he's suggested adding a CSD for articles that do not have citations based on Misplaced Pages:Verifiability. I don't think this is a necessarily good idea, based on ideas of organic growth for the project and everything, but you might want to offer your words of wisdom in our discussion. Since you were heading up the relatively recent CSD expansion, I'd certainly welcome your advice for us there when you have time to get to it. --Idont Havaname 00:04, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

My RFA

Hi, thanks for voting for me in my RFA. I was really touched at how many people voted for me! --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 22:43, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Your input is requested

at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Roflcopter (again). — Phil Welch 22:59, 10 September 2005 (UTC)