User talk:Yami Takashi/Archive 3

Archive Aug 13, 2008 to August 23, 2008

re:Help on List of Pokémon

Hey, its good to know that you are editing productively. Looking over some of your edits to List of Pokémon (101-120), I am seeing a lot of gamecruft and trivial material. Try not to include things such as specific moves, etc. and only add things that are definitely worth mentioning. I think you will doing more trimming than adding, but overall your grammar is looking good. Just remember to proofread. Also, adding some reliable sources would be pretty awesome. Happy editing, Artichoker[talk] 20:19, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually I think less is better than more if the "more" happens to be gamecruft. And one way to make the various Pokémon exert notability is to add reliable sources. Artichoker[talk] 20:54, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Awesome. And you are absolutely correct about that; they are hard to find. Especially these ones, focusing on individual and minor Pokémon. Artichoker[talk] 21:05, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

My guess is yes, that is a reliable source. Keep up the good work, Artichoker[talk] 23:23, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

re:I'm gettign no where with these guys

Well it's good that you aren't edit warring. As for the content dispute, I am sorry but I just don't have enough time to get involved in one. Also, it's not a topic I'm really interested in; but let it be known that I do support the removal of the video. Artichoker[talk] 02:16, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

re:No one can win with this atom guy

Well it seems that discussion is still going on, so we'll wait and see what happens. Sorry I couldn't participate more in the whole thing, it's just that I really don't have time right now. I'm thinking about going on a WikiBreak. Artichoker[talk] 00:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Breast talk

There is clearly no consensus for your proposed change to the lead image in the Breast article; and at this point you are being tendendtious and disruptive by repeating the same argument over and over again without persuading people, and are making accusations against other editors of article ownership [1][2] and "misrepresenting" consensus [3][4] . I strongly recommend you step back, relax, and pull back from the brink, or you risk being blocked. Dreadstar † 01:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Even if consensus were a strictly numerical vote, 5/4 would still not make a consensus, as other editors have pointed out - 75 to 80 percent is the minimum standard for a passing percentage on Wikipeida, 5/4 is only 55.6%. On top of this lack of a numerical percentage, Wikipedia is not a democracy, and we do not use a majority or supermajority rule. It takes more than just a certain percentage of "support" or "oppose" votes to create a true consensus. And no, I am certainly not "obligated to maintain a distance and not interact or persuade others to interact for me" with you, your characterization of my interactions with you are highly flawed, and I see you've made the same false accusations of bias against others who have warned you.[5][6][7] Dreadstar † 02:03, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Calm down

You keep this up you're going to get blocked, perhaps indefinitely, by an administrator who is completely uninvolved. It's not worth it. Also read WP:MASTADON. It has helped me in times of need. ScienceApologist (talk) 02:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Who are you, and why are you here? have you been contacted by Dreadstar outside of Wikipedia? I didn't see anything on your talk page, but then again Dreadstar and surian were talkign to eachother but not by talk page. Surian being the second admin to block me, after talkign to Dreadstar who i accused of being biased.

"You keep this up you're going to get blocked, perhaps indefinitely. It's not worth it. ScienceApologist (talk) 02:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC)"

You changed your wording quick enough, why you have to add the uninvolved part? You've already poisoned the well for me because this makes me even more suspicious of yours and his intentions.

Also i only want a ethical treatment and Dreadstar is not giving me it. I have asked he not contact me multiple times and he had acted in a harassing type manner. Yami (talk) 02:26, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm a little paranoid when it comes to admins, especially ones i feel are conspiring against me. Yami (talk) 02:30, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Listen, I'm definitely no friend of Dreadstar's. I just see in your lashing out the same sort of frustration and anger that I've evinced many times, toward many of the same administrators. And you know what? You are absolutely right to think that there is a conspiracy of administrators. And they really ARE out to get you. See, there are a certain number of administrators here because they enjoy the power of being able to say who gets to stay and who has to leave, some of whom you've already met. They definitely conspire off-line, in chats, over the phone: you name it, they communicate that way. Only, you can't change Wikipedia. It's this way and it's not going to change. You're only giving them the excuse to treat you harshly. By the way, I added the "uninvolved" part because it is clearly the next step in the process. Administrators back up other administrators over non-administrators all the time. It's part of the hierarchy that keeps Wikipedia running fairly smoothly.

My intention here is really just that I saw your note at User talk:AGK's page and looked into the matter. I think I vaguely agree with you on the image issue, but trust me: it's really not worth the level of anger you're going through.

From the looks of things, my prediction was sadly borne out. As someone who has been blocked 19 times, let me tell you that the best thing to do is to take a WP:WIKIBREAK. Let this one slide, take breast off your watchlist, cut your losses, and do something else. I'll put your page on my watchlist if you need to vent.

ScienceApologist (talk) 02:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

ScienceApologist (talk) 02:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

This isn't about the image this is about Dreadstar Harassing me. Ethically he was to remove himself from involvement but he refuses to do so. Yami (talk) 02:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, WP:ETHICS is only a collection of essays, guidelines, and policies. There is no ethical accountability at Wikipedia. Harassment is a very serious charge and needs to be carefully substantiated or it will be dismissed as WP:Wikilawyering. Which, for some reason, is both a requirement and crime when being active on Wikipedia. Full of contradictions, yes, but that's what you get when you have an encyclopedia that anyone can edit. ScienceApologist (talk) 03:13, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Well I have accused Dreadstar multiple times for being Bias, and to leave me alone which he hasn't.

I have also had a public complaint against both him and Rlevse which they know each other well enough to award each other. And Rlevse is the one that contacted the admin that blocked me this time.

Both are conspiring against me. Yami (talk) 03:18, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I hear you! They're engaging in WP:CONSPIRACY: only, look again, that redirect doesn't address the issue of conspiracy at all. In fact, conspiracy is ENCOURAGED on Wikipedia. Sure it's unethical, but that's the name of the game. Once you're on the radar screen, you're on the radar screen. That's the way it goes. You better believe that Dreadstar and Rlevse wanted you blocked. Only, there's no rule in Wikipedia that says that they're not allowed to want you blocked. Nor is their any rule that prevents them for asking someone else to block you. And unfortunately, they have a lot more political clout and experience with such matters than you do, so when they conspire they're likely to win and you're likely to lose. Yes, it's a fact, their conspiracy is perfectly within the rules: in fact it's codified within the rules.

What is not allowed is for someone to pursue a vendetta against you. But to prove that this is happening, you have to show evidence that they're doing something like wikistalking you or you have to show how their activity rises to the standard of WP:HARASS. I haven't seen you do this. You are making an argument that is based on being powerless, which however righteous and evincing of fortitude, has no weight at this website.

ScienceApologist (talk) 03:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

look at the public complaint there eivdence there and tons of other incidences where i have told Dread he is bias and to leave me alone in the archive. Yami (talk) 03:30, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I see your complaint. I see where you ask him to leave you alone. Only he doesn't have to leave you alone: he just has to not harass you. There is evidence aplenty that Dreadstar was simply involved in the same dispute as you and would inevitably collide if you both remained involved in the situation. You don't really have the right at Wikipedia to tell someone that they cannot communicate with you. You can ask, demand, and insist that they do not, but if they continue and are unflappably within the bounds of WP:NPA and WP:CIV there's really nothing you can do. If Dreadstar follows you to another page, or if he swoops in out of the blue to bait you, then you can report him for harassment. But just because you have accused him of bias and have asked him to leave you alone does not mean that he is harassing you according to the rules of Wikipedia. ScienceApologist (talk) 03:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked for a period of 48 hours for Violation of WP:CIV at [8] and casting wild unfounded aspirations, as you have at ScienceApologist and Dreadstar, which is also impermissible for someone so recently block as you have been.. To contest this block, please reply here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} along with the reason you believe the block is unjustified, or email the blocking administrator. For alternative methods to appeal, see Wikipedia:Appealing a block. MBisanz ^talk 02:35, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

unblock

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Yami Takashi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I was not being uncivil. I was correcting a editor, and telling him that there were others who already voiced what he was asking for (images) And i was voicing my concerns about his intentions, and reasons. The admin who blocked me was contacted by a admin known as Rlevse who previously blocked me and who i had a public complaint against for being bias and conspiring with two other admins. One being Dreadstar who I have asked numerous times to leave me alone and have accused of beign bias. The other being a Admin who extended the Block after talking with Dreadstar and Rlevse. I find this block unjust and unfounded and i believe Dreadstar and Rlevse to be out to get me, as they repeatably harass me. Ethically they should leave me alone given our past, but they continue to conspire against me and get people to act for them. Rlevse contacted the blocking admin for a Neutral admin, but i feel given the fact it was Rlevse who contacted s/he was no longer a Neutral admin. Despite me asking both Rlevse and Dread to leave me alone they refuse and harass me still and are doing anything they can to target me..

Decline reason:

Declaring that there is a conspiracy against you isn't a good reason for an unblock. Per the diff provide in the block message above, I agree with the block. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 03:21, 20 August 2008 (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.

Nah, this tactic tain't going to work. If Rlevse isn't allowed to contact anyone then how is he supposed to get a neutral admin to get involved? Through the power of intention? People talk to each other on Wikipedia all the time. That doesn't make them "involved with each other" anymore than you and I are "involved" with each other. No, a better tactic would be to apologize, say you won't do it again, and try to stay away from the situation that caused the ruckus. ScienceApologist (talk) 03:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

unblock

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Yami Takashi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I was not being uncivil. I was correcting a User's math and voicing my concerns on his side of the argument. I was also voicing my concern that I believe he to be WP:TEND and WP:OWN for his comments and actions. I have repeatedly asked Dreadstar, as well as Rlevse who contacted the blocking admin not to contact me and to leave me alone. As well as asking them not to have others act for them. The Blocking Admin should have been aware of possible conflicts of interests as stated by the blocking policy. The blocking Admin also used the block that these two were involved in, to jusitfy his blocking me. I also have raised a Public complaint against Dreadstar and Rlevse very recently as can bee seen on this talk page. I find both to be bias and harassing me and doing what they can to "Frame me up" Rlevse went to the blocking Admin's page and posted this: "Could you look at this: [9], User_talk:Dreadstar#Re-Breast_talk, [10], [11], User_talk:AGK#Please_Tell_Dreadstar_to_back_off. I need a neutral admin input. Thanks. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)" One of those diffs shows me telling Dreadstar to leave me alone, the other is where I ask AGK to tell Dreadstar to back off of me. AGK is the one who handled the public complaint against the both Dreadstar and Rlevse. I am being unethically treated by these two. Baited, threatened and stalked by them. Rlevse and Dread star recently had made contact with me in the Breast Article's talk page, where he accused me of being WP:TEND Dreadstar diffRlevse diff Meanwhile Dreadstar is contacting me on my Talk page relating to the breast article and threatening me here The Block should be undone because the Diff used in the block was used out of context and not uncivil. Because the blocking admin should have been aware of a possible conflict of interest. Also because of these Admins involvement, as well as the justification of this block based on a block Dreadstar and Rlevse were involved in

Decline reason:

You and you alone are responsible for your actions, not others. — Tiptoety ^talk 04:55, 20 August 2008 (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.

I see that Rlevse has gotten to you based on your award on your talk page.

I wish to say thanks for your support in my successful request for adminship, which ended with 82 supports, 3 opposes, and 1 neutral. I will do my best to live up to your expectations. I would especially like to thank Rlevse for nominating me and Wizardman for co-nominating me.
                                                  — JGHowes ^talk - 19 August 2008

This can be seen as a conflict of interest.Yami (talk) 05:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I see how, considering that message was actually left by another user. Many of the longtime users of this site have interacted with each other, previously, but that doesn't mean they agree on everything as a habit. – Luna Santin (talk) 05:13, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

(E/C)That is not a award, but instead a thank you from JGHowes (talk · contribs) for the fact that I participated in a RfA. The only reason Rleves name is mentioned is because JGHowes is thanking him. How does that deal with me? That is in no way a conflict of interest, if anything take this time to read over WP:COI. Tiptoety ^talk 05:14, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Well considering the unethical and harsh treatment Dreadstar and Rlevse are giving me, as well as their repeat harassment makes me paranoid and suspicious of you admins. I'm responsible for my own actions? please justify the reason you say that? Can you deny that there is no conflict of interest here considering Dreadstar and Rlevse are involved? given my past with them and my multiple pleads for them to frankly leave me the hell alone? Yami (talk) 05:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: "I'm responsible for my own actions? please justify the reason you say that?" It seems to go without saying that you're reponsible for your actions, whatever those actions may be. Do you disagree? – Luna Santin (talk) 05:27, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm responsible for my actions if i'm in the wrong. All i ask is that Dreadstar and Rlevse leave me alone and keep from contacting me or getting others to do so. How am i in the wrogn if i ask that two admins who i have had a not so pleasent history with leave me alone? Yami (talk) 05:36, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I see that you have talked with atom. I was wonderign where you came from. Yami (talk) 05:40, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

That is true; Atom and I are in the midst of a disagreement, recently, though I don't recall having any close association with them previously. I regularly respond to unblock requests, and am here in the course of that habit only. – Luna Santin (talk) 05:46, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

unblock

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Yami Takashi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I was not being uncivil. I was correcting a User's math and voicing my concerns on his side of the argument. I was also voicing my concern that I believe he to be WP:TEND and WP:OWN for his comments and actions. Also the Admin Rlevse who contacted the blocking admin, and i have a complex and unfriendly history. I have repeatedly asked Rlevse and Dreadstar who is another admin and his associate to leave me alone, but they still harass me. I have also them not to have others act for them. The Blocking Admin should have been aware of possible conflicts of interests as stated by the blocking policy. The blocking Admin also used the block that these two were involved in, to justify his blocking me. I also have raised a Public complaint against Dreadstar and Rlevse very recently as can bee seen on this talk page. There you will see a quote from Rlevse's talk page where Dreadstar and another admin were talkign off wikipedia and the admin commented on Rlevse's talk page about extendign Rleve's block. This is what Rlevse posted on the blockign admin's talk page "Could you look at this: [12], User_talk:Dreadstar#Re-Breast_talk, [13], [14], User_talk:AGK#Please_Tell_Dreadstar_to_back_off. I need a neutral admin input. Thanks. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)" I request a admin who hasn't been awarded by Rlevse, Dreadstar or their associates to review this request.

Decline reason:

Let me preface this by saying that I am totally uninvolved. I have had no meaningful interaction with any of the admins who have reviewed/blocked you so far. I wouldn't have blocked you for only the diff provided in the initial block but I do believe that this is part of a pattern of uncivil behavior on your part. Your further repeated unblock requests and continuous unfounded accusations confirm this. Accusations of a WP:CABAL against you do not help your case. It is very unlikely that these administrators have anything against you and accusing them of conflicts of interest and improper behavior without any evidence is counterproductive. Notifying another admin of an issue is not itself improper as it is the way that another uninvolved administrator can be pointed to a situation that needs attention. If you want my advice, take your 48 hours, familiarize yourself with WP:CIV, WP:AGF, and WP:NPA and when you come back try not to throw around unfounded accusations. Oren0 (talk) 05:42, 20 August 2008 (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.

unblock decline edit conflict: No idea what's going on here, but "is that you wife or girlfriend in that image," at least to me, seems to cross over the line of rational discussion into a fairly brutal ad hominem personal attack on a person's character. While ad hominem arguments are common (though fallacious in and of themselves), they normally don't warrant a block; however, given the subject at hand (i.e., a nude picture), in my opinion most people would take offense to such comments, and I feel that it would be hard to demonstrate the merit in making them in the first place. — slakr^\ talk / 05:50, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Didn't you already have that, with Ohnoitsjamie? The text of your unblock request doesn't seem to be changing much; are you that eager to beat a dead horse? – Luna Santin (talk) 05:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

do some detective work and you'll see that Dreadstar and Rleves are to closely associated and that i caught Dreadstar and him in the wrong during the last block where i found that Dread and the admin Scrain who extended Rlevse block were talking off wikipedia and then decided to extend the block. Yami (talk) 05:23, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm disinclined to investigate these claims, because they seem neither here nor there with regard to the block rationale. Were your comments within the bounds of civility or not? Do you intend to act within those bounds, in the future? Those strike me as more important questions. – Luna Santin (talk) 05:30, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I have been acting civil. How is me questioning someone uncivil?Yami (talk) 05:33, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

If that's the case, why do you think several users above have described your actions as uncivil? This isn't a loaded question, I'm just curious to hear your take on that. – Luna Santin (talk) 05:39, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

clarify what actions and what users? Yami (talk) 05:40, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

The actions which led to your block, and the various users who have since commented on it (including declining your unblock requests). – Luna Santin (talk) 05:46, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

what actions? Dreadstar harassing me despite me having asked him dozens of time to leave me alone? Me being suspicious of why all these people are showing up on my talk page out of the blue? My trust in admins shattered by admins fraternizing in the last block? Using diffs that were out of context and no adequate for a block? Accusing me of being WP:Temp on the article talk page then comeinghere to threaten me? Me tellign the admin to leave me alone again while the other uses those diffs agaisnt me for the blocking admin? Yami (talk) 05:55, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I haven't reviewed every edit of all users involved, but I don't see any evidence that any admin has acted improperly. If you believe that you have evidence that admins are acting improperly, the correct thing to do is to open up a thread at WP:ANI when you're unblocked. I stress that if you want to do that be sure that you can demonstrate diffs that show what you're talking about and you must present your case neutrally and without namecalling or personal attacks. Oren0 (talk) 05:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

if you would have taken the time you would have seen that this is a continuous thing with these two admins. look at the Public complaint at the top of the talk page.

"Hallå, Dreadstar and I were discussing whether it'd be appropriate to extend Yami's block. Would you be partial to this? He does appear to be refusing to abide by our policies. Or would you be more inclined to let the block lift naturally and see if that sets him straight? I'm okay with either, but he does seem unrelenting, to be honest. Wondered what your opinion was. Thanks. Hejdu! ScarianCall me Pat! 14:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)"

that is from the last block which showed Dreadstar fraternizing with the Admin who extended Rlevse's block. Also Dread and Rlevse have worked together before and were both contacting me on the breast article talk page and after i told them not to.

Also Rlevse is the one who contacted the blocking admin and Dreadstar has repeativly becoem ucivil and harassed me as can be seen on this talk page.Yami (talk) 05:49, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

For what it is worth, I was also going to reject the unblock, because the unblock reason requested tries to frame others. "is that you wife or girlfriend in that image?" was unnecessary. I would not have blocked you for it, but I can understand others getting tired of this unnecessary personalisation of the issue. Your constant insinuations that everyone else is colluding with Dreadstar and Rleve is also unnecessary. Our admins are expected to independently review each others actions despite having interacted with each other in the past. If you want to be unblocked, simply tell us you'll keep your comments on talk pages more civil in future. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 05:59, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll keep them civil, But i just am asking for some ethical treatment. Where are the ethics here?

Dread has keeps coming back despite me asking him to leave me alone and saying uncivil things like no, I am certainly not "obligated to maintain a distance and not interact or persuade others to interact for me" when i ask him to leave me alone and not have people do their dirty work like he did with Scarian.

Or like Rlevse who goes and gets someone else to block me as to not get into another jam like he got in back on the 7th with Dreadstar and Scarian in the public complaint.

plus i have people I don't know, coming out of the wood work from nowhere, talking here and there and its driving me nuts.Yami (talk) 06:09, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

People you dont know are coming out of the woodwork because you are requesting an unblock. That template places your user talk page into a queue being viewed by all admins. You asked for a review of the block; this is how it happens. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 06:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

As John said, lots of admins watch the unblock queue. You asked for an uninvolved admin, you were essentially rejected by three of us, and then you complain that people you don't know are here? You got the forum you were asking for. Oren0 (talk) 06:22, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't see admin on your pages, so i didn't know you were admins. Yami (talk) 06:30, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

It says it on my user page; it's the first user box. Yes, all three of us are admins: [15] [16] [17]. Only admins can decline/approve unblock requests. Cheers, Oren0 (talk) 06:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I am just looking for a ethical treatment. Dreadstar and Rlevse are not on my trust list, and for them to threaten me and then have me blocked because i ask them to leave me alone is not right. Frankly how the hello Japanese kitty is me questioning a user be uncivil? I get blasted for accusing him of WP:TEND and WP:OWN when the same people are accusing me of WP:TEND that is BS. Rlevse accused me of it and so did Dreadstar. Why does the guy with a history with these two get picked on by them for doing the same thing they did.

This is a case of entrapment if i ever seen one. Where are these admin's ethics? The second i called Dreadstar bias before the first block he should have excused himself from beging involved. Instead he goes out of his way to find diffs that "show my wrong doing" and completely ignoring the others. Cold harsh fact it takes 2+ to edit war, so why am i treated as the hitler when they're stalin Tojo and Mussolini?

Or when after dozens of times telling Dread to leave me alone, he gets uncivil, and Rlevse goes and tells another admin i'm being uncivil.

If the cat stays out of the dog house it won't get chased.

Oh how about me being called disruptive by Dreadstar on a user's talk page who kept reverting every comment i left on there and even called me a troll. Now that is disruptive and disrespectful. Oh and i love this one. I made a survey that was called disruptive by atom on the breast article talk page. I call atom's comment disruptive and who gets in trouble for saying disruptive? me.

I might act a little more civil if Dreadstar and Rlevse could leave me alone, practice a little ethics, fix their tunnel vision and stop working together to entrap me.

the bottom line is i want them to leave me alone but they refuse. And the guy i reported Dreadstar to on the board thing got a attitude with me in the e-mail. He got mad i kept asking him to tell dread to leave me alone.Yami (talk) 06:35, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Asking them to leave you alone is fair enough, but if you guys edit similar pages it's unreasonable to ask them to leave the pages because you don't want to edit near them. And accusing these same admins of entrapment and "pick[ing] on you" is just begging to have your block lengthened (not that I intend to do that or am recommending that anyone else does). You're showing that you don't understand why you were blocked. Oren0 (talk) 06:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

The first blocked was a little harsh. I admited to edit waringand calling atom a ass. The rest of Rlevse reason for doing so was completly out of context thus not adequate.

The extention of that block was undon because They knew they were in the wrong. Its not on Rlevse talk page anymore, but the second i saw that Dreadstar, who i had accused of being bias and blah blah blah, had been talking to Scarian. He extended the block based on talking with Dreadstar, which was in clear conflict of interest.

Not only were the two caught but it seemed they were associating outside wikipedia. I only found out because Scarian who was is a young admin who was having a pervious block questioned made the mistake of posting ""Hallå, Dreadstar and I were discussing whether it'd be appropriate to extend Yami's block. Would you be partial to this? He does appear to be refusing to abide by our policies. Or would you be more inclined to let the block lift naturally and see if that sets him straight? I'm okay with either, but he does seem unrelenting, to be honest. Wondered what your opinion was. Thanks. Hejdu! ScarianCall me Pat! 14:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)" on Rlevse talk page.

not to mention i was being accused of breaking consensus, when i was blocked! Plus Scarian goes and protects my talk page so that i have absolutely no way to get unblocked at the time, just because i continued to preach the others involved wrong doing.

You'd probaly understand more if you were there or had the time to research.

Well Scarian quickly undid the block because they knew they were in the wrong.

This whole thing is ehtics. Where are their ethics.

Now i might seem like i'm trying to place blame on everyone, but what do you think of me being blocked by these admins who were working together? or what about now with Dreadstar coming here to start and Rlevse in the background getting my fingerprints on the smoking gun I don't own, never seen, but i wish i had it and was pointing it.

You don't find it suspicious that slick cat Dreadstar keeps coming into this old dog's house? Gets me to bark and chase him. only to have the his owner have a leash and shock color put on me for doing so?

You don't see anything ethically wrong here? Yami (talk) 07:00, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Also i'm not requesting they not edit the same article, just leave my talk page alone and stop conspiring against me or at least leave me alone and let other admins take care of any wrong doing i might be doing, but not go out and contact them their selves. I am not going trust any admin sent by them or touched by them.

You know the day they blocked me they awarded each other. I am a strong believer in ethics. Someone call your bias and your in power, you should remove yourself from being involved. I have made a habit to check out these admins and everyone around me since then. I looked at all your pages for even a smell of them on yous. I don't trust admins because of this kind of thing. Right down to it i see those two as dirty cops. Yami (talk) 07:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

On a collaborative project, people are going to communicate with each other; that's hardly nefarious by definition. You consistently complain that Rlevse asked another admin to block you, when in fact that's exactly what they're supposed to do instead of blocking a user with whom they're involved in a dispute (see Wikipedia:Blocking policy#Disputes); would you prefer that Rlevse had blocked you himself, or left that decision to the judgement of an independent administrator? You've repeatedly accused other users of harassing you (or of conspiring to do so), but have not yet provided any concrete evidence that they are doing so -- diffs are your friend. If you do feel that any users are acting maliciously, your best move is to present your case calmly and with evidence. At this point your block has been reviewed and commented on by several independent administrators, all of whom seem to be in agreement that your behavior prior to the block was uncivil, and none of whom appear to be advocating obviously for an unblock; perhaps it would be helpful if you could open yourself to the idea that maybe, just maybe, you're not perfect, here? At least two of us, I think, have mentioned that sort of openness could go a long way toward considering an unblock. – Luna Santin (talk) 09:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Where in the world do you get this i think i'm perfect junk? what part of frame job don't you understand? I get a little uncivil with Dreadstar after telling him to leave me alone for the umpteenth time on my talk page, And Rlevse comes a long and reports me to another Admin for doing so. Mean while both him and Relvse accuse me of being WP:TEND and get mad when i say its Atom who is being WP:TEND and WP:OWN When Atom says he doesn't want or think the article in question shouldn't use a illustration.

How is that uncivil to atom where the diff for the block comes from. I already showed you Dreadstar and Scarian's little convo, you can go and see the diffs for yourself on Rlevse talk page. Or what about the Public complaint up top of the talk page its right there? If you think i made it up then you rely to much on diffs and are to trusting of those two and distrusting of me for me to trust you. You don't think its unethical for these two to get involved in the banning process or be a contributing factor for any uncivilized behavior because they refuse to leave me alone or keep calling me WP:TEND for correcting a person's counting/math skins and percentages.

I admit i was getting confused with them myself because everyone kept on wanting to change the numbers, but at least i tried to keep people on track.

That Survey was up for 2 weeks and it was pretty much decided the first day. the second Day Asher changed his position, but for 2 weeks not one person voice another opposed or support but more people still ended up supporting a change.

Naturally i'm going be a little disgruntled when someone falls to no consensus so quickly as Atom does. 2 weeks is a long time. I don't see why he has to ask for the same info multiple users have given him. Also how is me questioning his motives and choices uncivil?

he asked for a better picture, me and multiple users have suggested the same ones, yet he ignores them.

Despite this Atom isn't the problem here, its Dreadstar coming to get me up in arms to get me in trouble. I said it before if the cat stays out of the dog house it won't get chased. If Dreadstar left me alone as i have asked multiple times, or if Dreadstar and Rlevse were not working together again to get me then there would be no problem. If I was being uncivil to Atom where the diff for the blocking comes from then he should have reported me.

What about Rlevse's comment on the blocking admin's talk page. Using diffs that clearly show me telling Dreadstar to leave me alone, and having to do so multiple times.

What the hell is wrong with Dreadstar is he in love with me? I just want him to leave me alone and he can't seem to listen. Why would Rlevse sumbit multiple diffs to the blockign admin that all had me telling dread to leave me alone? Why did the blocking admin not do the research into a possible conflict of interest or ignore the fact that Dreadstar is causing me trouble.

This is not rocket science, I just want dreadstar to leave me alone and be unblocked because him and Rlevse conspired agaisnt me, if you don't blieve that fine, but don't you dare accuse me of thinking i'm perfect.

Why are you not suspicious of those two? Why don't you tell them to leave me alone? Is it ok for them to aggravate me and then report me because they started it? You seem to be ignoring that this started because thjey can't leave me alone and get mad and call me WP:TEND Yami (talk) 15:35, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

As you have again raised the issue of Dreadstar/Rlevse, I've looked at their involvement and the diffs. I dont have time to investigate the entire he said/she said of who called who disruptive in order to give an opinion on who I think was right. Hopefully, everyone involved learnt to be less disruptive! However, I have looked through a lot of the diffs, and can say that I think you have been given the raw end of the stick in this. A number of people made mistakes, but your thumb stuck out the most. A few minor missteps on your part has grown into a far bigger dispute, mostly because you keep escalating the matter based on what you think is mishandling of the initial block.

The initial block is fine - you were causing people grief, calling them names, refusing to indent comments as is expected, edit warring on Asher196's talk page, etc, etc.

Dreadstar's fraternizing with other admins is fine. Rlevse's open request for another admin to take a look at something is also fine. We talk to each other and ask for second opinions. This is how Wikipedia runs. If you dont like it, that is fine too.

Scarians extension of the block was not unreasonable, as you were attacking the people who had done the block, and had posted lots and lots of text on your user talk page and not managed to convince another admin to unblock you. Do you notice that the current unblock requests are not being accepted either? Scarian protected your user talk page because you were continuing to post, claiming that everyone involved was colluding against you. At that time you needed to quit posting to your user talk.

This recent block is another escalation of the dispute from last time.

Dreadstar's comments above regarding consensus is fine: straw polls are not a good reason to change - we like discussion and if one person objects, we try to understand why and fix their objection. It did seem like you were pushing for change based on a numerical majority.

You have no right expecting that any other another editor should not talk to you. You expected to be able to discuss the Breast matter with Asher196, and even edit-warred to keep a message on that users talk page. Remember that you said talk pages are a "public feature of Wikipedia". That includes your talk page too. Standard protocol is that we dont reject other peoples comments on our own talk page, but if someone does remove a comment from their own talk page, we accept that they have at least read it, and we realise that it is best to leave them alone. Removing comments from a persons own talk page can be seen as disruptive, but it depends on the circumstances. Your request on Aug 4 for Dreadstar to not contact you wasnt ideal.

A few times I have seen you say that you have reported Dreadstar to ANI. I see this report, which was only commented on by one person who said I'm not seeing any gross incivility on either side, really. I suggest you two just leave each other alone, in order to avoid escalating the conflict. Dreadstar wasnt notified and didnt comment, and there was no consensus that Dreadstar should leave you alone. Are there other ANI reports?

Your recent reply to Dreadstar was ignoring the underlying message in Dreadstar's post on your user talk, which is that consensus is not about numbers. For you to reply and request that Dreadstar stay away from your user talk page isnt appropriate when the message being given to you was bang on the money. In that reply you also accuse Dreadstar of collusion, and tell the user to stay away from your talk page again. It is incivil to not read and comprehend someone's message, and then go over to their talk page, and tell them off for telling you good advice. This is a collaborative project - the quality of the advice is what should matter. Only if there is a long standing dispute between two people do we decide that they should permanently avoid each other - usually one person is permanently banned before a stalemate like that is established, because it is usually not feasible for two people to peacefully always avoid each other.

Also, exchanging awards is not bias!! I remember the day your last block occurred, because Rlevse and Dreadstar were over on Wikisource where I am an admin. They deserve awards for their work there. I have also had a lot of involvement with Rlevse, as I was an arbcom clerk with Rlevse. Am I also a dirty cop?

You talk of ethics, but so far it seems like you are intent on continuing to accuse Dreadstar and Rlevse with very little substance. I can understand that you feel wronged by the initial block, and the block extension, but the best way forward is to stop attacking these lads, and to do some non-controversial editing for a little while. You have amply defended yourself here - it is suffice to say that this incident, and the blocks that go with it, are not simple matter. Sit out the block, or request an unblock showing an appreciation that A month or two from now, this block will be unimportant if you take ScienceApologist's advice and calm down.

John Vandenberg ^(chat) 11:32, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I learned long ago that trying to have a discussion with Yami is unproductive and frustrating. That is the reason I kept removing his comments from my talk page. I didn't want to deal with him anymore. Asher196 (talk) 12:02, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow, a lot happened while I was sleeping. After seeing everything that unfolded, I think, for the good of the project it would be best if Yami and Dreadstar just avoided each other, at least for some time. Useight (talk) 14:35, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

The last time i tried to wait out a block, Scarian extended it the day it was to expire, after talking with Dreadstar. That would be a case of poisoning the well or Jury tempering in Dreadstar's involvement there.

Ethics dictate that a person accused of being bias shouldn't be talking to other, which weigh in on their decisions.

You don't find it unethical for Dreadstar to have contacted Scarian and talk with him, our of wiki's hearing distance about me? unethical to keep coming back here and harassing me? Harassing me to get me up in arms, and then having Rlevse get involved by reporting me for doing so? It is not to much to ask that these two editors with Scarian not contact me, and not get involved in talks between me and another editor.

Also where have i done any controversial editing here? Did i go and change the Lede image on that article after i disagreed with Atom's decision to fall to no consensus by default? no i didn't. What are you trying to accuse me of, you act like i got the raw end of the stick but then say things that says otherwise.

Please don't confuse actions from the first block with actions that might have led to this block. The admin before your comment acted like i was acting like i was prefect. well did it ever accrue to both of you that these two are not perfect? or that they are overstepping the boundaries of what a admin should be doing? That wikipedia is not perfect or any part especially the policies? I get in trouble for calling a editor WP:TEND and Relvse alone called me it 2+ times and Dreadstar called me it when he came back to the talk page after it was so peaceful here. Three guns fired but only one person who forgot to blow away the smoke.

Dreadstar comes here and threatens me with a block for telling a editor (Atom) I view as WP:TEMP and WP:OWN that he is those things. When a editor says things like "A Illustration is not appropriate for this article" what else am i going think? Especially of a editor who has admitted to being apart of the article for 7 years.

For the part with me telling Dreadstar off for threatening me, Of coarse i'm going to object to him coming here to say those thing especially with our past. Dreadstar has acted uncivil and over steped the boundaries here. Go up and look for yourself its under Breast talk on this talk page.

Also there are no other ANI reports because i was blocked and wikipedia's higher ups didn't have the brilliant idea to allow people to report admins during blocks and talk page protections. I would have got the rope for the gallows right there if i had been able to report them, because i had their smoking guns. I would have brought all three up for trial right there with the rope around their neck. However, and i wish i wasn't so nice, I was wiling to loosen the nooses and let them go when i was unblocked in the Public complaint. But it seems just like in the old west movies, letting the bad guys go always comes back to haunt you.

Ask Useight or Artichoker how i decided to let it go even though i could have carried on the whole thing in the public dispute on.

Those admins were in the wrong and couldn't unblock me fast enough when their dealings was brought into the light. Why don't you go and look at how i ask them questions in the Public complaint and they ignore them. Its like the master catching the manservant in his chair, and the manservant trips on himself to look like he's dusting it or checking for a squeaky spring. Both knows the manservant is busted, and its awkward as hell for the manservant when the master keeps asking questions. "The chair still dirty?" "What about that squeak jeeves.?" Sometimes that awkwardness is the best punishment. They tried to say they had no significant interactions with each other when Rlevse's talk page said different.

I was going let it go. i was going be the bigger person and just let it sink in that they were caught and i knew it, they knew it and it was time to step away. My Whole reason for asking to be unblocked this time and the extension block is because i feel these admins have over stepped the boundaries by pulling the strings to tangle me up and trap me. Please tell me where i was uncivil enough to warrant a block without their involvement? The blocking admin only used one diff and that was from a convo between me and Atom where i state the facts that there were 5 for change 4 for stay, not this 6 to 5, or even 6 to 4. Now Onnly us in support would benefit from the 6-4 rulling but as a person who believes in ethics i couldn't rightfully take advantage of Atom's mistake. I was also voicing things i feel are going on. I get blocked for asking a editor to clarify his reasons for wanting to keep a image that multiple users have asked be replaced with images he keeps ignoring? I get blocked for telling the user i feel he is being WP:TEND and WP:OWN After 7 years of involvement and not listening to multiple users. Multiple users suggested 95C and Breast image 289 and he is still asking for images to replace the lede.

You guys keep getting on me by saying "Multiple people have said you were inthe wrong yet you deny any wrong doing" Well what about Atom? Seems to me he's doing somethign and gettign away because he knows these admins and has been on that article a lot longer then me. New guy brings to much new vibe and they don't like it. I'm two steps from leaning towards accusing Dreadstar of WP:OWN as well because he has a longer editing history on that article and he is taking it as a personal task to drag out a debate that should have ended 2 weeks after it started, not drag on for months or years as some have suggested.

From my point of view it seems that these users are only defending the lede image of that article so they have something to do. I even stated that i was pretty sure that the image was on the article 2 years ago before i went to college, and if a image has been up that long then it should be changed. Why are these editors dragging this out longer then it has to be. Wikipedia might not be a democracy, but if following majority rules in this one case can let it end i don't see why the hell not use it. I mean if a discussion has gone on that long, it might be time to think out of the box.

Also Atom claims that non of the images suggested were to convincing to replace the led, but he didn't give people the options. I had to go back and show people there were two images up for nomination.I even voiced my concern that if more people knew about the images then their decision might have been different.

Also a person from WP:MED voiced that the image should be changed, and those editors on there accuse me of forum shopping.

I get blocked for voicing my concerns of WP:TEND and WP:OWN but they don't get even a warning for accusing me of forum shopping. No one tells Atom that he might be Acting WP:TEND or WP:OWN with comments like "The problem with that one is that it is an illustration. That would be fine if we had no real images. We have an abundance of real images that do a better job. It's not like a picture of human breasts is lurid or something, it is simply another part of the human body. Atom (talk) 22:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)"(don't trust this quote go to the breast talk page)

To me that is pushing his POV onto people WP:TEND, and that him blocking a illustration from the position of lede is a case of WP:OWN. Are Dreadstar and Rlevse and the other editors so out to get me that they ignore their own actions?

Like you said i am getting the raw end of this stick, and right now I'm tempted to beat some people with it. I'll wait out this block but you guys in the admin department need to learn to do more research and be less judgmental. like Luna who kept trying to get me to admit wrong doing in a passive aggressive way. I don't trust you admins because of this kind of crap. Just like Scarian who told me "You might get unblocked if you admit your wrong" (go to my archive to see that if you don't want to believe he said that) What kind of adminship is that?

Please spend a little more time looking into if a person is in the wrong instead of trying to get them to admit to it. There is no reason for asking a person to admit they're wrong when they're not or its being questioned if they are truly wrong. Also don't focus on one person, it takes more then one person to edit war, and in cases like this look at the talk page of everyone and every article involved. You'd be surprised what people miss when they don't investigate. How you think i found out about Dreadstar, Scarian and Rlevse the last time. I did my homework.

Non of you admins notice Dreadstar, Rlevse, Atom, Asher or Asarelah accusing me of WP:TEND and Forum Shopping. Do you admins have tunnel vision so bad you can't look at more then a pixel of a picture? You guys might be volunteers, but what the use in serving your community if you're not going do a little extra work here and there.

Those editors and admins are the uncivil ones. They are falling into WP:OWN by becoming to over protective of the article, and being uncivil by accusing editors of being WP:TEND and Forum Shopping As well as a bunch of other things. Like Asher who says things like I learned long ago that trying to have a discussion with Yami is unproductive and frustrating. Or saying that i'm uncivil and that i need to have good faith when they're being a dick. And that's from WP:TE

Ask yourself this question. Doesn't it seem a little funny that the new editor is singled out when these editors that know each other, and have been on this article Breast longer then me are doing the same things i got accused of in both blocks?

My POV might be a little paranoid but given the circumstances it seems i am just in not trusting people here. Yami (talk) 17:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

This conversation is going no where but in circles. This is not the time to bring up any other issues except your behavior in relation to the block you have received and your blatant use of the unblock template as a soap box is going to stop. If you feel you are being stalked or harrassed take those issues up at ANI, or file a RfC, but sitting here and blaming others for your actions is counter productive and does nothing but create a hostile environment. Also, accusing others of supporting each other on the basis of awards and having conflicts of interest is just as blatantly rude to those attempting to solve this situation. I have not seen you one time admit you have made a mistake but instead always make excuses like: "Oh, how was I was I to know you were a admin?", and "I only said those things because he started it", do you hear how immature those statements sound. Blaming others and playing he said she said is school yard behavior and I think we are all tired of playing School Yard Monitor/Mediator. Remember, two wrongs does not make a right. So, I am going to stop this three ringed circus and protect your talk page for the duration of the block. If you want to purse a unblock further, fallow the directions listed in the block notice above. Tiptoety ^talk 20:01, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Block time

ANI post

Some are saying at your ANI post that perhaps Dispute Resolution would be a better venue than ANI. There are several sections of Dispute Resolution, such as Request for Comment and Informal Mediation, so perhaps you should select your best option there and go with that. I'm not sure, though, it's not an area of Wikipedia I delve into too often. Useight (talk) 21:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

My view: Basically editors and particularly admins often work closely together, and admins must "protect each other" since an admin shouldn't use his/her powers in a dispute in which he/she is involved. Bias often informs these decisions, especially in the realm of civility. That's just a fact of life around here. Reacting against a block often leads to further charges of incivility, or, if none is present, disruption, tendentiousness etc. When unblocked, put the merits of the block behind you, watch your own behaviour, and get on with editing. It's not really such a black mark against you, bad or questionable blocks happen all the time, and are quickly forgotten if left behind for good editing. Admins with a genuine pattern of bad or questionable behaviour are generally the subject of an RfC sooner or later, after which they improve slightly, sometimes. 86.44.28.251 (talk) 22:04, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

re:Well that was a pain in the Wobufet

Yeah I guess it would probably be best if you left that article alone for a while. As for Pokémon articles that I need help with; Pokémon FireRed and LeafGreen is my current project, so sourced additions to that article would be greatly appreciated. Happy editing, Artichoker[talk] 14:09, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:ANI

Unfortunately, I didn't find anything unusual in my review, though I did not have the opportunity to post as such. The blocks appear to be valid, and it is not clear that consensus was with your edits. My best advice at this point would be to take a deep breath and edit other areas for a while. Chances are good that, if you stick to non-controversial edits for a while and discuss proposals on talk pages, that this whole mess will go away. I know you feel strongly about what's been going on, but sometimes it's easiest to simply disengage. Given the discussion at ANI, an archival is appropriate - though, note that the material remains for further review, for those so inclined. Best, UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 19:32, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Use of "Please" in Cincinnati

Your recent contribution to the Cincinnati, Ohio article on the use of "Please" in that area was correctly removed because it was not linked to a reference source.

For your information, however, this use of the word is a direct translation from the German, "bite", which meanes "please" and is commonly used by German-speakers everywhere to ask that a statement be repeated. This is a clear legacy of the German heritage in Cincinnati, but unless you can find a published source that discusses it, it would be inappropriate to include a note such as yours in the article. Also, it would belong in culture or history, not in a Trivia section. (Trivia sections are not prefered in Wikipedia, according to the guidance I have seen.) Pzavon (talk) 21:50, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

You completly misunderstood the whole thing.

Extended content

Yeah i might have gotten into a edit war on the lede image and that was the one and only real case of going against consensus. As for the gallery I wasn't asked to get consensus until Asher196 who said removing 8/57 images was to big of a change. I say that would be a case of WP:OWN right there. Those editors claimed i went against consensus with the lede image, that there was a consensus to keep it all this time. I didn't see any consensus on keeping the gallery 57 images long, the only way i got that shortened was that i had to tell them that half the images were in the Breast cancer article's Gallery and its still 28 images long. As for the rest of the edit waring they were so busy undoing any edit i did that they reverted edits that helped make the article more creditable. I removed a site from external links that disclaimer even said it's answers wwere for entertainment. I removed an image that was a stain of the exact same thing next to it. I added a Image of a illustration and all three kept getting removed in the shuffle because of Asher196 and Atom who edit wared with me over the article. Asher196 edit wared over 8/57 images and Atom edit wared saying me and Asher196 were censoring by putting the long 57 or so image gallery into a hidden state to keep the page from stretching. As for this whole Dreadstar thing, he shouldn't have gotten involved if he had a history with that article and he does. He also has a history with Rlevse and this is where you don't get what i've been trying to tell you all on AN. Those two are basically overstepping the boundaries of decency and ethics. I've asked Dreadstar to leave me alone multiple times and he just keeps coming back. What about Dreadstar talking with Scarian about extending the block? A admin who was called bias by the editor gets another admin who is much younger and doesn't know the situation to bock the editor for more time? You know they quickly undone that when i opened the public complaint agaisnt them and showed them proof of their wrong doing. As for this block Dreadstar contacted me and got me uncivil if i was uncivil so that Rlevse could go to the last blocking admin to have me blocked for something both Dreadstar and Rlevse were involed in. Why don't you go to the Breast article talk page and my talk page and see for yourself. Go to them and you'll see them ganging up on me. This isn't about a simple content dispute this is about two Admins maybe more who have done wrong. If you don't want to believe that them remove yourself from the situation. If you can't believe that two admins that have been hassling a editor for a month are in the wrong then you are clearly not qualified to judge the situation. Yami (talk) 18:59, 23 August 2008 (UTC) I'm sorry if you think that is uncivil but its been a month of blocks and two admins bugging me after i asked them to stop. Yami (talk) 19:20, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Review of your talk page shows that you have been flogging this dead horse for quite a while now and have so far persuaded no one that the evil conspiracy that you are complaining about actually exists. I think I should make something very clear now. Your actions are now being disruptive and if you don't stop wasting editors time with this stuff I'll block you myself. There are 2.4 million articles to work on. Go and find some of them and forget this incident. Its not nice to hear I know but that's the reality of where you are right now. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:00, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• Endorse. I've had multiple requests to review this matter by Yami, and my conclusions are identical to Spartaz's. I endorse all of this statement, and would strongly encourage Yami to refocus himself on the encyclopedia. Anthøny 22:27, 23 August 2008 (UTC)