User talk:Chairboy: Difference between revisions

Thanks for pointing out Category:Wikipedians who are pilots!

Hi, I noticed you on Quarl's talk page. Although he's been reluctant for adminship I nominated him anyways... and I'm awaiting for his response... but feel free to vote and hopefully he'll accept Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Quarl .

~ Cheers —This user has left wikipedia 19:59 2006-02-01

About my page in which i made an admin claim, I'm sorry. I just copied that section from another user's page. I line checked the code but i think i may have overseen this. Really sorry if this caused any trouble. Thanks User:Ageo020

Whats wrong with it?

Why did you delete my gobbledigook page? How did you delete it and how did you know it existed? I created it as a test 2 seconds before you deleted it.

Thanks

Ok. I don't have any personal reason for creating the referendum, I just think that guy is nice and will benefit wiki on E. European subjects. Cheers! Sosomk 00:25, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if wiki is not a democracy, then what is it? A left-wing dictatorhip? Sosomk 17:13, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see this talk page regarding a status update to Stanislav_Petrov. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 12:54, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, edited wrong user talk... ha. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 12:54, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you had deleted Westview High School (Tennessee) with an edit summary of A1 [1], meaning, per WP:CSD: "Very short articles providing little or no context ... Limited content is not in itself a reason to delete if there is enough context for the article to qualify as a valid stub. I would point out that the article was indeed created as a stub, flagged as such, and had obvious context (it's a school). I would also advise you to re-read WP:CSD where it states, Please note that some Wikipedians create articles in multiple saves, so try to avoid deleting a page too soon after its initial creation. In this particular case, I was on my way to further expand the article, but noticed you had already deleted it. I will go ahead and re-create it, but please try to be not so quick on the draw in the future. --Elonka 19:16, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy! I deleted it quite a while ago, so the "it was going to be expanded shortly" argument doesn't seem to apply. I strongly suggest that you increase your use of the Preview button. There is no reason an article cannot avoid being a CSD A1 at any point in its lifecycle. The article also met the A7 notability deletion requirement, I merely chose A1 at the time because it was the most relevant. I look forward to reading a new version of the article that asserts its notability and contains enough content to stand on its own as an encyclopedia entry. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 19:21, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I created the stub last night, and was going to expand it this morning. That counts to me as a "too quick" deletion. As for A7, I strongly disagree, as there is a clear consensus that all public high schools are deserving of pages. Or are you just in the "anti-school" camp? In any case, since you're obviously active on Wikipedia at the moment, I would appreciate if you would undelete the article so that I can continue working on it. --Elonka 19:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly! I've restored the content to your userspace here. I'm not anti-school, I'm just pro-CSD and anti-cruft. Best regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 19:33, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Sorry if you thought I was critical of you. Obviously, I intended my last comment as a reply to Improv, not you! Pascal.Tesson 13:22, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate if you stop deleting this article. This is a legitimate social organization with verifiable reference. You're personal "holier-than-thou" quest to delete what you personally find inconsequencial is inappropriate. I find it to be against the intent of Wikipedia and object to it outright.

thank you.

I will once again reinterate that your opinion that this article is not notable is subjective, and therefore should not be cause for deletion. I disagree that one individuals opinion on a subject he/she is entirely unfamiliar with should be cause for tampering and/or deletion of an article. Would you edit a page on a subject you had absolutely no knowledge of? I should hope not. This is the same. I will thank you to unlock the article.

thank you.

Nah. Please read the policy I cited. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 04:12, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Wow. What a convincing argument you have. "Nah." That is absolutely profound. How clearly it conveys exactly the extent of your intellect is uncanny. I guess that's why you choose to spend your life editing Wikipedia instead of doing something that might require a bit more intelligence than "Nah." Bravo. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FrixFrixFrix (talk • contribs) .

Hi. I'm seeking advice from you since you are an admin yourself and since you were involved in the debate about the cookiegate. I am very concerned about the attitude of Improv (talk · contribs) who has been absolutely unwilling to admit he made a mistake on that occasion and has made clear his feeling that he understands policy and core goals better than anyone who argues against him. On the follow-up discussion on the WP:CSD talk page he has continued to argue that his actions are justified because AfD is broken [2] and that the community by and large cannot be trusted when it comes to handling the deletion process [3] [4]. I further removed a PROD tag that he had put on a South Korean film My Scary Girl despite the fact that minimum search (e.g. Google) easily showed that the film had been shown in festivals and had been released nationwide in Korea. When I did ask him about it, he again argued that he was perfectly in-line with policy although it is quite evident that this was nowhere close to being a case where the deletion is uncontroversial. As I said earlier in the cookie debate, I'm a deletionist with full credentials but I feel that admins who place themselves above consensus of the community because they know what's right for Wikipedia. I have never started an RfC or AN/I and would rather not do so but I feel that his actions are unnecessarily irritating well-established editors and are overall detrimental to the project. And so I am seeking your help or at least your advice on how to deal with this. Many thanks for your assistance and sorry about the rather long rant. Cheers. Pascal.Tesson 02:49, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chairboy this is Penetrating Fluid, I saw your comment on my discussion page. I feel very strongly that I am being injustly censored soley because one administrator didn't know what penetrating fluid is and imagined it to be some kind of offensive term. Please read the discussion here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Samsara#User:Penetrating_Fluid and if you feel I am wrong then I shall desist from further action.

I am not mad or anything I am just curious why did you delete the artice Rene martinez, Please let me know on my talk page so I can be more knowledgeble when creating articles next time. Thanks --Seadog.M.S 16:19, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It said he was a guitar technician for a famous person. Just knowing or doing work for someone notable doesn't automatically make the subject himself notable. For instance, Ted Bundy was a notable figure, and I was his neighbor briefly back in the 1970s. This doesn't make _me_ notable. This is covered under WP:CSD Article item 7. Best regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 16:37, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know you Rock, but he was a little bit more important that a famous persons neighbor. Well anyway you are right I couldn't find any info on him on the internet (that should have been my first clue). Have a nice day.--Seadog.M.S 16:58, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Were you really that guys neighbor?!?!?!?!--Seadog.M.S 17:07, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. My parents say he seemed like a "nice guy". I still rib 'em for that one. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 17:11, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! Have a nice day pretty interesting, Any thanks for all your help.--Seadog.M.S 19:09, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate it if you could delete a history file for me the information is listed below.

Potomac Senior High School

Here is the history file I would like removed.

(cur) (last) 13:51, 11 October 2006 205.174.125.54 (Talk) (→State Champions)

It has somethings in there that I do not like. If you remove that history file I would appreciate it. Thanks.

a diff to help —12.72.73.61 17:35, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is the 7th one down on the list of history files. John R G 17:22, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I talked with User:InShaneee and she said she could not have it removed that is why I am talking with you about this to see if you could have it removed or maybe have the whole page deleted. I would really appreciate it if you could remove that one history file. I am trying to do this the right way. Thanks John R G 19:23, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What does A7 mean? Anyway I started it 5 minutes ago and am in the process of sourcing it with India's most read newspaper and other reliable sources.Bakaman _Bakatalk 02:21, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:CSD section 'Articles' item 7. To avoid having your articles deleted like that, use the preview button before submitting it. An article must be able to stand on its own merits from the first save as it is immediately available. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 02:28, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I'm guessing you mean

The Economic Times, I think is good enough to source him. I haven't had much experience with the preview button, but I'll start using it.Bakaman _Bakatalk 02:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If yoyu would give me a damn minute i would provide content Briaboru

The Preview button may be the functonality you're looking for. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 04:00, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted HOTSOUP and protected it against recreation. There was an AfD listed at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/HOTSOUP during one of its earlier recreations. It is still open, of course. I just wanted to make you aware of it, so you can close it early as speedily deleted. AubreyEllenShomo 17:42, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please put page back!SpaceyDave 21:14, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Review WP:CSD to see what things are deleted on site. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 21:15, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...?SpaceyDave 21:21, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to. You're repeatedly recreating a nonsense article and ignoring messages asking you to stop. If you're blocked, it's not a 'punishment', it's a device we use to limit disruption. You're creating work for people who have to clean up after you, and that's poor wikitiquette. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 21:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have deleted my Kim Dingle article twice, citing notoriety. I would like to respond, and request that you stop deleting the article as it is completely relevant to Wikipedia. One of the main reasons I joined Wikipedia as a contributor was to write articles on historically ignored artists who tend to be women. Amazingly, Dingle doesn't fit into this category at all - yet you seem to think her unworthy of inclusion. She has gallery representation in New York, Los Angeles and Italy. Her works are in large museums like MOCA LA, and she has received a great deal of critical review and acclaim in major art magazines. I intended to start the article last night and add more content in the upcoming days. I understand the usefulness of the sandbox, but felt my original and second versions of the article substantial enough to meet Wikipedia's suggestions. Furthermore, my second version did make reference (and external link) to her NY gallery. When you do a google search of the artist's name, google has 10 pages of results! What kind of notoriety are we expecting, and who gets to decide whether a topic is worthy of space? This has been a major problem with western art history in general, and I would like to think it could end at Wikipedia!

Thanks in advance for your time and consideration in this matter. Please respond to me at [my talk page].

lonebiker 16:36, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:CSD Article #7. She may be notable, but the article made no assertion of notability. You're welcome to recreate the article, but you need to state in the article which aspects of WP:CSD are being met. As the article creator, the burden is on you to clearly document in the article why the person belongs in an encyclopedia. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 16:48, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mean to be persnickity with you, but I suggest that you read the second paragraph of WP:CSD.

As I stated in my article and in the previous post, Dingle is described by "multiple, independent reliable sources" as outlined in the wiki notability article. I am not affiliated with the artist nor her galleries, and therefore consider myself as neutral an editor as possible. I do however, consider her a significant and note worthy contemporary artist worthy of an article in this encyclopedia.

If you would allow me the time to state in the article which aspects of WP:CSD are being met, I would be happy to have that opportunity. However, you have twice deleted my entries, which I now have to completely re-create. I would also like to kindly suggest that you read WP:BITE and maybe not be quite "as fast as a speeding bullet" when it comes to making important decisions regarding the importance of an entry.

Thank you for posting the article back into my user space. I do plan to add further content to it because I believe Wikipedia to be an important portal of information, but I do have to say that this experience has kind of turned me off a bit.

lonebiker 19:22, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"However, you have twice deleted my entries, which I now have to completely re-create." doesn't really make sense, because I posted the entire contents of the article back to your userspace. Also, each article must stand on its own merits from the moment of conception. This is why we have the preview button. Welcome to wikipedia, I look forward to seeing your contributions but must insist that your submissions meet the community driven standards. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 19:32, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was in the middle of creating this article, and it was deleted by Chairboy; I have recreated the article. Please don't delete this article. Thank you. --McTrixie 14:52, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article was deleted because it was a 'list' with a single entry and met the WP:CSD. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 15:17, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I inadvertently deleted your comment when I reverted KP Botany's talk page to restore his comments that you had removed. I don't think it's appopriate to delete comments from somebody else's talk page. If you think his comments are inappropriate, take it up with an admin. MrDarwin 22:36, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am an admin. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 22:37, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! I didn't realize that you're an admin. Sorry, my bad; I won't do it again. MrDarwin 22:39, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, not a big deal. I'm trying to keep KPB from getting himself blocked. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 22:43, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The consensus on DRV supports the actions of me and other administrators who deleted your article. Is there anything else we can assist with? I'd be more than willing to help explain further if there's still any confusion about the 'why' of it. Regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 21:43, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - Please suggest a neutral way of naming this important topic so it doesn't get deleted. As the link proves, it's a documented wordwide phenomenon. After more thought, I agree that it shouldn't just be limited to Bush. Some on the right are fond of calling Senator Clinton "Hitlery", and some compared President Clinton to Hitler.

The Gallery of "Bush = Hitler" Allusions

There is a Wiki page on PETA's holocaust comparsion. This is even more important. PETA's Holocaust Ads Thanks for your help. NBGPWS 03:28, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Chairboy as I am new to wikipedia I have deleted some of your home page details exploring who you are. I have reverted that as I am doing my first steps in wikipedia.

I would like to add the Crescendo Networks page as it is my assignement, lots of companies are listed in the wikipedia e.g. Cisco, Riverbed, Expand Networks etc. I see what you mean concerning marketing and I will delete any marketing related stuff with leaving only informational data. when it was established what is it practicing etc.

Please comment

Please see my comment. It was done un-intentionally which I apologize for.

Still new here :)

regards

ori247

No worries. The main reason I deleted the article was that it appeared to use the same breathless marketing-speak that I'd expect to find in a press release. Instead of describing a company as "The world leader in innovation, with innovative solutions in cross synergistic fantasticness" (for example), write your own description of the company using neutral, WP:NPOV language. Remember, it should be an encyclopedia article, not an advertisement. This assignment is a little harder than it appears, ya can't just copy and paste from their website!  :) Regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 15:02, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

)

Anyway, now that I have updated the content would like to get your feedback, if you think something can be added or dismissed.

Thanks again

Don't worry, I am careful not to recreate stuff accidentally. This one was me just hitting "Enter" one too many times unintentionally. Pascal.Tesson 16:17, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, just a helpful tip. Regards, and thanks for tagging! - CHAIRBOY (☎) 16:18, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

A comment on DRV talk brought this to my attention. Care to explain why you speedy deleted three days after a keep AfD closure? Isn't DRV the forum for such reviews? At first blush, the article satisfies no CSD that I can see. Best wishes, Xoloz 17:59, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy! The AfD 'Keep' was inappropriate because there was a specific policy that already decided the fate of the article in its form at the time. It meets WP:CSD A7 for notability. There's no claim of notability (being the daughter of someone famous does not equal notable) and she fails to meet the WP:MUSIC guideline applied to musicians on their own merit. WP is WP:NOT a democracy, and we have an obligation to do whats right, not just what's popular. If the latter were true, then we'd be awash with userboxes, have userspace full of fair-use copywritten images, and be awash with copyvios in the main article space. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 19:11, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia operates by consensus, and admins must abide by it, absent really compelling evidence (like US law in the case of copyvios, or Jimbo's fiat in the userbox case.) In this case, not only do I disagree with your contention that the article met CSD A7, I don't see any reasonable way you could reach that conclusion, based on the numerous notability claims in the article. Since your undeletion has no meritorious rationale outside of IAR, as I see things, I will now use IAR to reverse the deletion. To prevent wheel-warring, I'd suggest that, should you dispute my restoration, you take the matter to DRV. Best wishes, Xoloz 21:37, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see Alkivar beat me to it. Should you dispute his restoration, DRV would be the place to go. We now clearly have a dispute over the CSD interpretation among a number of admins. By the way, just FYI, having a famous parent usually earns even completely non-notable children redirects to their parent, so your stated rationale for deletion is inappropriate on a second ground. Best wishes, Xoloz 21:43, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let me get this right, you announce that you plan to wheel war, then you suggest that my actions are irrational? Please re-examine the nature of your interactions. Wheel warring is never appropriate, and the DrV would have been far more appropriate than a restoral. The article is now a redirect to Tony Bennett. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 22:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unless you are very naive, or ill-informed, you must know that there is substantial discussion regarding what constitutes a wheel-war. I take the view that undoing another admin once is not wheel-warring; hence, your reversal of the AfD was not wheel-warring (if it had been, I might have warned you in preparation for a block for disruption.) Neither would any restoration from me or Alkivar be wheel-warring. Only repeatedly undoing other admins is wheel-warring. If you read my words more carefully, you will see that I warned only that reversing me (or Alkivar) after a restoration would be wheel-warring, and hence, very bad. My actions were perfectly consistent; your understanding of policy here seems unclear.

I do find it impressive that you counsel me (or, rather Alkivar) to take a matter to DRV after your own anti-consensus, out-of-process deletion. You're right that the dispute is best-settled there, but your suggestion is not without a tinge of hypocrisy.

In any event, your hostility to me is unwarranted -- I never did anything to this article, Alkivar did. I spoke to you first, and only after judging your explanation very poor did I even consider reverting you, by which time, the deed was done already. I'm glad that a good result (redirection to Tony Bennett) has been reached, as I recommended to you above. I hope, in the future, that you will more carefully consider policy before acting, will be more quick to heed your own advice and seek opinions at DRV before unilaterally overturning an AfD, and that you will read others' messages more closely, as you seem to have missed the several subtleties in my early post that I have now reiterated more plainly for you. Best wishes, Xoloz 01:31, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your hostility is misplaced. We disagree about the appropriate policy, that's fine. A member of the foundation endorsed my action, that's fine too. Alkivar and I spoke on #wikipedia-en-admins and decided that we really did, in fact, disagree with each other, then dropped it when CSCWEM converted the article to a redirect (which is fine). My deletion was appropriate, and your vaguely menacing tones have no place on the project. We're supposed to be working together but the antagonistic tone you've adopted makes that difficult. If you feel my actions were inappropriate, I urge you to file an RfC. My actions are motivated by a reasonable and positive interpretation of the policies and guidelines that create the structure we build the encyclopedia on, and I'm confident that while the RfC would generate a healthy amount of conversation back and forth on the issue, the end agreement would be that yes, the article _was_ a speedy delete candidate, and yes, even though deleting an article after a 'Keep' AfD can raise eyebrows, we need to act decisively in the interests of the project. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 01:57, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing "menacing" about my tone at all To the extent that I allow a certain dislike for your action to be displayed, that display also is in the interest of the encyclopedia: disagreements over the proper result of an AfD should go to DRV, and not be settled by "boilerplate" rhetoric regarding WP:NOT a democracy, or specious claims that CSDs apply when they cannot reasonably be so interpreted. Anyone making such claims should see that their actions will only sow discord, and harm the project. Your unwillingness to admit an obvious mistake is disquieting, but I'll be contented to hope that you won't repeat these sort of unilateral reversals. Should they be, I will take your suggestion, and file an RfC. I apologize if you perceive the antagonism as personal; I am only dedicated to opposing actions which harm the project, and contentious out-of-process deletions do such harm. Best wishes, Xoloz 04:06, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I am still getting the hang of the Wikipedia thing, I just updated the Max Landing Weight to 3420 Lbs, just bought a 400 and that's the Max landing weight that I got in the manual. You can contact me at aaronflyplanes@gmail.com!

Aaron

I am verrrrry envious. Beautful plane, see ya in the flight levels. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 03:18, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell me why my page was deleted and how I can make it better?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Psnb (talk • contribs) .

Please see WP:CSD, specifically G11 (which covers advertisements). The article appeared to be an advertisement for a business and/or services instead of an encyclopedia entry. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 21:09, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see that. I am not intending to spam or advertise anything. How can I make my page acceptable like Alienware, Voodo, Falcon Northwest, WidowPC, and all the other computer companies that have profiles just ilke the one I wrote. It's not very clear to me.

OH... WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHY DID YOU DELETE MY ARTICLE ON QUADRUPLE STARS? THEY EXIST...Xizes 00:47, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ZOMG PONIES! - CHAIRBOY (☎) 00:59, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You made a reference to a copyright violation. I actually wrote that particular text several years ago as a student under Dr. Smith. It has been used widely as a short bio used when he presented papers, attended conferences, etc. The IEEE site copyrights everything it publishes (I am also a memeber if IEEE). Can I resubmit the article with a reference to that sight or by re-stating the fact (even though they are already "in my words")?

Howdy! Nope, you must own the copyright because posting something to the project licenses it under the GFDL. If you know the subject, you should be able to write a new, non-infringing article about him. Regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 00:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In what country are pictures of erect male genetalia allowed to be shown to minors, sir? Xchanter 03:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)Xchanter[reply]

Your interest in male genitalia and children is not the issue here, being civil to your fellow wikipedians is. In regards to the rest of the conversation, since you have not answered the rest of my question, whyever should I pay any attention to yours? - CHAIRBOY (☎) 05:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You believe, sir, that I am a Nazi? Not that it will help, because, frankly, you have been the one who has accused and not answered, but my great grandfather was a Rabi. I completely understand your discussion of where the slope should be defined, and I am saying: at pictures of erect male genetalia. To place the words back in the public domain (for your response was certainly rude, and I would ... if we were in person), I do not believe pictures of erect penises should be shown to children. That you disagree is to your own morality.

I will leave you alone if you do the same.

My best wishes,

Xchanter 05:46, 30 October 2006 (UTC)Xchanter[reply]

I think you may have responded to the wrong person, where's the nazi talk and rudeness stuff you're talking about? If you'd like some assistance navigating Wikipedia, I'd be happy to help, but I'll need a little more information. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 05:53, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to help XChanter navigate I trust you'll show him the door. --Doc Tropics ^{Message in a bottle} 06:01, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir-

So apparently, this is your site. You have the ability to insult me, not respond to me, and put your insults back on in the public domain. And you call me a Nazi.

Respond reasonably.

Xchanter 06:02, 30 October 2006 (UTC)Xchanter[reply]

You still haven't shown me where I called you a Nazi. I've been nothing but civil to you, I'm beginning to suspect your motivations. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 06:03, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will be perfectly clear: a man saying another man is interested in male genatalia and children is fighting words (bad english, but the point is there). You were deliberately rude to me and, frankly you can f*** o**. Should you have the power with this site to remove/destroy my presence, then you had best: do so; attempt a different tone; leave me alone. I herein provide you that opportunity.

My best,

Xchanter 06:15, 30 October 2006 (UTC)Xchanter[reply]