Difference between revisions of "User talk:Aschlafly"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Markman: new section)
(Markman: avoid duplicate section title)
Line 287: Line 287:
Thanks you--[[User:Tomqua|Tomqua]] 13:18, 9 July 2013 (EDT)
Thanks you--[[User:Tomqua|Tomqua]] 13:18, 9 July 2013 (EDT)
== Markman ==
== Markman 2 ==
This morning, Markman made [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Project_200_plus&diff=prev&oldid=1060218 this edit] that called NKeaton a troll.  I blocked Markman for 3 days based on that disruptive act of incivility, and this led to Markman unblocking himself and [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=Markman&page=User%3AGregG&year=&month=-1 blocking me] (with a block reason that is a personal attack that triggers the spam filter).  Thus, I am leaving it to you to decide how this should be handled.  Thanks, [[User:GregG|GregG]] 20:08, 9 July 2013 (EDT)
This morning, Markman made [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Project_200_plus&diff=prev&oldid=1060218 this edit] that called NKeaton a troll.  I blocked Markman for 3 days based on that disruptive act of incivility, and this led to Markman unblocking himself and [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=Markman&page=User%3AGregG&year=&month=-1 blocking me] (with a block reason that is a personal attack that triggers the spam filter).  Thus, I am leaving it to you to decide how this should be handled.  Thanks, [[User:GregG|GregG]] 20:08, 9 July 2013 (EDT)

Revision as of 19:09, 9 July 2013

Comment here

Hi! Thank for for creating this website.

Archive Index

Christian Feasts

I was a little bit disappointed that Pentecost didn't make the Main Page, even after I had mentioned it: see Talk:Main_Page#Pentecost....

I'd like to see the Christian Feasts being honored on the Main Page, be it by a masterpiece, a link to an article, etc.: the next will be Trinity Sunday. Any ideas?

Thanks, --AugustO 08:42, 21 May 2013 (EDT)

Good suggestions. Often this will depend on what else is in the news, or what other entries editors are spending their time on at a particularly moment. Other websites on the internet are purely religious sites.--Andy Schlafly 10:48, 21 May 2013 (EDT)

Conservapedia Proven Right

Mr. Schlafly,
I wanted to apologize if my past edit offended you or damaged the project. It was never my intent to remove information from the table, but only to enhance the layout and supplement the content through additional citations. I have also apologized on the talk page of the article, but I thought I owed you a direct apology as well.

Additionally, I still have a desire to improve the article. I have posted a proposed plan on the talk page, and I would be very grateful for your input. I eagerly await your suggestions.

Sincerely, WilliamWB 11:27, 23 May 2013 (EDT)

„Jesus prayed, often publicly, for people”

Andrew Schlafly, you claimed that „Jesus prayed, often publicly, for people”. I'm still interested in an example for this - as you said that this happened often, you should be able to provide us with one. To be more precise: I don't want examples of Jesus blessing or giving thanks ( εὐλογέω - like in Matthew 14:19) or laying hands upon someone (ἐπιτίθημι χεῖρας - like in Matthew 19:15), I'd like to see an example of Jesus praying (προσεύχομαι) publicly for people.

Could you please give us a verse? Thank you. --AugustO 15:40, 24 May 2013 (EDT)

For example, Jesus routinely prayed in public before each meal.--Andy Schlafly 21:32, 24 May 2013 (EDT)
  • „I don't want examples of Jesus blessing or giving thanks
  • „I'd like to see an example of Jesus praying (προσεύχομαι) publicly for people
  • „Could you please give us a verse?”
As you can see, your answer doesn't match the question. --AugustO 22:45, 24 May 2013 (EDT)
Try John 8-14 (Translated)#11:41 - when Jesus very publicly prays to and thanks God prior to raising Lazarus from the dead.--Andy Schlafly 23:45, 24 May 2013 (EDT)

I wonder if he'd be satisfied with John 17:11-17:
  • Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one. 12 While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. 13 But now I am coming to you, and these things I speak in the world, that they may have my joy fulfilled in themselves. 14 I have given them your word, and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. 15 I do not ask that you take them out of the world, but that you keep them from the evil one. 16 They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. 17 Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth. [1]
Perhaps there aren't as many transcripts of our Lord's specific prayers as we'd all like. --Ed Poor Talk 19:46, 26 May 2013 (EDT)

My faith is VERY IMPORTANT to me

I may be a "liberal" Christian but I am devout, but some articles (guess by who?) suggest I am more associated with Satan them I am Jesus. I will not stand for it any longer--Patmac 09:34, 26 May 2013 (EDT)


Dear Mr. Schlafly,

Can you please unprotect this page? I would like to update it with information about VY and Shock's chatroom that has come to light at Talk:Main Page. If this is not desirable, then I would suggest unprotecting the page (which is currently sourced only to a single page on an anonymous blog) so that a more verifiable article can be written in its place (and perhaps if I can get a hold of Conservative, he can point me to reliable sources). Thanks, GregG 21:28, 31 May 2013 (EDT)

Dead link

Can you do anything with this: Template:Dead link? --JoeyJ 14:02, 1 June 2013 (EDT)

What is wrong with it?--Andy Schlafly 16:20, 1 June 2013 (EDT)
Maybe you can expand it. In Wikipedia there is a category for articles with dead links --JoeyJ 09:00, 2 June 2013 (EDT)
I've done it. If Mr. Schlafly or someone else wants to change the exact name of the category, they can go ahead. Onward 09:25, 2 June 2013 (EDT)

My talk

Could you restore my talk page, actually? A nice little memento from the hoopla. :) Onward 20:24, 1 June 2013 (EDT)

A copy from my post on Main page talk

Conservative still goes on with his hatred, I will get blocked for this but here is my promise, I will wait 3 days and if after that time this users hatred is not completely removed from this site I am going to report Conservapedia to the Southern Poverty Law Center and request it is designated a hate group.--Patmac 11:28, 3 June 2013 (EDT)

I would have preferred to send these messages to you in person but I cannot find an email for you so it has to be done here, I have requested you do something before but have been constantly ignored. Lets face it Andy, despite not holding office you are very much a politician, and what does a politician do when a subordinate constantly jeopardizes his position? He gits rid.--Patmac 11:41, 3 June 2013 (EDT)
Conservapedia supports and defends the full right to free speech, and urges liberal groups to do likewise.--Andy Schlafly 12:16, 3 June 2013 (EDT)

This is not free speech, this is hate speech. When i read that Jesus eats and spits out moderate Christians that is hate speech, and it also brings the name of our saviour into disrepute. He does not just attack evolutionists and atheists, he attacks Christians, to the extent that we are not Christians at all. "Liberal" Christianity and marital infidelity, "Liberal" Christianity and whore mongering, "Liberal" Christianity and bestiality, need i say more? But if someone dare challenge his position, he blocks them, how is that free speech? I think you personally have some pretty strange ideas but you do allow them to be challenged without going on a hate spree, and you are to be respected for that. But constantly allowing Conservative to post his vile tirade, however free it may be, just undermines Conservatives and by extension your image.--Patmac 12:32, 3 June 2013 (EDT)

This user Pacmac is blocked indefinitely. Apparently, he thinks he can define what hatred is, even so far as to saying that the above reference concerning Jesus constitutes "hate speech". This is the place in the Bible where it comes from, Revelation, Chapter 2:
14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;
15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.
16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.
What it means is that this user is trying his best to stop any mention of the Bible unless this mention is done in accordance with his liberal philosophy; which means that the above Revelation verses are null and void. He further threatens to call the SPLC on us if we don't behave in according to his whims, i.e. one hate filled individual calling a hate-filled organization to complain about our alleged hate against his own hate-filled ideas.
Patmac had also forgotten about our First Amendment RIGHTS to FREE SPEECH, FREEDOM OF RELIGION, and FREEDOM TO ASSEMBLE. He's so filled with hate himself that he would demand the SPLC to try to stop us from enjoying those rights. As far as I'm concerned, he failed. And he can continue failing somewhere else. Karajou 13:12, 3 June 2013 (EDT)
Firstly, let me say that I do not endorse user:Patmac`s tactics of legal threats. They have no place on a wiki, and should instead be sent to the site's owner (Mr. Schlafly) by email. However, as per hate speech and the Bible, it is clear that the Bible condemns churches who do not uphold the tenets of Christianity, but on the other hand, who is User:C to decide which churches are not upholding these tenets? brenden 13:43, 3 June 2013 (EDT)

This is an opportunity for Andy to show some leadership in setting a path that de-escallates the conflict here. On the one hand, Patmac is absolutely right about the intemperate nature of User:C's comments. On the other hand, Patmac's frustration with the failure to address that problem led him to make intemperate remarks as well. I suggest that we forgive Patmac for his transgression, and address whether User:C's edits are consistent with the fundamental commandments of Conservapedia. This is not a "Free Speech" issue. User:C is free to express his views on his private blog. Our question is whether CP should endorse and republish some sharp comments as the views of the entire project. Wschact 07:22, 4 June 2013 (EDT)

Can you please nuke

ReymeDneK's contributions? Thanks, GregG 10:15, 5 June 2013 (EDT)


There is a dispute between myself and user:Markman regarding User:Rafael's block. Could you please provide some guidance? Thanks, brenden 15:34, 6 June 2013 (EDT)

See this edit. Clear case of incivility. Considering his previous record I'd say he should be banned for at least a week if not more. I would have given him a lifetime ban but unfortunately there are too many editors with blocking rights who seem to be determined to subvert Conservapedia's rules. Interestingly enough, many of those editors are also in cordial relations with the RW userbase. - Markman 15:42, 6 June 2013 (EDT)
You should also point out that, aside from you, the only other person who has given Rafael a block, was DamianJohn, and a now outed parodist. As per "determined to subvert Conservapedia's rules", I would suggest that you re-read the rules. I still haven't forgotten your bullying of AlanE. brenden 15:48, 6 June 2013 (EDT)
"You should also point out that, aside from you, the only other person who has given Rafael a block, was DamianJohn, and a now outed parodist." Come on darling, don't be afraid to call the parodist by his name - Dvergne. The same Dvergne who sided with you and with AlanE against me. So you're basically admitting to both associating with a liberal website and with parodists. - Markman 15:54, 6 June 2013 (EDT)
As far as I understand, User:Dvergne, Karajou, and myself were chastising you for spamming {{uncited}} specifically on AlanE's contributions. Are you insinuating that Karajou is "associating with a parodist"?? Furthermore, once again, you have shown yourself unwilling to read that userpage, that explains my goals on that website specifically. In case you can't see that website, I have the words reproduced below:

==Wat?== *Why are you here? :I'd rather not be impersonated, and I would like a word in this place. *What are you doing at Conservapedia? :I do enjoy thought exercises. While Conservapedia does go in a little overboard at times, I still have faith in it. I feel that the only reason that Conservapedia's problems are so famous, are because of the inordinate amount of trolls and parodists, trying their best to write something so ridiculous, that their comrades might congratulate them. That, and the continued threats by [[user:naca|certain]] [[user:Umichcynic|people]] [[user:Proxima Centauri|at]] [[Liberapedia|certain websites]], to (blocked by spam filter), and harrass the precarious community at Conservapedia, have not helped the situation. One of my goals there is to rectify that. brenden 16:00, 6 June 2013 (EDT)

Your other edits on that website reveal a different story. Your cordial relations with the RW userbase shows that you're one of them. - Markman 16:04, 6 June 2013 (EDT)
In the days of TK your admiting you are even reading that site would have earnt you a ban. Davidspencer 16:05, 6 June 2013 (EDT)
On the contrary, I have been called a dick, a parodist, a "smarmy little prefect", among other things. I do my best to present Conservapedia in a positive light, and frankly, are doing a lot more good than Markman, going there to deliberately spread a false impression of a surly, confrontational Conservapedia. brenden 16:06, 6 June 2013 (EDT)
I think that I made my case and I don't need to elaborate any further. I don't only enforce the 90/10 rule but also try to comply with it, so I'll refrain from any further replies until Mr. Schlafly says his word. - Markman 16:09, 6 June 2013 (EDT)
I think that you shouldn't jump the gun, and instead, should wait for Mr. Schlafly's word on this matter. brenden 16:05, 7 June 2013 (EDT)

Community Portal

A sock of Mr. Mason has recently posted some vile attacks on that page. Although I have undid them, someone may want to block that sock and/or take other remedial measures. Thanks, WilliamWB 12:43, 7 June 2013 (EDT)

I wouldn't worry about this. Karajou took a minute or two to learn oversighting. Mr. Mason will now become even more obscure than he already is and rightfully so. Conservative 00:12, 11 June 2013 (EDT)

Arkansas voter ID rulemaking

Dear Mr. Schlafly,

I know you've taken interest in voter ID just as I have, and I found out this week that the Arkansas Secretary of State has proposed rules to implement Arkansas' new voter ID law. [2]. I'm planning on writing up and submitting comments to fix several issues with the rules, and I was wondering whether you were planning on submitting comments or wanted to see what I am writing. Hopefully, if the rules are fixed as I suggest, the voter ID law should survive federal and state court challenges. Thanks, GregG 13:24, 8 June 2013 (EDT)

That's interesting. I wasn't planning on submitting any comments, but I'd be curious to see what you submit. My own view is that voter ID laws are not as significant as early voting laws.--Andy Schlafly 22:36, 8 June 2013 (EDT)

Building content vs. fighting spammers

Andy, I think if Conservapedians could spend more time creating content rather than fighting spammers that they would do so if given the opportunity.

Why don't you add the feature to the wiki that fights spammers that Brenden says works great at his wiki?

Here is the informmation:

I noticed that in the RC, there's been a large amount of spammers. Perhaps implementing QuestyCaptcha, a system that uses questions that Mr. Schlafly chooses, could stem the onslaught. It works excellently at my wiki. Here is the information for this extention: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:QuestyCaptcha brenden 21:10, 1 June 2013 (EDT)

I hope this helps. Conservative 10:30, 9 June 2013 (EDT)

Quote mining

Dear Mr. Schlafly,

User:Conservative reverted my recent edits without explanation and protected the page. Since there is no way to contact U:C and I don't see it likely that there will be fruitful discussion about improving the article about the logical fallacy of quote mining, I would request that the page be unprotected and that U:C work in collegiality with me to improve the page. Thanks, GregG 11:21, 9 June 2013 (EDT)

There is nothing wrong about quoting the other side and using those quotes to disprove and discredit their position. Some evolutionists pretend there is something wrong with this, yet politicians, attorneys, and any debater properly does this frequently.--Andy Schlafly 13:00, 9 June 2013 (EDT)
I'm glad you are offering your input, and I should probably explain my changes fully on the talk page. Science, law, theology, politics, mathematics, and philosophy are all different systems for answering questions about our world. Each system has its own rules, so what may be a valid argument in law (citing to binding precedent or quoting an authority) is not necessarily valid in science or math. Likewise, logical deduction from axioms is the main way mathematical results are proven, but it has less utility in the other systems of answering questions.
In any event, I think there should be a full discussion on the talk page, and, revisiting this issue, I think that what would probably be best (and what I will therefore request) is for the page protection to automatically expire, say, a week or two from now, and hopefully, the discussion that takes place during this next week will improve the article. Thanks, GregG 13:10, 9 June 2013 (EDT)
EDIT You wrote "politicians, attorneys, and any debater properly does [sic] this frequently." I trust you are familiar with Rule 3.3 of the New Jersey Rules of Professional Conduct. GregG 13:23, 9 June 2013 (EDT)


Try this:

$wgGroupPermissions['*' ]['createpage'] = false; $wgGroupPermissions['user' ]['createpage'] = false; $wgGroupPermissions['autoconfirmed']['createpage'] = true; $wgAutoConfirmAge = 600 ; # Ten Minutes

I disagree with this proposal. I think one of the things that makes wikis so successful is that people can jump in by creating an account and instantly contribute by improving pages. To be honest, I think that there are enough blockers to handle the spam efficiently, but if there needs to be a solution, I would recommend QuestyCaptcha. GregG 17:03, 9 June 2013 (EDT)


It keeps on coming up everytime I add a link to references, is there any way that you can turn it off for my user? I clearly am not a bot or spammer so if you can it would be much appreciated. JAnderson 20:51, 10 June 2013 (EDT)

Thanks for asking. I've added SkipCatcha privileges to your account.--Andy Schlafly 21:19, 10 June 2013 (EDT)


I'm happy to announce that the Book of Malachi is now fully translated. I would like you to take a look at it and if needed help improve it. Note: not all of the book's translation was done by me, but in the parts that I did translate I changed "LORD of hosts" into "LORD of armies". The Hebrew word "tsvaot" (צבאות) that is sometimes translated into "hosts" actually means "armies". I think that this translation is more accurate, plus it sends a strong anti-pacifist message.

I also see that I can't add Malachi to the list of fully translated books in Template:ConservativeBible. Could you please do that for me? - Markman 06:16, 15 June 2013 (EDT)

Fabulous! I like your correction of the pacifist bias. I've updated the template. Well done!--Andy Schlafly 11:41, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
Thanks you for your kind words! - Markman 11:41, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
I look forward to more of your translations.--Andy Schlafly 11:48, 15 June 2013 (EDT)

Catholic Church and evolution

Schlafly, could you please answer to my post on Talk:Roman Catholic Church about the RCC and evolution? Thanks, cheers. --Swordsman 08:10, 15 June 2013 (EDT)

Replied.--Andy Schlafly 11:48, 15 June 2013 (EDT)

Hi can you please uploud these pictures: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Anarchy-symbol.svg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ancapflag.svg Thanks --JoeyJ 13:49, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

Done as requested.--Andy Schlafly 14:28, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
Thank you but I cant put them into the articles Anarchism and Anarcho-capitalism Can you help me, please? --JoeyJ 13:58, 18 June 2013 (EDT)
I resized them from 500px to 200px and now you can use them in a format smaller than 500px. See: Anarchism and http://conservapedia.com/File:200px-Ancapflag.svg.png Conservative 14:35, 18 June 2013 (EDT)
Thanks Conservative. Please uploud yet this here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Anarchist_flag.svg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Christian_punk.svg --JoeyJ 08:47, 21 June 2013 (EDT)
and this one also --JoeyJ 09:30, 21 June 2013 (EDT)

U.S. History

Mr Schlafly, Having visited the Eagle Forum website I noticed you run courses on US history which interests me, but have noticed the registration is restricted to those living in the USA. Is it possible to enrole from elsewhere?--Tomqua 16:27, 18 June 2013 (EDT)

Consider using the U.S. History course I posted here: Conservapedia:Index.--Andy Schlafly 16:41, 18 June 2013 (EDT)

Thank you--Tomqua 16:42, 18 June 2013 (EDT)

Hollywood Values strike again


It's the same old story over and over: a Hollywood liberal (he helped raise money for Kerry) engages in a self destructive lifestyle (compulsive eating in this case) leading to his own demise. So tragic and yet so preventable. - Markman 15:08, 20 June 2013 (EDT)

Previous Breaking News Archives

The archives from "Previous Breaking News" are very unvalid. Where are the archives from 2012/2013?--JoeyJ 12:01, 24 June 2013 (EDT)

Here: [3].--Andy Schlafly 12:13, 24 June 2013 (EDT)

Recent vandalism spree

We've under a vandalism spree recently. Users involved: SwissE, Namkram, JackieS. I think we should consider a range block in case their IP addressees are dynamic.

I also blocked some users who registered in close proximity to the vandal spree: Mar92vg8br, Numisexpert37, Car9d94nha, NigelM, DennyH. I recommend using checkuser to see if they share IP addressees with the vandals. If not, than those with a proper username should be unblocked while those with an improper username should remain blocked but with their IP unblocked and account creation enabled. - Markman 09:09, 25 June 2013 (EDT)

Thanks. I'll look into this.--Andy Schlafly 09:13, 25 June 2013 (EDT)

User:Ryancsh and blocks

You don't have any problems with his blocks, do you? brenden 14:11, 25 June 2013 (EDT)

Checkers, stop barking at Mr. Schlafly this instant! - Markman 14:16, 25 June 2013 (EDT)


Please do something about this person. I realise has has been very helpful to you in the Bible Project but he is now blocking long standing and valued contributors on the most spurious of reasons. Davidspencer 15:03, 25 June 2013 (EDT)

Hate to join on but I agree. Markman is a good editor of the bible project but he does engage in block wars and the infighting between Him and Brendan managed to drag me in when he attempted to associate my name is a previously unknown (to me anyway) internet joke. Also, I have serious issue with him questioning my Conservative Ideology simply because I am British and calling British conservatives "sexual degenerates"Ryancsh 20:07, 25 June 2013 (GMT)
And before he comes back with an accusation of me being a sock of another user I have been here for far longer than he has, I may not have been that active a contributor but I am not a parodist. And I am not a sock of anyone on this site I assure you. Davidspencer 15:18, 25 June 2013 (EDT)
I find no need to defend myself from accusations of libs such as yourself. Mr. Schlafly knows what's right, I trust him to act on it. - Markman 15:26, 25 June 2013 (EDT)
Ad hominem attack from someone who quite frankly has no real arguments to defend himself. I may end up perma-banned from this site but the site will be worse in the long run for allowing you to continue editing and stopping those you block for no reason other than your whim. I will now bow out and leave you the last word, I would certainly not want someone to block me for 90-10 (an advisory limit only ayway). Davidspencer 15:31, 25 June 2013 (EDT)
Since when was I a liberal? Last time I checked, I was more conservative than a lot of other users on conservapedia Ryancsh 21:39, 25 June 2013 (GMT)

recent main page right post had panache

"If he cannot even control his own NSA, then why would anyone believe he can control the climate?". This most recent main page right post had panache. :) Conservative 02:28, 26 June 2013 (EDT)


I'm happy to announce that Ruth has been fully translated. Can you please add it to template:ConservativeBible? I would have done so myself but I'm not an admin. - Markman 07:35, 29 June 2013 (EDT)

Fabulous work! I've added Ruth (Translated) to the template, and also trimmed the template a bit. Well done!--Andy Schlafly 09:11, 29 June 2013 (EDT)
Thank you for your kinds words! - Markman 10:13, 1 July 2013 (EDT)

£10 Note

May I suggest using this source, from the conservative Telegraph rather than the leftist Daily Mirror http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/money/money-matters/jane-austen-could-become-the-new-face-of-britains-10-pound-note/story-fni0ctl0-1226669886966 --Tomqua 18:20, 29 June 2013 (EDT)


Recently a vandal who attacked my talk page claimed that the users Eg, Brenden and Rafael are his socks. Eg is already banned for other reasons, I suggest an investigation into Brenden and Rafael (whom I temporarily blocked for emergency reason) to see whether or not this claim is true. - Markman 10:13, 1 July 2013 (EDT)

The account for User:Eg does not appear to be a sock.--Andy Schlafly 11:37, 2 July 2013 (EDT)

Off topic

Glad that got cleared out. Kind of off topic, but it came to my attention that some of your family members have a brewery, and that the Schlafly brand has been getting some really good reviews. Is it sold anywhere outside of the US, such as in Israel or in one of the more friendlier Mediterranean nations that are close to it (such as Cyprus or Greece)? - Markman 11:59, 2 July 2013 (EDT)

I don't think it is sold outside of the U.S. I don't have any connection with the product, which was started by a cousin.--Andy Schlafly 12:05, 2 July 2013 (EDT)
Really? I'm an avid home-brewer myself. How are the beers? WilcoxD 23:10, 2 July 2013 (EDT)


Is this site a conservative news source?--08:55, 2 July 2013 (EDT)

Tennis liberal claptrap

Name one person - anyone - who said that a low seed could not win a Grand Slam. You're making up counter-arguments to suggest that the opposing side is wrong; when the reality is everyone got on you for suggesting that low ranking players are "best of public" - or when you said that expert opinion was factored into rankings.--IDuan 14:23, 7 July 2013 (EDT)

you would pretend that Wimbledon is a female only event so you can pretend you're correct.--IDuan 18:12, 7 July 2013 (EDT)

Conservative youth groups

Andy, here are the top conservative youth group websites:

Why don't you try to strike up an alliance with one or more of them? People who frequent wikis are often in their teens or 20s. Conservative 08:51, 8 July 2013 (EDT)

Those websites aren't representative of conservatism in my opinion. brenden 11:20, 8 July 2013 (EDT)

Sorry to bother you on a trivial matter but can you tell me if the sites logo is subject to copyright. Can I use it on other websites or publications? For reference only of course. Thanks you--Tomqua 13:18, 9 July 2013 (EDT)

Markman 2

This morning, Markman made this edit that called NKeaton a troll. I blocked Markman for 3 days based on that disruptive act of incivility, and this led to Markman unblocking himself and blocking me (with a block reason that is a personal attack that triggers the spam filter). Thus, I am leaving it to you to decide how this should be handled. Thanks, GregG 20:08, 9 July 2013 (EDT)