User talk:JRG: Difference between revisions
Timeshift9 (talk | contribs) minor edit |
Timeshift9 (talk | contribs) comment |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
== Joestella == |
== Joestella == |
||
I wouldn't give Joestella the pleasure (although now I more or less have, but not over him). If and when I come back to wikipedia, it will be politics as that is my overwhelming interest on wikipedia. I've just got to the point where i'm so fed up with wikipedia and all the bullshit that goes on. It's anarchism at it's finest. [[User:Timeshift9|Timeshift]] 11:58, 18 March 2007 (UTC) |
I wouldn't give Joestella the pleasure (although now I more or less have, but not over him). If and when I come back to wikipedia, it will be politics as that is my overwhelming interest on wikipedia. I've just got to the point where i'm so fed up with wikipedia and all the bullshit that goes on. It's anarchism at it's finest. [[User:Timeshift9|Timeshift]] 11:58, 18 March 2007 (UTC) |
||
:Speedy delete got removed by Scott, but now it's on AfD. Rather than just leave again, I will give it a chance. You are welcome to participate in [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Mars Bar]]. [[User:Timeshift9|Timeshift]] 14:07, 18 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 14:07, 18 March 2007
Userfied Anglicans
I'm not making any call on whether the Anglicans article will be deleted, but just in case I've userfied the content to User:JRG/List of Anglican Australians, as you have done so much work on referencing and if the closing admin misses your request if deleted. --Steve (Slf67) talk 22:23, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- I closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Australian Anglicans and I did notice your request the Anglican and the Presbyterian list have been moved to your user pages as requested, the catholic article has been deleted as it was totally unsourced. There are links on the AfD discussion to the user pages for these articles. The list steve created was a cut and paste list which didnt follow GFDL requirements about retaining edit histories, and since there was no other edits I just deleted it. Gnangarra 16:08, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm not particularly interested in how a deletion debate pans out, and I never change my vote; I tend to make deletion nominations so that other editors can reach a consensus. You adding and removing a comment to my talk page because I didn't respond in hours, then re-adding a comment to my talk page and getting cranky at me is absurd. Acting all belligerent on my cfr/cfd isn't useful for building an encyclopedia either.--Peta 06:05, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Joestella
I wouldn't give Joestella the pleasure (although now I more or less have, but not over him). If and when I come back to wikipedia, it will be politics as that is my overwhelming interest on wikipedia. I've just got to the point where i'm so fed up with wikipedia and all the bullshit that goes on. It's anarchism at it's finest. Timeshift 11:58, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy delete got removed by Scott, but now it's on AfD. Rather than just leave again, I will give it a chance. You are welcome to participate in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Mars Bar. Timeshift 14:07, 18 March 2007 (UTC)