User talk:Angielaj

Scrap paper

Tank you for your efforts in keeping garbage off wikipedia. However before nominating an article for any deletion, you ALWAYS have to look into page history, because the current version may be the result of vandalism or some toddler's good faith but stupid edit. `'юзырь:mikka 16:54, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete my entry? - superkick

Article revert

The reason I added those citations (not spam) in List of Linux distributions is because the Jesux article has been nominated for deletion; we need something else to go by in case the article is deleted. 76.183.213.20 20:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

regulus

I read it. My initial judgement is it is a complex edit, but to led it ride and think about it tomorrow as a whole piece. Sandpiper 02:20, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

footystar tom

I know you put a warning on his talk page, but the damage he did to Shrek was only a third of his antics today. He also hit Harry Potter and Manchester United. Ccrashh 14:01, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

J.K. Rowling

I'm not sure how you decided that User:Libertycookies was closest to the consensus but he is the only one a) supporting those opinions b) attempting to add that section. Multiple editors and admins have all agreed that the content should be removed until such time as original, first-hand references (i.e. direct quotes from Jo) can be found and cited for his claims. Thanks AulaTPN 23:13, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Long Running Debate

you have a very odd page here. Anyway, Folken and I have been arguing the merits of including information, mainly about horcruxes for months, and have exchanged thousands of words of debate. Others have commented from time to time, on both sides of the debate. If you are really interested, I suggest you dig out the archives for all the pages we jointly edit and have a very long read. It is my considered view that during that time more considered editors have favoured inclusion of the material than exclusion. Most HP editors have ducked out in view of the forthcoming book launch. My position is to maintain what I see as the established consensus (not withstanding Folkens rather wild claims). Sandpiper 08:14, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I award you this barnstar for you vandalism revertion, proper warning, and prover AIV reports. I blocked the users you have reported, and I noticed you were doing a great job. Keep it up! Evilclown93_(talk) 20:14, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

No worries. It actually happens all the time. Some admins are strict in following the order of warnings while others aren't. But believe it or not, there are some vandals who complain that they weren't given "enough" warnings before the final one. Go figure. ----Ðysepsion † ^{Speak your mind} 05:44, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User Talk Revert

Thanks for the revert, the emo redirect vandal has been quite busy. Dust Filter 23:59, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]