IF YOU NEED IMMEDIATE HELP AND I AM NOT HERE PLEASE GO HERE FOR A LIST OF Administrators/Sysops: Sysop list
|No Ping-ponging Conversations!||Archive Policy|
|Conversations are easier to read if they stay on one page. If I leave a message on your talk page, please respond there; I'm watching it. If you start a conversation here, I'll reply here, so please watch this page.||Conversations which have not had additions in 14 days may be archived. Or just deleted and recreation prohibited. My "castle", my rules. A 'conversation' is a group of messages delimited by a heading. Hopefully this will allow conversations to stay in one place long enough for people who are interested to read the whole thing, without leading to an overly long page. Make sure you sign your posts, please.|
- 1 Block
- 2 Bible
- 3 Email
- 4 URGENT
- 5 Unlock request
- 6 User
- 7 Why do you deleted Final Fantasy article?
- 8 News
- 9 Feminism
- 10 Flowerpot man...
- 11 McCain
- 12 Names
- 13 Al Gore
- 14 Block
- 15 Directing you to...
- 16 A major online conservative christian newspaper.....
- 17 thanks!
- 18 Double redirects
- 19 hey!
- 20 Blocking rights
- 21 User space
- 22 Richard Dawkins
- 23 Latest News Article...
- 24 quick note
- 25 Might be of interest
Changed name from Kiss20 to AndrasK as per your request. AndrasK 22:59 April 27 (EDT)
- Thanks Andras. --DeanSformerly Crocoite 23:03, 27 April 2008 (EDT)
Do you know of any Bible related articles that need to be created?Kuli 20:26, 18 March 2008 (EDT)
- You can start with all the red links in the Bible article. Thanks for asking. --Crocoite 21:18, 18 March 2008 (EDT)
I have repeadetly tried to get my email confirmation code, but I still haven't recieved it yet, as such, using the email this user, is not available to me yet--Kuli 16:03, 19 March 2008 (EDT)
- He was blocked by another sysop. --Crocoite 18:01, 20 March 2008 (EDT)
I don't know how to revert MCollins 17:16, 20 March 2008 (EDT)
- What do you mean? --Crocoite 18:01, 20 March 2008 (EDT)
- Another sysop unlocked the article. --Crocoite 23:01, 20 March 2008 (EDT)
- I removed the references to the personal wiki. Thanks for the alert. --Crocoite 23:00, 20 March 2008 (EDT)
- No problem, glad I could help DrCB 23:18, 20 March 2008 (EDT)
Why do you deleted Final Fantasy article?
I'm very curious, I check the history, you said it was vandal, and I fail to see why, Final Fantasy article . I know you are very powerful guy and please don't ban me, I just very curious T_T. --TagoPagdaluhong 08:41, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
- The game is filled with highly offensive material and the article was not appropriate for this website. The article also attracts vandals. --Crocoite 01:27, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
(Looking the history again) Oh! My bad, AlbertaFarmer mess up, he put lot UNnecessary stuffs. I will make better version WITHOUT spoiler info and warning for famliy-friendly reason.
Thanks, I was about to make Final Fantasy article, but I was in fear of banning. Now I know the reasons. --TagoPagdaluhong 08:22, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
Since you seem to be The News Guy at CP, I'll post this here...This might be a good story for the front page (to wit: a bunch of high school students were suspended for wearing shirts with a pro-life message).--RossC 13:35, 26 April 2008 (EDT)
- Thanks for the suggestion Ross. The article is posted. --Crocoite 17:43, 26 April 2008 (EDT)
Why? It is an eloquent demonstration of the anti-family, anti-man agenda of so-called "feminists". FlowerpotMan 14:45, 27 April 2008 (EDT)
- That reference crossed the line from exposing feminism to bashing women. --Crocoite 14:55, 27 April 2008 (EDT)
Drops a link to pictures of naked people in an article and gets a "welcome template" from you- and I get banned for a month making jokes about the "largely defensive weapon of gun?" How does that work? AliceBG 15:14, 27 April 2008 (EDT)
- The welcome template was before I saw that link (check the time stamp). I'm going to review his other edits before I decide further action. --Crocoite 19:24, 27 April 2008 (EDT)
- Your "largely defensive weapon of gun" line was pure parody, and pure stupidity, which you reverted again and again after being removed. That was why you were blocked, and that kind of nonsense is not going to be tolerated here, Alice. Karajou 20:41, 29 April 2008 (EDT)
I'll tell you the same thing I told Chippeterson: If you're going to keep reverting my McCain edits, then you better remove the same information from the Barack Obama picture. And if you're going to try and validate the inequality by saying that "it's become a campaign issue" for Obama, and that he's been evasive about it, I would submit to you the fact that McCain had an interview with Charles Gibson or Tim Russert or some other such media "luminary", and simply laughed off the question when asked by a viewer why he didn't wear one. This isn't fair to omit. LinusWilson 15:50, 27 April 2008 (EDT)
After looking at the recent changes I am wondering if you will change the Conservaedia commandments to reflect the name rule you are imposing? AdenJ 00:56, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
Al Gore's Nobel Prize-winning theory is not actually his own. The reporter you quoted made an error.
- BillyJ is a good username. Ultimahero isn't a preferred username and I wanted to get you to switch before you did a lot of editing. btw, sign your posts using 4 ~ signs like this ~~~~. --DeanSformerly Crocoite 02:34, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
What's wrong with it, though? According to the rules, it's preferred that you use your real name, but not required. So why was I blocked for something that isn't mandated? BillyJ 10:23, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
- This was my own interpretation of the policy. I'm reconsidering this type of blocking in the future. --DeanSformerly Crocoite 12:34, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
Well, considering that it's your own interpretation and it's a debatable issue, then will you please unblock me? BillyJ 13:44, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
- Done. --DeanSformerly Crocoite 13:53, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
Thank you, sir. Ultimahero 13:55, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
Directing you to...
...my talk page, where Ed explained to me that what I thought was a defense of your actions against a charge of hypocrisy apparently sounded like I was the one accusing you of hypocrisy. I'll let you read the full conversation there, but the short version is: if it sounded like that to you, I apologize. Aziraphale 11:47, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
- Thanks for the explanation. --DeanSformerly Crocoite 12:28, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
A major online conservative christian newspaper.....
A major online conservative christian newspaper is very interested in regards to Conservapedia's atheism article and the reporter said she would very likely do a story on it. She said her readers are VERY interested in the subject of atheism and the story that we are promoting our article and that some major Christian internet ministries have started to feature our article is a good story. I am making the conservapedia atheism article the article of the month which I think fits in nicely with the Expelled controversy. I have sent Andy an email on this matter and I am awaiting an answer. Conservative 14:43, 1 May 2008 (EDT)
- Thanks for the info. Keep me posted. --DeanSformerly Crocoite 14:45, 1 May 2008 (EDT)
for the warm welcome! Rubico 09:43, 2 May 2008 (EDT)
- Fixed. Thanks for the notice. --DeanSformerly Crocoite 10:23, 2 May 2008 (EDT)
Hi Dean! I hope you don't ban me because I didn't make a username with my first name and last initial! lol! --DeanSa 17:30, 3 May 2008 (EDT)
- No, that must be done by Aschlafly. --DeanSformerly Crocoite 18:38, 5 May 2008 (EDT)
I'd like to hear your account of why my edit was inconsistent with evidence about Prof. Dawkins' credentials, and why I was summarily blocked. As it stands I'm willing to adhere to practice on this site and not enter a "revert war", but I should tell you that the University would probably regard the article as defamatory as it stands (although I should stress that I'm not an expert, and don't speak for Oxford University in this regard).
- Dave, if you want to discuss edits to the Richard Dawkins article, you can edit the Dawkins talk page and debate with Aschlafly about suggested changes to the article. Aschlafly is the site owner and reverting his edits will definately start an edit war and I will intervene.
- (cur) (last) 15:21, May 6, 2008 DeanS (Talk | contribs | block) (Undo revision 448477 by Special:Contributions/Oxymoron1985 (User talk:Oxymoron1985) - You made a bad mistake undoing Aschlafly's revert - now you will be blocked)
- (cur) (last) 15:14, May 6, 2008 Oxymoron1985 (Talk | contribs | block) (Revert - this is consistent with the bulk of the discussion and evidence in the talk page.)
- (cur) (last) 04:55, May 6, 2008 Aschlafly (Talk | contribs | block) m (Reverted edits by Oxymoron1985 (Talk); changed back to last version by Philip J. Rayment)
- (cur) (last) 04:30, May 6, 2008 Oxymoron1985 (Talk | contribs | block) m
- (cur) (last) 04:30, May 6, 2008 Oxymoron1985 (Talk | contribs | block) (Clarified Oxford position - I work for Oxford University. This is an authorative edit.)
- Start a discussion on the talk page and go from there. --DeanSformerly Crocoite 09:33, 7 May 2008 (EDT)
As I said in my edit summary, my edit was consistent with the evidence already on the talk page. It would appear that Mr Aschlafly has willfully ignored this evidence, and pressed ahead anyway - perhaps it's he who should have been blocked? I don't particularly care whether he's the site owner, the truth will out. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oxymoron1985 (talk)
- You're suggesting the site owner should be blocked? That's absurd! --DeanSformerly Crocoite 12:16, 8 May 2008 (EDT)
What I'm saying is that the site owner appears not to be adhering to the rules of the site, and you have to question that. You still haven't told me why my edit was wrong. Your silence speaks volumes. Oxymoron1985 10:43, 9 May 2008 (EDT)
Latest News Article...
I have taken to heart, as best I can, guidance from many sources that I need to be less confrontational on CP. It is with some trepidation, therefore, that I point out to you that I believe you've mis-read the article that you've posted in the news section. A plain-text reading, in my opinion, of someone who writes that conservatives are happier than liberals because conservatives are better at rationalizing inequality would be that conservatives are happier because they delude themselves into believing that a problem doesn't exist, regardless of the truth.
Let me be clear that -I'M- not making that argument. I'm saying that's a reasonable interpretation of the FOX article, and as such you might not want to feature it on the front page. Regards, Aziraphale 17:58, 7 May 2008 (EDT)
- Interesting take on the article. I appreciate your non-confrontational approach.
- I have not misread the article. Your objection is not a reasonable interpretation for a conservative, and thus, the article stays on the Main page. --DeanSformerly Crocoite 18:32, 7 May 2008 (EDT)
- Well, as always I reject your judgment that I am not a conservative, as I have consistently rejected it from anyone who has said similar. That having been said, your decision as to what goes on the Main Page stands, obviously. Aziraphale 01:29, 8 May 2008 (EDT)
I know you are a big fan of the atheism article at Conservapedia and wanted to help get the article more widely known. Therefore, I just sent you an email as I wanted you to be among the first to know. Conservative 11:46, 15 May 2008 (EDT)
Might be of interest
I don't remember seeing this mentioned elsewhere (though I didn't have time to look very hard, so forgive me if it's a duplicate), but this item may be of some interest:
|“|| Steven Curtis Chapman’s youngest child died Wednesday evening after being struck by a car driven by her teenage brother in the driveway of the family’s Williamson County home.
Singer/songwriter Chapman, who recently was inducted into Music City Walk of Fame, is one of contemporary Christian music’s most recognizable and most awarded names.
If not, feel free to ignore. --JBrown 11:22, 22 May 2008 (EDT)