# User talk:TK/TKarchive13

## The XKCD Article

XKCD is a notable webcomic given its unique highly intellectual humor and being the most popular webcomic on the internet (as far as I can tell). Why was the article removed as being 'non-notable'? DesertEagle

## Thanks

Hi, Thanks a lot for the advice. I hadn't realised that the changes I addressed had been made by the site owner - I feel pretty embarrassed now! I've read the info you gave me and I'll make sure I stick to it.

By the way, when you reverted what I had changed on Red-Letter Christians, you also reverted a spelling error that I'd corrected on Cambridge University - just letting you know in case you hadn't mean to revert that also!

Sorry - one other thing. You (or another administrator) might like to look at deleting the article entitled 'UBS'. UBS (University of Bums on Seats) is a fake university -in the UK it's a widely known satire of educational policy. Haniyagaz

Thanks for the information! You can correct the spelling, if you've a mind to. No I wasn't aware of the spelling reversion. --₮K/Admin/Talk 08:03, 29 May 2009 (EDT)
Hi, Just one further point on this. I discovered that another minor revision I had made (correcting a translation from Russian on the Alger Hiss article) had also been reverted, at the same time as the others. I presumed this was an error (like the Cambridge University revert) and so I reinserted my correction. You've now reverted it again. I'm not really sure why, so I just wanted to mention it here in case it had been a misunderstanding.
Jurist is a closer match, as originally used by FOIA, than Lawyer, IMO. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 23:43, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
Ah okay, thanks for clarifying. To me that doesn't seem right in terms of the translation, so I'll open it up on the Talk page. Sorry about the revert before: I just presumed it was an error like with the Cambridge University article.
Absolutely, I do appreciate that reverting Administrators is both unhelpful and against the guidelines; I really did only revert you because I thought you had reverted my edit accidentally. Sorry for having taken up your time with this. I'll move on to other things. Haniyagaz

## Nuc Wpns Accidents

Thanks for the advice. Added notes and references, will be adding more very soon!Mhmm 08:23, 24 May 2009 (EDT)

## My block

After being inactive for a while, I noticed that you blocked me for using multiple accounts? WesleyS emailed me just the other day to inform me that you had suspicions of us being the same person. I'm from West Virginia and he's from Pittsburgh. It's only about a 30-mile difference, so I understand why you would suspect. I would have emailed you, but my email feature has been disabled. If you could please reply I would really appreciate it. I always have (and still do) had the best of intentions for this site. Thanks. --JLauttamus

Hopefully I was wrong. I have unblocked you. For others who find themselves in the same position, my contact information is given in a prominent box at the top of my User page. --₮K/Admin/Talk 15:01, 9 May 2009 (EDT)

## Uighurs

I emerged it with RJJensen's Uighur article because his was more detailed and full of information, and there were three Uighur articles, making it redundant. Sorry about that. RKLuffy

## Atheism Talk Page

You contributed yesterday to the Atheist talk page on 'Atheist definition' and in it you not only provided a completely irrelevant subject (how children are born pure and are corrupted by liberals) but also insulted the original asker by insinuating that he corrupts little children and, by proxy, causes them to go to hell (OK, the very last bit is a complete exaggeration).

There are also many other points on there that require editing, if you have the ability to edit it would you mind cleaning out the un-necessary bits? (If you want I can probably list them here). Hobohodo 13:16, 13 May 2009 (EDT)

• I doubt you will find any Administrator here at Conservapedia interested in diluting that article, with the end-game being to obfuscate and present in a better light, the agenda of Atheists, Liberals and Socialists. Personally, I leave it to God to decide who is going to Hell and who isn't, FYI. However I very much meant to say (not merely insinuate) that those supporting, or wishing us to present Atheists and Liberals in a more positive light, do indeed corrupt the innocent. You should ask that your account be re-named to something less silly, by the way, if you ever expect to be taken seriously. --₮K/Admin/Talk 13:35, 13 May 2009 (EDT)
• Using someone's name as a reason to reject a logical and valid point isn't a very good argument. I understand you're an administrator and have various jobs to perform and stuff, but you have no real proof, no REAL proof that atheists do corrupt the innocent. Taking on board you are a Christian and believe the Bible 100%, is totally fair enough and you're allowed to use that in an argument. I know several atheists would disagree but allow me to point out that whilst you can use it as evidence, you cannot use it as proof. As such, your statement should be retracted. Add to that, WHY did you say that in the first place? It was totally irrelevant to the subject matter. Deeer 14:55, 13 May 2009 (EDT)

## landmarkean no lamarckean in baptist article

Hello Brother in Christ TK, in that article it must to be landmarkean after landmarks;because lamarckeans after Lamarck-a french surname- is name from a trend in biology, no relation to baptists.

As judging from [1] and [2], he's out to be silly and malicious.--Woloct 01:01, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

## Moving Pages, Consolidation

My most sincere apologies, TK. I was unaware that certain issues required administrator approval, and I believed that organizing articles in what I feel is a more efficient and more user-friendly manner would be well-received. If you or any of the other admins have any specific objections as to why you believe my undertaking is unwarranted, please let me know so that we can resolve the differences in our views and work toward a solution that everyone can agree on. --Economist 22:49, 27 May 2009 (EDT)

Ping-ponging a convo? Up until this, I swear my hand was nowhere near that block button! :P It isn't a matter of me disagreeing, but because of the unceasing vandalization here, it is more a matter of not wanting "surprises" or adding to the duplication of efforts. In this case, the remnants of your consolidation could be moved or deleted, working with you. It is like an editor re-directing instead of just asking if an article can be moved...and that keeps the revision history intact. Thanks for responding, and just let me, or another Admin know what needs to be deleted/moved, etc. --₮K/Admin/Talk 01:57, 28 May 2009 (EDT)

## Wowzers!

That's a lot of blocks. JY23 16:42, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

? LOL! If you think four or five blocks is "lots" you haven't been watching.....--ṬK/Admin/Talk 17:20, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

Sorry to bother you, but I wanted to add a photo of some saffron I took to use on the saffron page, but I note that only administrators can upload files. Could you possibly copy the file from here and upload it for me please? Thank you in advance. MattS 17:44, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

I would need to see the full link, not just to the specific image, to see if it is under copyright. You might want to see if the United States Department of Agriculture has such an image.....--ṬK/Admin/Talk 17:49, 1 June 2009 (EDT)
I just took the photo myself in my kitchen, so it's OK, it really isn't copyrighted by anyone (other than me I suppose) MattS 17:54, 1 June 2009 (EDT)
Cool....can you add that to the page where it is? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 18:11, 1 June 2009 (EDT)
Can you embed images directly into a wiki from a URL? I've never tried before. Bear with me and I'll give it a try. MattS 18:14, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

Well one will always go wrong thinking I have any particular technical ability! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 18:19, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

No, doesn't seem to work. I tried:
[[Image:http://s3.amazonaws.com/mattstafford/saffron.jpg|thumb|200px|Spanish Mancha Saffron]]
But it just shows a hyperlink to the image. Don't fret about it, if it's a problem to upload images then it really doesn't matter too much. I just started an article on saffron because I was using it in a rice dish and thought the historical aspect of it would appeal. As I have some saffron at the moment I thought an image would soften the article a bit, but it isn't essential. Thank you for your time anyway. MattS 18:23, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

Take a look. AddisonDM 18:51, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

Replied on my user page. Thank you. MattS 19:01, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

--ṬK/Admin/Talk 19:12, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

## Quick Question

Hello! I was just wondering why you got rid of my relatively minor edit to the article Judaism. Judaism is indeed considered to be an ethnic religion. I made similar edits to the pages on Taoism, Islam, and Christianity (making it clear that the first is also an ethnic religion while the other two are universalizing religions), and none of those edits were reverted. In fact, both the pages on Christianity and Islam were edited multiple times by high-ranking administrators (Andy Schlafly himself in the case of Christianity) and my edits were not removed, so I'm kindly asking that you revert the page to the way it was when I last edited it, as there have been no revisions since (except for your reversion of my edit to the one before it). If there's some specific reason as to why you're opposed to having that particular factoid on the page, I'd be happy to hear it. Please respond on my talk page because I probably won't check yours. Thanks! -Ilikecake 00:56, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

• You should check here. Your edit said: "Though there is some controversy, Judaism is generally considered to be an ethnic religion." Generally? By whom? Controversy? About that term being applied to Judaism? I wonder if that is because there are hundreds of thousands of non-Semites who practice Judaism? I don't always have time to stop whatever I am doing and go digging around for citations to back up statements inserted into articles as you did. In our Manual of Style it clearly instructs editors to back their assertions/content with sources. In the example I just gave you, about non Semites who practice Judaism, you merely saying it is so, clearly is not. I left you a clue in the Christianity article to show you why your edits were reversed. Finally, thanks for pointing out your edits that I failed to revert! Here we don't ping-pong responses, keeping everything where it began, so it is easier for all to follow, so my response is here, and I do hope you find it! If you have further questions, just ask. Thanks! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 01:34, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
I properly sourced the claim that you disputed on the Christianity page, as well as on the pages for universalizing and ethnic religions. I am now asking your permission to restore my edits on the pages for Taoism, Islam, and Judaism using the same source that I used on the pages I just mentioned. It's a very well-respected textbook on the topic of Human Geography, which is quickly becoming a general education requirement in many of the country's leading universities, authored by a man named James M. Rubenstein (economist, professor at Miami University, and consultant for the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago). I believe this to be an adequate source, as it is the same information that is being taught to young people around the country. -Ilikecake 13:45, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
Also, I know this has nothing to do with what we've been discussing, but I have an additional request: can you please rename the article Paul Cezanne to Paul Cézanne? I have explained why in the talk page here: [5]. Thanks! -Ilikecake 15:22, 5 June 2009 (EDT) (And P.S.—I know now to check here for responses!)
• You sourced it? Where? Did you add the ref link with your information? I did not see a reference link. Please do not add information from what you consider to be a "good" source. Textbooks are liberal sources of information. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 17:10, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
...I did add a reference link on the Christianity page, unless I am mistaken. If you click the little superscript "2" next to the sentence in question, you are directed to the bottom of the page where I properly cited the book that I drew the information from. Whether or not textbooks are liberal sources of information, I used the book in question as my primary resource because I cannot see any way in which the topic at hand can be influenced by politics in any way. The tone of the textbook does not indicate in any way that the author intends to bash Christianity, Judaism, or any other religion, just provide in a matter-of-fact way the status quo as it relates to the study of human geography. -Ilikecake 19:40, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
...and the plot thickens. I saw that you deleted my redirect from The Metropolitan Museum of Art to Metropolitan Museum of Art, stating that it was unauthorized. I was not aware that it was "unauthorized" or that I had to get authorization to do so, but regardless, was it not a helpful edit? Would you not make the same redirect if you came across two pages that differ only as it relates to a definite article? I'm very sorry if I violated a rule, but I'm requesting now that you restore the redirect. I can't see any reason why you wouldn't other than to spite me personally, which I can't imagine you'd do. -Ilikecake 19:46, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
I don't see merit to the above criticisms. We avoid public-school-textbook style jargon here. The term "ethnic religion" is unfamiliar to most people and it's unclear what it means.
As to "Paul Cezanne," that is the English spelling of his name, and this encyclopedia is in English.--Andy Schlafly 19:17, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
The Paul Cézanne thing seems to have blown over at this point because it has been kindly renamed by Joaquín Martínez. The accent is present on the "e" in virtually all sources consulted, including the databases of several major art museums in America and elsewhere (the links that I provided on the talk page are for database queries from The Metropolitan Museum of Art and The Art Institute of Chicago). Also, I don't understand how "universalizing religion" and "ethnic religion" are "public-school-textbook style jargon." Beyond the fact that I've only ever encountered the textbook in question in private universities (though I guess I can conceive of its use at a public school because the author, James M. Rubenstein, is a high-ranking professor at the public Miami University in Ohio). Whether or not "most people" are familiar with the term "ethnic religion" is inconsequential (and I would actually argue that many people are familiar with the term)—it is the term preferred by the majority of human geographers today. Furthermore, I'm sure you can open any encyclopedia to any page and encounter a term that "most people" are unfamiliar with—aren't encyclopedias supposed to be databases jam-packed with all information that could be considered helpful to know about the world? Even if "ethnic religion" is a term unknown to most people, why inhibit people from learning more about it? -Ilikecake 19:40, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
Before I block you, Ilikecake, please prove to me you inserted properly formatted citations for the edits I reverted. I cannot see your citations. Also, you were previously blocked for diluting conservative articles with your insistence on world-view, internationalist so-called consensus....don't make the same mistake twice. You have received an instruction about proper sources from two Administrators now, including the site owner. That's it. It is over, complete, done, finished. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 19:46, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
I don't want to be blocked. I will stop now and I will never again touch upon the issue of universalizing or ethnic religions. I still believe that my original block was unmerited, but I will not argue that here nor will I ever argue it because it is in the past. As stated above, I inserted a properly formatted citation on the Christianity article alone. As stated above, currently reference #2 on the page Christianity is a citation from the book The Cultural Landscape: An Introduction to Human Geography by James M. Rubenstein. I did not source my claims for the Islam or Judaism article because I was waiting to see if you approved of the way that I cited in the Christianity article. If you have any more questions I'll be happy to answer them. -Ilikecake 19:57, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
Never mind, you removed my citation. At least I know, then, that you saw it. I'll take that to mean that you feel it's inadequate and I'll stop now. I'd still like to hear back from you as to what I was doing wrong. -Ilikecake 20:04, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

Your help is needed and appreciated, I want to be clear about that. But usually, here, that means editing articles from our conservative perspective only, and asking and discussing major changes first. I consider re-directing pages to be major. I consider disambiguation pages to be major, especially when filled with silly, small European cities on an American encyclopedia. I consider labeling an entire religion to be ethnic-specific as major, and misleading. Personally I also find it slightly anti-semitic as well, perhaps marginalizing is a better word.--ṬK/Admin/Talk 20:17, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

Thank you very much for clearing that up. I will definitely seek help from administrators before making large changes like that in the future. My intention was not to be anti-Semitic nor was it to offend anybody or violate the rules of Conservapedia. I'll be sure to do my reading from now on. You can tell me no, but I'd really much rather keep my username. If I recall correctly, it's Conservapedia policy to mandate that usernames are based on real names—growing up my schoolyard name was "Illinois Ike," which is actually where the "Ilike" part comes from (and the "cake" part was just me trying to be clever). -Ilikecake 20:37, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
• Yes, I well remember seeing that cleverness elsewhere. Thanks for cooperating.--ṬK/Admin/Talk 21:17, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

## Template Unprotection

Sir, could you please unprotect Template:Calculus? I need to remove a link to a protected article. JY23 15:52, 7 June 2009 (EDT)

Yes sir, done. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 16:18, 7 June 2009 (EDT)
Finished, thanks. JY23 16:35, 7 June 2009 (EDT)

## Articles for deletion

Hi TK, I nominated the article modal tonalities for deletion a while back, but wasn't able to put it on the current discussion list in Articles for Deletion, which is locked. Would you be willing to help out with this? JDWpianist 18:24, 7 June 2009 (EDT)

• Deleted. Thanks for the heads-up. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 21:14, 7 June 2009 (EDT)

## Thanks for the welcome

I do have a question, can you tell me how to make those little boxes that users put down the right side of their user pages? I'd like to express myself so people know who they are dealing with. Thanks again --CJHallock 23:12, 7 June 2009 (EDT)

Check here. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 23:20, 7 June 2009 (EDT)
Thanks, and I'm sorry if I misunderstood you, no hard feelings? --CJHallock 13:30, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
I'm in Colorado not Sheffield, but I was stationed in Shannon for two years before I retired from US customs. I'm sorry that I didn't realize that disagreeing with administrators was forbidden. --CJHallock 14:04, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
• My comment was to the user Alain, CJHallock. And you should have known that, since you never raised a question needing my response, about email. Perhaps you forgot who you were logged in as? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:09, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
I figured you would reply to him on his own talk page. I was quite confused, sorry I got it wrong. This is my only conservipedia account. and I added my e-mail account, which I did think was optional. --CJHallock 14:24, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
• Thanks, CJHallock. Email isn't optional, but apparently when we upgraded the software recently, changing the sign-up page was overlooked. Here we prefer users not to "ping-pong" conversations, so that all exchanges are in one place. I have let the Webmaster know of the issue. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:58, 8 June 2009 (EDT)

## Block reasons

Why don't you make sure my edits to the block reason drop down list are OK.... AddisonDM 15:40, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

• Will do, Addison! You like minefields, do you?  ;-) --ṬK/Admin/Talk 15:53, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
• The changes seem just fine to me, Addison. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 16:05, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

## Hi

Why did you delete my comment on the main page talk? ConservativeCanuck 21:31, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

• I am indeed sorry, but thanks for reminding me. I thought I had blocked you, got busy elsewhere, and forgot completely about it! Enjoy your summer and Godspeed to you. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 21:52, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

## Re: Czars

Sorry for the cross-talk page post -- how do I correctly respond on my own talk page to a discussion? In any case, I'd be happy to merge the Obama czar articles. I was only filling them all in since the main page had a link "See Conservapedia's list of the 16 czars . Editors can start writing articles on each of these czars." Do you think it would be better to merge all to one article or to continue to expand the individual pages? I'm not sure how much there is to say about some of these folks, as they haven't really done anything before or after appointment.

Yes, we prefer you to answer where the question is asked, but no big deal. Continue doing what you are as another Admin created the empty links. Later tonight I will create a blank page, and you can copy and paste over your work, so it shows your edits. I don't think I can move multiple pages into one. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 22:27, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

## Thanks for the welcome message :)

I hope I can prove worthy of it :) MaryC 17:47, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

• You're welcome! Follow your principles, believe in your Christian Faith, and the rest will take care of itself. Politics is the art of the possible, and all things are possible for people who can resist the constant temptation to betray their ethics. Sarah Palin is a good example for you (and all of us) to follow. It isn't going to be easy, because the battle is literally between good and evil. I too was bitten by the political bug when very young. To be of service to our country is one of the highest callings. Good luck to you! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 17:55, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

It seems Ed is away on a vacation or something. Could I at least get your approval to start a debate page? I intend to call it Debate:Correct attitude towards the existence of a god? -- non-controversial enough, I think. PaulCM 17:49, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

• It seems the only way you know how to communicate is to make socks and force your ideas upon others. Typical of liberals and atheists. My (and Ed's, as I have his 100% proxy here on CP) response is still the same as it is on Ed's talk page, when I responded to your PaulMC persona. You and your little vandal site friends do not have a right to force people to debate you, or even listen to your ideas. If people really wanted your liberal drivel, your site would be more popular than CP or other leading Conservative sites. But it isn't. Godspeed to you. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 18:04, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

## A Storehouse of Knowledge article

I looked at the article on aSK a couple of days ago and I didn't see anything attacking CP's owner and Admins. Isn't it possible this was simply added by a vandal? Wouldn't it be better in this case to just remove the offensive part, rather than delete the entire article? --OscarJ 08:20, 13 June 2009 (EDT)

• It is the site itself that does the attacking and tries to legitimize lies, not the article. Why is this so important to you? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:25, 13 June 2009 (EDT)

I'm sorry, I thought you were referring to the article. I was just confused why it was deleted. Thanks for the explanation --OscarJ 07:07, 14 June 2009 (EDT)

## Andy is fine with it

I received Andy's permission to start the debate page. Please stop banning me for no reason. It would also be nice if you unbanned my original account (PaulMC), since I believe it was closed because of a mistake (I'm not a member of any vandal site and neither did I vandalize CP). DannyC 09:37, 13 June 2009 (EDT)

But of course you never informed Andy you have previously been blocked several times, and you have refused, contrary to our rules, to abide by the decision of two Admins, Ed Poor and myself. You are a deceitful troll. Bye. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:28, 13 June 2009 (EDT)

## AuroreF's edits to Apple-related pages

Why was AuroreF blocked and her edits reverted? They seemed to be in good faith. HarriettO 21:34, 13 June 2009 (EDT)

• Do you really consider inserting ridiculous statements, one about the i-Phone being called the "Jesus Phone", without so much as one citation or reference, editing in good faith? I don't. Since you lack the judgment to realize that (and I suspect you are the blocked user socking it up to post here, rather than contact me with the info on my user page per the message on the block screen) you shouldn't be editing here as well. A person of good faith would have read our Manual of Style and followed its instructions. If you make yet another account here, try reading it. Articles without supporting citations belong in a magazine, not in an encyclopedia. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 21:57, 13 June 2009 (EDT)

## Media on Obama

A quote by (pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, pro Islamic magazine) Newsweek editor Evan Thomas may be of interest, referring his perception of the President after his recent speeches overseas,

"I mean, in a way Obama's standing above the country, above the world. He's sort of God." http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/26445/

Perhaps this belongs in the MSM page, but i thought it might be pertinent on his own, as illustrative of the effect he has on many.

(Acts 12:21-23) "And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them. {22} And the people gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god, and not of a man. {23} And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost."

Daniel1212 17:32, 14 June 2009 (EDT)

• Yes, it got lots of media play, both MSM and Conservative sites and blogs. It is pretty typical, isn't it, of how the media makes excuses for Obama? Please feel free to add it, Daniel...perhaps a "cquote" would be appropriate? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 23:19, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
Added substantial statistical data on listing of MSM to port side, as well as above quote. On another subject, it bothers me to even reference certain sources in the History of homosexuality article, as being liberal pro homosexual they often describe lewd practices. Can i add some some sort of warning to them?Daniel1212 23:16, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
Yes, of course. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 17:23, 19 June 2009 (EDT)

## Hello TK

Not to criticise, but the word "that" should be included between "it has come to my attention" and "some vandal sites". Godspeed. TPatterson 13:51, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

I've been lurking for a while and am not looking for a MYOB block but I saw you [revert] a post in a talk section that didn't seem to break any commandments to me. If you read the article there is a large block quote about white racist intellectually elite liberal eugenics proponents from the 1930's-40's, I think that sounds like Nazi stuff to me, was there something else that I missed? Thanks for your time --JerriahD 23:34, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

• I can only explain it as trying to throttle back some inflammatory language, and if you stop and look at the users total edits and actions, its something you get a feel for. We have been under seige for a few years now, and it never gets better, so long as there are people out there who insist on stopping POV's they have decided shouldn't exist. We're pretty skittish about re-directs as well, especially with no edit note explaining. PLEASE take a moment to read our Style Manual and Editors Guide....things are not the same here as WP. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 01:01, 17 June 2009 (EDT)

## Thought for the day....

One cannot say the most inhumane and vile things about a person hundreds of times, and publicly, then turn around and state they have sympathy for that person, or extend condolences. If you made policy criticism personal, you cannot go back. Trying to do so smacks as the worst kind of deceit. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 17:29, 19 June 2009 (EDT)

## I wanted to inform you...

...of the fact that I was not "trolling" when I posted my thoughts on the Main Page's talk section. I would have accepted a plausible answer to my question and, if satisfied, or at the very least, threatened, wouldn't have dredged up the issue again. On a Christian wiki, the idea of posting graphically violent images just below the scroll cut-off (for most computer monitors, anyway) seems extremely unintelligent. However, if my post had been left there for a number of people to comment on, I, as well as potentially other users with similar concerns, might reach a consensus about why, exactly, those images belong there. Thank you for taking the time to read this, and, one imagines, replying in a helpful manner. GregP 20:42, 19 June 2009 (EDT)

## I do not understand

I am trying to figure what what I did to offend you. I am guessing you are referring to the Billy Sunday article and the broken link I tried to fix. The link simply said "<ref name=tnr>" in the code and appears as an error on the page, so I thought the previous editor wanted a link to the same source as the other link referred by the same reference name "tnr" which refers to reference #9 "# ↑ "Billy Sunday," The New Republic, March 20, 1915, from The New Republic Book, p. 183", which the previous editor refers to in a previous section on the page. I was just attempting to help and thought the editor of the page would let me know if I miscalculated. I do not understand the anger, I was simply trying to help. BMcP 20:54, 19 June 2009

• I don't understand you reading all that motivation into my pretty matter-of-fact message, BMcP. I sincerely hope you don't do that as a matter of practice with everyone. I didn't see the 1915 date, so may well be jumping the gun about the "liberal site" business. If you were not linking directly to today's New Republic, it should be fine, so please re-insert the ref. If it is linking to today's New Republic, perhaps we can find another reference? Thanks for explaining! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 23:37, 19 June 2009 (EDT)
Here is the link if you interested. The book is from 1916 (the article is from 1915), the book is a reprint of the first 100 issues of New Republic magazine. I will re-insert the link then, if it's good with you.
As for the modern New Republic, is the magazine not considered an acceptable source? I honestly never heard of it until the other day. --BMcP 8:08, 20 June 2009
Thanks for showing me, BMcP. Please go ahead and re-insert the reference + link. I apologize for not taking the time to peruse it more carefully in the first place! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 08:20, 20 June 2009 (EDT)

## Harry Potter

Why have you reverted my improvements without so much as reading them? LarsJ 14:41, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

• You have guts, I'll give you that, coming to my page and telling me what I have read, lol. Collaborative efforts are just that. Read the dictionary definition for the word. It is a fact of life that trust is earned. Making wholesale changes, dismissing the additions of senior administrators as "fluff" is pretty insulting and cold, don't you think? In order to have a collaboration, one would need to see who added what, and perhaps (as our editor's guides say) gather some input on proposed changes. While I know this somewhat stifles the ability to just make needed changes, without doing so also creates problems for the collaboration as a whole, don't you think? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:49, 21 June 2009 (EDT) (part time fireman)

## Permission error?

Hello. In trying to leave a message to another user (User talk:JessicaT), I was shown a "Permission error" page (http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:JessicaT&action=edit), and a link to your User page. Is there a problem with my account preventing me from editing certain pages? Carillonneur 01:22, 22 June 2009 (EDT)

The person you are trying to email through this wiki is no longer an Administrator here, and has been blocked. When I click that link, it says exactly that, so it is odd you also needed to ask me. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 01:32, 22 June 2009 (EDT)

This title has been protected from creation by TK. The reason given is "'". " Sorry if I misunderstood. And I was trying to leave a Talk Page message, not send an email. Carillonneur

## Spelling Error?

Landmark Baptist are most often refered to as "Landmarker" rather than "Landmarkean". Don't take my word as a 20 year Landmark Baptist Pastor, but do a search on the other word and then use my word. May God Bless. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JTBaptist (talk)-- 12:13, 23 June 2009

• Don't worry, I won't. :D I also thought as you did, but decided I would take the word of the PhD in American Studies from Yale, my fellow Administrator, RJJensen. You might want to take it up with him. And by the way, Pastor, you might want to use the button above the edit screen, that looks like handwriting (next to the "W" in a circle) to sign your posts. It inserts what needs to be inserted, after you finish typing your posts. Thanks! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 15:21, 23 June 2009 (EDT)

## retired user

Is there a reason we need to keep the userpages of blocked users around instead of deleting them along with the talk pages? AddisonDM 21:38, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

Oh, I am pretty sure there is, Addison. However, we don't discuss policy or security issues on wiki. Remember? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 07:26, 28 June 2009 (EDT)

## WilliamSmith

Could you block WilliamSmith, he is creating parody articles --OscarJ 11:01, 28 June 2009 (EDT)

## My user page

You just accidentally deleted my user and talk page as being that of a "blocked vandal". As I'm not blocked, and am not a vandal, I presume this was an error. Just wanted to confirm that so I can recreate both pages. Many thanks, and sorry to trouble you. Leo Samuels 13:42, 28 June 2009 (EDT)

Sorry! I have restored the pages, Leo....still early here for a Sunday.... --ṬK/Admin/Talk 13:45, 28 June 2009 (EDT)
Not to worry, and thank you. :D Leo Samuels 13:46, 28 June 2009 (EDT)

## Future user boxes

I have a few user boxes I am working on, but the question is, "will Conservapedia allow it due to being conservative?"

The "in development" boxes are currently located here. Let me know with a comment either here, or on the corresponding talk page. Thanks JonGI am a beautiful trap 16:11, 29 June 2009 (EDT)

Yes, I will be certain to "let you know" in no uncertain terms, and will also try to avoid your "beautiful trap" as well. Thanks for getting back to me. Godspeed to you! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 17:21, 29 June 2009 (EDT)

## Blanket block

Hi TK, my username's underscoreb .I was caught in one of your blanket blocks on 01 April and despite multiple emails to cpwebmaster it's been three months without a reply. If you look at my contribs you'll see I'm not a vandal and I'm well in line with the 90/10 rule. I've posted this to Andy's userpage to make sure the message gets through. Cheers! Scoresby 20:59, 29 June 2009 (EDT)

Cheers to you as well! Posting here and on the owner's page, without following instructions and contacting the blocking Administrator shows your bad faith. I cannot find the block effecting you, simply because you did not copy and paste the block message as instructed. My contact information is at the very top of my user page, rather well highlighted, and if you were sincere, you would have availed yourself of it, rather than make a trolling complaint using a sock and proxy. Of course your own user page states that you are both a liberal and an atheist, so I wasn't expecting better of you. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 22:50, 29 June 2009 (EDT)

## Bizzare Behavior

• I responded there, and please always sign your posts with the nice button above the edit screen. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 00:54, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

Sorry, sometimes in such a rush to save the page I forget to sign. that should be the worst mistake I ever make. Please respond--BigM 01:02, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

Can we please continue to discuss changes to the Mark Sanford article on the talk page? I'm going to (for now) revert the article back to RJjeanson's last edit with Bizarre Behavior as the header of the section in question. RJ added very good material that should still be in the article. I will see you on the talk page. --BigM 17:03, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

## Have you seen this story?

No wonder newspapers are headed for bankruptcy! And, of course, there's no bias shown when a newspaper is throwing massively-overpriced parties for Obama administration officials... --Benp 09:02, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

Ben, you forgot the link! :p --ṬK/Admin/Talk 09:04, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

Argh! My fault, sorry; it's early here and I'm still about half asleep. [6] As it turns out, it's even worse than I thought at first glance: they were openly trying to sell ACCESS to their reporters and administration officials, suggesting that "An evening with the right people can alter the debate." Wow. Is it just me, or does that sound AWFULLY like an offer to spin the news for a price? --Benp 09:05, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

## Happy 4th

Thanks for all the help on this site. Happy Independence Day, you make Reagan proud!--Jpatt 15:13, 4 July 2009 (EDT)

Same to you, John...all of us here would make him proud! The grills are ready, the weather is picture-postcard perfect, and some 30 family and friends await the fireworks over the lake! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 16:11, 4 July 2009 (EDT)

## Jackboots

Yu vil hab heilth inschuranz!

Actually, the intent was the jackboots, not the trousers (you know, if you don't buy health insurance from an health insuror who happens to be a big money donor to Democrats, you may get a jackboot in the face). I may have to crop the img cause we may need it again. Rob Smith 18:31, 5 July 2009 (EDT)

How's this one? We may need it again. Rob Smith 16:21, 6 July 2009 (EDT)
Perfect! I'm still looking for the cartoon from long ago, showing the jackboots crushing people beneath them, although I am wary of adding ever more Hitler pictures and analogies to CP, as is Andy. A little goes a long way. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 16:50, 6 July 2009 (EDT)
Also..great additions to Liberal hate speech! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 01:06, 7 July 2009 (EDT)
ROFL! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 23:33, 12 July 2009 (EDT)

## Re: 7 Cats?

Hi TK and thanks for your comments! I first introduced my grandmother to cats and then we couldn't stop getting more :p. We actually only have seven that live in the house, but about two dozen strays that come in from time to time, and I have the scars to prove it too! What kinds of cats do you have? All of mine are strays, so I don't know what kinds of breeds they are, but my favorite one, Zoboomafoo (after the kids TV show) is a nice shade of black and white. Thanks again for your comments! --TimothyN 16:04, 7 July 2009 (EDT)

## Stuff to do

I was wondering, I know that I'll be working on getting rid of the red links on Special:WantedPages, but I was wondering on what other pages you think I could help with or create? I really want to hep out here. Thanks again for your help! --TimothyN 16:08, 7 July 2009 (EDT)

Aside from the red links, many article talk pages are in need of having the talk archives created, for all except the last couple of months discussions. You could also be a big help in checking the reference links for articles when you visit them. Some are not what they are supposed to be, lead to diametrically opposing POV's, inserted by liberal vandals, or are disguised links with hidden text. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 16:44, 7 July 2009 (EDT)
Thanks for the comment! I'll be sure to get on it! --TimothyN 16:48, 7 July 2009 (EDT)

## Bombast

I would like to say that my name calling comment was meant to be a joke, and I completly understand how you did not recognize that, and I understand that the joke was in bad taste, and I apologize.--IScott 09:54, 10 July 2009 (EDT)

## Changing my name?

TK, is there a way to change my name to JacobB to fit with the first name, last initial policy, without losing my contribution history? I've looked around and I don't see a way to do that. JDBowen 20:41, 12 July 2009 (EDT)

Post to Aschlafly's talk page, requesting the name you want to change to. You cannot make the account first yourself, he needs to do it. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 23:35, 12 July 2009 (EDT)
Thanks, I'll do that. JDBowen 01:06, 13 July 2009 (EDT)

## Hello, I'm New

Hello, I have looked over the guidelines. When I edited the Democratic Party, I made sure to add sources. I referenced my work even when there was just one sentence in between my sentences. However, now that you mention it, I'm not sure if I cited the National Republican sentence. Thanks for noticing. But I do know that I cited the Cleveland/Bryan split in the party. Bryan was such a little turd.

## Moving articles

OK. I didn't actually move the articles, formally, I just copied the content from one article into another, and nominated one of these articles for deletion. This doesn't do anything to the revision history, but if this was against the rules, I apologize - now I know.

I wasn't the only editor for the p-adic numbers, CherryS had put up a lot of relevant material, to which I added. I don't know why you deleted that article, which existed long before I suggested the merger and now that content appears to be irretrievably lost. Is there any way to retrieve it?

I'm also curious as to why p-adic numbers was deleted at all - granted, it only took a few minutes for me re-write, and probably only a few minutes for CherryS to write originally, but why couldn't you have just reverted my edit, rather than delete all that content?JacobB 19:31, 14 July 2009 (EDT)

• In order to move an article, which maintains all of the edit/creation history, the name place for it has to be empty. Insofar as I know, you can simply look at the edit history (even if deleted) and copy what is there, like to Wordpad, show me the link (to be sure I don't screw it up) and say, "please move the entire content of ______ to _______(new name)." Anything written on a wiki can be restored, at least by Admins, so no worries, okay? Just give me instructions for what you want to do here, and I will keep checking back here. Thanks! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 20:24, 14 July 2009 (EDT)
OK, that's good news.
So here's what I'd like to do. As it was this morning, we had two pages, p-adic values and p-adic numbers. What I'd like to do is see the content which used to be on p-adic numbers, [7], restored to that page, since it had content which was not present in p-adic values.
Second, since everything from p-adic values was included in p-adic numbers, and since this is a subject we really don't need two articles on, I think we should delete/merge the values article to the numbers article.
Does this seem wise to you? Is it doable? JacobB 20:35, 14 July 2009 (EDT)
Assuming (a big deal, when speaking of my tech ability!) the Admin knows what he is doing, and has access, no problem, and will attempt that in just a little while, after dinner here. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 21:53, 14 July 2009 (EDT)

## Great block and reverts!

TK, great block and reverts! God bless you.--Andy Schlafly 21:24, 19 July 2009 (EDT)

Thanks, Andy....hate to admit I totally missed this post by you! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 23:26, 23 July 2009 (EDT)

I'm not sure why the link didn't work; it seems to still be valid. [8] I'll leave it up to your discretion whether it merits mainpage attention or not. --Benp 22:22, 23 July 2009 (EDT)

I know....really weird...it is working for me now, so I added it back to the Main Page/talk. Thanks for helping! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 23:25, 23 July 2009 (EDT)

## More video game talk

Since video games are nearly in the area of "pop culture", should I either remove all the red links of video game characters or should I create redirects to the video game each character belongs to? --ChrisZ 00:06, 30 July 2009 (EDT)

Let me ask Mr. Schlafly and some other Admins, and will get back to you tomorrow, Chris. I am pretty certain no one will want links to all the Characters, ala' Wikipedia, but I want to be absolutely certain before creating possibly neeedless work! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 00:09, 30 July 2009 (EDT)

## Reversions

Why did you revert my factual edits? What did I do wrong? DanielPulido 14:02, 1 August 2009 (EDT)

And what edit would that be? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:05, 1 August 2009 (EDT)
Several of my contributions were reverted without comment by you, most recently to the Boston Red Sox article. DanielPulido 14:09, 1 August 2009 (EDT)
This edit? "Many such as Dan Shaughnessy questioned whether this illegal behavior tainted the championships the team won in 1004 and 2007." That edit? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:11, 1 August 2009 (EDT)
That was part of what I wrote, yes. Other than an apparent typo for 2004, what was wrong with it? DanielPulido 14:16, 1 August 2009 (EDT)
Well, I think if you'll review what I said above, you'll notice that no one is "objecting" to anything. I *asked* why my edits were reverted, so that if I did something wrong, you could explain it to me and help me to contribute better next time. If you need a citation, here one is: http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2009/07/31/suffering_from_roid_rage/ I'm not so wiki savvy, so maybe you could help me format it properly and insert it. It's not that easy yet; I'm still learning. Thanks for your patience, and let me know if I can do anything else to improve my contributions. DanielPulido 14:42, 1 August 2009 (EDT)
You wrote on my talk page: "I am moving the discussion off my own page, Daniel, since it is pretty much user-specific to you."
Before I contacted you, I checked your page to see if there was anything applicable to my situation, but I couldn't find anything. Let's keep it in a more accessible place! Maybe someone else will find it useful next time.
"The editors guide, style guide, provides easy to use information on how to insert citations."
Since you didn't tell me what was actually wrong with the edits I made, can you blame me for asking for your help rather than fumbling and bumbling my way through the directions for an unfamiliar process, only to get that reverted without an explanation as well?
"What one cannot make happen on a wiki, it seems, (and the same goes for my own office) is make people ask questions before actually doing something! Rather than discuss an idea, people on wiki's seem to feel some particular right of theirs has been violated or circumscribed by actually discussing it first."
I see that you and I feel the same way about it: Of course you don't blame me; I was right to ask you before making further edits! That's why it's so puzzling that you seemed to take issue with my asking.
"In the instant case you discussed on my talk page, I could have stopped what I was doing and corrected the glaring mistake, or, taking even longer, made a post calling to to your attention the wrong date and lack of citation, or simply, easily, hitting the "revert" button you don't see, but all Admins do. Multiplied by several dozen times a day, perhaps you can see why I chose the course of action I did"
Perhaps so. And perhaps an even easier way would be to take a few seconds to tell me 1) I mistyped a 1 for a 2, and 2) I needed a citation, the first time I asked you what was wrong. Even less stopping what you were doing that way, no? Dividing your troubles, rather than multiplying them, seems sensible, doesn't it? DanielPulido 16:48, 1 August 2009 (EDT)

Well, you seem to have the time for argument and parsing what I say, even adding your own speculation(s) as to how I feel and what I mean, so one would expect that you had actually read our style guide and pages about sourcing before embarking on an extended discussion here. New students and new employess, even new volunteers for the Red Cross, are all expected to read the available reference material, and you doing that, would have had your own question(s) answered. It isn't a matter of my being "too busy" but of you being willing to comport yourself with basic respect and politeness.

You asked me why your edit was reverted. I responded by saying aside from the wrong date, it wasn't sourced. Am I expected to use my special super powers and read your mind, know you were not a common vandal, and inserting the wrong date deliberately?

When, as an Administrator, I moved this convoluted discussion, with several interjections from other users, to your talk page, what happened? You decided to contradict my decision, without regard to the fact that others adding their own issues to this dialog made it confusing to read, and embarked on explaining to me why I was "wrong" in moving it there.

Then, in spite of being a new user, and obviously not being willing to invest the small amount of time it would take to read our Style Manual and other rules, you posted to the owners personal page, suggesting (after implying I and other Admins were "too busy" to answer simple questions, about the need for a new program to service the needs of new users like yourself.

You personally made the judgment as to what I should have done in regard to your edit, without even the basic consideration as to what I was doing at the time, where I was, what I was doing, suggesting (as if to some adolescent) how it would have been "easier" (if only in your own personal opinion) to have done this or that, other than what I did. This in spite of the fact a quick and easy reading of the guidelines would have told you why I reverted -- lack of source and date mistake. Like many users here, especially Mr. Schlafly and the other Admins, I am not always sitting at my personal machine, at home.

So, if I have a problem with your action(s), it is only that you were asking questions about my actions that you should have known the answers to had you done the right thing in reading the guides new users are expected to read BEFORE editing, and reversing my decision to move this conversation from where it properly belonged, and then acting as if/implying, that you are some injured party, or a victim of my being too busy. I strongly suggest you read and understand this wiki encyclopedia operates under far different rules than any other, and for good and just reasons. Being "new" doesn't exempy anyone, for any reason, from not reading our guides and rules BEFORE embarking on editing, because there isn't anything so desperately in need of changing that it could not wait until you familarized yourself with how we operate.

Now, once again, I ask you: Fair enough? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:58, 2 August 2009 (EDT)

## GregL

• In your case, GregL, you inserted speculation and/or rumor, as what you added was unsupported by citation/reference/link. And Daniel, apart from it being wrong, you object to an administrator removing it.....why? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:21, 1 August 2009 (EDT)
All of that is easily sourced but I'll add references this time and be sure to do so in the future. GregL 14:22, 1 August 2009 (EDT)
If it is that "easy" I suggest you have all that done before you insert changes here. Fair enough? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:24, 1 August 2009 (EDT)

## OscarJ Edits Reverted

Why were my edits to the Neo-Taino article reverted? I only introduced some headlines to improve readability, added the missing references section and corrected some grammatical errors. --OscarJ 14:47, 1 August 2009 (EDT)

OscarJ, we do not tolerate proxy use, and hiding your identity here, and that is in our rules. So long as you continue to do so, your contributions will be suspect. That is the product of a site terrorized by liberals and European Socialists for over two years, of them inserting false information, lies, which they try to deceptively label as "parody" but which most certainly is not. In short, new users taking unilateral actions, without first discussing such, are increasing the suspicion surrounding them. Is that a clear enough answer? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 15:42, 1 August 2009 (EDT)
I don't use a proxy, at least not to my knowledge. In fact, I wouldn't even know how to use one, so if I am, it's not intentional. Can you explain how I can stop using it, if I'm really doing so? --OscarJ 15:58, 1 August 2009 (EDT)
According to this site, my IP address location is exactly the place where I live, so I don't think I'm using a proxy. Are you sure you didn't confuse me with another editor? --OscarJ 15:43, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

## Featured articles

Your help is needed. --Joaquín Martínez 20:48, 1 August 2009 (EDT) --Joaquín Martínez 09:10, 22 September 2009 (EDT)

Voting? I was headed there, honest! :-) How is your summer proceeding, my friend? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 21:51, 1 August 2009 (EDT)
I am in 3 weeks journey. At present in Mexico City. Nice to hear from you Terry. --Joaquín Martínez 22:03, 1 August 2009 (EDT)

## Beauty is a breath, but it has breathed its last

You nasty, nasty man! How dare you beat me to the punch?

15:01, 5 August 2009 TK (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Bishop Edward Bagshawe" ‎ (archaic subject matter, about minor historical figure) (restore)

Grrr! ;-) --Ed Poor Talk 15:08, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

Yes, I understand, Ed. It can't be easy being "Mr. Wiki", can it? (:P) But there are two more, by the same editor, you might want to look at! I wonder if they are "for real", and just ignorant of wiki formatting, or one of the usual UK trolls? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 15:20, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

## Editing blocked certain hours

For some reason i am finding editing blocked many days, after a time, (Eastern, USA), usually beginning in the afternoon. The pattern usually is one which happens after i do some editing. Yesterday it began in the afternoon, and continued thru the night. Wondering if it is just me. Thanks.Daniel1212 09:39, 6 August 2009 (EDT)

TK, do we need to give Daniel night-editing privileges? --Ed Poor Talk 09:48, 6 August 2009 (EDT)
No, i burn the midnite oil enough as it is, but i am talking about blocks during the day, like beginning around 2pm in the NE. Thanks.Daniel1212 10:58, 6 August 2009 (EDT)
Daniel, "night-editing priviledges" refers to when a Siteadmin "blocks" all other users from editing--except Sysops and those with "edit" rights. This is typically used to prevent an influx of new users (possible vandals) from editing. --ɹǝlƃǝız ɹǝdoʇsıɹɥɔ 14:22, 6 August 2009 (EDT)
• Night editing, since I have been at CP, (which is longer than most) is an automatic process, overnight, that was added in response to habitual vandalism by certain sites. The process of shutting off registration and/or editing, at times other than roughly 1-5:30 AM, Eastern U.S. time, is something else entirely separate from the rather draconian locking of the entire data base which all with Site Admin authority can do. Daniel, I emailed you (I hope you got it!), to let you know we are working on resolving this for you. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:33, 6 August 2009 (EDT)
Thanks - it happened again around noon today, but was restored quicker.Daniel1212 15:57, 6 August 2009 (EDT)

I'm not sure if I am suffering from the same issue as the person above, but I find that I am blocked from editing sometimes such as earlier today. Is this a protective measure (since my name was changed to AlexanderM from Turbine)? Generally I am only free to edit in the early morning (I am on GMT). Regards ◄Turbine► 09:45, 7 August 2009 (EDT)

If you would read the comments above yours, it is indeed almost the same. --ɹǝlƃǝız ɹǝdoʇsıɹɥɔ 12:47, 7 August 2009 (EDT)
Thanks, ChrisZ, and yes, Alexander seems to be saying he is trying to edit from the U.K., or European areas, in the morning for him, and therefore during that brief time, early AM's in the Eastern Time Zone, here in the United States. It has nothing to do with your account or name change...it effects everyone. Before we started doing that, the vandal site members added nasty porn links to articles, and the most vile language and the like...just as they do with user creation, just to make their smut visible, if only in the logs. Infantile, I know, but to them free speech means only if you agree with them. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 13:38, 7 August 2009 (EDT)

## Edit to Njalsson

Hi, TK! I noticed you reverted that article. Did you do this perhaps by mistake thinking it was my inserted paragraph about the ACLU? (I got your comment and responded about that as well). ExFin

It lacked any reference, ExFin. Sorry, just running really slow, but meant to leave you a note! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 00:25, 8 August 2009 (EDT)
Ok, I'm putting them in today. Will translate titles from the local language to English for the references (within parentheses).

## From PatrickD

(BTW, I've been having the same problems as Daniel, above, and haven't been able to edit for a few days.)

I have updated my talk page in response to your message. You are correct in that people can't be expected to notice everything that goes on on other people's talk pages. But there's a custom that "ping-pong" conversations are to be avoided. So I don't know what the correct solution is. In any case, go and look. Also, you seem to be saying that my suggested changes to the math level templates can't be acted upon until they are posted here. So here they are. PatrickD 21:33, 15 August 2009 (EDT)

Template: Are you saying you like the idea of the templates but not the chosen format, with an illustrative equation on the left and the text on the right? Or you like the format, but not that particular equation? I like the format, and I think the first 3 equations (E, M, and H) are fine, but I think the "A" equation is over the top. In any case, do you want me to come up with another "H" equation, preferably one that doesn't use primes, so I'll stop grousing about it? PatrickD 23:59, 17 July 2009 (EDT)
It was just that particular one.....is all. I'll ask Ed Poor to take a gander as well....but demonstrations are always better than text for most things, I think. --T.K/Admin/Talk 04:13, 18 July 2009 (EDT)
OK, here are some suggested replacement templates for H and A. I'm not sure whether "that one" meant H or A. For reference, here are the existing E, M, H, and A:
 x + 3 = 7 x = ? This article/section deals with mathematical concepts appropriate for a student in early high school.
 x2 − 5x + 6 = 0 x = ? This article/section deals with mathematical concepts appropriate for a student in mid to late high school.
 $\frac{d}{dx} \sin x=?\,$ This article/section deals with mathematical concepts appropriate for a student in late high school or early university.
 $\pi_1(S^1)=?\,$ This article/section deals with mathematical concepts appropriate for a student in late university or graduate level.
I think some elementary calculus formula, like the derivative of the sine, is the right thing for H. So here's one suggestion that just gets rid of the invisible prime character:
 $\frac{d}{dx} \sin x=?\,$ This article/section deals with mathematical concepts appropriate for a student in late high school or early university.
Another one that would be good for H, at about the same educational level, would involve series:
 $\sum_{n=0}^\infty\frac{x^{2n+1}}{(2n+1)!}=?\,$ This article/section deals with mathematical concepts appropriate for a student in late high school or early university.
I think the existing A template is overboard. It refers to a conjecture that has never been proven! Here's a replacement that I think is appropriate, based on MarkGall's work on the fundamental group:
 $\pi_1(S^1)=?\,$ This article/section deals with mathematical concept appropriate for a student in late university or graduate level.

PatrickD 23:53, 19 July 2009 (EDT)

An ex-girlfriend of the "Lion of the Senate."

What do you think of this caption? (Pardon me if I seem a little impatient, I'm just upset about the couple of hundred viruses I downloaded last night just trying to find this img). Rob Smith 22:47, 28 August 2009 (EDT)

Being in the field, I'm not the best person to ask, Rob....not that I haven't participated in such in the past, I no longer do. If it were up to me, I would oversight it. Nothing is served, nothing at all, now that Kennedy is dead, in piling on. I am sympathetic, to be sure, and the liberals constantly do this kind of thing to Palin, Coulter, lots of people, but I would rather conservatives act differently than liberals...and maybe that makes me naive...but it's how I feel. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 23:21, 28 August 2009 (EDT)
We should recognize progressives have progressed from Ted Kennedy to Bill Clinton; instead of killing embarssing bimbos, they just slander and smear thier repution in the politics of personal destruction. Give them credit where credit is due. Rob Smith 15:04, 29 August 2009 (EDT)
Agreed! Let's just leave the recently dearly departed be. That other cheating liberal guy, the one who was cheating on his wife, riddled with Cancer, with some harlot in Hollywood, doing cocaine and fathering a child with her, that he denied all through the election campaign...he's fair game, IMO. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 16:29, 29 August 2009 (EDT)
Is this the amatuer porno star? Rob Smith 15:52, 30 August 2009 (EDT)

Could you please unblock user TrishaM? She is my daughter and we have the same IP address. She would like to do the Economics course. She can't edit your page becuase she has been blocked. We have both sent emails but haven't heard anything back. Thanks!

## Welcome Back!!!

Welcome back, TK!!!! Seeing you again makes our day. Actually, it makes the entire month!--Andy Schlafly 06:18, 4 October 2009 (EDT)

• God bless you, Andy! Bit by bit, slowly but surely, I will be increasing my presence back to normal. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 05:58, 5 October 2009 (EDT)
Great news, you are back. --Joaquín Martínez 10:34, 8 October 2009 (EDT)
Thanks, Joaquín! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 06:33, 9 October 2009 (EDT)

## SavedBeliever1

Could you block User:SavedBeliever1? He vandalized a couple of articles. --OscarJ 07:39, 9 October 2009 (EDT)

## Welcome back!

Your appearance and block have made my day!--Andy Schlafly 13:33, 19 October 2009 (EDT)

I'm not objecting to this deletion; in fact, I agree with it. But just out of curiosity, what is your/Conservapedia's definition of "encyclopedic"? I ask because I was trying to find it yesterday in the commandments, guidelines etc. and could not. Thanks, ChrisFV 12:22, 20 November 2009 (EST)

As conservatives we don't need to codify (like Wikipedia does) each and every eventuality, as we prefer to use common sense. The "article", such as it was, wasn't entirely incorrect, but it was not 100% correct either. The bread isn't indigenous only to Pakistan, but rather to most of the entire South Asia area. Given the originator of the article, and early contributors, I surmised their intent wasn't good, and simply deleted it.
To add food stuffs, individually, serves what purpose aside from clutter and pop culture? Should a serious project have a "Beef" article, or individual articles on "Pot Roast", "Porterhouse Steak" and "Round Steak"? Should we have a general article on "Grass" or several dozen entries for each and every hybrid and type of grass? In my judgment, creation of dozens of stubs on such examples is non-encyclopedic. You raise a good point about the need to specify something about this in our Guidelines, however. I will discuss this with the other Administrators, and see if something, generally, can be added. Thanks! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 12:41, 20 November 2009 (EST)
I entirely agree, and (IMHO) this place is littered with non-encyclopedic pages. Something more explicit in the guidelines might help, but a lot of it is just people adding stuff related to their pet interests. (Suddenly I have such a craving for Indian food!) ChrisFV 13:05, 20 November 2009 (EST)
This is a good point. There are a great many non-encyclopedia pages about books, movies, TV shows, and video games of no importance. Do we have a non-encyclopedic tag that we can apply in an effort to clean up? DouglasA 13:34, 20 November 2009 (EST)
Not that I know of. Most "non-encyclopedic" pages could be merged into another, broader article if one exists. For instance, Naan could have been merged into Indian Cuisine (which doesn't exist but perhaps should, because there are pages such as Tandoori and Tikka Masala that belong there as well). I recently added some merge tags to pages that were nothing but a track listing of an album. Rather than have a page for an album, relevant information should be added to the page for the artist. ChrisFV 14:07, 20 November 2009 (EST)

## Safety

Thanks for adding the e-mail block and getting rid of him for good - I just wish I'd noticed what he was up to sooner. JacobB 18:35, 20 November 2009 (EST)

• You beat me to emailing or posting on your talk page! No worries...these trolls from our dedicated vandal site never tire of their self-appointed task of fascist attacks to deny our free speech. Liberals never tire of preaching one thing and yet demonstrating by their actions quite another, which is the essence of their complete deceit. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 18:41, 20 November 2009 (EST)
On a related note, I'm working on cleaning up some of the things he left around. For example, I've changed his atrocious article on Ares 1-X rocket, but doing so inspired me to write a series of articles on current and planned human spaceflight. Everything I'm going to create in the next hour is red-linked on Constellation Program. As part of this plan, could you move Ares 1-X rocket to Ares 1-X, to fit the style of this plan? The only contributors are Safety and myself, so there won't be any meaningful edit history lost. I'd really appreciate it. Thanks, TK! JacobB 18:58, 20 November 2009 (EST)
Done. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 19:01, 20 November 2009 (EST)

## Re: Liberal Style program on main page

Sorry about that, TK, you were gone. This is a program Andy has approved, which downloads the contributions of users and searches for things like words that liberals use more often than conservatives, last wordism in talk pages, things like that. It's not a bot, it doesn't send any data to the Conservapedia servers, it just downloads recent contributions. You, by the way, have a rating of 1.28 on the last run - which is about as non-liberal as it gets! JacobB 19:52, 20 November 2009 (EST)

Is there a link to this approval and results? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 19:58, 20 November 2009 (EST)
Yes, I've found them. Unfortunately, I can't find any archives of User talk:Aschlafly, so I can't wikilink, but if you look at the history for that page, MarkGall, the inventor of the program, requests approval in an edit at 22:33, 5 October 2009, Mr. Schlafly approves it at 23:02, 5 October 2009, and the first results come in at 12:50, 10 October 2009 from MarkGall. Once MarkGall retired, I contacted him asking for the code to the program, since I thought the idea was so revolutionary and, well, cool! I've emailed the source code to DouglasA at his request and would be happy to it email to you, if you like. JacobB 20:14, 20 November 2009 (EST)
I don't care about the source code, but am interested in the results, so if you could email those to me, I would appreciate it, and distribute those to the other Admins. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 20:21, 20 November 2009 (EST)
Done! JacobB 20:38, 20 November 2009 (EST)

Hi, TK. I just wanted to ask about your block of Hurricanetornado. This user hasn't made any edits, so why not just block him with "please re-create your first name and last initial?" and leave account creation open? Perhaps he came here, fed up with Wikipedia bias (as many of us did), but wasn't aware of our username policies. Should his block setting be changed to "pleace re-create..." with account creation enabled? JacobB 22:01, 22 November 2009 (EST) The same goes for LiberationX, although I won't ask about Southamerica - his two edits showed he was either a moron or a vandal. JacobB 22:03, 22 November 2009 (EST)

My mistake, I see now they were offered plenty of time to change their name and didn't. Sorry to bother you! JacobB 22:27, 22 November 2009 (EST)

## Thanks

...for dealing with PatrickD's userpage. It's good to keep that kind of thing from filling up the encyclopedia. DouglasA 23:23, 22 November 2009 (EST)

## Bounce

Apologies for your email to me bouncing, I did receive it. I'm afraid the spammers phishing for hotmail accounts was a bit too successful and so I had to resort to blocking all hotmail addresses. So anyway, nice to have you back. MattS 16:40, 23 November 2009 (EST)

No problem. Thanks to the vandal site members, my Hotmail receives well over 75 spam emails each and every day, but thankfully they are so good at catching them, I never see one! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 16:46, 23 November 2009 (EST)
Only 75? My gmail account (which I got rid of in the end) was getting several hundred per day! MattS 16:55, 23 November 2009 (EST)

Title says it all. JacobB 16:51, 23 November 2009 (EST)

## Are you me or am I you?

Does this make sense to you? Jinx McHue 00:04, 25 November 2009 (EST)

I Am the Walrus!
I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together. See how they run like pigs from a gun, see how they fly? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 00:59, 25 November 2009 (EST)
Koo koo ka chu! If you want to be me, be me, and if you want to be you, be you. Jinx McHue 07:46, 25 November 2009 (EST)

## Thanksgiving edit

Hi TK,

Sorry, but your edit on the Thanksgiving page is incorrect. As someone who is currently living in Canada, I can tell you with 100% certainty that Thanksgiving is a national holiday (See this site from the government of Canada: [9]) I appreciate that you're trying to prevent an edit war, but this page is now factually incorrect. I felt that my last edit was a good compromise. Can you please revert your edit or add your own? EMorrissey 17:08, 26 November 2009 (EST)

No, sorry, it is you who are not correct. What do you think a true, national holiday is? It isn't one that isn't recognized by the entire nation, just part of it, thats for sure. And given the date that Canada established its Thanksgiving, it wasn't something unique, never done before, as the U.S. had already established its holiday by then. Therefore Thanksgiving remains a uniquely American holiday, no matter how many other countries established a like-named holiday afterwards. CP still recognizes the Canadaian holiday by that name in several places. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 19:04, 26 November 2009 (EST)

## Jesus Christ article

Done. Thank you!Bert Schlossberg 19:08, 27 November 2009 (EST)

## Blocking

Heya. Andy gave me blocking right when the brainless Colbert groupies were piling up. I really wasn't expecting him to do that. Anyway, since that's all pretty much over, I really don't need the right anymore, so go ahead and take me off of it. Or let me know if you'd rather I ask Andy to do that since he was the one who gave me it. Thanks. Jinx McHue 23:33, 28 November 2009 (EST)

Hidey Ho! Have you checked and tried to block? Take a look Here. It shows me you do have blocking! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 00:37, 29 November 2009 (EST)
Yes. When the Mindless Vandals for Colbert showed up, Andy gave me blocking rights to help stop them. I don't see much need for it anymore, especially if I shouldn't be blocking per your warning on my talk page. Take me off the list or let me know if I should approach Andy about it instead. Jinx McHue 15:26, 29 November 2009 (EST)
That is exactly why you have blocking, Jinx, for the Mindless Vandals. The policy change Karajou posted in the Guidelines was to prevent non-admins from making policy decisions on their own, not stop you guys from blocking blatant vandalism and the like. To have your blocking rights removed, you need to contact Mr. Schlafly, but I hope you will decide to keep them. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 15:31, 29 November 2009 (EST)
Jinx, your blocks have been invaluable and I hope you can continue exercising your blocking power as appropriate.--Andy Schlafly 15:33, 29 November 2009 (EST)
Okay. I will take some more time to consider. I've been pushing myself lately to spend less time on the computer. At this time, I suppose retaining the right doesn't hurt anything even if I'm not using it much and I will endeavor to follow the guidelines for my rights level. I wasn't aware of them before. Jinx McHue 21:59, 29 November 2009 (EST)

## nice catch

I just wanted to say well done with the global warming news items. I only joined today, but I've seen before your postings before debunking such things as global warming - good job! GaryB 19:11, 2 December 2009 (EST)

## Good day

Nice to see you around, Terry. --Joaquín Martínez 09:18, 17 December 2009 (EST)

Thank you, Joaquín! Feliz Navidad to you and your loving family! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 09:24, 17 December 2009 (EST)

## Nomination for deletion of that essay

I nominated [Inspiration of Holy Scripture: An Eastern Christian and Jewish Perspective] for deletion because it was written by a user who has been blocked for vandalism. JacobB 01:10, 18 December 2009 (EST)

Fox? I know....I was the one who did away with that vandal. However BertSchlossberg has reworked the entire article so that not much of the original remains, and given his major contributions to CP, he deserves better than to simply have it deleted without comment or a chance to discuss your objections. This is another area that remains in the purview of Admins, so the best idea is for you to contact me about such things first, to avoid you being placed in the "cross-fire" so to speak.  ;-) --ṬK/Admin/Talk 03:19, 18 December 2009 (EST)

## Doing much better, thanks

I finally got over my breathing problems. Combination of H1N1 and asthma, I think. Now we're just dealing with run-of-the-mill colds. Jinx McHue 10:34, 18 December 2009 (EST)

So, things are perhaps too dull, eh? Well don't worry, there is still the regular flu! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:44, 18 December 2009 (EST)

## Climategate

TK, may I ask your reason for reverting my edit on Climategate here? I moved the Al Gore image to the media section because Climategate is not specifically about Al Gore, though he has been a focus of some media coverage. Because Climategate is primarily about Global warming, I think it's more appropriate that the other image be used for the introduction. Otherwise, if there is an image not yet uploaded to Conservapedia which uses the word "Climategate" in the picture, that might be a better option. For these reasons I have changed it back because Al Gore is not the main focus of the article and in placing him as an introductory image could only distract from the primary message on Climategate. Hopefully this makes sense. DerekE 19:42, 18 December 2009 (EST)

First and foremost, DerekE, this is not a "mobocracy" like Wikipedia, so it is never appropriate for an editor to change the additions made by an Administrator (exceptions being grammar and spelling corrections, etc.). Secondly, and ancillary to the first, you might wish to read up HERE on what Admins here are charged with. After reading our rules I believe you will understand why your edits were reverted. Thirdly, "Climategate" isn't mainly about Global Warming, it is mainly about liberal deceit and there is no greater practitioner of it than Al Gore.

I posted this on the Climategate talk page but thought it might be news worthy item: If you were perplexed (as i am sure you were) why WP seemed less than objective in its treatment of Climate Change (should that be capitalized?) then see Lawrence Solomon: Wikipedia’s climate doctor, December 19, 2009 Daniel1212 14:20, 20 December 2009 (EST)

"In these ways, Connolley turned Wikipedia into the missionary wing of the global warming movement.". Great find, Daniel! I suggest you guys work this into the article, and certainly into the Wikipedia one as well!
I left that same response on the Climategate talk page too. Get with DerekE about adding it, or just do it. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:38, 20 December 2009 (EST)

## Hi

Sorry if my response on Climategate seemed a bit hostile. But can I ask why you reverted it? Thanks. TobyG 22:14, 18 December 2009 (EST)

Because we are not a Mobocracy, as you yourself posted to a user about a conversation on Dr. Jensen's talk page, TobyG. And yet you still inserted yourself into my instuctions to another editor, showing your true trolling nature. Godspeed to you! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 22:20, 18 December 2009 (EST)

## Reverted Edit

Hi. I see you have reverted the edit I made to the feminism page. Did you find that part of the quote? When I checked I didn't see it anywhere (and I'm also not sure what she could even mean by that!). Just checking in, since I didn't see a description of your edit. --AdamBurns 09:48, 19 December 2009 (EST)

I notice on Free piston engine your citations are without links. Are the from technical papers you just have laying around the house, or could you perhaps find on-line links for them? Thanks! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:48, 20 December 2009 (EST)

I added one for now, I'll try for better ones later. What about the reverted edit I mentioned in my original comment? I don't think that quote is quite right as is.--AdamBurns 16:31, 20 December 2009 (EST)

I will look at it again. Administrators decide policy and rule on editorial content, so not all of our edits will offer what you are looking for, or what we might demand of editors, and that isn't different from any other place or business, including colleges or universities. ;-) --ṬK/Admin/Talk 17:08, 20 December 2009 (EST)

## Nice Christmas banner!

Thanks for the nice Christmas banner!--Andy Schlafly 00:01, 23 December 2009 (EST)

And thank you for posting your thanks here....it reminded me to put it up on my own page! ;-) --ṬK/Admin/Talk 01:30, 23 December 2009 (EST)

## Thank you!

Thank you for letting the webmaster know about our formatting issues! While I have your attention, do you think you could take a look at the image upload page? I'd appreciate it. Thanks again! JacobB 03:44, 23 December 2009 (EST)

And if maybe you could delete User:JacobB/reflisttemp1, that'd also be great. Thanks again! JacobB 03:49, 23 December 2009 (EST)
Zzzzzzz, I deleted the one, but its 2:48AM here, and I need to grab some sleep! Please ask Jpatt in a couple of hours, will you? Thanks! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 05:48, 23 December 2009 (EST)

## Greetings

The same to you and your family, dear Terry.

--Joaquín Martínez 09:16, 23 December 2009 (EST)

## Christmas banner

Your Christmas posting on the Main Page is fantastic, but let's give news top billing again until Christmas Eve. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly 13:54, 23 December 2009 (EST)

Fine by me, just didn't know if I would have access then. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:25, 23 December 2009 (EST)

## edit

Just making an edit here to make vandalizing this page by means of "undo" a little harder. JacobB 15:01, 25 December 2009 (EST)

## Keeping the focus

Thanks for this talk page edit. If users don't want to help write the article, there's alwasy the debate topics page. --Ed Poor Talk 12:26, 26 December 2009 (EST)

## Image Protection

TK, I can upload images but I can't protect them. Can you please go through my image uploads and protect them? Thanks so much! JacobB 23:38, 30 December 2009 (EST)

Also, do you know how to get a gif to format properly here, as in the Riemann.gif on Calc3.1? What I have on that page is pretty much exactly how wikipedia has it, but there it functions and here it doesn't. JacobB 23:46, 30 December 2009 (EST)

## Superb work!

Superb culmination to a terrific project, Conservatives of the Decade, 2009!--Andy Schlafly 20:06, 31 December 2009 (EST)

Thanks, Andy! I was a late mover in the project however, with you and Chip Petterson doing the heavy lifting, along with TerryH. I predict a banner year for CP, as Obama and his lackey Congress drag America ever more leftward, and the leftist bloggers and vandals exact their petulant, child-like revenge on anyone who dares to disagree with them. But we've faced bigger foes in our time, eh? Happy New Year to you and yours! Onward Christian Soldiers! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 20:42, 31 December 2009 (EST)

## Ann Coulter

Thank you for the welcome. I recently noticed that your website listed Ann Coulter as one of the top conservatives of the decade. I also found Ann Coulter to be a significant person when I began to write about her on Wikipedia, shortly after her second book. (I have contributed substantial amounts of writing to about 40% of the sections listed on her Wikipedia webpage.) But I didn't anticipate her ability to speak freely and her native wit would eventually place her significance even above many national political officials with her political persuasion.

As a consequence of being one of the first to do research on Ann Coulter for the World Wide Web, I discovered a number of subtleties of experience and thought that informed her actions, actions which were often reported with little regard to shedding light on her thinking, when they were not deliberately reported in such a way as to attempt to do as much damage to her reputation as possible.

Since your site has honored Ann Coulter with this mark of significance, I thought it might be appropriate if I added some of these subtleties of motive to the Ann Coulter article here in the course of describing some of her significant actions (not to the point of defensiveness, however). I can prove I wrote them on Wikipedia, if necessary, through the use of the Wikiblame tool along with an admin here who can do a checkuser for an IP address on my user name.

I wanted to consult with an Admin here before proceeding to edit a high-visibility article, however. If you want to see some of my work, I did most, but not all, of the Paula Jones section on the Wikipedia Ann Coulter article, which despite the deterioration of the punctuation by others, gives a good example of my writing.