text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Authentic Matthew (inconcluded)

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was ''Inconclusive, due to various allegations of sockpuppetry. Therefore, Keep, but permitted to be relisted under hopefully more controlled and less messy conditions. khaosworks 01:37, July 22, 2005 (UTC)''

Note: to whichever admin closes this VfD — has taken control of the VfD, deleting and moving to the Talk page comments opposed to his position, while leaving in comments supporting him, including many of his own (including personal attacks and unsubstantiated guesses at sockpuppetry presented as dogmatic claims.  I've tried to reinstate his deletions, but he's made a real mess, and I'm sure that I've missed many.  My own feeling is that the VfD has been compromised, and should be restarted. --Mel Etitis  ( Μελ Ετητης ) 22:37, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

 * If the person who submitted the VfD would like to move this and resubmit it, I while administer the vote. But they will have to do it on Monday, as I won't be around on the weekend. - Ta bu shi da yu 08:10, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Authentic Matthew
This VFD concerns the above AND its copy+paste duplicate, if recreated, at Authentic Gospel of Matthew.

Article is
 * a large source text
 * discussion of Eusebius' opinions on Biblical Canon
 * Original research assuming accuracy of Jerome's erroneous [according to the majority of relevant scholars] claim that the Gospel of the Hebrews was the same as the Gospel of the Nazarenes and the Gospel of the Ebionites

This was merged by me, as a result of someone else requesting a merge, as follows
 * The source text is already at WikiSource
 * Salvagable content about Eusebius and Biblical Canon was already moved to Eusebius and Biblical Canon.
 * Salvagable content about the Gospel of the Hebrews merged there.
 * Unsalvagable original research deleted.

This was then changed into a redirect to Gospel of the Hebrews.

There followed an edit war between editors restoring the article and me returning the redirect. The editors restoring the article (not including the recent addition of Mel Etitis, who was requested to do so by one of the aforementioned editors, and appears to have a vendetta against me for no known reason) are in my opinion sockpuppets of Melissadolbeer - the original creator of the article. For further discussion of this alleged sockpuppetry see Requests for comment/Melissadolbeer.

Reply to VFD
As the original writer of this article, I specifically deny all the allegations.

 *  Jerome, a published scholar who did the original research on Authentic Matthew wrote,
 * Matthew, also called Levi, who used to be a tax collector and later an apostle, composed the Gospel of Christ, which was first published in Judea in Hebrew script for the sake of those of the circumcision who believed. This Gospel was afterwards translated into Greek (and the Greek has been lost) though by what author uncertain. The Hebrew original has been preserved to this present day in the library of Caesarea, which Pamphilus diligently gathered. I have also had the opportunity of having this volume transcribed for me by the Nazarenes of Beroea, Syria, who use it. (On Illustrious Men 3)

and
 * In the Gospel which the Nazarenes and the Ebionites use which we have recently translated from Hebrew to Greek, and which most people call The Authentic Gospel of Matthew

(Commentary on Matthew 2)
 * No original research Original research refers to original research by editors of Wikipedia. It does not refer to original research that is published. --Melissadolbeer 06:23, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Votes

 * DELETE.     22:27, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * No vote (for the moment) - I've a Phd in New Testament - and I'm going to need time to get my head round this - it is all quite technical. This article looks to me like original research - and very questionable at that. So I think I'm with User:-Ril-. However, I'm not sure that redirecting Authentic Matthew to Gospel of the Hebrews is valid either, I'm off to do a little thinking. --Doc (?) 22:58, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I chose the redirect merely based on the fact that most of the content that was merged rather than deleted was merged to Gospel of the Hebrews. I have no particular preference over where it gets redirected to, and have no quarrel if it is preferred that it goes to Gospel of Matthew or other such article.     23:12, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

 * OK, enough this is doing my head in,- this article (or rather essay) is making all sorts of assumptions. To cut a long and complicated story short - it is original research, POV-ridden, and very confusing. Delete - I see no need for any redirections. --Doc (?) 23:48, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Poorman made a minor alteration to Doc's delete vote above; I have removed the alteration. -- Hoary 04:48, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per Doc Glasgow as POV, original research etc. Capitalistroadster 01:04, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete james gibbon 01:08, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - I have no personal use for this article (there is already too much biblical trivia), but it is mentioned in Apocrypha. Those links to this article are months old(possibly years - I could not find when it was added), so it's obviously something that more than a single contributor knows about (ergo not completely original research). If we leave ANY apocrypha, I'm sad to say this must stay. Unsinkable 01:37, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * User has 32 prior edits.     17:02, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * N.b. the item of the apocrypha in question is alleged by the article to be the Gospel of the Hebrews, Gospel of the Ebionites, and Gospel of the Nazarenes. These 3 already have articles.     07:59, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I couldn't find any mention of Matthew in Apocrypha, even in older versions, much less any mention of "Authentic Matthew". There are links to Hebrews etc. in New Testament apocrypha but no months-old link to Authentic Matthew, in fact none at all. Could you say more specifically which links you were verifying? My search has yielded two candidates for most (possibly all) links, or one if 202.176.97.230 and Melissadolbeer are the same. This is not at all indemnifying, of course, but I would be very interested to know if there was at least one pre-existing link. The page was created Feb. 8 of this year. Davilla 06:05, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete, orignial research. --nixie 01:54, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Original research, as per Doc. Fernando Rizo 02:04, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. My vote is partly the result of having seen the way that  has behaved over this article, but mainly that there's a genuine encyclopædia topic here.  The content of the article isn't the issue (that can be edited; though, for the record, I don't think that it is wholly original research); if it were, the article should have been placed at RfC, not VfD (just as -Ril-'s RfC against Melissadolbeer should not have been leapt into before any other attempt at mediation of moderation). --Mel Etitis  ( Μελ Ετητης ) 10:47, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Melissadolbeer's behaviour with sockpuppets as described in the RFC is beyond acceptable. The article was edited. Melissadolbeer + sockpuppets reverted it back.     17:09, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * For the record 1) I am not Melissa's sockpuppet but rather her husband. 2) Melissa has never used a sockpuppet! 3) I do know sockpuppets are legal at Wikipedia but not to vote more than once or to lie and abuse people like my wife. Over the years you have hurt many people including my wife and that is what I object to! People are more important than articles or your ego.  --Poorman 08:00, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * In wikipedia, articles are more important, this isn't about creating an collection of popular opinion, but one of noteworthy facts.     19:34, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * An additional note. If Poorman is not melissa, then why make this edit where Poorman signs as Melissa?      18:32, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment - Hardly a sockpuppet abuse! Indeed this when taken in context affirms they are husband and wife.--Mikefar 00:58, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * No, it doesn't. It is clearly Poorman signing as Melissadolbeer, there is no signed "Melissa's husband" its signed "melissa".     07:43, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * No offense, but I don't think it's wise to vote based on the conflict between these two. That can be resolved in mediation, as you say, unless you were to pass judgement yourself. If that's the case then it's your choice to risk making a decision that isn't fully informed. One would say of the other that Ril has a vendetta and that Melissa is taking it personally. I don't know who's right, if anyone is, but who's right shouldn't really be the point. We know we want to vote objectively. I say, vote on the objective aspects. Davilla 05:28, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep and list on Peer Review so that original research can be weeded out. Interesting and encyclopaedic topic. I'm not sure the current title is the best though. David | Talk 11:39, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Doc glasgow (above) has a PhD in New Testament (i.e. one of the Peers that Peer Review would involve), and says it is original research, and is a collection of scraps from other articles put together solely to push one POV.     16:40, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete original research. JamesBurns 09:23, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Comments and discussion moved to talk page.
 * Delete, WP:NOR. Radiant_ >|< 12:22, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, original research. --TruthCrusader
 * Delete, pick one of the reasons listed above. --Scimitar parley 19:40, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NOR Friday 05:19, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep 1) Original research: Jerome, Parker and all the writers cited, did the original research! They have all been published. Melissa merely summed them up in an objective factual style into a good article.  She does not have an original thought in her head. 2) My vote is mainly the result of having seen the way that  has behaved over this article (see edit history of Ril and 81.156.177.21 --Poorman 08:39, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The above user is a sockpuppet.     19:26, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The user has stated clearly that he is Melissadolbeer's husband. --Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 13:50, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * (1) I am not Melissa's sockpuppet but rather her husband.   (2) Melissa has never used a sockpuppet!  (3) She has been guilty of forgetting to log in while editing and for that matter so have I.  (4) Read her work with care and you will a kind polite person who always sees the good in people. (5) What you have done has really hurt her. But I will hand you this- you are clever to have gotten away with so very much Ril!  (6) Mel Etitis, does NOT  have a vendetta against you!--Poorman 09:36, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * A note. If Poorman is not melissa, then why make this edit where Poorman signs as Melissa?      18:32, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment - Hardly a sockpuppet abuse! Indeed this when taken in context affirms they are husband and wife.--Mikefar 00:58, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * No, it doesn't. It is clearly Poorman signing as Melissadolbeer, there is no signed "Melissa's husband" its signed "melissa".     07:43, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep - but the article needs serious amounts of editing, especially moving material to the appropriate articles and to WikiSource. -Acjelen 12:22, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * As mentioned before, this was already done. Melissadolbeer's sockpuppets reverted it back to its original state.     19:27, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Comment - please see Special:Contributions/Mikefar, indicating the desperation with which the sockpuppets are trying to defend the article. Clearly indicating it is their original research.     19:29, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * 'Non sequitur''. --Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 22:26, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Large comment about what a user thinks is "original research" (as opposed to what Wikipedia policy - WP:NOR says is "original research") moved to talk page.     19:30, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - As it stands, current article is original research and very dodgy. More importantly, the name of the article is inherently POV-ridden. I cannot imagine a way for this article to be salvaged. IT is my understanding that the small usable parts have already been incorporated elsewhere, leaving nothing left to but to delete this one. DreamGuy 19:36, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as original research. --Carnildo 19:50, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and .  Disputes about the "additions to Matthew" etc. go back to the time of the canonization of the NT.  Tomer TALK  19:57, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * And go in Gospel of Matthew, or Biblical Canon, or Gospel of the Hebrews. This article solely pushes original research.     16:40, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete. Josh Cherry 23:42, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * SEE BELOW - As the original writer of this article, I specifically deny all the allegations made by Ril and put him to the strictest proof thereof.  Melissadolbeer 07:45, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * further extensive comments by the above moved to talk page
 * USER HAS ALREADY VOTED AS A SOCKPUPPET.     10:09, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * N.b. the user votes below, and the above should not be counted as a vote by them in addition.     07:49, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The previous user has stated clearly that he is Melissadolbeer's husband. --Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 13:50, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * And I am definitely not -Ril- but his wife. Yeh right, like a sockpuppet's word is trustworthy. The Wife of -Ril- 16:16, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Excuse me for jumping in here, but where is the concrete proof that said users are sock-puppets? You suspect they may be, yes, but from what I can see, there has been no point where this has been verified by admin. I've noted that every single "Keep" vote was followed up with an attempt to discount, either waving the sock-puppet flag, pointing out prior edits, or, in my case, by asking for a review of the vote on my user talk page. Might I suggest leaving the discounting of votes to those who are qualified to discount votes? That would help to cool down this debate. --Blu Aardvark | (talk) 22:16, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The article was restored by numerous extremely obvious sockpuppets after its having been merged. There has been a massive series of postings to User talk pages by sockpuppets to try to get the article preserved. This seems to have happened also a prior time that the article was merged by someone else. The sockpuppets have even opened up an RFAR (WP:RFAR) claiming that everyone who has voted delete here is a sockpuppet of me. The likelyhood that sockpuppets will be voting here is extremely high, and their contribution history makes it extremely obvious.     22:35, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to an appropriate sister project, or Keep. Article is noteworthy enough in my opinion. --Blu Aardvark | (talk) 10:13, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I have been asked for a review of my vote, to determine whether I feel that the article as it stands deserves existance. I do feel that the article does deserve existance as it stands, although I also feel it may be better suited for one of Wikipedia's sister projects, as I'm not entirely convinced it is strictly encyclopedic. --Blu Aardvark | (talk) 10:37, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep but consider Merge, Transwiki and redirect as and where appropriate. Rich Farmbrough 00:35, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - As the original writer of this article, I specifically deny all the allegations made by Ril and put him to the strictest proof thereof.  --Melissadolbeer 03:37, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The above has already voted as a sockpuppet.    07:49, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

 * DELETE See talk. Davilla 05:35, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * extensive comments moved to talk page     07:45, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * extensive comments moved to talk page again. Please read talk page for discussion.     11:52, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, but I agree with David about listing on Peer Review and trying to find a better title. JamesMLane 09:49, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Doc glasgow (above) has a PhD in New Testament (i.e. one of the Peers that Peer Review would involve), and says it is original research, and is a collection of scraps from other articles put together solely to push one POV.     16:40, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Ril, stop deleting everything that shows you as being in the wrong. Both sides have right to be heard.--Mikefar 00:06, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * No Vote, as Ril has kept this vote from being a fair one! No one can be heard from but Ril.--Mikefar 22:51, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * THE ABOVE USER IS A SOCKPUPPET (AND HAS ADMITTED BEING SO AT WP:RFAR)     07:39, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep it short, or move it to the talk page. It is not being deleted, just moved to talk. The talk page is there explicitely for extensive discussion. This is not the place for a huge essay.    16:16, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * extensive comments moved to talk page - available here     16:19, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep it equal! Every time Melissa tries to reply to a Ril comment, you delete it!--Mikefar 00:58, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * THE ABOVE USER IS A SOCKPUPPET OF A USER WHO HAS ALREADY VOTED. SOCKPUPPETRY ADMITTED AT WP:RFAR     07:39, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

 * ''extensive comment moved to talk. It is available here     07:39, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Melissa + Sockpuppets please note: VFD procedure does not permit a "response to VFD" section preceeding the vote. If you wish to respond do it briefly, and against your vote, or if you have a more extensive comment, put it on the talk page, and link to it from here     07:39, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment a temporary history-only undelete may be later requested by the arbitration committee if they open the case Melissadolbeer requested. This does not affect the voting, which concerns the long-term status of the article.     07:39, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * CommentRil,you have a lot of comments on this page. Then you delete any and all replies. People who vote only read your side of the story without reading the other side.  This has totally skewed the vote, for, as the record shows, virtually all the votes to delete have come after you have removed material that goes against you.  I respect your right to put your comments on this page.  Please respect other people's rights.  You know as well as we do, if all your views are on this page and everything else is on the talk page, there is not a fair vote.--Mikefar 10:21, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * ''extensive comment moved to talk. It is available here     07:39, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Melissa + Sockpuppets please note: VFD procedure does not permit a "response to VFD" section preceeding the vote. If you wish to respond do it briefly, and against your vote, or if you have a more extensive comment, put it on the talk page, and link to it from here     07:39, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment a temporary history-only undelete may be later requested by the arbitration committee if they open the case Melissadolbeer requested. This does not affect the voting, which concerns the long-term status of the article.     07:39, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 07:48, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete.  Grue  22:00, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment:Ril, I will bullied by you or your Sockpuppets. Most of the above vote will be gone when when the TRUTH comes out! (If it come out-you are good at being bad)--Mikefar 00:17, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * (A) Please avoid personal attacks under any circumstance. There is no excuse for personal attacks ever - see No personal attacks.
 * (B) I have no sockpuppets, all the people you accuse of being my sockpuppets are substantial contributers of over 6 months standing, exhibiting a very diverse range of views quite different to mine in many cases.
 * (C) People are quite capable of viewing my contribution history and deciding if I am bad or not. Likewise they can view yours and see that you are an obvious (and self-admitted) sockpuppet.
 * (D) Truth is not capitalised.     08:01, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

 * No vote If Jerome is considered a published work, then Keep. However if there is a wiki limitation period for old works then delete.--Ejhardy
 * User has 8 prior edits (and uses Melissadolbeer's fairly distinct terminology - "published work", which is all over her & her sockpuppet's edits)     18:15, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Jerome's opinion on the matter is universally regarded as a (probably innocent) mistake on his part amongst academics. AND it is still mentioned in the relevant articles. The article at Authentic Matthew is an original research POV pushing issue based on assuming (against the vast consensus amongst academics) that Jerome was correct.    18:15, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Comments not directly linked to a vote

 * Final Comments Ril's VfD accuses Melissa Dolbeer of: a) sock-puppet abuse and lying; b) original research. I, --Melissadolbeer 05:39, 21 July 2005 (UTC) state
 * a) I have never used a sock-puppet, and Poorman is my husband. I am willing to provide Wiki administrators with full documentation to prove my innocence via snail mail. (Also, Poorman has agreed to joint web cam interviews or a conference telephone call.)
 * N.b. Poorman signed as melissa, and only appeared when Authentic Matthew was threatened, and has no other edits. The other socks are even more obvious, e.g. User:Mikefar.     06:40, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * b) the sources I have used are all published works which are still in print -- Jerome, etc., etc.
 * N.b. academics almost universally consider Jerome to have made an error. He never pushed his opinion as a rival theory, and indeed seems quite unaware his opinion was unusual. Academics universally consider that this was most likely an innocent error due to lack of information on his part, and not a deliberate "they were definitely one book" theory. The article being VFD'd presents this as a deliberate theory, which is original research.     06:40, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * As my mother-in-law has been in a life-threatening car accident, I request an adjournment of the arbitration proceedings for one month, as neither Poorman nor myself will be available for the next couple of weeks. I further request that Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) not be one of the administrators involved with this, due to her special relationship with Ril. --Melissadolbeer 05:39, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

That's most likely just a lie to avoid the VFD's result. 06:40, 21 July 2005 (UTC) (struck out personal attack)
 * N.b. only the arbitration committee can "adjourn", suspend, or postpone VFDs, and only then by an injunction. There is none, so this VFD must close at the normally allocated moment.     06:42, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

 * While I hope nothing but the best for your mother-in-law/mother, and fully support adjournment of any arbitration (none of which is presently extant) for such a reason, I would like to ask (i.e., demand) that any conflict of interest discussion of arbitrators be left to any relevant RfAr discussion. As yet, I have not seen any indication as to why Theresa should be excluded from voting in an RfAr between you/se and -Ril-, but should such evidence be presented in the proper forum, I would expect Theresa to recuse herself, without prejudice, from voting. In light of that, if you're attempting to cast Theresa in a negative light here, you'll receive no kudos (although the same cannot be said for your negative characterizations of -Ril-, who seems to have something of a vandetta against you, for whatever reason, which I expect to be explained COHERENTLY and WITH COMPLETE CITATIONS HERE as soon as he makes it back to this page. Tomer TALK 08:24, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * As you asked - citations.
 * The following users are Melissadolbeer's sockpuppets created specifically to preserve the article - check their contribution history and edit summaries - Poorman (contribs), Watcher1 (contribs), -Watcher1- (contribs), Goodboy (contribs), 202.176.97.230 (contribs), Angel77 (contribs), -Angel77- (contribs), 202.176.184.118 (contribs), 202.176.97.116 (contribs), 203.144.210.225 (contribs), Teenangel (contribs), Mikefar (contribs), -Johnny- (contribs), Ejhardy (contribs), Kendea (contribs), Jlchan (contribs)
 * Some of the above sockpuppets are mine. However, I do not believe that melissadolbeer has had anything to do with the above sockpuppets.--Mikefar 01:15, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

 * The rate of appearance is roughly 1 sockpuppet per day. This is totally inappropriate behaviour. Also, creating so many sockpuppets just to preserve the article, which should be argued for on its own merits, convinces me beyond any doubt whatsoever, that not only is it original research, but that it is also pushing some POV that melissadolbeer wishes to push.     17:00, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I have absolutely no idea why Theresa Knott would be considered to have a "special relationship" with me?     16:34, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I was personally considering proposing to remove the VfD tag on this article, as well as proposing a one-month editing ban on both User:-Ril- and the various editors whom -Ril- claims are sockpuppets of whomever. This article is clearly at the core of a much bigger argument between at least two editors, and as such, their relationship needs to be worked out before anything constructive can EVER take place wrt this article. Meanwhile, I think going forward with a vote on whether to keep or discard this article will negatively/positively reflect on n/either party in what is clearly a conflict of much greater scope. I move to suspend this vote until such time as the relevant RfAr is resolved. (Without prejudice, I also vote to take both parties, but especially -Ril-, out behind the woodshed for a sound spanking. This entire mishegas is utterly unseemly, and does nothing but serve the best interests of those who hold the entire WP project in disdain.) Tomer TALK 08:16, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * N.b. You may NOT remove VFD tags until a VFD is closed.
 * Which is why I didn't. Tomer TALK  17:51, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * This move to "suspend" VFD is purely a callous one by Melissadolbeer because she doesn't like the way it is going, and I have nothing but contempt for such behaviour seeking to abuse VFD's process. It is my opinion, that a more likely truth is, that Melissadolbeer, a school teacher, has a holiday booked, it being end of term, and will be unable to sockpuppet during that period, consequently requiring suspension so that this does not detriment her position. Articles can always be put to Votes for Undeletion once the VFD is complete, there is no reason to suspend it.    16:34, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Not exactly correct. VfU is only a move to put the article back on VfD if the article is determined on technicality to have been deleted improperly.  That said, I still think you do yourself and your "side" a great disservice by arguing with the sockpuppets and by running around behind everyone who votes "keep" like a tattle-tale, asking them to change their vote.  I note that you have not run around behind everyone who votes "delete" telling them all about your "problems" with the socks, etc., and thanking them for their vote.  From where I'm sitting, it appears far more likely that the reason all the socks are showing up is to have additional names fighting against the vitriol you've unleashed.  It looks to me like you've created a problem editor by the fierceness of your onslaught against hir.  Tomer TALK  17:51, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment and suggestion to closing admin. This debate has resulted in more heat than light. However, it does actually matter, since references to 'Authentic Matthew' have been inserted into other, more important Biblical Studies articles, giving it an unmerited prominence (and IMHO distorting WP's presentation of the discipline). I have some knowledge in the field - and I had intended to set down my thoughts for others, but I withdrew rather than poke a stick in a hornet's nest of sockpuppetry, accusations, flaming, and trolling (by whom I leave for others to judge).
 * A proper informed debate on the article does need to happen and reach a resolution -'freezing' it for long, whilst it might (??) cool individuals, does Wikipedia content no favours! I'd suggest that this current nomination be terminated (quickly) and another begun (soon), in which -Ril- on one hand and Mellisodobeer (and associates) on the other are each invited to make a statement then withdraw (on that basis I'd chip in my bit too) - and then some disinterested party (not -Ril-) monitor the debate. --Doc (?) 08:34, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * This is the sanest and sagest suggestion rendered to date (including my own several "contributions" even). The POV-warriors who have brought this finally to VfD should be permitted to say their piece and then SIT DOWN AND LET EVERYONE ELSE SPEAK. Tomer TALK 09:09, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

 * This article should not be deleted until we find out who is in the wrong. ALSO NOBODY HAS SAID ANYTHING BAD ABOUT Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) EXCEPT THAT SHE HAS HELPED RIL IN THE PAST. --Jlchan 11:53, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Above user is a sockpuppet (ZERO PRIOR EDITS)     16:34, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Nobody says anything bad about Theresa because everyone's scared of her. She can reach you wereëver you try to hide.  Run!!! Quick!!! Here she comes!!!  Tomer TALK  17:51, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * I disagree. The relevance of the article is independent of "who is in the wrong" for edit wars of the article. However, I concede that for fairness, it may be necessary for a "disinterested party [to] monitor the debate" and avoid edit wars of the debate itself. (Am I correct that deletions objected to are primarily the same single chunk of material repeatedly moved from this page to talk?) Davilla 13:17, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * N.b. VFD procedure does not contain procedure for a "rebuttal section", but it does specify that extensive discussion goes in talk.
 * N.b. In the same edit, Melissadolbeer's sockpuppets are also deleting all the comments marking users as sockpuppets (e.g. user has n prior edits). It is standard procedure in VFD to mark suspected sockpuppets, due to lack of prior edits, as such. Removal (by Melissadolbeer's socks) of such comments can only possibly serve to attempt to hide that the users are sockpuppets, which is pretty much conclusive evidence that they are.     17:08, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Comment to closing admin. This is a VFD. A set of votes. Once a user has cast their vote, their presence is unimportant. The purpose of VFD is to determine consensus. Neither Melissadolbeer, Me, or sockpuppets, need to be present for this to happen. Even if we both find ourselves in a warzone (I am currently somewhat trapped inside a police bomb cordon resulting from today's london explosions - the coffee is nice though), I see absolutely no reason why this should prevent other people from being able to vote, which is all that VFD is about. There is no reason to suspend or postpone this - it does not require me, or melissadolbeer, to be present. This is about determining the will of the community, and not that of me, or melissadolbeer.     16:47, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Note: to whichever admin closes this VfD — has taken control of the VfD, deleting and moving to the Talk page comments opposed to his position, while leaving in comments supporting him, including many of his own (including personal attacks and unsubstantiated guesses at sockpuppetry presented as dogmatic claims.  I've tried to reinstate his deletions, but he's made a real mess, and I'm sure that I've missed many.  My own feeling is that the VfD has been compromised, and should be restarted. --Mel Etitis  ( Μελ Ετητης ) 22:37, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Menéndez

Menéndez or Menendez is a Spanish name of Germanic origin. In English, the name is often spelled without the diacritic. A shorter form sharing the same root is Mendez.

Menéndez or Menendez may refer to:

Persons

 * Andrés Ignacio Menéndez (1879–1962), President of El Salvador twice, in 1934–1935 and 1944
 * Emilio Menéndez (born 1945), Spanish politician and member of the European Parliament
 * Francisco Menéndez (1830–1890), President of El Salvador 1885–1890
 * Francisco Menendez (creole) (18th century), former slave who led a militia against the British in 1740
 * Jorge Fernández Menéndez (contemporary), Mexican editor and columnist
 * José Menéndez Menéndez (1846–1918), Spanish businessman based in Argentina and Chilean Patagonia.
 * Katherine M. Menendez, American judge
 * Luciano Benjamín Menéndez (1927–2018), Argentine general, Provisional Federal Interventor of Córdoba, Argentina 1975
 * Mario Benjamín Menéndez (1930–2015), Argentine general, military Governor of the Falklands during the Falklands War
 * Lyle and Erik Menéndez, American brothers who were convicted of murdering their parents in 1989
 * Manuel Menéndez (1793–1847), President of Peru for three brief periods 1841–1845
 * Marcelino Menéndez y Pelayo (1856–1912), Spanish scholar, historian, and literary critic
 * Matilde Menéndez (born 1944), Argentine psychiatrist and public official
 * Osleidys Menéndez (born 1979), Cuban Olympic championship javelin thrower
 * Pedro Menéndez de Avilés (1519–1574), first governor of Spanish Florida & governor of colonial Cuba
 * Pidal Juan Menéndez (1861–1915), Spanish archivist, jurisconsult, historian, and poet
 * Pidal Luis Menéndez (1860–1932), Spanish genre painter
 * Pidal María Goyri de Menéndez (1873–1955), Spanish Hispanicist, professor, and author
 * Ramón Menéndez Pidal or Pidal Ramón Menéndez (1869–1968), Spanish philologist and historian
 * Robert "Bob" Menendez (born 1954), American politician, Representative and Senator from New Jersey

Fictional characters

 * Raul Menendez, the main antagonist of Call of Duty: Black Ops II

Places

 * San Francisco Menéndez, municipality in the Ahuachapán department of El Salvador

Other uses

 * Pedro Menendez High School, St. Johns County, Florida, United States

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Menéndez


text:
User talk:Mansour1

Block evasion
I've extended your 3RR block by 24 hours for block evasion. See User talk:Mansour. SlimVirgin (talk) 22:28, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mansour1


text:
User talk:Rick lay95

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hawaii § Campaign to upload Lāhainā photographs
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hawaii § Campaign to upload Lāhainā photographs.

Proposed deletion of 2017 Kentucky Christian Knights football team

The article 2017 Kentucky Christian Knights football team has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "Subject does not pass the WP:NSEASONS"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Let'srun (talk) 04:24, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rick lay95


text:
Hemodialysis product

Hemodialysis product (HDP) - is a number used to quantify hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis treatment adequacy.

It was proposed by Scribner and Oreopoulous because of their perceived inadequacy of the Kt/V measure of dialysis adequacy.

The HDP is defined by the following empirical formula:

 * HDP = t * f 2

Where:
 * HDP - hemodialysis product
 * t - dialysis time (hours/dialysis session)
 * f - dialysis frequency (dialysis sessions/week)

The formula, like all empirical formulae, has no theoretical basis. The HDP has not seen widespread use. An Egyptian study published in 2011 found that HDP is "a valid test with high sensitivity and specificity for assessment of adequacy of hemodialysis in comparison to KT/V and URR." The formula has been tested by me using nxstage system one 4.78 x 7 x 7 = 234 During dialysis I performed potassium blood electrolyte test. Using 2K dialysate potassium level went to normal. Here is the reason: lactate 45 instead of bicarbonate. This is the theoretical basis, Scribner has no machine that uses lactate but peritoneal is using lactate. Also with HDP 234 my BP is normal without medications. My hemoglobin is 14.7 no EPO.

title: Hemodialysis product


text:
Category:Robin Hood

Articles relating to the Robin Hood legend.

title: Category:Robin Hood


text:
Brownsville Station (band)

Brownsville Station is an American rock band from Michigan popular in the 1970s. Original members included Cub Koda (guitarist/vocalist), Mike Lutz (guitarist/vocalist), T.J. Cronley (drummer), and Tony Driggins (bassist/vocals). Later members included Henry "H-Bomb" Weck (drummer) and Bruce Nazarian (guitarist/vocalist).

They are primarily remembered for the top-10 hit single "Smokin' in the Boys Room" (1973).

Early history
Brownsville Station was formed in Ann Arbor, Michigan, in 1969. Their early albums included song covers from bands which had inspired them. In 1970, they released their debut studio album, No BS, on a Warners Bros. label. Their biggest hit, "Smokin' in the Boys Room", written by Michael Lutz & Cub Koda, from their 1973 album Yeah!, reached No. 3 on U.S. Billboard Hot 100 chart and No. 27 in the UK Singles Chart. The track sold over two million copies and was awarded a gold disc status by the RIAA on 15 January 1974.

Later history
In 1977, Brownsville Station recorded "Martian Boogie", one of their seven singles to chart on the Hot 100. The song was also a feature on Dr. Demento's radio show. "(Lady) Put The Light On", their penultimate single, also charted in the Hot 100, at 46.

After drummer Cronley left the band, Van Wert, Ohio, native Henry "H-Bomb" Weck was called on to fill the position left by Cronley.

The band's second-highest Billboard charting single was "Kings of the Party" which topped out at No. 31 in 1974.

Original members of Brownsville Station disbanded in 1979 and their final studio album together, Air Special, was released by Epic in 1978.

Cub Koda was the most visible Brownsville Station member after their break up. He recorded a number of solo albums and toured with his own group The Points as well as blues man Hound Dog Taylor's backing band The Houserockers. His solo repertoire included the albums Cub Koda and the Points, It's the Blues, Box Lunch and the career spanning compilation Welcome to My Job. In addition, Koda, a rabid collector of rockabilly, doo wop and blues, wrote liner notes for numerous retro releases (including Jimmy Reed, Freddy Cannon and The Kingsmen) and countless music reviews for the All Music Guide series of books and website. He also wrote a popular column ("The Vinyl Junkie") for Goldmine magazine and co-authored the book Blues For Dummies. In addition, he hosted The Cub Koda Crazy Show for Massachusetts radio station WCGY during a period in the early 80s. Koda died of kidney disease in July 2000 at the age of 51.

Mike Lutz went on to produce many bands, including Ted Nugent's Spirit of the Wild album, and toured in the 1990s with Nugent. Lutz still resides in Ann Arbor, teaches guitar and bass at a local music store called Oz's Music, writes and produces many acts.

While still in Brownsville Station, Henry Weck engineered and co-produced the Strikes album for Blackfoot, which produced two hit singles, "Highway Song" and "Train Train" (on which Koda played harmonica). Weck continues to record and produce in Memphis, in Ann Arbor at Lutz's Tazmania Studios and is the co-driving force of the re-united Brownsville Station.

After T. J. Cronley left Brownsville Station, he spent a career in the U.S. Marine Corps as a Marine aviator, and retired as a lieutenant colonel in 1992. He is currently a pilot for FedEx and resides in Yuma, Arizona. He is also an artist.

Bruce Nazarian went on to produce, engineer and perform with his band "The Automatix", who released their debut LP on MCA in 1983. He was the CEO of Digital Media Consulting Group and ran a popular digital media website "TheDigitalGuy.com". Nazarian also produced and hosted The Digital Guy radio show in addition to being a music producer, concert impresario and artist manager. His last band, "The Brotherhood" is slated to release their debut CD "(It's) All About The Groove" in early 2016. Nazarian died in October 2015.

In 2008, Brownsville Station was inducted into the Michigan Rock and Roll Legends Hall of Fame.

Through the band's early days, Weck captured over 500 hours of Brownsville demos, rehearsals, live shows and even some special events. In 2012, Lutz and Weck began sorting through the recordings in Lutz's Tazmania Studio. The result is Still Smokin', featuring new songs and updated versions of the band's "My Friend Jack" and “Smokin’ In The Boys Room”.

Augmented by new players Billy Craig, Arlen Viecelli and Brad Johnson, Brownsville Station returned to the road in 2013.

In popular culture
In the television series King of the Hill, Brownsville Station is part of the subplot of "Hank Fixes Everything" (Season 10, Episode 10), reuniting for the "Still Smokin' in the Boys Room" tour (incidentally, when the band reunited for real in 2012, their subsequent album would be titled Still Smokin'). The band is a favorite of the character Lucky (voiced by Tom Petty), who camps outside the ticket booth to purchase seats for prime viewing of Mike Lutz playing guitar.

Influences
Brownsville Station's early influences included Chuck Berry, Bo Diddley, Jerry Lee Lewis, and other 1950s rock and roll musicians. Koda's onstage antics influenced many rockers including Peter Wolf and Alice Cooper.

Band members

 * Mike Lutz          (1969–1979, 2012–present) - guitar, lead vocals, bass, keyboards
 * Henry "H Bomb" Weck (1972–1979, 2012–present) - drums, vocals
 * Billy Craig        (2012–present) - guitar, vocals
 * Arlen Viecelli     (2013–present) - guitar, vocals
 * Brad Johnson       (2013–present) - bass, vocals

Former members

 * Cub Koda (1969–1979; died 2000) - guitar, lead vocals, harmonica
 * T.J. Cronley (1969–1971) - drums
 * Tony Driggins (1969–1972) - bass, vocals
 * Bruce Nazarian (1975–1979; died 2015) - guitar, lead vocals, keyboards, bass
 * Andy Patalan (2012–2013) - guitar, vocals

Compilations

 * 1993: Smokin' In the Boys Room: The Best of Brownsville Station
 * 2003: Smokin' In the Boys Room and Other Hits
 * 2005: Smokin' In the Boys Room
 * 2006: Rhino Hi-Five: Brownsville Station

title: Brownsville Station (band)


text:
FC Leon Saturn Ramenskoye

FC Leon Saturn Ramenskoye (ФК Леон Сатурн Ра́менское) is a Russian football club, based in the town of Ramenskoye in Moscow Oblast. It is also sometimes referred to as FC Saturn Moscow Region (ФК Сатурн Московской области).

History
The club was founded in 1946. Although the club is based in Ramenskoye, the club represents all Moscow Oblast. Due to huge debts it was dissolved in January 2011, but was recreated on the base of their former farm club FC Saturn-2 Moscow Region. It returned to the professional level in Russian Professional Football League in the 2013–14 season. Before the 2015–16 season, the club didn't receive the professional license and moved back to amateur levels. It returned to the third-tier once again for the 2016–17 season.

Their nickname “Aliens” (Russian инопланетяне) comes from the name 'Saturn'. Also, nicknamed "Extraterrestrials."

It was previously called Krylya Sovetov (1946–1957), Trud (1958–1959), Saturn (from 1960 to 2002 and from 2004 to 2023) and Saturn-REN TV (February 2002 to January 2004). In July 2023, the club was renamed to "Leon Saturn" due to a sponsorship deal with bookmaker Leon.

In 2006 the club beat the record of drawn matches played in the Russian Premier League during one season - 16 times.

League and Cup history
Saturn's reserve squad played professionally as FC Saturn-2 Ramenskoye in the Russian Second Division in 1999 and 2000. Since 2004 exists a separate farm club — Saturn Yegoryevsk, since 2008 called Saturn-2, played in the Russian Second Division to 2012.

Current squad
As of 11 July 2024, according to the Second League website.

Supporters
The football club Saturn Ramenskoye (FCSR) supporters movement was born in the second part of the 1980s when the team started playing on the professional level. The organised group of fans at that time consisted of not more than 20 people; however the first trips (Russian: выезда) to Tula, Kaluga, Pskov and other cities were already done by them in 1986.

The new age for FCSR supportive movement is connected with the year 1995. Then the famous supporter Andrey Egorishev (nicknamed "Arsenal") had begun to unite fans of Saturn. It is believed that the team played in black and blue colors because of him. In 1996 Saturn had played in red and white colors. Fans who disliked these colors (because of ideological views) had many discussions – and finally chose black and blue colors. Some time after that the team changed colors too.

The first union of FCSR fans – Dorf Menschen (the bumpkins; the German translates literally as "Village People") – was organised in January 1996. At that moment it consisted from about 15 people, but its size (as the size of FCSR fans in common) has been increasing. Many groups of fans were formed (mainly according to geographical location). Because a large number of these groups became uncontrollable, it was decided to unite them around a Dorf Menschen. The South-East Confederation (Russian: «Юго-Восточная Конфедерация») was formed in this way. It was able to gather about one thousand supporters at the home game. At the moment the main FCSR band is "BBS firm" whose name means "Black Blue Supporters".

After beginning to play in the highest Russian league, the structure of the FCSR supportive movement has been changed a lot. There are some different unions at the moment, both hooligans and ultras, which are united by the 46 km. The main enemies of Saturn fans are fans of FC Lokomotiv Moscow, FC Shinnik Yaroslavl and FC Khimki. There is the friendship between FCSR fans and fans of Torpedo Moscow and Spartak Moscow.

Many FCSR fans' nicknames are connected with the aliens' club name. The black and blue fans themselves mostly use the nickname gumy ("гумы") (short form of Russian "гуманоид" – "humanoid").

Notable players
Had international caps for their respective countries. Players whose name is listed in bold represented their countries while playing for Saturn.

 * USSR/Russia
 * Yuri Gavrilov
 * 🇷🇺 Andrei Kanchelskis
 * 🇷🇺 Andrei Afanasyev
 * 🇷🇺 Nikita Bazhenov
 * 🇷🇺 Maksim Buznikin
 * 🇷🇺 Pyotr Bystrov
 * 🇷🇺 Valeri Chizhov
 * 🇷🇺 Vadim Evseev
 * 🇷🇺 Aleksei Igonin
 * 🇷🇺 Andrei Karyaka
 * 🇷🇺 Valery Kechinov
 * 🇷🇺 Yevgeni Kharlachyov
 * 🇷🇺 Dmitri Kirichenko
 * 🇷🇺 Valeri Kleimyonov
 * 🇷🇺 Dmitri Loskov
 * 🇷🇺 Andrey Lunyov
 * 🇷🇺 Viktor Onopko
 * 🇷🇺 Roman Shirokov
 * 🇷🇺 Artyom Rebrov
 * 🇷🇺 Sergey Ryzhikov
 * 🇷🇺 Vladislav Ternavski
 * 🇷🇺 Roman Vorobyov
 * 🇷🇺 Valery Yesipov

 * Former USSR countries
 * 🇦🇲 Andrey Movsisyan
 * 🇧🇾 Vladimir Korytko

 * 🇧🇾 Konstantin Kovalenko
 * 🇧🇾 Leonid Kovel
 * Gogita Gogua
 * 🇰🇿 Dmitriy Lyapkin
 * 🇲🇩 Radu Rebeja
 * 🇲🇩 Serghei Rogaciov
 * 🇲🇩 Oleg Shishkin
 * 🇲🇩 Adrian Sosnovschi
 * 🇹🇯 Sergei Piskaryov
 * 🇹🇯 Akhmed Yengurazov
 * 🇹🇯 Farkhod Vasiev
 * 🇺🇦 🇷🇺 Oleksandr Horshkov
 * 🇺🇦 Andriy Husin
 * 🇺🇦 Yevhen Levchenko
 * 🇺🇦 Dmytro Parfenov
 * 🇺🇦 Oleksandr Pomazun
 * 🇺🇦 Vyacheslav Sviderskiy
 * 🇺🇿 Pavel Solomin

 * Europe
 * 🇧🇦 Samir Duro
 * 🇧🇦 Samir Muratović
 * 🇧🇦 Omer Joldić
 * 🇧🇦 Marko Topić
 * 🇨🇿 Antonín Kinský
 * 🇫🇮 Alexei Eremenko
 * 🇫🇮 Boris Rotenberg

 * 🇱🇹 Edgaras Česnauskis
 * 🇱🇹 Rolandas Džiaukštas
 * 🇲🇪 Simon Vukčević
 * 🇷🇸 Dušan Petković
 * 🇸🇰 Ján Ďurica
 * 🇸🇰 Branislav Fodrek
 * 🇸🇰 Martin Jakubko
 * 🇸🇰 Kamil Kopúnek
 * 🇸🇰 Branislav Obžera
 * 🇸🇰 Peter Petráš

 * Central America
 * 🇨🇷 Winston Parks

 * South America
 * 🇦🇷 Pablo Horacio Guiñazu
 * 🇦🇷 Daniel Montenegro
 * 🇵🇾 Fredy Bareiro
 * 🇵🇪 Martín Hidalgo
 * 🇺🇾 Javier Delgado

 * Africa
 * 🇨🇲 Benoît Angbwa
 * 🇬🇭 Prince Koranteng Amoako
 * 🇬🇭 Baffour Gyan
 * 🇬🇭 Illiasu Shilla
 * 🇳🇬 Solomon Okoronkwo

title: FC Leon Saturn Ramenskoye


text:
User talk:Woohookitty/Archive

Edit summary
Hello. Please provide an edit summary. Thanks and happy edits. Hyacinth 02:26, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

xhosa
Can you provide a reference for your contention that the Xhosa people live in Namibia? It seems you may have confused them with the Khoisan. Ferdinand Pienaar 21:32, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

"America"
I see you're fixing links to "America"! While you're doing it, you might adjust the text to read "the United States" if that's what's really meant in the context, and if Canada is definitely not meant. Or "North America" if that's the meaning. You may think this is unnecessarily sensitive ...and imagine that I'm Canadian or something! --Wetman 06:55, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Hi! Thanks for the note. Another tip: When you get to a Userpage, look at the lefthand column and click on Discussion. You'll get a chance to leave your note and read everybody's mail! You can even add an "I couldn't help overhearing..." remark, if you're sure you have a helpful solution to an issue, or a good link: Careful! Wikipedia is a glass house, so behave yourself! When leaving a note, select Watch this page, as answers are often left right under your note. --Wetman 01:07, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * There was no condescending tone intended in my attempt at helpfulness. Here's a quote from Dr. Johnson that James Boswell noted down: "If you would be thought agreeable in society, you must consent to be taught a great many things you already know." I have restrained a cross remark more than once with the thought of Dr. Johnson's remark. --Wetman 01:47, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * I have reverted your disambiguation of America at User:Thryduulf/Geonamesongs (the proposed re-working of List of songs whose title includes geographical names. I have done this because the link to the disambiguation page is purposefully there. Thryduulf 22:07, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

United States
I apologize, but I had to revert your edits to Last edit made by Postdlf. The prior use before you vandalized the article page and your edit was lost in the revert since I can't determine clearly what you're edit was trying to do. Please be alert for vandalism, as it does occur frequently on several pages, such as United States, and George W. Bush... just to name a few. Make sure that you check the history first on articles which have high volume or appear to have a lot of reverts due to vandalism. (Edits which have "Reverted edits by..." are rollback edits, and if they show up a lot, it could mean vandalism.) Thanks for your contribution to the Wikipedia. -- AllyUnion (talk) 09:04, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Er, I should clear up my sentence. What I meant was that the last edit before you was a vandalized edit, and you edited on top of the vandalized edit.  What I meant was "the prior edit before you, was a  vandalized edit"  Sorry about that. -- AllyUnion (talk) 12:39, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * No problem. No harm done. --Woohookitty 18:35, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

America is not always United States
Your work to disambiguate America is great. However, please be careful to choose the right meaning of the word. In Swedish slave trade, you redirected America in "when the Swedish colony in America, New Sweden, was taken over by the Dutch in 1655" to United States. While the colony was within the borders of present-day U.S., I think the reference is inappropriate, since the U.S. did not exist at the time. I changed it to read "North America" instead.

In the same edit, you seem to have changed African to African. Both will look the same, but the change is no improvement - quite the contrary. The first form is correct syntax, as it makes the whole word hyperlinked, but links directly to Africa. The second form links to African which is a redirect to Africa. Linking through redirects is generally considered ugly.

Please consider this in your future edits - and keep up the good wikiwork! Alarm 10:50, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

*Thank you for the help. Yes usually in that situation I changed it to North America, which I've done several times but I missed that one. --Woohookitty 20:49, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Canto General
"Canto General" consists of 15 sections, 231 poems, and more than 15,000 lines. It is an incredible ambitious work that attempts to be a history or encyclopedia of the whole continent of North America. --> Shouldn't that be South America? Neruda lived in Chili, so... georingo 20:13, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thank you. --Woohookitty 21:14, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar
Woo-hoo, the suggested redirects are done! Good job on finishing those off! For your efforts, I award you this barnstar. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 21:49, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject Arcade games
Woohookitty, I replied to your post on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Arcade games talk page. Thanks for joining. As for stepping on others toes, I don't think you will, but there is one user who currently is. See my reply to you on the Talk page for more information. Thanks again! :-)  — Frecklefoot | Talk 19:10, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)

tagging articles
Please put templates like that only are useful to editors, on talk pages (the only exception I can think of would be the different stub templates). This is to Avoid self references as much as possible and make our content more useful to third party users. Thank you. :) --mav 08:50, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Wayne Static
Hello, hello. Do you remember tagging this for vfd? Do you remember putting your reasoning on the Talk page instead of the VfD page? :P You must have had one too many windows/tabs open. I'll let you sort it out. —Mar·ka·ci: 2005-02-10 13:33 Z

Mr. Do
I'll give the revised version look when I have the chance later today. Both articles were pretty good, which is why I didn't do a "vote for deletion" which I have seen some people do with duplicates. I figure both had merit and anything different in one should be merged into the other. Thanks for taking it on. 23skidoo 18:45, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hey, Woohookitty. I'm glad you've changed your mind. As far as the WikiProject Arcade games, I'm not officially a member because I don't really think I have too much to add, though I am a member of WikiProject Computer and video games, which I'm much more conversant in. However, maybe sometime I'll take a shot at the arcades :) Anyway, no apology necessary, you acted in accordance with the appropriate WikiProject and that's a valid reason to want the article a certain way. Andre ( talk ) 21:02, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

Cheng Kung Senior High School
HI, I'm the copyright holder of http://www.cksh.tp.edu.tw/english/english.htm. so the article is innocent. Thanks:P

i see the nominated for deletion page... and it seems that the article of high school is not suitable here. however, there are some High_school article.

therefore i dont know whether i misunderstand the rule here or not.

if the high school article is offend the rule here, I'm sorry and i will remove the page. if what i should do is expanding it ,i will do it as soon as possiable.

Excuse me to incommode. (anyway i add {school-stub} tag now)

OK,i understand:P Thanks your instruction.

Image copyright tags
I see from your contributions that you're perhaps working on the untagged images project. I tagged thousands during the first round of that project and so have some familiarity with the issues involved.

You put a tag on Image:Vancouver area map.png. That image is not in the public domain, and I don't see how you would have thought that it was. I created that image and had tagged it. A vandal had removed that tag and the information on the source of the image. I can understand you not catching that vandalism. But I do not understand how you thought to label the image as public domain.

Though I don't have particularly strong proprietary feelings about that one map, I certainly hope that you're not willy-nilly slapping tags on images without justification.  Public domain is a specific legal concept, and it doesn't mean that you just don't know where an image came from or that it's found widely on the 'net and therefore "must" be free to use. Copyright is an important issue with Wikipedia, and using unlicensed images that are not in the public domain could have serious consequences.

Thanks for your work on tagging images. It's an important project that needs lots of help. But every effort needs to be made to determine the source of the images and apply the proper tag. I looked at some of your tagging efforts. Many are right on, but many seem mis-tagged to me. If the image is described as being made by the user who uploaded it, e.g., then it is assumed to be if the user has not tagged it otherwise. I've found other cases where you could have used or  but didn't.  You might find it useful to more carefully review the definitions of the copyright tags and the Wikipedia copyright information. You also should be leaving notes on the talk pages of the users who uploaded images of undetermined origin – many, as I would have, respond with useful information and even volunteer to revisit and tag all the images they've uploaded.

Thanks for contributing. -- Kbh3rd 04:41, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Sorry, I didn't really mean to scare you off the project! (I was pretty tired last night, and in the light of morning the above looks rather stern.)  If you can educate yourself a bit more about how to go about it, your help would certainly be welcome.  But if you have other areas where you think your efforts would be better directed, I'm sure your contributions will be appreciated there, too.  I don't have a lot of time right now, which is why I'm not active on this phase of the image tagging project, but maybe I'll find time to review the images you've tagged and fix what needs it.  Thanks for helping.  Kbh3rd 14:59, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Tariffing
I am about to reverse your redirect of Tariffing. There is a whole clutch of articles indexed by Teletraffic Engineering which need to be considered for deletion as a group. For example Cell handover process duplicates handoff. Redirecting one article just confuses matters.

I think they are a project by students at Witwatersrand University - some refs are to lecture notes from there and a recent anon edit was from South Africa. -- RHaworth 06:41, 2005 Mar 3 (UTC)

I have now created Deletion policy/Teletraffic Engineering. -- RHaworth 09:07, 2005 Mar 7 (UTC)

Fnarr, fnarr!
Why did you remove "fnarr, fnarr!" from the List of catchphrases? — J I P | Talk 11:27, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Germany
Nice job on that mess! · Katefan0(scribble) 21:32, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ach! I can smell the sauerkraut from 1922 in Germany from here!  You truly are a glutton for punishment.  :)  · Katefan0(scribble) 20:53, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup Taskforce Procedure note
Please add new items to the list of open tasks at the bottom of the list. Thanks ! --Randy 20:38, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

expos/nationals debate
There is a major debate going on, and I wondered if you might want to chime in. The debate involves how to deal with franchise moves in baseball. The question is whether Montréal Expos should be its own article or if it should redirect to Washington Nationals. All other instances of franchise moves in MLB redirect the old team name to the new team name, and the history of the franchise is covered within the new team name (for MLB, NBA and NFL examples, see here. Some people are confused and think the Expos and the Nats are different teams. Some people don't want to upset Canadian readers.

Indeed, the Washington Nationals are not a new team - the Montreal Expos franchise has moved to Washington, and the old franchise name should redirect to the new franchise name, just like the 20+ instances of this occuring in Wikipedia. For example, Brooklyn Dodger history resides in the Los Angeles Dodgers article. New York Giants history, including the Shot Heard 'Round the World, resides in the San Francisco Giants article.

If you have the time, maybe you could chime in on the conversation there, Votes for deletion/Montréal Expos. Kingturtle 17:22, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Mexico City Metro Stations
Thanks for adding the tags and more or less cleaning the article. But as I'm getting better at wiki markup, I decided to join the Cleanup Task Force myself!

- Rune Welsh 18:25, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup Taskforce
Good job cleaning up the Samuel de Champlain page, it's much better organized now. I came across it when I was cleaning up the Trent University page and flagged it for the Taskforce. Keep up the good work. Ben Babcock 00:04, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your help
Hi Woohoo - I just wanted to say thanks for all the work you put in on the bad stub articles. Contributors like you make me glad I spent the time to create that project and gives me even more energy to work on the next one. Thanks again and keep up the good work. Triddle 02:32, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Open issues list, Cleanup Taskforce
Please add new issues to the bottom of the open issues list of the Cleanup Taskforce. --Randy 11:34, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce/First Baptist Church, Columbus, Indiana
Can you please put Cleanup Taskforce/First Baptist Church, Columbus, Indiana on someone's desk... someone else. I'm not quite sure what to do with it. Thanks --Randy 02:20, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Death and state funeral of Ronald Reagan
Oh boy. I didn't envy you this job (waiting for your retaliation!!). I think it's shaping up nicely. Quite a task. There is still some unencyclopedic style and POV to edit out (People knew that Reagan had been ill, suffering from Alzheimer's Disease for a decade and that morning, there were reports indicating that his health had significantly deteriorated, and the words, "Reagan is dead," had been expected to come in weeks or months. ... sounds like a research paper or op/ed or something). I give you permission to finish your work (duck). Would you like some help? · Katefan0(scribble) 14:32, May 28, 2005 (UTC)

 * You've done a nice job in cleaning up the page and editing. Have you finished with it? If yes, you can now proceed and do the same with Death and state funeral of Pierre Trudeau. I've given you permission to do so there. SNIyer12(talk) 15:41, May 28, 2005 (UTC)

 * I've already added the Pierre Trudeau article to the Cleanup Taskforce and to your desk, as well as for Operation Yellow Ribbon. --SNIyer12(talk) 18:37, 28 May 2005
 * Absolutely! My pleasure.  I'm really sorry to hear you're having continuing problems.  If I'd realized, I would've put it on my watchlist to see if I can't help out some.  I'll do that now.  More eyes and voices are always better. · Katefan0(scribble) June 29, 2005 19:25 (UTC)

Letter writing
Well, I guess I didn't really know what I was stumbling into. It's just that, I maintain the transwiki log basically single-handedly. I've been going through all the old entries to resolve them, and when I come upon an old interwiki redirect, I have to tag them for speed delete, since those redirs don't work ,and discourage editing (and are explicitly mentioned in the CSD). This article was just one of the ones I came across as I was going through them. I don't think you have much to worry about from the vandal, as you had no part in it. And, I don't really think we have much to fear in general from someone who's been inactive since February. I transwiki articles every day, and it still baffles me how much people oppose moving things to our sister projects, as if they're being deleted or somethin. Anyway, thanks for the heads-up. --Dmcdevit 07:10, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The scary thing is, because of the flakiness of VfD, a lot of times articles that aren't really encyclopdia material, but strike a fancy with a bunch of editors, are kept, even against deletion policy. --Dmcdevit 07:22, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It's been recreated by an anon :( Rather than speedy it again, I've brought it up at WP:AN/I, though I'm not positive if that's the proper forum. Any input? --Dmcdevit 06:26, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, I hope by presenting a united front we can fix this thing before it gets out of hand, like it looks like happened last time. It's ironic that this person makes such a big deal about such an insignificant issue, really. If he really cared about the spirit, the idea of Wikipedia, he would have moved on and helped out elsewhere by now. Ah, people... --Dmcdevit 08:01, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Vote for deletion alert
I see from the page history for Cut Ending to Knights of the Old Republic II that you once edited it. I thought you would like to know that there is a VfD on that page now at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Cut_Ending_to_Knights_of_the_Old_Republic_II. Please stop in there and comment on this vote! --maru 15:55, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

False positives on the double redirects
Hi Woohookitty,

Can you leave just a couple of the false negatives as a message on my talk page? I'll take a quick look and see if they can be ignored but I have a strong suspicion that they have been fixed in between the snapshot I can work with and the point that Wikipedia is at right now. Thanks for the heads up and once I check it out I'll put up a note on the project page. Triddle 05:09, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

I did a quick check and verified my hypothesis. You can safely ignore any false positives. Thanks again. Triddle 05:21, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Military of Pakistan
Would you be interested in discussions on this (Talk:Military of Pakistan) particular page?--PrinceA 00:09, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Lots of edits, not an admin
Hi - I made a list of users who've been around long enough to have made lots of edits but aren't admins. If you're at all interested in becoming an admin, can you please add an '*' immediately before your name in this list? I've suggested folks nominating someone might want to puruse this list, although there is certainly no guarantee anyone will ever look at it. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) June 28, 2005 13:43 (UTC)

 * Hey, you might want to check your watchlist, :), it's kind of funny that you would ask me to vote. By the way, I think advertising is a good way to put off some regular voters. I'd just let the vote take its course. --Dmcdevit 29 June 2005 03:56 (UTC)
 * Oh, well never mind then. And good luck. --Dmcdevit 29 June 2005 04:41 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, and I had been meaning to tell you, it looks like Letter-writing Richard came back a few days ago to vandalize my user page. It went on for so long that the page was finally protecetd for a day. Look at the history. Might want to look out for that, he's switched to a dynamic IP now. --Dmcdevit 30 June 2005 01:20 (UTC)
 * Haha. I like the recent addition to your user page. That's kind of how I feel (not that anyone's asked). You will henceforth be referred to as "it" and "that", not he or she! --Dmcdevit 3 July 2005 08:14 (UTC)

reagan
Well, I was feeling masochistic this afternoon so I went over the RR death/funeral article and copyedited it pretty mercilessly. I dont' even want to know what it was like before you got out your red pen. Excellent work! Anticipating the complaints soon. · Katefan0(scribble) July 1, 2005 18:11 (UTC)
 * As an aside, are you having trouble with your watchlist today? Mine hasn't been updated since the wee hours of this morning, it seems. · Katefan0(scribble) July 1, 2005 18:23 (UTC)
 * Mmmhmm.... I can see what you mean. Apparently, this is one of SNIyer's pet articles (I guess we all have them -- ones we put more loving care into), and he feels pretty invested in it.  I sympathize, but not enough to just leave him to it.  I haven't even looked at the Trudeau article.  Not sure I have the strength today! There is definitely a bug with the watchlists. Annoying. · Katefan0(scribble) July 1, 2005 19:47 (UTC)
 * I guess that's one word for it. I was thinking something more like... nevermind.  Are you American?  If so, we're both up late. · Katefan0(scribble) July 2, 2005 05:18 (UTC)
 * BTW, if you feel like returning the favor, I'm having a particularly frustrating time dealing with an editor who just doesn't care about NPOV mandates at Price-Anderson Act. · Katefan0(scribble) July 2, 2005 05:20 (UTC)
 * It does get tiring, doesn't it? I get discouraged with this sort of thing, sometimes.  It seems like Wikipedia is far too easy on bad actors, to the detriment of editors that really care about the project.  It's too difficult to get bad actors penalized, and in the process good editors end up burned out from being Don Quixote. My $.02...  Cookies good.  I just got in from an evening of good beer, but feel restless, so here I am.  I'm a total nerd. · Katefan0(scribble) July 2, 2005 05:33 (UTC)

Price-Anderson Act
If you're going to got through the article (please see my comments in Discussion), I'll defer making changes until you do. Simesa 2 July 2005 20:27 (UTC)

 * Thanks for your reply. I've requested Protection for a cooling-off period, and Pstudier and Katefan) have supported that on the RfP page.  Would you add your comments?
 * Unfortunately, I see this going to the Arb Committee. I think Ben is on a crusade, and simply won't stop making unsupported statements. Simesa 2 July 2005 21:45 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much for your help. It's much less of a burden having more NPOV eyes on the thing.  I'm hopeful that ArbCom won't be necessary (if we are diligent, we can keep him honest, even if that's through reverting), but if it is, it is.  There don't seem to be too many admins patroling the RFP page lately; I may drop a message to an admin who protected a page I had requested in the past.  Don't get discouraged; keep up the good work. · Katefan0(scribble) July 3, 2005 03:24 (UTC)
 * laugh* Could be!  Actually though, I think there is a policy against admins protecting a page they've been editing. I could be wrong though. · Katefan0(scribble) July 3, 2005 03:34 (UTC)
 * Well, at least he sourced the USPIRG stuff properly this time. The problem with that addition is that that same criticism is already stated in the article... he could pick one or the other, but piling on like that isn't needed.  If you get a minute, could you read my comments on the talk page and see what you think?  I won't be offended if you disagree, but I feel like if we start establishing consensus on certain items on the talk page and be very clear about it, then we can more assuredly revert some of Benjamin's POV changes. · Katefan0(scribble) July 3, 2005 03:50 (UTC)

Thanks for all your hard work on this, I appreciate that it hasn't been fun. I restored the section on Chernobyl-vs-Western plants, with 4 citations (which I admit I should have had there originally). Unfortunately, I view this text as very significant for PAA, even though Ben may go through the roof. I hope I have your and Katefan0's support on keeping this. Simesa 3 July 2005 12:52 (UTC)

 * I wrote to Katefan0 - I'll go along with Mediation covering the whole article, but I'm looking for mutual solutions - not just caving in to Ben. His attitude is that as long as he's talking, he's winning - my attitude is that the article shouldn't get any more slanted. Simesa 4 July 2005 15:21 (UTC)

title: User talk:Woohookitty/Archive


text: User talk:139.55.49.33

title: User talk:139.55.49.33


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stuffed crust pizza

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was 3 for delete, 6 for merge and direct, 4 Keep, and 1 transwiki. That qualifies for No Consensus. Redwolf24 02:30, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Stuffed crust pizza
Trivial. Should be merged with pizza. 67.174.230.30 22:32, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete (changed from Merge) -- A single dish from a single franchise (and a dish which may be seen as a "fad" dish nonetheless) shouldn't deserve its own article User:24.9.10.235
 * Merge -- anything useful into pizza and redirect. - Longhair | Talk 12:21, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge -- As per request --RN 13:30, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge, but VfD is not the place to discuss this. - ulayiti (talk)  17:32, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment This is vote for deletion, not vote for merge. If you want to merge something, be bold! But it's not the domain of VfD. --malathion talk 17:39, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually, we're directed not to merge articles while a VfD is going on... ^^;  Almafeta 18:30, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. In its current form, there is pretty much nothing to merge.  Unless this is expanded to talk about how stuffed-crust pizza became a fad that was copied by every pizza chain under the sun, then I'll change my vote to keep.  Almafeta 18:30, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep The fact the Wikipedia articles don't have to be good to start out with is one of the fundamental reasons why Wikipedia has been a success. CalJW 15:57, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, an adequately notable pizza product in its own right james gibbon  18:32, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Factually incorrect:  It's not just Pizza Hut that's making stuffed-crust pizzas, it's every pizza chain out there, and most brands of store-bought frozen pizza. --Carnildo 21:18, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect, stuffed cruft. (Awww, quit your heckling!) the wub  "?/!"  08:33, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to Wiktionary. Peter Grey 09:53, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect with pizza. This stuff is awesome, but pure awesomeity does not a good Wikipedia article make. Lord Bob 21:12, July 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect with Dave Porter 22:18, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Not much worse than several other entries in the Pizza Category, to which it should be added. William Avery 15:44, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Eh. If it's possible to fill in the article some more (who invented it?  what kinds of stuffings are common, besides cheese?  is it associated with any other style of pizza?), then keep it.  But if this is all that can be said about it, then merge into the main pizza article.   Dr.frog 01:20, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, awesome foodstuff. Kappa 16:45, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Talk:Dare (song)

Characters
Should it be also noted that "挑戰" (Pinyin: tiǎo zhàn) also means "challenge" in Traditional Chinese characters? --Andylkl [ talk! 18:35, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Capitalisation
So why is DARE in capitals for this page? M.C. Brown Shoes 00:18, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Because it's listed as capitals in the Demon Days tracklisting. :) --Andylkl [ talk! 08:04, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Does that really mean anything? Every song on the Demon Days tracklisting is in caps, but it's not FEEL GOOD INC.? M.C. Brown Shoes 11:18, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * When in doubt, find an authorative source. And I'm not talking about the tracklisting at the back of the album, but the tracklisting from this discography. It's the official website. :) --Andylkl [ talk! 12:05, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I stand corrected. Carry on! :) M.C. Brown Shoes 04:20, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm going to move this page because it's not in fitting with the manual of style(see here). The manual of style suggests anything that uses all capitals (even if it's the way it's presented) should be adjusted to standard case. Use of all caps is reserved for where the letters are an acronym. -- linca linca  04:16, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Noodle
Who actually sings "Noodle"'s vocals? -- The Anome 02:09, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Rosie Wilson, according to the Gorillaz article.--KrossTalk 10:02, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Even though she's a cartoon Noodle is hot! Especially in this video! (I'm 15 so I'm allowed to think she's hot XD) --User:RejectFalseIcons2323

Shepard tone
Is the beginning of DARE a Sheppard Tone? Acegikmo1 06:26, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * It sounds like one to me... but it's so fast that the illusory effect is lost. Doc Sigma (wait, what?)  18:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

subtext of masturbation???
What part of the song does it hint masturbation???
 * Depending on your mindframe, all or nothing. 惑乱 分からん 00:13, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * If you intend on finding innuendo referencing masturbation, a creative mind and a little thought will yield results. That's where the rumors started, that this song is about Noodle 'coming of age', so to speak. -- Jelly Soup 23:51, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
 * It's true that many, many songs with ambiguous meaning can be thought to have subversive ends when the evidence is sketchy. Many of the Beatles songs come to mind- Hey Jude, Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds and so on. This in mind, DARE could be seen as an internal monologue/instruction about masturbation. I'm not saying it is (hence my excluding this from the main page).

Here's how it could be seen: "It's coming up, it's coming up" -an erection "Jump back and forth/And feel like you were there yourself"- imagining intercourse during masturbation "Work it out" masturbation "Never did no harm"- rationalizing an action typically considered "dirty" "You've got to press it on you You just think it, that's what you do That's what you do, baby Hold it down, DARE" a number of meanings. again, imagining intercourse during masturbation.

Does any other idea fit better? Tymothy 17:27, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Live Performance
Anything on the Live performance at Manchester? Shaun Ryder was singing it a really weird way.

Brit Awards reference
I've written the addition from memory, if anyone has a recording of it or can add something more concrete to it, please do. Damiancorrigan 10:44, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Removed Nonsense
This:
 * "DARE" is a staple song used by several car audio enthusiasts to test their sound system's performance, as it contains both human voice, plenty of treble and a very strong bassline.

It's uninteresting, not referenced, and has bad grammar. Bye bye! Damiancorrigan 10:50, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

fez?

 * "Russel had an identical fez like Spongebob and Patrick had on the episode "Good Neighbors"." What does this mean? Like, i have no idea what this is talking about here.(chubbstar) 21:42, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * oh. its a hat. nevermind.(chubbstar) 21:46, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Is it identical? I actually saw that episode of Spongebob, doesn't Spongebob and Patrick have fez with an eye on it? Russel has only a plain red one.

Random fact
I just noticed, on the poster for DARE, Noodle's wearing socks and the outfit seen in the video. But in the video, Noodle's wearing white shoes and no socks! -- Fushako 18:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Trivia
The song's audio background music and lyrics is slighty similar to that of Sonic And Knuckles's Death Egg Zone.

Firstly, some wikification needs to take place here (as well as a spell check). Secondly, the Death Egg Zone didn't have any vocals. At all. If there are no objections, I will make changes reflecting the above. -- Jelly Soup 23:26, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:DAREVideo.jpg
Image:DAREVideo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:10, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Trivia again
I think someone needs to spruce up the Trivia section. I don't think I should be the one to do it though because I'm not sure what's right and what's not right. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

Fair use rationale for Image:DAREVideo.jpg
Image:DAREVideo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:45, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:DAREVideo.jpg
Image:DAREVideo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Gorillaz DARE CD2.jpg
Image:Gorillaz DARE CD2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:16, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Gorillaz DARE.jpg
Image:Gorillaz DARE.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:19, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Daft Punk sampling!
Near the end of the song, if you listen closely, it sounds just like the beginning crowd talk from Revolution 909 by Daft Punk on Homework. I think that this should be noted.--Finest1 (talk) 16:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * See my reply at Talk:Revolution 909. Just64helpin (talk) 01:21, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:DAREVideo.jpg
Image:DAREVideo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 13:15, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Background Sampling
I'm sure the background female vocals used are from a seventies tune. Can anyone identify the song? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Captain haddock01 (talk • contribs) 19:16, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Dare (song). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090316064811/http://www.aria.com.au/pages/aria-charts-accreditations-singles-2005.htm to http://www.aria.com.au/pages/aria-charts-accreditations-singles-2005.htm
 * Added tag to http://itunes.apple.com/gb/album/dare-single/id78979001
 * Added tag to http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/dare-single/id77607401

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:06, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Dare (song)