User talk:Deepfriedokra/2008jan

Vandalism is futile Please understand that this userpage is frequently vandalized, and vandalism is reverted pretty quickly. You will not accomplish anything by vandalizing Wikipedia. If you wish to try test editing, you may do so in our sandbox located at Wikipedia:Sandbox or create a test subpage by putting "/test" after your username and clicking "create page." Thanks

Contacting me

If you wish to contact me, the quickest and easiest way is to CLICK HERE.

If you have a question about a deleted article, please leave a message by CLICKING HERE. You can also appeal a deletion by clicking this link to Deletion Review and following the directions found there.

Archives

Talk archives for 2006 and 2007

Messages

Back to Iamastabbingrobot

So, it seems the article of the book survived...too bad the same didn't happen to the author's. However, I still think Iamastabbingrobot should watch his tone when writing at Wikipedia. Victao lopes (talk) 00:19, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

You think that's bad? One time a user was editing his user page without logging in. I reverted the edits, thinking it was vandalism. He had a few choice words for me about that! Hopefully he will mellow a little. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 00:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Guidelines

Thaank you for the guidelines, These may require me to spot and solve other issues on articles. I am currently working on the articles that require cleanup from January 2006. If there were other problems, I would find a solution to them too. ThanksSnikSpot (talk) 02:12, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

U R Welcome. Cool. Dlohcierekim 02:13, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks very much for that. I'm actually 'Realiseyourdignity' but i've forgotten my password.

I think you guys don't realise what your're oing the internet was aoriigninally a weapon of war, and you are helping everyone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.91.33.130 (talk) 03:29, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about not signing in.

is the objectivity of the article ok? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Notpayingthepsychiatrist (talk • contribs) 02:37, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

U R welcome. I don't know. I've never read it. Dlohcierekim 02:41, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Admor of Nadvorna.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Admor of Nadvorna.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:01, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Catherine Lip

That's fine, it was a rambling article which didn't look very reliable, thanks for cleaning it up. Harland1 (^t/_c) 16:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure. Dlohcierekim 17:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Jenny Sparks.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jenny Sparks.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 18:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA

Ooops! Bearian (talk) 18:19, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: "articles with quotes"

I've seen that you left a comment on my talk page about creating redirects with the article name in quotes, is that right? To the best of my knowledge, I only create redirects where say, a company or a TV show or anything in general which has an article with the title say, X is also known in other regions of the world as Y. As you said, it's highly improbable that anyone would search for articles with quotes, and you're right in speedily deleting them. I still don't completely understand what it is that you're talking about, could you leave an example by my talk page, so I may reply authoritatively? Thanks , so speaks rohith. 18:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Nope, I don't think I make such redirects. I do feel that they're highly improbable. I don't think that anyone would search for an article in quotes. Thanks anyway, so speaks rohith. 19:16, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[[[Mi-5 Persecution]]

Thanks for your notice. I realize the danger in creating a controversial entry, but the posts have hit all of my Usenet groups, and people are just starting to notice because he's changed his style. Since the earliest version was copied from Notable Usenet personalities, I went back and edited that to reflect WP:BLP. If you can help in any other way besides deletion, thanks. MMetro (talk) 22:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

NOTICE FOR ADMINS

If anyone willing to tell me how to actually use Wikipedia properly, (I'm relatively inexpierienced with the project) then please drop me a line at my talk page, thanks.--Hammerandclaw (talk) 23:27, 2 January 2008 (UTC)hammerandclaw

Thank you Dlohcierekim, dude, you've started me on my way!--Hammerandclaw (talk) 23:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)hammerandclaw

I'm glad. Dlohcierekim 23:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Anon Prod Removal

An anon has removed the prod from Carlos Redman claiming the references at the bottom of the article prov he is notable. Ridernyc (talk) 00:47, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Cool. They might just. Dlohcierekim 00:53, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed nearly unanimously with 46 support, 1 oppose, and 0 neutral. Thanks for supporting me!

-Djsasso (talk) 17:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

The whole DJ Derrida thing turned out to be a silly hoax (a rather funny one) so I deleted our previous conversation due to its irrelevency. I hope you understand this deletion and thanks for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DJ Derrida (talk • contribs) 17:58, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Dear Deepfriedokra, Thank you for voting in my RfA, which closed successfully with 34 support, 2 oppose, and 0 neutral. I appreciate your support! I promise I will wield the mop wisely, and do my best to improve Wikipedia.

-- AKeen (talk) 15:21, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi Dlohcierekim, I am still new here, and am possibly "out of sorts", and would like to thank you for your welcome and for pointing out my mistakes. You have helped me out lots! Writelydie (talk) 17:18, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

SOCK PUPPETEERING

I've been accused of being a sock puupet. I frankly do not see how this can be possible, since I have made almost no edits bar those to my user page/talk page, and have only just started up. The sock puppeteer in question seems to have over a hundred suspected accounts to his name, and he is not someone I am familiar with. Certainly, I find it hard to believe he really has so many aliases. Can someone please give me an explanation, my accuser, has left no trace on any of my pages, and I would lie to find him/her, and have my sock puppet status removed. Contact me on my talk page.--Hammerandclaw (talk) 23:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)hammerandclaw

Smile

NHRHS2010 (talk · contribs) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

NHRHS2010 Happy Holidays 23:44, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

..

RfA !vote

Any chance you could reconsider your vote on the TPH RfA again? I have no connection to him or any reason to canvass on his behalf, but I hate to see the RfA fail based on one or two opposes that push it over the edge numbers-wise. I think that controversy attaches to anyone who participates so actively in AfD discussions, and inevitably in a large number of decisions some will be found that folks can disagree with. Perhaps since you supported initially, you can reconsider again?

Thanks, ^Avruchtalk 16:26, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

It seems it has been closed as unsucessful, ah well. Rudget. 17:25, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Yup. Bummer. Was a squeaker. ^Avruchtalk 17:27, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Drat. Dlohcierekim 14:45, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which which passed nem. con. with 45 support, 0 oppose, and 0 neutral. Thank you for your support and all the kind words that were expressed. I will try to live up to the trust placed in me by the community. I now have my homework to do and then pass the Marigolds.

And thanks for taking the time to wend through my contributions. Cheers.

Kbthompson (talk) 16:04, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Machias, Maine

Thanks for the delete, but weren't you supposed to move the specified article as well, per {{db-move}}?--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 20:04, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

OHHHH! Good idea. Thanks. Dlohcierekim 20:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. I actually thought the requester would and someone did. Dlohcierekim 20:07, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I did. :-) I just wanted to call your attention to the implications of db-move. Thanks again!--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 20:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

A bit of help with some vandalism please

A bit of help with some vandalism pleaseWould you have a quick loook at Gladys the Swiss Dairy Cow's article - you'll see what I believe to be some vandalism. If you are willing, I'd be grateful if you would revert it. ~--James.lebinski (talk) 18:53, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Let's talk this over

Feel from to come on over to my talk page and I'll explain the Jim Downer thing. It's not "patent nonsense," and I think you are exhibiting a bit of an "itchy trigger finger" in your speedy deletion. I do not doubt that this article may very well be a candidate for deletion, but I believe there's no reason there should be no dialogue, especially since you've ignored my initial response on both occasions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexmce (talk • contribs) 05:39, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

my reply. Dlohcierekim 05:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Woops

Sorry about the formatting confusion on WP:AIV. BTW, I decided to block that one because the identical vandalism was repeated over several days implying that it was not a shared IP. I block quick and hard under such circumstances. No reason not to when you're pretty sure who you are blocking. —Wknight94 (talk) 16:36, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

LOL No longer sure which one we're talking about. My comments floated up the page as vandal reports came off. I agree-- if it's vandalism only, block 'em. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 16:38, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

That BOT...

...is unbelievably annoying. The uzer supposedly added me to its whitelist, but it refuses to respond to it and randomly decides that I'm "vandalising" or "SPAMming" and reverts me. I duked it out with it on Reform mathematics as far as I could without getting blocked for edit warring. I'd dearly love to have the thing blocked untill it answers to its configuration. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 17:50, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Germany battle

I feel that it could be useful information. Thats why I didn't tag it for deletion in the first place. Bottom line is its history, and someone may need some information on it one day. Like I said, I didn't create the page, and I feel that in its current state, sure it should be deleted, but if its expanded and more useful info is added, then it should stay. Dustihowe  Talk  18:41, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Are you seriously going to go there? I mean, come on.... Dustihowe  Talk  18:50, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Why not go ahead and undelete it, add an expand and cleanup template to it, and see how the user changes it, if no changes are made, then lets go ahead and delete it. Give it a chance and see what happens. Dustihowe  Talk  18:54, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Whatever, if your going to continue to be disrespectful, then I am going to completley ignore you. You really don't deserve the power that you have been awarded if your going to disrecpect users and their opinions and beliefs. Dustihowe  Talk  19:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

If you feel that the article should be deleted, then go ahead and delete it. After revewing the page, I somewhat agree with you :-) Dustihowe  Talk  19:25, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Michael Bloomberg links

ChrisG nyc just reverted your removal of the links. --Michael White^T·C 20:54, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I think he removed the part about your organization. Y'all appear to be involved in an WP:edit war or content dispute. Would advice dispute resolution. You might want to seek help at WP:AN/I. Anyone sho violates the Wikipedia:Three-revert rule can be reported at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR. Good luck and happy editing. Dlohcierekim 21:01, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Did he? I didn't see that. Well, in any case, he also added back the external links. If you look into it, you will find that the Unity08 Draft Bloomberg group is highly notable, having been mentioned in countless MSM sources a few days ago, while UniteForMike.com and DraftMichael.com have been mentioned in a few big sources (i.e. WSJ), but, honestly, probably only deserve a couple sentences in the Mike Bloomberg article, while his site has only been mentioned once in a third-party source that I can find (but I don't want to argue about the notability of his site. More importantly, he exposed the confidential name of one of our members (also a Wikipedia member), who has to remain confidential, in his last comment at Talk:Michael_Bloomberg#External_links. He is engaged in a personal vendetta with that member. Can you please do something about it? --Michael White^T·C 21:11, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Wow! This definitely needs to go to dispute resolution and/or WP:AN/I. Dlohcierekim 21:13, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Look, I am going to explore that avenue shortly, but in the meantime is it at all possible for you to remove the confidential name he exposed on that talk page, and from the edit histories? Please? I'm not terribly familiar with the policies in this area, but I know that isn't allowed. --Michael White^T·C 21:20, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

My apologies, he did not readd the links. I will explore dispute resolution shortly. But my urgent request still stands. He divulged a confidential name, of a Wikipedian as well, as part of a personal vendetta. --Michael White^T·C 21:27, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

John Forbes (actor)

There's no such person. The guy who created the article made it all up. I watch Grey's Anatomy; there was no change in the doctor who plays the chief of staff and the claimed "actor" has no entry on IMDB. It's a completely fake page. Gromlakh (talk) 06:52, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which closed unsuccessfully with 25 support, 18 oppose, and 6 neutral. Thanks for the support and I'll look forward working with you. --BritandBeyonce (talk) 06:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which which passed with 40 support, 9 oppose, and 6 neutral. Thanks for your support. Alexf(Talk/Contribs) 02:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Andrew Nichols

First of all, thank you for your comment on my RFA. But I have a question, unrelated to my RFA. I'm confused about that Andrew Nichols. The log says it was deleted on January 10, but I apparently tagged it for deletion on January 11, but it doesn't show up in the history. What am I missing here? - Rjd0060 (talk) 19:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I see. Yes, being able to see the deleted version would help. I was just looking at that article and was thinking about AfD'ing it. Thank you for your reply. - Rjd0060 (talk) 20:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA thank-spam

Deepfriedokra/2008jan, I wish to tender my sincere thanks for your support in my successful request for adminship, which ended with 37 supports, 2 opposes, and 2 neutral. The results of the RfA are extremely bittersweet because of the recent departure of my nominator, Rudget. Hopefully I can live up to his and your expectations. I would especially like to thank Epbr123 and TomStar81 for mentioning that they were preparing to offer me a nomination. The past week has been one of the most stressful weeks in my life, and I appreciate your vote of confidence in me. If you ever need anything, just get in touch. -MBK₀₀₄ 21:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

About Dorftrottel

Ha, ha, yes, I felt he deserved that Barnstar. :) Searching for this diff earlier reminded me to award him one. :) Acalamari 21:53, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

You did what I should have. Dlohcierekim 21:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Giving him a smile the other day was nice. :) Acalamari 00:36, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

User:75.82.151.159's block

Hi, Bovlb. I blocked this user for 31 hours. When the block expired, he came out shooting. Would you mind if I extended to 72 hours. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 01:50, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

No objection. Bovlb (talk) 01:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Adminship

I'll have 3000+ edits by the end of the weekend.Undeath (talk) 16:07, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Bothremydidae

I do not doubt that Bothremydidae is a type of turtle but when I CSD'd it contained the following:
== Bothremydidae ==
This is a kind of neck-holding turtle.

which is clearly CSD#A1 material --/\sSb\/^TALK/\-- 23:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

YOR.com

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article YOR.com, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of YOR.com. Argyriou (talk) 00:57, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Dlohcierekim 00:58, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

RFA

Deepfriedokra/2008jan, Thank you for your support in my RFA which passed 43/0/1. I would like to especially thank Bibliomaniac15 for being my nominator and admin coach. I would also like to thank Rudget for being my co-nominator. I'm sure that I can live up to the community's expectations as an administrator, and not totally mess everything up. Thanks again for your support! Malinaccier (talk) 17:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

My Rfa

Well, not this time anyway it seems...my effort to regain my adminship was unsuccessful, but your support was still very much appreciated. Let me know if there is anything I can do for you. Thank you!--MONGO 07:17, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Euclid

I'm in Hillsborough so I'm not the best of experts on it, but I have never heard of it either. I say search for websites, and if you're willing to do the time, call the St. Pete Times switchboard and ask if they've heard of it. If they don't, then just have something done about it. Mike H. Fierce! 23:58, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I figured they'd have neighborhood reporters, and what better than a newspaper to tell you if they have someone on that beat (or not if it's fake)? Mike H. Fierce! 05:06, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

*n

I don't think you should have deleted the article about *n, because you can't confirm that Bigfoot exists, but it still has an article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Conspiracynut2 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC) I don't think you should have deleted the article about *n, because you can't confirm that Bigfoot exists, but it still has an article.

No, but there are verifiable sources that people think/wanna believe/have spent time researching Bigfoot exists. You provided no verifiable sources. Bigfoot is notable as a "household name". Everyone has heard of Bigfoot. *n sounds like something made up in school one day. Open to persuasion, though. If you can show me media coverage, scientific research, etc then we can recreate the article. Dlohcierekim 23:06, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I have a source, but I didn't consider blogs reliable, so I wasn't going to cite it. www.davidastley.co.nr —Preceding unsigned comment added by Conspiracynut2 (talk • contribs) 23:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Would it be okay if I said that *n is not confirmed to exist, but David Astley thinks it does? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Conspiracynut2 (talk • contribs) 23:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

5 Clicks

No problem. I believe you it's real. I was just quite surprised to find out it was. I suppose some people have too much time on their hands. LOL. Redfarmer (talk) 00:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Deleted articles

why do you erase my suffff? i not writing anything bad! awwwwwwwwwwwww i dont want problems just answers... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hazewalker (talk • contribs) 02:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

AWWWWWWWWWWWWW "UTTER NONESENSE" so some one will delete what i wrote every time if i write things like that? oh and ps. do you wanna be my friend? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hazewalker (talk • contribs) 03:22, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Anything that dose not meet notability guidelines WP:N and verifiability guidelines WP:V will likely wind up deleted. Anything that is nonsense or an attack page will be deleted on sight. Dlohcierekim 03:25, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Vandleblaster

Naw, leave him be. He's on quite a few radars right now. Let's see if he does what I asked him to do here in regards to re-striking his own comment and adding a new comment. Keeper | 76 19:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

heilige scheisst

Thanks. Only the best for Wikipedia. Cheers. Dlohcierekim 20:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I don't know what heilige scheisst means. Do tell. My first instinct was to attempt to read it from right to left, seeing as it was coming from you. Which reminds me, for the first month or so of seeing your username around the wiki (before I visited your userpage), my mind pronounced your name as "Dough Cream" Now my mind just says "Mike".  :-) Cheers, 67repeeK.

Laughed out loud. What does it mean in English pray tell? Don't make me go to Wiktionary!. EEEEWWwwwwww. Keeper | 76 20:19, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Sreb Article

SP alert..this taken from GriffinSB's talk page...makes it look like Bosniak created the article but a quick check reveals the page history has GriffinSB as the creator.

I think we should make a small section about Srebrenica Genocide deniers and apologists.((GriffinSB) (talk) 01:39, 25 December 2007 (UTC)).

Let's make it now. Here is a opening article: Srebrenica Genocide Denial . Let's build it. Bosniak (talk) 07:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

His talk page is revealing...

Thank you for for your help, Berean Hunter (talk) 04:20, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Freddie Nobile

Hey, if I'd known it wasn't a real person, I would have done it differently.  :) Thanks. Corvus cornix_talk 22:45, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Hm. If he's a real character, he might fit into the article about the book. Corvus cornix_talk 22:54, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Maybe he was in the book instead of the movie. Dlohcierekim 22:56, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

furf

I would like to know why my article for the slang term "furf" was deleted. This was my first time writing an article on Wikipedia, thus I realize it might not have met the standards of writing here; however, this term is catching on in popularity and I believed that it deserved its own article here.

Any feedback would be appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobbymcprescott (talk • contribs) 01:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

reply Dlohcierekim 02:09, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

speedy

Thanks. Why some taggers think that geography stubs are "patent nonsense" is beyond me. And yes, Scotland. :-) Carlossuarez46 (talk) 06:04, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Request to reconsider statements

I just put myself into consideration on the Rfa page. It has also been brought to my attention that the quantity of edits I've accumulated may be on the low side, and I see you are voting against me for that. I would ask that you please consider an emphasis on the quality of the individual's sincerity and willingness to be a part of a team. Quotas are dangerous and can discourage serious people from wishing to contribute to the common good. Thank you. Ecoleetage (talk) 16:35, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Withdrawal of RfA candidacy

As per your suggestion, I just removed myself from consideration on the Rfa page. I am viewing this process as one that actively discourages sincere and serious people from contributing to Wikipedia. I will seek out another organization that encourages input without holding people up to Simon Cowell-worthy ridicule. Thanks! Ecoleetage (talk) 16:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• Thank you for your polite response, but I respectfully and sincerely disagree. In your own words, you stated approval should come if "1) demonstrate the nom believes that the project is important. 2) To demonstrate the nom wants to help improve the project. 3) To learn enough about how the project works to not damage it by deleting encyclopedic content or blocking constructive editors. These are the most important, sysop-type duties of the admin. Historically, users have been given admin responsibilities after about three months experience and about 2000 edits."

I sincerely believed the project was important, which is why I put the request in. I specifically wanted to help improve the project, particularly after a negative experience I had. And I was willing to learn enough...etc. (no need to repeat that verbatim).

I am not one for holding people up to ridicule, nor do I wish to be in that situation, which is why I abhorred the would-be Simon Cowells I was facing. In reviewing comments made for unsuccessful RfAs, I was surprised at the puerility and cruelty of some commentators. Character assassination is not constructive criticism, and insults are not encouragement.

In any event, Wikipedia seems to be limping along without having me as its crutch. Thank you for hearing me vent. Ecoleetage (talk) 20:17, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• Thank you, but the nastiness in the RfA process, along with sarcastic and condescending treatment I received in the WQA section, has completely soured me on providing any input to Wikipedia's maintenance. Ecoleetage (talk) 20:27, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Egypt

Hi, I edit your page because Egypt is not in Asia. I'm sure you know that already. It's located in NORTH AFRICA....not ASIA! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.248.62.248 (talk) 21:52, 31 January 2008 (UTC)