Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Guilpert (talk | contribs) at 12:46, 26 June 2007 (Tecmobowl). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives

*/Archive 1: July, 2005 – June, 2006 */Archive 2: June 2-3, 2006 */Archive 3: June 3-20, 2006 */Archive 4: June 30 – July 18, 2006 */Archive 5: July 19 - September 8, 2006 */Archive 6: September 9 - October 5, 2006 */Archive 7: October 7 - November 26, 2006 */Archive 8: November 27, 2006 - February 12, 2007 */Archive 9: February 13, 2007 - March 3, 2007 */Archive 10: March 3, 2007 - March 11, 2007 */Archive 11: March 11, 2007 - April 1, 2007 */Archive 12: April 1, 2007 - April 9, 2007 */Archive 13: April 9, 2007 - April 28, 2007 */Archive 14: April 29, 2007 - May 14, 2007 */Archive 15: May 15, 2007 - May 23, 2007 */Archive 16: May 23, 2007 - June 15, 2007

Feel free to leave comments at the bottom of the page.

• Please sign your comments with ~~~~.
• If you are here to complain about something I deleted please tell me the name of the specific article.

It should go without saying that trolling, vandalism, and personal attacks will be promptly removed. Thanks. IrishGuy

Reviews of Super PLAY

Why did you delete the article, I thought this would be a good place to collect all of the grades from that magazine, and it makes it easy for all readers to add reviews for issues that i don't own.

Isn't that what wikipedia is for?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MasahiroHayamoto (talk • contribs)

No actually it isn't. Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia, not a series of lists. IrishGuy 21:12, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

But would it really be the end of the world if all the readers of this magazine could a have a free place to store all the grades?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MasahiroHayamoto (talk • contribs)

Feel free to create a website on GeoCities and have your list there but it doesn't belong on Misplaced Pages. IrishGuy 21:15, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

You don't own Misplaced Pages, it belongs to all of us, and no-one would suffer from this page being on Misplaced Pages — Preceding unsigned comment added by MasahiroHayamoto (talk • contribs)

Misplaced Pages is not an indiscriminate collection of information. IrishGuy 21:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Would it be okay if I merged it into the article about Super PLAY, and added a good explanation to how it works? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MasahiroHayamoto (talk • contribs)

As I noted above, Misplaced Pages is not a place for random lists of information. There is nothing encyclopedic about that list. IrishGuy 21:38, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

But really, wouldn't this be the perfect place for every reader of the magazine to edit the grades, without having to register, and doing it completely free? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MasahiroHayamoto (talk • contribs)

No. That isn't what Misplaced Pages is for. IrishGuy 21:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

FIFA_100#List is just a list of all the players, but also very interesting reading for people interested in football.

Our article works in the same way, just a list, but very interesting reading for people interested in games. MasahiroHayamoto 23:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Manchester United

I've now patched things up with PeeJay2K3. It was just a misunderstanding really. Anyhow, thanks again for your help. Millbanks 22:12, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem. IrishGuy 22:12, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

External link deleted

Regarding links I placed on the following articles: Richard Z. Kruspe and Emigrate

I got a notice saying that an external link I posted had been removed and to discuss it on the talk page. I feel the link is 100% relevent to this page so may I please re-insert it?

Please feel free to review the page I would like to list :)

I also posted this on the Richard Kruspe wiki page and the Emigrate page but have not gotten a response yet.

http://emigrateunofficial.com/

Emigrateunofficial 22:24, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Adding links to your own website to various articles is a violation of WP:COI and WP:SPAM. Please allow other editors to look over your proposal on the talk page. IrishGuy 22:26, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the input

Not advertising myself. The history of performances that I am writing about is important to alot of people in Seattle and elsewhere. Constructive input would be appreciated. If I am the source of the information that is accurate, how do I write it without quoting myself if is in fact factual?

Mike Morrison Wrex Nightclub Owner — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcmorr (talk • contribs)

Like your vanity article, all of your edits are promoting yourself. What you are adding is original research which isn't encyclopedic. IrishGuy 23:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Taking a minute

Howdy,

I thought I'd take a minute to drop by and say hello. I figure its only appropriate that we introduce ourselves, if we're going to be involved in any of the same article discussions. I'm john.

Hopefully it's clear that I do not have nearly the same level of energy on the baseball situation as Miss Mondegreen does. I've never been very interested in sports, though Shoeless Joe seems to have a special place in my heart, probably due to the movie, and an emotional connection that I have to it.

In the case of the EL in question, I really do believe that it is a good candiate for an External Link. EL's are there to link to information that would not otherwise be includable in an article. Is it trivia? Perhaps. Then again, so are lifetime batting averages and rbi's. And I think an article about a famous baseball player, that doesn't include a batting average, is lacking a significant piece of information.

I think the real questions are: Is it too much trivia? Is it really a spam site? And the answers to those are no. There is an entire group of people out there who live and breathe baseball cards. I, for one, have never collected them, and have no desire to collect them. However, to me, as a very casual reader, it was very interesting to see the list of the cards, as well as some of the old photos. As a casual, uninvolved, mostly disinterested reader, I see value in that link.

My question to you, is a private one for you to ask yourself. I don't need an answer, but I'd like you to consider the question. Why are you so adamant about removing this link? Objectively, it really isn't an obvious candidate for removal. It's not clearly spam. It doesn't clutter the article. It isn't unrelated. At worst its marginal and subjective. At best it provides a unique collection of information. WP:IAR could be used to override any 'marginal or subjective questions', if one chose to envoke it. So, for you, privately, what is the source of your resistance to this link? To me, your resistance seems personal, not professional. But that is just the energy I'm picking up from it, and I may be wrong. Consider this: If the information were available elsewhere, would you object to the alternate source being linked to? If not, then your objection is probably personal and not professional.

I would rather the link stay, but I have no desire to fight for it or revert it. I've said why I support it, and thats the last I'll say about it, unless asked again.

As for my brief remark on AN/I, I strongly believe that admins should not use their tools in situations where they are already involved as editors, or in situations where they have any significant personal history with an editor being considered for block/unblock. When admins use their tools in areas of personal interest or involvement, I believe it does a disservice to the wikipedia community. Even when it's a clear cut and obvious block/unblock decision, it can leave a flavor of impropriety which clouds the issue and can be used to shift the focus away from the actual violation and onto the admin. We don't have a shortage of admins. The obvious calls will be obvious to a neutral admin. And it's even more important that a neutral admin make the less obvious calls. End Soap Rant.

Anyway, thats my two cents.

Peace in God. Lsi john 14:09, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

It isn't personal. If it was, I would be involved in the debates about all the other links he is removing. I'm not. I don't know why my name has been included in the Wikiproject baseball discussions about mass link removals. I haven't reverted Tecmobowl's link removals and don't really have much of an opinion one way or the other. I agree that many articles have too many links and I agree that there is no point in redundant links with the same information. I haven't looked over what he is removing to know if they are or aren't redundant, but he claims that it his motivation and it is one I agree with. As for Blacksoxfan.com, as I said, the bio is unreferenced, the stats can/are found on numerous others sites which makes that aspect redundant. The list of baseball cards he has appears on, to me, is the very definition of trivia. Most fansites fall into that category. They are filled with unreferenced trivia which is why I usually remove fansites. IrishGuy 18:16, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Without qualifying the blacksoxfan.com link, it would seem to me that an EL would be the perfect place for a link to trivia. In a lot of cases, I'd probably be on-board with deleting it, but in this case the link appears to be a decent page, and adds value IMO. Peace. As for 'sourcing', well that site appears to have been done by someone 'who knows', making them a semi-expert in the field. I see no reason to doubt the list of cards, nor the stats. Lsi john 18:36, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

While he may "know" the subject, WP:EL is clear in the section of links to be avoided: Any site that misleads the reader by use of factually inaccurate material or unverifiable research. See Reliable sources for explanations of the terms "factually inaccurate material" or "unverifiable research". That site is filled with unverifiable research and as such it is original research and fails as a reliable source. IrishGuy 19:33, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

• You didn't mention that in the discussion--that's an entirely different point and a serious one. There's a difference between unreferenced but verifiable, and and unverifiable, or inaccurate. I've replied to this concern at the Shoeless Joe talk page to try and make sure that all of the pertinent discussion points are covered there. I didn't raise this EL guideline points as an issue there as I didn't see facutal innaccuracies or unverifiable material, and no one else raised it, so I had no clue that anyone thought this was a problem. I'd appreciate if you could reply to my questions to you there and elaborate on your concern, since I don't quite see what you're referring to. I'd also appreciate that if you do have other concerns, other EL guideline points you think apple or other discussion points that haven't been raised, please do mention them there. Not everyone notices the same things and it's hard to have a good discussion about how to weight different concerns if we don't even know all of the things that people are concerned about. Thanks, Miss Mondegreen talk  00:59, June 17 2007 (UTC)
• IrishGuy, I anticipate that this will be my last comment on the matter. I don't believe you are reading that sentence correctly.

" Any site that misleads the reader by use of factually inaccurate material or unverifiable research."

It does not say that unverifiable research is misleading. It also does not say that sources must be cited. I would submit that each of those baseball card numbers can be verified. And, as I understand WP:RS, experts are allowed to self-publish. (If not, then please come edit some of the LGAT and Scientology articles, where Rick Ross', and other anti-cult experts, self-published works are regularly cited).

It is my opinion that the website in question does not mislead the reader. If you have evidence that it does, then I'm willing to change my opinion on the site.

Lots of (reliable) secondary sources that don't provide their sources are cited on wikipedia. It is my opinion that this site is also reliable.

Peace in God. Lsi john 01:23, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

outline a reason for appealing my block

Hi, thanks for at least looking at my case. How can I outline things more? Do you honestly think I am Vince B? What more can I do, look at my contribution list, I have contributed to serious articles (albeit made a few mistakes as well) But nothing of serious gravity — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.97.93.15 (talk • contribs)

last message was from lazio_gio

I would have written it logged in but I am prevented from editing even discussion pages so I had no other choice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.97.93.15 (talk • contribs)

Softblock?

Hi Irishguy. How come User:LOL at people dying from AIDS was soft blocked?. Though it's a username violation, autoblock shouldn't have been disabled because of the nature of the name. Could you change it to autoblock enabled, and use {{UsernameHardBlocked}} in the block log instead? --(Review Me) R Contribs_@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 20:57, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Done. IrishGuy 20:59, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. --(Review Me) R Contribs_@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 21:01, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

G-Kay1500

i removed your reference in the "keytar" page. As an experienced Wiki, you really do know better than to make unsubstaniated claims. This product at the moment, is nothing more than a myth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.247.205.37 (talk • contribs)

I added no such reference. Please read the edit history correctly before making accusations. IrishGuy 16:38, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

My mistake, i did read the edit history wrong.

Werewolf fiction

Regarding the dispute with DreamGuy and external links, for the moment, my reply is in this diff but I hope to add more soon. Please be patient and thank you. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 16:23, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

User:Jordan brice sock

User:Venkat47 edits are similar to brice's contribs. User's only edits have been removing or replacing Height/Weight stats from wrestlers' articles. That fact that most of this user's edits come before or after Jordan brice's makes it more obvious. -- bulletproof 20:17, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Got him. Thanks. IrishGuy 20:23, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh come on - enjoy it it is funny as hell...leave it up. The guys back in Iraq were getting a kick out of it :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by IDNeon (talk • contribs)

No. Stop screwing around. This is an encyclopedia. IrishGuy 20:39, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Um, I did not threaten an edit war. The "Lion War" is a literary reference. Please do not make false claims about my Wiki editing. K, thnx. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kd27 (talk • contribs)

You had already added that info with your IP, then you registered an account and continued. You made it clear that you don't agree with the guidelines and will continue to add it. That is edit warring. Please don't. IrishGuy 20:54, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me. Look at the list of people you have written articles for. Some guy that stars in a direct to video film is hardly notable. Gerard Coletta is a highly regarded poet amongst people who know poetry. This is utterly ridiculous, and exactly the problem with a user edited encyclopedia. You have no interest in anything but your own version of the truth. This is not a democracy, but a who-can-exert-the-most-control-acy. Grow up. Read one of his poems before you delete this again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kd27 (talk • contribs)

You have been warned repeatedly. Stop adding non-notable people to articles. IrishGuy 21:01, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

User:GuyIrish

Hi there; why do you tell me, then beat me (narrowly} to the indefblock? Did you hardblock?--Anthony.bradbury 22:03, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I did when he returned as Irishhgguuy. I thought I would notify you because I'm pretty sure he is using a dynamic IP based on how quickly he returns. The autoblock never seems to slow him down. IrishGuy 22:05, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Witton Albion

Sure, only kidding really.

There is saomething strange about this article page. It now crashes my browser again when I try to access the history. I know that we talked before on this problem.--Anthony.bradbury 22:08, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. It still does it to me too. I checked earlier and it crashed my browser. I still haven't found any other articles that happens with. Odd. IrishGuy 22:09, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I would help. But attempting to look at that IP's edits crashes me. Again. As an extreme measure, how about printing a hard copy of the article, deleting it and re-typing? Or is that too time-consumimg? --Anthony.bradbury 22:14, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Can't do that. I would violate the GFDL because we would be tampering with the edit history. IrishGuy 22:15, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Granted. I knew that, hence my comment about extreme measures. And inserting code which crashes browsers when we try to edit must be against some part of WP:POLICY, surely? Time for WP:AN/I?--Anthony.bradbury 22:38, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

OK. Will you take it there?Or would you like me to?--Anthony.bradbury 22:40, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Submitted to WP:AN/I.--Anthony.bradbury 22:52, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

User:Venkat47 and User:Jordan brice

Hey, after reviewing their contributions, I don't think they're JB.. while they edit wrestling articles exclusively, from what I'm reading into their contributions, they don't match JB there.. they pass the WP:DUCK test of the two accounts being the same person though, dunno if you would consider blocking them both until they determine which one account they want to edit from, or if you want to leave it the way it is. SirFozzie 22:15, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Most likely, if he even bothers to return from his block, he won't continue to use them both. IrishGuy 22:17, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I think they/he is back using an IP, , seems to be the same MO, hitting the same wrestlers. Darrenhusted 16:21, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Satchel Paige

Well, here we go again. Tecmobowl is now asserting that Paige's birthdate and even birth year are "unknown", despite statements by most researchers and Paige himself confirming the date of July 7, 1906. Baseball Bugs 03:55, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Another editor, who has done a fair amount of work on the page, has stepped in. It might be OK for now. Baseball Bugs 04:14, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

My page -- Andy Hart

You have still not responded to my question of why my page was removed. Please get back to me with an answer. AndyHartPFW 14:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)AndyHartPFW

Sales 2.0

Hi, I think you just deleted this post of mine. I was about to link it to Sales but it was gone before I could. Very fast. I think you commented that it lacked length and relevance. Could it fly if it was linked to "sales"?

There is likely going to be a conference in Oct called the "Sales 2.0 conference" and I am trying to define the term. It is being used in several places already but trying to document. Is this OK?

Nigel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nedelsha (talk • contribs)

You must provide reliable and verifiable sources otherwise it is just original research which isn't allowed. IrishGuy 17:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

...

I am part of that duo and I want to page removed NOW. --Eweridge and Fortitude 17:55, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

What would be the basis for removal and can you provide proof that you are who you claim to be? IrishGuy 17:58, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

.......

How do I provide evidence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eweridge and Fortitude (talk • contribs)

The Barats and Bereta website offers an email address. They also have a forum. You would either email me from that address or you could create a post in the forum proving you aren't just some kid screwing around. Beyond that, you still haven't outlines what the basis would be for the article's deletion. IrishGuy 18:17, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

ok here we go

http://z7.invisionfree.com/Barats_and_Bereta/index.php?showtopic=2490

There, that his a forum post.

and I want it deleted because you didnt use my permission. Now delete it please. --Eweridge and Fortitude 18:27, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

That post was left by a "MrBarats". That is his first post. The actual Barats appears to post as "Barats" as can be seen here. Additionally, here you claimed to be Barats just as in that forum post, but in your first edit you claimed to be Bereta. IrishGuy 18:31, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

5 O’Clock Charlie

Thanks -- just like the 4077th, I'm starting to get pretty used to this guy coming around every day! --A. B. 23:59, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Wow. That's quite a fan you have there. :) IrishGuy 00:00, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Casey at the Bat

I must attract trouble like a magnet. Now I'm at risk of an edit war (or skirmish, anyway), because some IP address is trying to put a spin on Casey that the protagonist might have thrown the game. It's obvious he's unfamiliar with wikipedia citation rules. At least this gets me away from Tecmobowl for awhile. d:) Baseball Bugs 02:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

CSD AutoReason

I was informed earlier today about a bug in IE6. I've since fixed it per the suggestion and IE6 is working fine again. Just thought I'd let my spamlist know that they need to purge their local cache (Ctrl+F5 on most browsers) to get the latest version of the script. Regards, ^demon 16:09, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

JDG

If I might make a suggestion - the best way to deal with User:JDG is probably just to ignore him. He's obviously attempting to provoke you, but I'm sure he'll get tired quickly enough if you don't let him get under your skin. Just my 2 cents. MastCell 21:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Ordinarily I would agree, but if he fully intends to continue to harass other editors upon his return then I feel he is becoming a disruption to the project. IrishGuy 21:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Witton Albion F.C.

Hi; what do you think about totally protecting this page for a couple of weeks? I can now, for some reason, access the history without crashing but sadly, it would appear, so can every sockpuppet on the planet.--Anthony.bradbury 21:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

My initial thought against a full protection was that we could eventually exhaust his sock supply...but I have noticed that all the new ones were created on the 6th as opposed to the previous socks which were created earlier. Apparently, every couple of days he creates about ten accounts so there is no way we will exhaust them all. Full protection would probably work. IrishGuy 21:28, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Good work! Ryan Postlethwaite 21:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I have fully protected the page for three weeks.--Anthony.bradbury 21:36, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

youmeyoume

Thanks for the swift action, Irishguy. You beat me to it.--Atlan (talk) 23:39, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem. When someone's first edit is to AN/I it is clear that person is a sock/troll. IrishGuy 23:42, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

MedCom Case

I have made the decision to take the MedCab case Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-06-15 Shoeless Joe Jackson. I hope I will be of some help in this case. I will try to all of you guys communicating in a civil manner and will assist you in finding a compromise. Have a nice week and God bless.--†Sir James Paul† 08:48, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Bepimola and Documenta Catholica

Hi Irishguy, were you having the same problem as me with that site? None of the documents actually seem to be there, they all come up with "page not found" for me. It's too bad because those would be good links to add. But Bepimola claims they work for him, so I don't understand. Adam Bishop 00:28, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Some I had problems accessing, others I didn't. I removed them for two reasons: first, the editor was only adding those links to articles which struck me as a bit spammy. Second, the entire website is written in latin which makes it pretty much impossible to use for the average English reader. IrishGuy 00:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, if you're looking for anything on that website, you probably already know Latin anyway! I don't think it's spam, though. Adam Bishop 07:17, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Matthias (70's Canadian Rock Band)

Hello. I just wanted to know why you would delete this page that I put up? The band Matthias was very well known in the mid 70's for their original music and covers of many UK bands. They played warm-up for such bands as Sweeney Todd and Chilliwack, and played two shows at the Cariboo-Chilcotin's First outdoor rock concert, "Strawberry Hill", in Williams Lake in 1976.

They had a large following and as recently as one month ago were asked if they would be interested in getting together to do a "reunion" concert in the next year.

The lead singer, Douglas Campbell, has 2 CD's that are available from CD Baby, Amazon, iTunes, etc.

Just would like to know why you were so quick to delete. Thanks. Crosstrax 04:30, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

They are/were a non-notable band. Please read WP:NOTE and WP:BAND for more information. It had already been deleted and recreated three times. IrishGuy 08:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, this is not the third deletion. Perhaps you did not research it properly. The other deletions were to do with a fairly current Christian metal band with the same name (but none of the same members).

Now, according to your WP:NOTE, Douglas Campbell's song compositions fall under the "Others, item 4" section. He has composed numerous songs that are being used in churches all across North America. Please go to http://www.ccli.com/US/WhatWeOffer/ChurchCopyrightLicenses/CCLI%20Publishers.aspx which is the Christian Music Licensing service and look for Crosstrax CMI Services. This is the publishing company that he uses. Also, if you Google Douglas Campbell + Christian music you will find many sites that list and offer his songs. Cheers! --Crosstrax 00:26, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

OK...so a publishing company he uses is listed on a website. How does that prove he has composed a number of melodies, tunes or standards used in a notable genre, or tradition or school within a notable genre? If his publishing company is entitled "Crosstrax" and your username is "Crosstrax" how is this someone other than a giant conflict of interest? IrishGuy 00:31, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Rules?

Sorry about the personal attack page. I should've actually read some user rules. My bad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iweeniealot (talk • contribs)

El redactor

Could you please unblock El redactor (talk · contribs)? Checkuser has established that he is not a sockpuppet of User:Tecmobowl, but he has not yet been unblocked. Shalom 17:20, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, checkuser simply states it was a different IP. As noted in the sockpuppetry report Tecmobowl has used TOR before to evade IP checks. The account was blocked as a sock for obvious sock behavior, not for having an identical IP. Other admins agreed and El redactor never requested an unblock. IrishGuy 18:57, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

• As a note of courtesy, i will be looking into the appropriate measure to have your status as an admin revoked. I am not a sock puppet, nor was i ever a sock. You simply skewed the facts to suit your presumptions and then prevented me from defending myself by blocking me. It is unfortunate that this is what has happened, but I felt it was appropriate to let you know. //Tecmobowl 19:56, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

You got caught and you still wont let it go. Other admins reviewed it and agreed. You should really let this go. IrishGuy 20:21, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

• Excuse me, but I will not. Regardless of whether or not you think I am a sock or not, your abuse of the system is not acceptable. You blocked me during the course of the discussion, you failed to recognize a number of wiki policies and guidelines, and you have indefinitely blocked the other user so as to prevent them from making any further statements. I will continue with due process. //Tecmobowl 21:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Even though you claim you don't care? In any case, you have used socks. You have avoided blocks. You have even used TOR in direct violation of policy to avoid scrutiny. IrishGuy 21:02, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

• Please use the arbitration page for further discussion. I am not sure if that is the best way to have your actions reviewed, but I am not going to get into it about "my actions". You have concluded that I am a sock and that is your prerogative. This is a separate issue. //Tecmobowl 21:12, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

You cannot keep claiming that you may have repeatedly violated policy but somehow that isn't relevant. Of course it is relevant. If it wasn't for the violations of policy there would have been no block. IrishGuy 21:14, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Request for Arbitration

Seeing as the dispute resolution process does not seem to apply, i have filed a case with the arbitration board. You can view it here //Tecmobowl 20:14, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Tecmobowl

Can they ban him from Misplaced Pages entirely? I'm sure he could always change IPs, but really he seems an obsessive wikistalker and quite destructive to the site.