User talk:Cuchullain/Archive 4

Thank you to everyone who participated in my Request for Adminship, which succeeded with a final tally of (61/1/1). I'll do my best to be a helpful and effective administrator. If there is anything you need, just ask.Cúchullain t/c 21:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Health Initiative International

I've already spoken with others about contributing to the Vanuatu entry and have their blessing. See below:

Our mission is to work with Vanuatu communities and health care organizers to improve education, awareness, infrastructure, and medical supply availability in areas that lack health resources. Our ultimate goals are to improve the living conditions of communities in Vanuatu, to foster positive international relations and cultural exchange between volunteers and the people of Vanuatu, and to communicate the living conditions in Vanuatu to Americans. From wanem yu no likem website blong mifalla? Mifalla wantem helpem ol man ples, be mifalla needum fullap man i save problem ia. Mo hemi wan goodfalla samting sapos mifalla putem hemia i go long lukem aout Vanuatu. Mi save traem bakegan blong putem samting ia? Fren blong ol man ples, Kristie

Dear Kristie, The question is not whether I like your website, nor whether your organization is useful for mankind. The question is whether your link has its place within an encyclopaedic presentation of the country "Vanuatu". Does it provide information, facts, knowledge about the history, geography, culture, politics, society of Vanuatu? Not really. It just happens to be related to Vanuatu in some way or another, just like 76 million other pages on the web [1]; are we going to add 76 million links to the bottom of wikipedia's "Vanuatu" page? The fact that you are a "useful" organization (which I don't deny) is not a sufficient reason for making an exception to the principle that we are writing a knowledge encyclopaedia (see what WP is not); otherwise how many links are we going to add to the Africa page??

Ale, naoia mi talem finis tingting blong mi, be i tru se fulap ol artikel blong WP ol i stap miksimap eni kaen infomesen we i no long saed blong save. Sipos yufela i laekem blong putum link ia bakegen i stap, i olraet nomo, bae mi no save agensem. Be maet igut blong adem wan smol sentence blong toksave ("Health organization involved in Vanuatu" o wan samting olsem). Hemia nomo ating, mo gudlak long wok blong yufela.

-- Fren blong Vanuatu, Womtelo 08:45, 5 December 2006 (UTC)"

Please allow my contribution. Thank you.

Sincerely, Kristie

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Christine.armstrong"

superman

i'll make superman very sorry —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.84.40.9 (talk) 12:26, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

the hulk too —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.84.40.9 (talk) 12:27, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

and merry christmas too! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.84.40.9 (talk) 13:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

Did you know nomination for Brangaine

Howdy! Whilst browsing through Special:Newpages for potential articles to feature as part of the Did you know? section of the Main Page, I ran across the article Brangaine, which you created. You can see the proposed blurb at Template talk:Did you know under the date heading corresponding to the creation of the article. I'm adding this notice here for two reasons: Firstly, if you feel the blurb I wrote is inaccurate or misrepresents the subject, feel free to propose a correction below it, or add a note to my talk page. Secondly, barring a large backlog or a significant problem cropping up with regards to the article, you should expect to see it on the Main Page within a week, so if you wish to add some polish to it before getting a sizable influx of eyeballs looking it over, you'll need to do so fairly soon. Regards and good luck, GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 19:53, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Did you know?

On 8 December, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Brangaine, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 16:41, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Reliable and non-reliable Arthurian books

Regarding your edits to Uther Pendragon and remarks on its Talk page, what books/sources (excluding actual stuff like Malory and Chretien) are reliable and what aren't? I suspect many about the "real" Arthur belong to the latter. Uthanc 13:16, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the late response, I've been out of town and busy with Christmas and all that. To answer your question, I find you pretty much have to go on a case to case basis. If someone claims they have definitive answers about Arthur and company, especially if it contradicts what everyone else has said before them, they're usually full of it. Such was the case with Uther Pendragon a while back- it was some guy pushing a crank theory and getting mad that no one believed it. Personally, I tend to stick to the literary side of Arthurian matters, since there's so much more that can be said about surviving fiction than about lost facts. Most modern writers discussing the historical Arthur rely on the same set of information- the early references in places like the Historia Brittonum, the Welsh Triads and Geoffrey of Monmouth. Some, like Geoffrey Ashe, interpret contemporary histories and documents, as well as archaeological evidence. Barring new finds, though, that's about all a reliable author can do. In the case of the Uther Pendragon article, the user was making very broad claims and citing documents only his colleagues have seen. That's not good history, it's delusional speculation. If you want more books I find reliable, I'd be happy to provide a list.--Cúchullain ^t/c 20:19, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

A very belated thanks! Uthanc 13:31, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Dante Arthurs

I see your point about the rumors section being well documented. Upon reading it again it seems to have little to do with rumors but more to do with allegations, which seems like a more appropriate topic for Wikipedia as an encyclopedia.

--Kevin Murray 05:36, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Namus (disambiguation)

Good job in refining/improving my work on Namus (disambiguation). From your contributions list, it look like you are using a tool to clean up articles. If you don't mind, what tool are you using to clean up articles? (I just got approved for AWB, but haven't fully explored it yet). Thanks. -- Jreferee 19:20, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not actually using a tool. "Namus" just came up on my watchlist, and I saw the new disambiguation page needed to be formatted per the Manual of Style.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:26, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks. I've done work on other disambiguation pages, but didn't know there was a Manual of Style on the topic. I'll give it a read and use it in the future. Thanks again. -- Jreferee 19:34, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem, happy editing!--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:35, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Just to let you know

...that Pound Puppies and the Legend of Big Paw has a reference to the Stone of Scone. I wonder why you reverted that good-faith submission of mine? --Slgr@ndson (page - messages - contribs) 00:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I never doubted you edited in good faith, but I reverted you for two reasons. First, that page is for films that are actually based on the Arthurian legend, i.e. retellings, adaptations, etc., not just for films that happen to reference it. Second, the Stone of Scone has nothing to do with the Arthurian legend at any rate, and the Arthur reference was trivial.--Cúchullain ^t/c 02:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Acallam na Senórach

Hey! Nice work. Would you have any ideas on expanding Togail Bruidne Da Derga? I've still never had time to read it, so the plot synopsis is a bit lacking. Happy New Year! Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:12, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Three Generous Men of Britain

Just wondering about your rationale for the redirect of this article -- not that I mind particularly but since the three men are not mentioned anywhere in the Welsh Triads article, now anyone searching on Three Generous Men of Britain won't learn anything other than that it's a Welsh Triad (which there's a good chance they knew already). I thought that when redirecting an article it was usual to ensure that the article's information, or at least a summary of it, was included in the new target page so that it wasn't lost? --Bookgrrl 23:31, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but the article included almost no information about the triad, other than listing the names of the three men and mentioning it appears in a modern fantasy novel; if there had been anything else, I would have merged it into the different articles. At any rate we can't go into detail about every triad in the Welsh Triads entry- there are 90 of them.--Cúchullain ^t/c 23:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Canute the Great ???s

Cuchullain. I am WikieWikieWikie, or Tommy. With a point to push on the article on the Viking king Canute the Great. Basically, although the consensus is maybe Cnut was born ca.995, it is a consensus which is by no means foolproof. In, Cnut: England's Viking King, M.K.Lawson, the writer most learned on the sources which regard the reign of Cnut, Cnut's age is explicitly left as, unkown, or ???. It is a point which is quite significant in the story of a man who's age is maybe ten years off, when it is told he was born in 995.

Unknowns permeate this period, and the desire to plant such a fact on the general reader is not good scholarship in my opinion. Afterall, the age issue, I believe, arises with a misinterpretation of the Knutsdrapa, Ottar the Black's, skaldic verse, which is easily misunderstood, and the faith in the book on the reign of Cnut written nearly a century ago, which fully subscribes to the derogatory wave story to boot.

I really think it is necessary to put in the information as unknown, or at least leave it completely unsaid, which maybe is just as bad scholarship, with the circumstances in consideration, being the presentation of truths, as facts which don't appear anywhere other than in the minds of scholars insistant on the presentation of fictions, as truths.

I read your interests, which I share with you almost exactly, while my main focus is a little more centred on the British Isles (as well as Ireland), and the role of England, and the Eurpeans at large, in the world. I am particularly interested in Cnut though, whom I intend to write a book on myself oneday, when I have read more fully into the sources. Maybe you can help me with the Knutsdrapa, if it is enough of a piece of medieval literature. Is it really plausible that the poem which praises and warrior hero, and the battles he fought in the English conquest, suggests, his age was 20, rather than the more likely, 30 (the legend of Cuchulainn is known to me, although I think it unlikely even such a hero was able to fight warriors in their prime, as a teenager)?

88.104.105.208 00:07, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I see your point, but you are not following the manual of style. If you dispute the date, don't just replace it with question marks, change it to "died 1035". Additionally, if it is convention, it is still useful to use, though disagreements can and should be included as well. Please bring this up on the talk page, so we can sort it out there.--Cúchullain ^t/c 00:14, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Acallam na Senórach, was selected for DYK!

On January 8, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Acallam na Senórach, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 04:31, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Award

The Black Cross of St. Declan You, Cuchullain, are awarded the Black Cross of St. Declan for going medieval on our asses with your excellent work on articles of Dark Ages and Middle Ages interest. De réir a chéile a thógtar na caisleáin - "It takes time to build castles" Ciarán of Clonmacnoise 06:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Islam articles

Please don't make your contributions to them a one-time thing! There's lots to be done to make them have NPOV. Arrow740 03:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Then why you keep cutting my contrib to Gog and Magog in Islam )?

You just reverted my whole work I worked on for several weeks??

let me know please. I did not violate the 3 rule. I reverted someone who all what he she did is reverting back to earlier article without adding nothing just getting rid of my work, he reverted to some body;s else reverting of my earlier work. so where did I go wrong if I return my contrib?

Please explain. I am outraged and I am about to complain to administrators. This should stop. You can see that I never cut anything but just added referenced materials to the best of my knowledge . I have nothing against ashkenazi since I have two jewish grandmother, but this got to stop71.220.89.177 08:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

satanic verser talk page

Hello, recently I did some very minor work on The Satanic Verses the fictional novel by Salman Rushdie and tagged the talk page with the Wiki Novels Project template and you took it off by saying it was misplaced. I now see it was and wasn't misplaced. The talk page for The Satanic Verses the novel has been redirected to the talk page for Satanic Verses the expression. I'm not sure why, nor do I know enough to try and split up the talk page so both articles can have there own. It looks like most of the talk page belongs to the novel but I could be wrong any chance you want to fix it? I'm going to go post this on the talk page too so hopefully someone will change it. Jask99 14:35, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I looked into it, it seems the problem is that someone moved the novel's entry from The Satanic Verses (novel) to The Satanic Verses, but forgot to move the talk page. I asked an admin to take care of it, thanks for pointing it out.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Me

I'm not really missing, I just got ticked off enough one day to leave. It was all over something stupid; namely Dan James Pantone who is User:Matses accused me of being racist against indiginous people from the Peruvian Amazon. --Descendall 06:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'm glad you're not gone. I removed your name from the missing Wikipedians list. Sorry to hear about your troubles with Pantone/Matses, I know dealing with users who actively edit their own articles can get ugly. Anyway, it's good to see you around again.--Cúchullain ^t/c 08:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Norteamericano

Hi. This sentence was about the usage of term norteamericano in Spanish. And, in informal Spanish usually norteamericano means "from United States", but the term América del Norte is not the same as North America's English, because it includes USA, Canada and Mexico, while América Central conflates the Isthmus and Caribe and a little beat of southern Mexico (Yucatan and Chiapas). Sometimes, América del Norte can be too the whole landmass from Alaska to Panama (as in English). Bye. --Lin linao 10:20, 24 January 2007 (UTC) PS: Before I choose my user's name, I thought about register Cu Chulainn :).

I know about the use of "norteamericano"; the sentence was trying to say it is often used specifically to refer to the US (and Canada) in some contexts. In this context it separates "Anglo America" from "Latin America". In other contexts, it is used to refer to all of the (sub)continent of America del Norte, which also includes Mexico and usually Central America and the Caribbean. This use is the same as the English word "North American". I suppose the sentence could be made clearer.--Cúchullain ^t/c 21:05, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Gog and Magog

You're probably right. You know, we've been in touch before. You answered a question of mine about Finn MacCool. (I had him confused with your namesake.) - Maggie --65.95.150.56 01:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Did you kill my section in other usages by accident or on purpose? Yoghurt80 02:29, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

On purpose. I believe I was working on an extensive edit when it was added, I would have explained why if I hadn't been doing other things as well. There are two problems: first, it's not particularly notable (I know, most things in that section aren't, they should get cut as well). Second, the source you provide doesn't actually verify the statement, it's just reproducing what was said in Alexandra Robbins's book. You'd have to provide a cite from that book and rephrase your entry to say something like, "According to Secrets of the Tomb by journalist Alexandra Robbin..." That is if it were notable, but I don't think unproven nicknames from a very small secret society at Yale University qualifies.--Cúchullain ^t/c 07:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Ever thought about it

Have you considered adminship? I've run across you a couple of times and you seem fairly reasonable and knowlegeable. I don't know if the idea interests you at all; it definitely cuts into the time you have to write articles. I think you would make a good candidate though and there are a heck of alot of backlogs that need good admins to look at them right now.--Isotope23 21:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words, Isotope. I have in fact thought about adminship, but I never actively pursued it, because, as you said, I know it would decrease the time I have to write articles. I am open to it though, I've often thought it was time I helped out with some of the janitorial work.--Cúchullain ^t/c 20:43, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

If you are agreeable to it, I would like to nominate you for the mop and bucket. Just hit my talk page if you accept and if so I will start up an RfA for you. Once I get it formatted I can send you the link so you can offically accept and answer the initial questions. Once we are in agreement everything is in line, I will list the RfA for comments. Some good reading (if you've not already read it) is Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship and Wikipedia:Miniguide to requests for adminship. Let me know!--Isotope23 20:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I've started an RfA here. Let me know if there is anything you'd like to see mentioned in the nom that I may have missed (accomplishments, etc). Once you've answered the questions and accepted the nom we can both have a once over of it and then I will list it for comment.--Isotope23 15:09, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Welsh Mythology

Okay, but got your message too late. Still have no "move" option, and believe me there's a whole lot more that needs moving, as many of the names are incorrect due to the reliance of non Welsh speakers on English translations which used outdated orphography. In the case of "Bran the Blessed" his correct name is Bendigeidfran (from MW Bendigeitvran), he is never called "Bran". Sanddef 06:53, 3 February 2007 (UTC)Sanddef

I figured as much. Just so you know, even after you get the "move" button, some of the pages will have to be moved by requested moves, for technical reasons (the software won't allow a move to a different title if there's page history there, unless you're an administrator and have additional options.) It can be frustrating, but don't worry. Also keep in mind that Wikipedia isn't always concerned with which name is "correct", but which is the most common name for the English-speaking audience. For instance, Genghis Khan is not at Chinggis Khan, though that may be more correct. I'll see if there's more I can do tomorrow.--Cúchullain ^t/c 07:04, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry but Id already created Euroswydd so I couldnt move it, hence the Copy and Paste. As for the spelling, it's the double "S" that's incorrect, not (that Im aware of) the double "D". I think it would be far more easier to add a section on orphography to all of the characters from Welsh mythology to clarify the confusion between Middle Welsh spelling and Modern Welsh spelling. Being a Modern Welsh speaker myself, Im obviously inclined to the modern orphography. Sanddef 16:19, 6 February 2007 (UTC)Sanddef

That's fine. For Euroswydd, I'd just follow the instructions at requested moves. I'll do it for you, if you'd like. The single "s" is more common than the double "ss" on the Internet, but that may be because we've had the page there for five years. The single "d" is much less common that either; it may be technically incorrect (I'm not 100% sure) but it seems the double "dd" is much more common nowadays.--Cúchullain ^t/c 21:03, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

OK Im back home now where Ive got a Modern Welsh copy of the Mabinogion: Euroswydd (with two "d"s) is fine. Anyway, I'll start adding bits in an orphography section as regards Modern Welsh spelling. Obviously I could look up the various Middle Welsh spellings as well (they form part of my Uni course, to a certain extent) but Id rather not have to take that on right now as I already have an academic workload on top of which Im contributing to the Welsh Wicipedia. Anyway, I think adding an orphography section will be the best solution all in all. I'll start with Bran to give a prototype example (assuming no one else has already done so today!) Sanddef 02:17, 7 February 2007 (UTC)Sanddef

Mi'kmaq language

I have responded to your MedCab case regarding Mi'kmaq language. If you are still interested, I believe that the editorial differences regarding this topic can be resolved at Talk:Mi'kmaq language. Your contribution would be appreciated. Thanks! Serpent's Choice 04:00, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Cuchullain

Looks good, I'm going to list it. Cheers!--Isotope23 16:54, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Your current RfA

Good afternoon (GMT time); I'd just like to ensure that you don't hold a grudge against me for taking a neutral stance in your RfA (link above) for the reasons listed there. I feel that my justification shows that you don't have a real need for the tools at this time.

I hope that you bear no bad blood against me - I certainly didn't oppose you personally, but rather was of the opinion that your contributions didn't demonstrate a need for sysopship.

Please do feel free to drop by my talk page at any time if you've got any questions about my decision, any advice for me or just a chat.

Yours,
Anthonycfc ^{[T • C]} 17:18, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd never hold a grudge over something like that (If I did, I'd really have no business being an admin.) You have a right to your opinion, and the reasons you listed are something to be considered.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:22, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Your nomination is scheduled to end today. The real challenge will be earning the respect of others based on your actions. Patience will go a long way. Here is a new template you can use.
Cuchullain (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
--BuickCenturyDriver 12:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your participation in the RFA and for your advice. I'll be around if you ever need anything!--Cúchullain ^t/c 21:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

O Fortuna/ Excalibur

I meant that the O Fortuna of Camina Burana is usually attributed as "Excalibur" because it was used as the theme for the motion picture. Please do a revert. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Awesimo (talk • contribs) 00:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC).

O Fortuna/ Excalibur

I meant that the O Fortuna of Camina Burana is usually attributed as "Excalibur" because it was used as the theme for the motion picture. Please do a revert. Awesimo 00:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I've never heard that before... do you have a source?--Cúchullain ^t/c 01:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

RfA result

I am pleased to let you know that, consensus reached, you are now an Administrator. You should find the following forums useful:

• Administrators' reading list
• Administrators' how-to guide
• Administrators' Noticeboard

• Administrators' Noticeboard for Incidents
• Administrators' Noticeboard for Three-revert rule violations

Congratulations on your promotion and the best of luck with your new charge! Redux 19:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

No Problem... Congrats!--Isotope23 17:51, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Excalibur (disambiguation)

I am wondering how adding two details about the Excalibur comic and linking them to Wiki entries is overlinking.

--Joelrees 04:27, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

See the manual of style for disambiguation pages: "Each bulleted entry should, in almost every case, have exactly one navigable (blue) link. Including more than one link can confuse the reader."--Cúchullain ^t/c 04:31, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Does the new entry work better?--Joelrees 16:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's good now.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:11, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Comment

That nonsense doesn't need to be propagated, at least not in its own section What does that mean? --Ephilei 22:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

It means that the claim that Jesus' otherwise unknown son is really the Beloved Disciple is nonsense, and doesn't need to receive undue weight in its own section. If it truly is a notable theory, then more credible analysts than Simcha Jacobiovici need to be cited. And if it must be included, it certainly doesn't need its own section, simply because it was suggested in one Discovery Channel documentary.--Cúchullain ^t/c 00:40, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I absolutely agree. Sorry, I was thinking of something else. --Ephilei 00:58, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Citation for phonetic similarity?

I'm afraid I'm a bit confused. How does one cite phonetic similarity? --Reverend Loki 22:11, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

You don't. If there is no connection between the Lost character and the Family Guy character other than the sound of the names, it's not important enough to include at all. I meant that if there is a real connection, then you'd need to cite the creators, or at least a reliable secondary source verifying it.--Cúchullain ^t/c 23:58, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, well, that's different than your note you made while removing it, then... --Reverend Loki 17:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you're confused, but I think my intention was clear enough. I was responding to including the line at all, not only to your version. There is no source for a connection between the characters, beyond the assertion that their names are similar (which still qualifies as original research, even though it's trivial). As such we shouldn't include it.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:59, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Community AfD

You may want to look at the current version of the article and consider revising your opinion since the current version has multiple reliable sources including a note about a notable award the community has recieved. Thanks JoshuaZ 02:28, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Possible renaming of Wikipedia:WikiProject Saints

It has been suggested that the above named project be renamed Wikipedia:WikiProject Christian saints. Please express your opinion on this proposed renaming, and the accompanying re-definition of the scope of the project, here. John Carter 17:05, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Inflaming

You're probably right, but I'm not sure merely saying you're misbehaving is going to be very productive either - as far as I can see, the only thing to do is continue to assume he's acting in good faith and just really doesn't see what's happening and respond in kind. At least, as long as he's not a clear-cut vandal. WilyD 18:39, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Your sig

You might want to change t and c, to talk and contribs respectively. Thanks. (Just for newbies). - Patricknoddy^{TALK (reply here)|HISTORY} 19:50, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Sarasvati River

Dear, please don't make changes now as I am against Dab's deletions. This may hide your changes repeatedly. Once the issue is resolved then make changes. WIN 11:36, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

500 edits

I was searching around and found that User:Graham Chapman has 377 edits. Graham Chapman (talk · contribs · count)

So, I want to tell you that other users on this list have less than 500 edits. Like User:Notransistory -Yancyfry 14:34, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, geez. I did it again. I didn't read your full message. I am sorry for disturbing you. -Yancyfry

Not at all. You'd be doing a service to point out names that shouldn't be there. However, I've always left Graham Chapman on there because (a)he'd been on there virtually since the page was started (long before I got here), and (b)his account was so old that I wasn't sure the counters were getting all his edits- I know Wikipedia used different software back then.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:26, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Please Block.

This is a school IP address, please block it from unhelpful edits. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.199.46.1 (talk) 16:19, 14 March 2007 (UTC).