TrueCRaysball |
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
← Archive 1 • Archive 2 • Archive 3 → |
Jun. 2007 - Jul. 2007 |
Hornetman16: from one Christian to another, you really need to another you really need to get a cool head about this issue of the image. I agree with your personal objection, however you need to realize that it is simply a personal objection. You're sounding like a ranting child. I'm sure that you're much more mature then that, but at the moment, you're not really showing it all that well. Take a moment, pray about how your witness is being displayed to these people. You're not showing a righteous indignation. You're just throwing a tantrum. And your user page very clearly displays your faith, however your action simply makes you appear to be a religious nut instead of a man filled with the fruits of the spirit. Look'em up and check your spirit on this issue. Just my thoughts. Blessings Tiggerjay 05:54, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Please read WP:NLT. Legal threats will get you blocked. Corvus cornix 06:39, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
That's Not Child porn because it's not a real child!-- Hornetman16 19:10, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Hornetman16, I've deleted your userpage. If you want to know why, I can send you a private e-mail, I'd rather not discuss the reasons too much in public. Please know that I am doing this with regards for your well-being, and no other reasons. Best regards, Riana (talk) 07:14, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Despite that she didn't have my permission to delete it I want it put back!-- Hornetman16 17:58, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Whatever just put it back *crys*!!!-- Hornetman16 18:37, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
OF COURSE.-- Hornetman16 18:40, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I've blocked you for 12 hours for your continued incivility and disruption at the IFD. When the block expires, please come back with a cooler head. -- Core desat 19:11, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Why don't you block big nole for personally attacking me!-- Hornetman16 19:19, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Then What do you call it?-- Hornetman16 19:21, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
BTW - I'm adding the block boilerplate message here, so you know how to proceed if you wish to request unblock - Alison ☺ 19:22, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
TrueCRaysball/Archive ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
They blocked me because I was fighting for what I believe, and what happened to free speach?
Decline reason:
First and foremost, you were blocked for being disruptive on the IFD page (making multiple "votes", making vague legal threats, et cetera). The block was instantiated to give you a bit of time to cool down, collect your thoughts, and attempt to return to civil discussion with us. I know you feel strongly about your parents and your religion, but on Wikipedia neither of those have any say-so in what we do. In regards to your userpage, we deleted it because it contained personally identifiable information which we feel is inappropriate for minors to post on the internet. I am currently working on clearing out the private information and will repost it soon. I suggest you calmly wait our your block (do not continually repost this template, or the blocks may increase in length), as it is only for 12 hours. All the best, ^ demon [omg plz] 19:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
As God as my witness I WILL get that photo deleted!!!-- Hornetman16 19:37, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a privately owned website, that is editable by the public. The US laws on free speech do not apply. -- Deskana (talk) 19:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
If User:72.184.88.30 is you, you are not allowed to edit while blocked. Evading your block is grounds to have your block extended. -- Deskana (talk) 19:56, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I reposted your userpage as I said I would. I took the effort to clean out the personally identifiable information (last name, age, state you're from, what school you go to, email address, screen name). Basically the most anyone knows about you now is your first name, that you're from the US, and you're a teenage. I think this allows us to let you retain your personality without potentially endangering you. Please try to understand that we're doing it for your own safety. We don't want to do this kind of things, but we've had people on the site threatened in real life (just the other day in fact!) and we don't want to risk the same thing happening to someone who's younger. So take care, and let me know if I can do anything else for you. ^ demon [omg plz] 19:49, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Look, your actions are getting way out of line. We are all trying to help you here, and all you have done is pine and pout. I'm trying to get you acquainted to Wikipedia, and you give me this childish attitude? Let me tell you right here right now that even though I am ready to assume that you are acting out of your best intentions, I, and everyone else here, will not be hesitant in indefinitely blocking you from editing Wikipedia if you continue disrupting it with your blind ranting, removal of others comments, and other childish antics. Consider this a formal warning from your fellow teenage Christian. — Kurykh 21:49, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
How 'bout on average?-- Hornetman16 22:12, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Per the guideline WP:AGF, you and your IP have been unblocked. However, please keep in mind the advice other editors have given you here, and present your arguments in a more civil tone. Failure to do so could lead to re-blocking later, but hopefully that won't have to happen. -- Core desat 22:20, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks For concern-- Hornetman16 22:25, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Four of the images you were using in your navbar at the top of all your pages are copyrighted by the Wikimedia foundation, and should not be used in the userspace. As such I have replaced them with example images. I suggest you look around other peopels userpages to find some icon images you can uuse. Viridae Talk 01:14, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
No Not right now I'm in the middle of asking for permission. IF the answer ends up being no then we'll have a deal...I'll let you know.-- Hornetman16 03:57, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't know the last person I was talking to was Alison ☺.-- Hornetman16 04:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I have no Idea what you talking about.-- Hornetman16 04:11, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
It's okay-- Hornetman16 04:18, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Hornetman16, have you checked out commons:Category:Icons? There's loads of free stuff there. Riana (talk) 04:18, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
†Sir James Paul† 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.
Moved here, because the conversation above is a little chaotic :)
From my talk page: what do you think of the one I have above [in my talk page, that is]? I can change the icon set for you to any you like, really. Some folks use the Crystal icon set. I chose the ones above because they're small and intricate. Mind if I snag a copy of your userpage, sandbox it and play around with it? I'll give you a shout when it's done & you can tell me what you think? I did this guy's the other day in about 15 minutes. It did look like this. What do you think? - Alison ☺ 04:17, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Article content should not reference user pages. Please see WP:ASR. There is a process for proposing new stub types - that way, everything is kept organized. In general, there need to be 30-60 or more articles available for the stub for it to be accepted. -- BigDT 04:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Place it on evry article of a christian bible scripture and you'll get like 200 of them!-- Hornetman16 04:50, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I'll get started on that tomorrow cause I'm getting sleepy. NIGHT!!-- Hornetman16 05:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Chris Benoit death.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Moe ε 03:31, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Do not under any circumstance replace free images with nonfree like the one you inserted. Do it again and I'll start handing out vandalism warnings. — Moe ε 03:42, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Don't keep adding Chris Benoit's death to the article, Eddie's last WM was WM21, but it isn't listed. Are you going to list Backlash as his last Backlash and One Night Stand as his last One Night Stand. Leave the trivia out of it. Darrenhusted 12:58, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I think he should be permanently blocked cause he'll probbaly go back to the same crap after the block has expired.-- Hornetman16 03:24, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Why do you insist on replacing the current picture (which is fine and looks nice), is it because you just want the picture to be one you uploaded? The two look like they are the same pic, the only difference being yours is .png while the previous one was .jpg. TJ Spyke 03:19, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Read Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability. "[A]ny material that is challenged or likely to be challenged needs a source, as do quotations, and the responsibility for finding a source lies with the person who adds or restores the material. Unsourced or poorly sourced edits may be challenged and removed at any time. Sometimes it is better to have no information than to have information without a source". McPhail 12:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Hornetman, please note that I reverted your edit on Talk:Philippians 4:13 regarding the status of the page from sub to start. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Christianity/Assessment#Quality_scale in which you will see that this does not contain any of the required elements yet. Please continue to contribute on the main page and it will eventually reach this status on its own. Tiggerjay 21:45, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Regarding Image:Ecw logo.gif, I restored the PNG version of the logo on the Extreme Championship Wrestling article. PNG versions tend to be favored over GIF images - see Wikipedia:Image use policy#Format. Thanks. -- Jtalledo (talk) 12:18, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
You are not to change an image's copyright status just so you can include it on your userpage, as you did here. It is a violation of the owner of the photograph's intellectual property, and it is not tolerated on Wikipedia, as well as being a likely violation of United States Copyright Law. -- ɐuɐʞsəp (ʞɿɐʇ) 01:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Then what goes on there? What tag?-- Hornetman16 01:59, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Welcome, and thank you for experimenting with the page Homeland Security Advisory System on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- HBow3 17:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Your recently changed all versions of USF gold to the incorrect color. According to USF's own visual standards at http://usfweb2.usf.edu/ur/identity_standards.pdf and http://usfweb2.usf.edu/ur/logos/ , the official USF colors for the Web are Green: #336633; Gold: #CCCC99, which was my earlier revision.-- BaRiMzI 02:54, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
That CCC99 crap isn't gold! I'm reverting it so it is gold!-- Hornetman16 02:56, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
H says that USF gold for web is #CCCC99 which isn't gold I made it gold and he reverted it! I just trying my look correct not exactly correct!-- Hornetman16 02:59, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
I'll quit now but I still want to see the policy!-- Hornetman16 03:04, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Are school color's even alound to decorate the infobox with?-- Hornetman16 03:07, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
|
~ Wikihermit 05:23, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
I have closed Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Hornetman16 2. In the sole hour of its existance, you gathered 8 opposes. Now is not the proper time to run for adminship for you, seeing as you just came off of a hot dispute and have issues concerning fair use and images on Wikipedia. Please hold off for a couple months.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龍) 05:44, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
This could be argued is a personal attack. Please read WP:NPA and consider changing your wording. Corvus cornix 06:18, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes, i have and I didn't attack him!-- Hornetman16 06:32, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
I reviewed you. If you have any questions or comments, please ask them on my talk page. Wishes, -- w p k t sfs 21:58, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
May I ask what this is in reference to? I'm curious because Coelacan has not been active in some time, so it may help to explain why you are annoyed with him. Please feel free to answer here. Cheers, ~ Riana ⁂ 06:49, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
I sure will-- Hornetman16 06:59, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Would you mind toning it down a bit? Keep in mind that wikipedia is not a soapbox or a social networking site. We don't mind you having user boxes for your faith, but having so much of your page focused on your religion is distracting. I'm not saying don't mention your religion at all, I mention mine on my page, but please just take it down some. I really don't want to see you get in trouble for your userpage. -- ʇuǝɯɯoɔ ɐqǝɟ 14:03, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm not changing it cause I'm not offending anybody.-- Hornetman16 00:13, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm not puting ya'll down so what's your point.-- Hornetman16 00:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
The point is that on Wikipedia, your userpage does not belong to you. The community is fairly tolerant, and does close its eyes to a certain amount that does not help in building an encyclopaedia. But once a few people have gently suggested that the contents are not appropriate, it would be advisable to listen. If you want to host a page about yourself and your religious beliefs, why not get your own free webpage? ElinorD (talk) 00:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
It's a flag dang it. what matter's mor is the article's not my user page. What do you want me to do with the flag?-- Hornetman16 01:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah it is too much to ask. But I shrink it if it'll make ya happy and get you off my back about it!-- Hornetman16 01:34, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
"But when you pray, go to your inner room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret..." -Matthew 6:6, NAB. -- w p k t sfs 18:03, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
That was incredibly disrespectful. We all have different religions. We're not trying to get you to change your beliefs, just have some basic respect for people with beliefs which are different to yours. To effectively tell someone of a different religion that yours is better is quite, quite wrong. If you pull a stunt like that again, I will personally block you for a short time, and I will not unblock your account just because you harp on and on about it. You were very lucky that Coredesat and Deskana were so nice to you. ~ Riana ⁂ 06:41, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
You say you working for me when your not cause I try to work with you back but you ignore it.-- Hornetman16 06:50, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I just remembered a verse and I know in the right state of mind and asking what do you want me to do to my userpage? It bugs me that I can't have it the way I want it cause 3 people think it's to annoying.-- Hornetman16 06:57, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I TRIED TO KEEP MY COOL AND YA'LL JUST COULDN'T LEAVE IT BE!!! I HAVE SENT A VERY STERN LETTER OF YOU ALL'S DISREPECT TO THE OFFICE!-- Hornetman16
Wait a minute. Hornetman16 has been misunderstood somewhat here. While the comment he posted to my user talk page was, overall, inappropriate, his comment seems to have been spurred by a particular (specifically religiously general) phrasing I used earlier - I said that "[...] when your faith in god(s) is expressed in scholarly [...] about him/her/them [...]", which could be misinterpreted as a misunderstanding of the nature of the Christian god or Trinity. Hornetman16, I understand reasonably well the intricacies of Christian theology, having studied it, if dispassionately, for five years at my high school, which happened to be a private one run by Jesuits. Since this is the case, I must apologize, to a certain degree at least, for the warnings leveraged against you. Regardless, your treatment of other users through your userpage has been inappropriate - Wikipedia guidelines concerning the user page say that a userpage shouldn't be the place for such blatant, shall I put it, advertising, regardless of the strength of your convictions. I and other users are certainly willing to help you create a userpage which compromises and allows you a certain expression of your faith without disturbing others who wish merely to create an encyclopedia, regardless of personal belief in any god, gods, or lack thereof. We don't want to attack you - we want you to not question our beliefs, directly or indirectly. Nihiltres( t. c. s) 14:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Hey, just chill out about the user page. I'm a christian too, so don't take this as an attack. Your user page is a little over the top. Yeah, I agree that you should be allowed to put the christian and american flag on your user page, but as Alison has said, you don't need to shove it into other people's faces. A small infobox or a few userboxes will do just fine. If you would like, I would be willing to help you create a user page that doesn't cause any problems. ~ Wikihermit 07:47, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Block message:
Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Cenafan16". The reason given for Cenafan16's block is: "Abusing multiple accounts".
Decline reason: reason — You created a sockpuppet to protest about Daniel's deletion of your userpage, pretending to be an uninvolved user, and then your real account got caught in the autoblock when your sockpuppet was blocked. I'd be prepared to lift the autoblock after 48 hours, or perhaps even 24 hours, if you promise to behave. But you don't get to create sockpuppets to plead your cause, and then escape the autoblock. ElinorD (talk) 19:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I didn't ask him to do that, he did it on his own.-- Hornetman16 19:43, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
It's not good faith if you unblock me this time...it's called understanding that my brother stuck his nose where it didn't belong.-- Hornetman16 19:49, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I do have a brother and don't insult him agian by saying he doesn't exist! Now please unblock me!-- Hornetman16 20:04, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
You guys are being awful selfish. How would you like it if your brother got you blocked and there was nothing you can do?- Hornetman16 20:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
The autoblock won't last forever. Just stick it out. Say your prayers tonight, and reflect on whether Jesus really wants you to keep on saying it was your brother. (Remember Revelation 21:8, again.) Stop arguing. Behave yourself. The autoblock will expire. And you can start editing within policy. I'd be prepared to adopt you, if it would help. If you're not prepared to tone down the disruptive behaviour, I'm afraid you're heading for an indefinite block. Alison and Riana and Deskana have been very patient and helpful, and look how you've repaid them. ElinorD (talk) 20:10, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Hello, this is a message from
an automated bot. A tag has been placed on
Midnight Cry, by
Wikihermit (
talk ·
contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be
speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because
Midnight Cry is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see
Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting
Midnight Cry, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at
WP:WMD. Please note that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it did not nominate
Midnight Cry itself. Feel free to leave a message on the
bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --
Android Mouse Bot 2
08:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Do not post personal information regarding your brother again. -- ɐuɐʞsəp (ʞɿɐʇ) 20:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Do you agree to what they did to my userpage?-- Hornetman16 20:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Could ya'll ask daniel to message me so I can talk to him...I'd do it my self but I'm blocked.-- Hornetman16 20:59, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I want to make copromise with you to get control of my userpage back where I can edit it.--- Hornetman16 00:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
I waant to make a deal that I'll revertmy userpage back to befor the flags if you let me have it back and I'll start treating it more with policy.-- Hornetman16 00:45, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Hornetman. I want to make some comments and suggestions:
Almost everything you have done since you registered your account has been leading you more closely in the direction of an indefinite block. I don't want to see that happen. Several other administrators don't want to see that happen either, but we are running out of patience.
I think you need a mentor or someone to adopt you. I'm willing to volunteer. That does not mean that I can or will save you from a block if you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, but it does mean that I can give you advice on what you need to do or to stop doing in order not to be blocked.
Although you may not have realised this, your userpage was not promoting Jesus (though that would have been unacceptable under Wikipedia policy); it was promoting Hornetman, and not Hornetman at his best. It did not look like the page of a Christian; it looked like the page of an immature and noisy teenager, who was unwilling to show respect for others.
If you are willing to accept either mentoring or adoption from an experienced user (not necessarily with me, though I don't think you'll find many other people willing to offer), then I am willing to undo the autoblock on your account (provided the blocking admin agrees, as I think he will), and to allow you some kind of userpage which discreetly mentions your faith in an inoffensive way rather than having it directing to your talk page (provided the deleting admin agrees, as I think he will). One of the first things that I will be suggesting is that you make your signature more discreet as well. You need to start giving the impression that you are here to build an encyclopaedia, not to draw attention to yourself.
It's entirely up to you. If you don't accept, the autoblock will probably expire in a few days anyway, and you'll be free to edit again, though I'm pretty sure your userpage will remain redirected to your talk page, as you've blown all the chances you've had so far. My motive in making this offer is to give you a last chance of avoiding rushing headlong into an indefinite block. Think about it. ElinorD (talk) 00:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
I would like Wikihermit to adopt me.-- Hornetman16 00:47, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Iwanted Wikihermit cause he's also a Christian but what you thinks best I'll do!-- Hornetman16 00:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Block message:
Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Cenafan16". The reason given for Cenafan16's block is: "Abusing multiple accounts".
Decline reason: Hornetman16, this account is not currently blocked, its your sockpuppet Cenafan16 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) who has been blocked which has caused you to be unable to edit. But I am not about to unblock either there or here as after reading all the words above I see no evidence of you demonstrating that you will become a constructive editor. Let alone your several attempts at sockpuppeting. Experienced editors have bent over backwards trying to give you constructive advice and second chances but you repay them with this. There's a suggestion below for another place for you to play. Go there and annoy them, we have serious business to do here. — Moondyne 06:15, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
If you want something like this, go to Conservapedia. There is no need to disrupt wikia and there is especially no need to spam Wikipedia trying to create your own little wiki when it's already been set up for you. Go, and be happy -- ʇuǝɯɯoɔ ɐqǝɟ 03:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm not convinced yet. These are the list things I feel you will need to do to regain the ability to edit Wikipedia, and the ability to edit your userpage.
I ask for review of these conditions (the first seven are my initial ones) by Riana, Alison, Deskana etc. (anyone else involved), and feel free to add 8 and beyond. Hornetman, we're trying to help you, because if you continue down the path you are currently on you will probably end up banned. Daniel 09:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
I AGREE...I was Cenafan16 I as trying to swap accounts cause I didn't want to be known as Hornetman16 anymore.-- Hornetman16 18:21, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
If you don't mind I'll change it after today cause I dressed it up for 4th of July!-- Hornetman16 18:47, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Is that better-- Hornetman➊➏ 19:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
How's this?-- Hornetman16 ✞ 19:08, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
That color is still bright enough that it's very hard to read -- ʇuǝɯɯoɔ ɐqǝɟ 19:10, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
How's this-- Hornetman16 ✞ 19:11, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Don't worrk tabout it I changed it-- Hornetman16 (Talk) 19:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
You have still given no indication that you agree to any of Daniel's conditions. Thanks for changing your signature, though. ~ Riana ⁂ 21:11, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
I was trying to be polite when I answered her if I wasn't I'm sorry!-- Hornetman16 (Talk) 21:15, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Say 'agree' or 'disagree', for the record, below. Daniel 21:24, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
TrueCRaysball |
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
← Archive 1 • Archive 2 • Archive 3 → |
Jun. 2007 - Jul. 2007 |
Hornetman16: from one Christian to another, you really need to another you really need to get a cool head about this issue of the image. I agree with your personal objection, however you need to realize that it is simply a personal objection. You're sounding like a ranting child. I'm sure that you're much more mature then that, but at the moment, you're not really showing it all that well. Take a moment, pray about how your witness is being displayed to these people. You're not showing a righteous indignation. You're just throwing a tantrum. And your user page very clearly displays your faith, however your action simply makes you appear to be a religious nut instead of a man filled with the fruits of the spirit. Look'em up and check your spirit on this issue. Just my thoughts. Blessings Tiggerjay 05:54, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Please read WP:NLT. Legal threats will get you blocked. Corvus cornix 06:39, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
That's Not Child porn because it's not a real child!-- Hornetman16 19:10, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Hornetman16, I've deleted your userpage. If you want to know why, I can send you a private e-mail, I'd rather not discuss the reasons too much in public. Please know that I am doing this with regards for your well-being, and no other reasons. Best regards, Riana (talk) 07:14, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Despite that she didn't have my permission to delete it I want it put back!-- Hornetman16 17:58, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Whatever just put it back *crys*!!!-- Hornetman16 18:37, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
OF COURSE.-- Hornetman16 18:40, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I've blocked you for 12 hours for your continued incivility and disruption at the IFD. When the block expires, please come back with a cooler head. -- Core desat 19:11, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Why don't you block big nole for personally attacking me!-- Hornetman16 19:19, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Then What do you call it?-- Hornetman16 19:21, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
BTW - I'm adding the block boilerplate message here, so you know how to proceed if you wish to request unblock - Alison ☺ 19:22, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
TrueCRaysball/Archive ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
They blocked me because I was fighting for what I believe, and what happened to free speach?
Decline reason:
First and foremost, you were blocked for being disruptive on the IFD page (making multiple "votes", making vague legal threats, et cetera). The block was instantiated to give you a bit of time to cool down, collect your thoughts, and attempt to return to civil discussion with us. I know you feel strongly about your parents and your religion, but on Wikipedia neither of those have any say-so in what we do. In regards to your userpage, we deleted it because it contained personally identifiable information which we feel is inappropriate for minors to post on the internet. I am currently working on clearing out the private information and will repost it soon. I suggest you calmly wait our your block (do not continually repost this template, or the blocks may increase in length), as it is only for 12 hours. All the best, ^ demon [omg plz] 19:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
As God as my witness I WILL get that photo deleted!!!-- Hornetman16 19:37, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a privately owned website, that is editable by the public. The US laws on free speech do not apply. -- Deskana (talk) 19:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
If User:72.184.88.30 is you, you are not allowed to edit while blocked. Evading your block is grounds to have your block extended. -- Deskana (talk) 19:56, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I reposted your userpage as I said I would. I took the effort to clean out the personally identifiable information (last name, age, state you're from, what school you go to, email address, screen name). Basically the most anyone knows about you now is your first name, that you're from the US, and you're a teenage. I think this allows us to let you retain your personality without potentially endangering you. Please try to understand that we're doing it for your own safety. We don't want to do this kind of things, but we've had people on the site threatened in real life (just the other day in fact!) and we don't want to risk the same thing happening to someone who's younger. So take care, and let me know if I can do anything else for you. ^ demon [omg plz] 19:49, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Look, your actions are getting way out of line. We are all trying to help you here, and all you have done is pine and pout. I'm trying to get you acquainted to Wikipedia, and you give me this childish attitude? Let me tell you right here right now that even though I am ready to assume that you are acting out of your best intentions, I, and everyone else here, will not be hesitant in indefinitely blocking you from editing Wikipedia if you continue disrupting it with your blind ranting, removal of others comments, and other childish antics. Consider this a formal warning from your fellow teenage Christian. — Kurykh 21:49, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
How 'bout on average?-- Hornetman16 22:12, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Per the guideline WP:AGF, you and your IP have been unblocked. However, please keep in mind the advice other editors have given you here, and present your arguments in a more civil tone. Failure to do so could lead to re-blocking later, but hopefully that won't have to happen. -- Core desat 22:20, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks For concern-- Hornetman16 22:25, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Four of the images you were using in your navbar at the top of all your pages are copyrighted by the Wikimedia foundation, and should not be used in the userspace. As such I have replaced them with example images. I suggest you look around other peopels userpages to find some icon images you can uuse. Viridae Talk 01:14, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
No Not right now I'm in the middle of asking for permission. IF the answer ends up being no then we'll have a deal...I'll let you know.-- Hornetman16 03:57, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't know the last person I was talking to was Alison ☺.-- Hornetman16 04:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I have no Idea what you talking about.-- Hornetman16 04:11, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
It's okay-- Hornetman16 04:18, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Hornetman16, have you checked out commons:Category:Icons? There's loads of free stuff there. Riana (talk) 04:18, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
†Sir James Paul† 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.
Moved here, because the conversation above is a little chaotic :)
From my talk page: what do you think of the one I have above [in my talk page, that is]? I can change the icon set for you to any you like, really. Some folks use the Crystal icon set. I chose the ones above because they're small and intricate. Mind if I snag a copy of your userpage, sandbox it and play around with it? I'll give you a shout when it's done & you can tell me what you think? I did this guy's the other day in about 15 minutes. It did look like this. What do you think? - Alison ☺ 04:17, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Article content should not reference user pages. Please see WP:ASR. There is a process for proposing new stub types - that way, everything is kept organized. In general, there need to be 30-60 or more articles available for the stub for it to be accepted. -- BigDT 04:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Place it on evry article of a christian bible scripture and you'll get like 200 of them!-- Hornetman16 04:50, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I'll get started on that tomorrow cause I'm getting sleepy. NIGHT!!-- Hornetman16 05:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Chris Benoit death.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Moe ε 03:31, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Do not under any circumstance replace free images with nonfree like the one you inserted. Do it again and I'll start handing out vandalism warnings. — Moe ε 03:42, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Don't keep adding Chris Benoit's death to the article, Eddie's last WM was WM21, but it isn't listed. Are you going to list Backlash as his last Backlash and One Night Stand as his last One Night Stand. Leave the trivia out of it. Darrenhusted 12:58, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I think he should be permanently blocked cause he'll probbaly go back to the same crap after the block has expired.-- Hornetman16 03:24, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Why do you insist on replacing the current picture (which is fine and looks nice), is it because you just want the picture to be one you uploaded? The two look like they are the same pic, the only difference being yours is .png while the previous one was .jpg. TJ Spyke 03:19, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Read Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability. "[A]ny material that is challenged or likely to be challenged needs a source, as do quotations, and the responsibility for finding a source lies with the person who adds or restores the material. Unsourced or poorly sourced edits may be challenged and removed at any time. Sometimes it is better to have no information than to have information without a source". McPhail 12:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Hornetman, please note that I reverted your edit on Talk:Philippians 4:13 regarding the status of the page from sub to start. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Christianity/Assessment#Quality_scale in which you will see that this does not contain any of the required elements yet. Please continue to contribute on the main page and it will eventually reach this status on its own. Tiggerjay 21:45, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Regarding Image:Ecw logo.gif, I restored the PNG version of the logo on the Extreme Championship Wrestling article. PNG versions tend to be favored over GIF images - see Wikipedia:Image use policy#Format. Thanks. -- Jtalledo (talk) 12:18, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
You are not to change an image's copyright status just so you can include it on your userpage, as you did here. It is a violation of the owner of the photograph's intellectual property, and it is not tolerated on Wikipedia, as well as being a likely violation of United States Copyright Law. -- ɐuɐʞsəp (ʞɿɐʇ) 01:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Then what goes on there? What tag?-- Hornetman16 01:59, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Welcome, and thank you for experimenting with the page Homeland Security Advisory System on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- HBow3 17:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Your recently changed all versions of USF gold to the incorrect color. According to USF's own visual standards at http://usfweb2.usf.edu/ur/identity_standards.pdf and http://usfweb2.usf.edu/ur/logos/ , the official USF colors for the Web are Green: #336633; Gold: #CCCC99, which was my earlier revision.-- BaRiMzI 02:54, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
That CCC99 crap isn't gold! I'm reverting it so it is gold!-- Hornetman16 02:56, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
H says that USF gold for web is #CCCC99 which isn't gold I made it gold and he reverted it! I just trying my look correct not exactly correct!-- Hornetman16 02:59, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
I'll quit now but I still want to see the policy!-- Hornetman16 03:04, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Are school color's even alound to decorate the infobox with?-- Hornetman16 03:07, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
|
~ Wikihermit 05:23, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
I have closed Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Hornetman16 2. In the sole hour of its existance, you gathered 8 opposes. Now is not the proper time to run for adminship for you, seeing as you just came off of a hot dispute and have issues concerning fair use and images on Wikipedia. Please hold off for a couple months.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龍) 05:44, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
This could be argued is a personal attack. Please read WP:NPA and consider changing your wording. Corvus cornix 06:18, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes, i have and I didn't attack him!-- Hornetman16 06:32, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
I reviewed you. If you have any questions or comments, please ask them on my talk page. Wishes, -- w p k t sfs 21:58, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
May I ask what this is in reference to? I'm curious because Coelacan has not been active in some time, so it may help to explain why you are annoyed with him. Please feel free to answer here. Cheers, ~ Riana ⁂ 06:49, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
I sure will-- Hornetman16 06:59, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Would you mind toning it down a bit? Keep in mind that wikipedia is not a soapbox or a social networking site. We don't mind you having user boxes for your faith, but having so much of your page focused on your religion is distracting. I'm not saying don't mention your religion at all, I mention mine on my page, but please just take it down some. I really don't want to see you get in trouble for your userpage. -- ʇuǝɯɯoɔ ɐqǝɟ 14:03, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm not changing it cause I'm not offending anybody.-- Hornetman16 00:13, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm not puting ya'll down so what's your point.-- Hornetman16 00:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
The point is that on Wikipedia, your userpage does not belong to you. The community is fairly tolerant, and does close its eyes to a certain amount that does not help in building an encyclopaedia. But once a few people have gently suggested that the contents are not appropriate, it would be advisable to listen. If you want to host a page about yourself and your religious beliefs, why not get your own free webpage? ElinorD (talk) 00:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
It's a flag dang it. what matter's mor is the article's not my user page. What do you want me to do with the flag?-- Hornetman16 01:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah it is too much to ask. But I shrink it if it'll make ya happy and get you off my back about it!-- Hornetman16 01:34, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
"But when you pray, go to your inner room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret..." -Matthew 6:6, NAB. -- w p k t sfs 18:03, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
That was incredibly disrespectful. We all have different religions. We're not trying to get you to change your beliefs, just have some basic respect for people with beliefs which are different to yours. To effectively tell someone of a different religion that yours is better is quite, quite wrong. If you pull a stunt like that again, I will personally block you for a short time, and I will not unblock your account just because you harp on and on about it. You were very lucky that Coredesat and Deskana were so nice to you. ~ Riana ⁂ 06:41, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
You say you working for me when your not cause I try to work with you back but you ignore it.-- Hornetman16 06:50, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I just remembered a verse and I know in the right state of mind and asking what do you want me to do to my userpage? It bugs me that I can't have it the way I want it cause 3 people think it's to annoying.-- Hornetman16 06:57, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I TRIED TO KEEP MY COOL AND YA'LL JUST COULDN'T LEAVE IT BE!!! I HAVE SENT A VERY STERN LETTER OF YOU ALL'S DISREPECT TO THE OFFICE!-- Hornetman16
Wait a minute. Hornetman16 has been misunderstood somewhat here. While the comment he posted to my user talk page was, overall, inappropriate, his comment seems to have been spurred by a particular (specifically religiously general) phrasing I used earlier - I said that "[...] when your faith in god(s) is expressed in scholarly [...] about him/her/them [...]", which could be misinterpreted as a misunderstanding of the nature of the Christian god or Trinity. Hornetman16, I understand reasonably well the intricacies of Christian theology, having studied it, if dispassionately, for five years at my high school, which happened to be a private one run by Jesuits. Since this is the case, I must apologize, to a certain degree at least, for the warnings leveraged against you. Regardless, your treatment of other users through your userpage has been inappropriate - Wikipedia guidelines concerning the user page say that a userpage shouldn't be the place for such blatant, shall I put it, advertising, regardless of the strength of your convictions. I and other users are certainly willing to help you create a userpage which compromises and allows you a certain expression of your faith without disturbing others who wish merely to create an encyclopedia, regardless of personal belief in any god, gods, or lack thereof. We don't want to attack you - we want you to not question our beliefs, directly or indirectly. Nihiltres( t. c. s) 14:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Hey, just chill out about the user page. I'm a christian too, so don't take this as an attack. Your user page is a little over the top. Yeah, I agree that you should be allowed to put the christian and american flag on your user page, but as Alison has said, you don't need to shove it into other people's faces. A small infobox or a few userboxes will do just fine. If you would like, I would be willing to help you create a user page that doesn't cause any problems. ~ Wikihermit 07:47, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Block message:
Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Cenafan16". The reason given for Cenafan16's block is: "Abusing multiple accounts".
Decline reason: reason — You created a sockpuppet to protest about Daniel's deletion of your userpage, pretending to be an uninvolved user, and then your real account got caught in the autoblock when your sockpuppet was blocked. I'd be prepared to lift the autoblock after 48 hours, or perhaps even 24 hours, if you promise to behave. But you don't get to create sockpuppets to plead your cause, and then escape the autoblock. ElinorD (talk) 19:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I didn't ask him to do that, he did it on his own.-- Hornetman16 19:43, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
It's not good faith if you unblock me this time...it's called understanding that my brother stuck his nose where it didn't belong.-- Hornetman16 19:49, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I do have a brother and don't insult him agian by saying he doesn't exist! Now please unblock me!-- Hornetman16 20:04, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
You guys are being awful selfish. How would you like it if your brother got you blocked and there was nothing you can do?- Hornetman16 20:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
The autoblock won't last forever. Just stick it out. Say your prayers tonight, and reflect on whether Jesus really wants you to keep on saying it was your brother. (Remember Revelation 21:8, again.) Stop arguing. Behave yourself. The autoblock will expire. And you can start editing within policy. I'd be prepared to adopt you, if it would help. If you're not prepared to tone down the disruptive behaviour, I'm afraid you're heading for an indefinite block. Alison and Riana and Deskana have been very patient and helpful, and look how you've repaid them. ElinorD (talk) 20:10, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Hello, this is a message from
an automated bot. A tag has been placed on
Midnight Cry, by
Wikihermit (
talk ·
contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be
speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because
Midnight Cry is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see
Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting
Midnight Cry, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at
WP:WMD. Please note that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it did not nominate
Midnight Cry itself. Feel free to leave a message on the
bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --
Android Mouse Bot 2
08:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Do not post personal information regarding your brother again. -- ɐuɐʞsəp (ʞɿɐʇ) 20:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Do you agree to what they did to my userpage?-- Hornetman16 20:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Could ya'll ask daniel to message me so I can talk to him...I'd do it my self but I'm blocked.-- Hornetman16 20:59, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I want to make copromise with you to get control of my userpage back where I can edit it.--- Hornetman16 00:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
I waant to make a deal that I'll revertmy userpage back to befor the flags if you let me have it back and I'll start treating it more with policy.-- Hornetman16 00:45, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Hornetman. I want to make some comments and suggestions:
Almost everything you have done since you registered your account has been leading you more closely in the direction of an indefinite block. I don't want to see that happen. Several other administrators don't want to see that happen either, but we are running out of patience.
I think you need a mentor or someone to adopt you. I'm willing to volunteer. That does not mean that I can or will save you from a block if you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, but it does mean that I can give you advice on what you need to do or to stop doing in order not to be blocked.
Although you may not have realised this, your userpage was not promoting Jesus (though that would have been unacceptable under Wikipedia policy); it was promoting Hornetman, and not Hornetman at his best. It did not look like the page of a Christian; it looked like the page of an immature and noisy teenager, who was unwilling to show respect for others.
If you are willing to accept either mentoring or adoption from an experienced user (not necessarily with me, though I don't think you'll find many other people willing to offer), then I am willing to undo the autoblock on your account (provided the blocking admin agrees, as I think he will), and to allow you some kind of userpage which discreetly mentions your faith in an inoffensive way rather than having it directing to your talk page (provided the deleting admin agrees, as I think he will). One of the first things that I will be suggesting is that you make your signature more discreet as well. You need to start giving the impression that you are here to build an encyclopaedia, not to draw attention to yourself.
It's entirely up to you. If you don't accept, the autoblock will probably expire in a few days anyway, and you'll be free to edit again, though I'm pretty sure your userpage will remain redirected to your talk page, as you've blown all the chances you've had so far. My motive in making this offer is to give you a last chance of avoiding rushing headlong into an indefinite block. Think about it. ElinorD (talk) 00:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
I would like Wikihermit to adopt me.-- Hornetman16 00:47, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Iwanted Wikihermit cause he's also a Christian but what you thinks best I'll do!-- Hornetman16 00:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Block message:
Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Cenafan16". The reason given for Cenafan16's block is: "Abusing multiple accounts".
Decline reason: Hornetman16, this account is not currently blocked, its your sockpuppet Cenafan16 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) who has been blocked which has caused you to be unable to edit. But I am not about to unblock either there or here as after reading all the words above I see no evidence of you demonstrating that you will become a constructive editor. Let alone your several attempts at sockpuppeting. Experienced editors have bent over backwards trying to give you constructive advice and second chances but you repay them with this. There's a suggestion below for another place for you to play. Go there and annoy them, we have serious business to do here. — Moondyne 06:15, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
If you want something like this, go to Conservapedia. There is no need to disrupt wikia and there is especially no need to spam Wikipedia trying to create your own little wiki when it's already been set up for you. Go, and be happy -- ʇuǝɯɯoɔ ɐqǝɟ 03:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm not convinced yet. These are the list things I feel you will need to do to regain the ability to edit Wikipedia, and the ability to edit your userpage.
I ask for review of these conditions (the first seven are my initial ones) by Riana, Alison, Deskana etc. (anyone else involved), and feel free to add 8 and beyond. Hornetman, we're trying to help you, because if you continue down the path you are currently on you will probably end up banned. Daniel 09:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
I AGREE...I was Cenafan16 I as trying to swap accounts cause I didn't want to be known as Hornetman16 anymore.-- Hornetman16 18:21, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
If you don't mind I'll change it after today cause I dressed it up for 4th of July!-- Hornetman16 18:47, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Is that better-- Hornetman➊➏ 19:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
How's this?-- Hornetman16 ✞ 19:08, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
That color is still bright enough that it's very hard to read -- ʇuǝɯɯoɔ ɐqǝɟ 19:10, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
How's this-- Hornetman16 ✞ 19:11, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Don't worrk tabout it I changed it-- Hornetman16 (Talk) 19:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
You have still given no indication that you agree to any of Daniel's conditions. Thanks for changing your signature, though. ~ Riana ⁂ 21:11, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
I was trying to be polite when I answered her if I wasn't I'm sorry!-- Hornetman16 (Talk) 21:15, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Say 'agree' or 'disagree', for the record, below. Daniel 21:24, 4 July 2007 (UTC)