User talk:Alison/Archive 33
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 30 | Archive 31 | Archive 32 | Archive 33 | Archive 34 | Archive 35 | → | Archive 40 |
Thanks...for the protection of Jamie Lee Curtis
...for the protection of Jamie Lee Curtis; I tried a while back. I do not understand the repeated and seemingly consistent vandalism. This should keep it off my Watchlist for a bit; and I appreciate it. -- Mjquinn_id (talk) 05:41, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, he's back as 83.71.105.150 (talk · contribs). Another open proxy? Best, Sandstein 12:45, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
- Also 66.199.237.22 (talk · contribs). Sandstein 17:37, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, for the bother. I'm clueless as to how to re-open a closed SP Investigation. I watch List of Linux Distributions for no apparent reason, though I'm about to WP:TROUT myself and accuse myself of masochism. User:Fortresslinux is back as single-purpose account Krocht31, or is a meat puppet. The diffs, 1 November 2009 and 30 October 2009, are the same text as before. Since we reverted the new sock already (see Talk) and the sock re-added just now, I think that additional measures are needed to give the individual another WP:CLUE (note previous blocks have not yet provided such WP:CLUE). Thanks for pointing me in the right direction to clear this up again. —Aladdin Sane (talk) 18:13, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
- Jake has answered my question. Thanks. —Aladdin Sane (talk) 15:17, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Welcome back
Fáilte ar ais. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 12:17, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
- Er, did I get it wrong? Well, you know what I was trying to say, anyway. Welcome back. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 20:28, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- Just got the 411 - evidently I accidentally deleted stuff I shouldn't have when I left my last message. Sorry. You know I would never go there. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 20:44, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
ISO magick pixie dust
Hello. Since you have had past dealing [1] with Qwertgb (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · sockssuspected), could you take a gander at an unusual 'new' editor that has my sock-senses tingling?
- Plural3776 (talk · message · contribs · global contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · user creation · block user · block log · count · total · logs · summary · email | lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · checkuser · spi · socks | rfar · rfc · rfcu · ssp | current rights · rights log (local) · rights log (global/meta) | rights · renames · blocks · protects · deletions · rollback · admin · logs | UHx · AfD · UtHx · UtE)
Except for the fact that this editor is exclusively tagging accounts suspected and proven to have been Qwertgb (something that has never been part of his modus operandi), the edits look more like some of the red herring socks of Bambifan101. I have been watching Plural3776 for several weeks in order to try and figure out what he or she is up to, and while I still have no clue as to what the editor is doing, I have no doubt that it is some subtle attempt at disruption to the project. Any assistance you could provide would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, — Kralizec! (talk) 17:02, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
ok
I got that from the local paper, from her statement —Preceding unsigned comment added by Regisfugit (talk • contribs) 00:01, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- I don't care where you got them from. Right now, they don't belong on Wikipedia, especially not the full name of the rape victim, who happens to be a minor. Same for the accused right now. Don't post them again - Alison ❤ 00:04, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- I see your concerns about the victim- the suspects I feel is a differnet story- I think having double standards like this is not very transparent.Regisfugit (talk) 00:15, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- Don't even think of posting the name of an underage sexual assault victim again. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:19, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- I have every concern for the victim here. Furthermore, our policies cover the issues with the minors that have been accused. We must have reliable sources for everything, especially if you are accusing children of criminal acts. See the problem yet? Not only that, but if it were seen later that the jury was prejudiced through the actions of Wikipedia, and it was deemed that the accused could not get a fair trial and were acquitted as a result, how would that be? When it comes to criminal matters, we need to be impeccable in what we do - Alison ❤ 00:56, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- but the ft hood suspect's name is in his article.... Richmondian (talk) 15:32, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
your comment
- Wikipedia is not the news - that would be WikiNews. We have obligations that the presses don't have and futhermore, if there are legal issues around what's being added to that article, I can pretty-much guarantee that you and others will be nowhere to be found. Pseudonymous editing tends to make people more relaxed over what they write here, given their real name is not attached to their words. It's a heinous crime - no mistake - but we need to be very careful and deliberate over who we name and who we accuse of doing what, given the profile Wikipedia has on-line - Alison ❤ 06:17, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- alison, why are you on my page? and your talk page was set up so i couldn't respond. anyway you might take another gander at WP:NOTNEWS, you may not have read it in detail. for criminal acts, the better policy is WP:N/CA Richmondian (talk) 08:03, 8 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richmondian (talk • contribs)
RE: I see what you did just there!!
Thanks. It's nice to see you here as well. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 17:18, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
sorry about that
hi alison, sorry i goofed up unstriking that Jessica Liao comment, i didn't realize she was a banned person. i went to undo it after figuring it out but you beat me to it.
what do you want to know? i see you are a BLP cop of sorts? i don't think i've broken the rules??
Richmondian (talk) 03:36, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
- No worries about the Liao comments! Yeah, I'm kinda strong on BLP all right :) I just have a question about something but don't want to post it here - Alison ❤ 03:40, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Abortion Debate Template
There has been a major change to the abortion debate template without discussion or consensus. It was changed from a sidebar to a footer, and then removed from all the relevant articles. I can't revert the changes because I don't know enough about template construction. Can I get your help?--IronAngelAlice (talk) 04:16, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Suspicious user
Check this user out: [2]. This user seems to fit the pattern of your friend (Grawp impersonating, imitating Rollback). Would you mind looking into this? Thanks, Triplestop x3 01:51, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, User:PirateSmackK - could be, all right. It looks like they're already blocked & just messing about with unblock messages. I'll protect the page in a minute - not sure if there's much more I can do - Alison ❤ 02:06, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Robert K S
Now this twit is putting words in my mouth. In an AFD, he said "TenPoundHammer's here because she was on Jeopardy! once, and TenPoundHammer has made it his mission to pare any Jeopardy!-related content from the encyclopedia. His edit record is becoming more and more littered with this nonsense." This false accusation is only more telling that Robert K S has some sort of vendetta against me. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 04:41, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Let's see how it plays out on ANI. You need more community eyes to look at it. I don't think it's blockworthy or anything, but he does need to chill a bit, IMO - just another WP:TROUT moment, is all - Alison ❤ 04:43, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Alison, it appears to me that you're taking TenPoundHammer's remarks at face value rather than actually looking at his edits. He's the one with the agenda, here. Robert K S (talk) 04:57, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) I've tried telling him that over a year ago, and he won't listen. For what it's worth, I did explain my removal on the talk page, but I bet he'll call me a deletionist [bad word] with a vendetta against Jeopardy! or something to that effect. Not to mention his totally baseless accusation of me having an "agenda." Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 04:57, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Filed a WQA on him. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 05:30, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) I've tried telling him that over a year ago, and he won't listen. For what it's worth, I did explain my removal on the talk page, but I bet he'll call me a deletionist [bad word] with a vendetta against Jeopardy! or something to that effect. Not to mention his totally baseless accusation of me having an "agenda." Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 04:57, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Alison, it appears to me that you're taking TenPoundHammer's remarks at face value rather than actually looking at his edits. He's the one with the agenda, here. Robert K S (talk) 04:57, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Alison, I note that WQA says, at the top, that it is not useful for mediation of longterm, ongoing conflicts between parties, which, respectfully, might describe the case here. I'm more than game to participate in a mediation if that is an available alternative. However, I'm involved in a lot of other goings-on in RL at the moment. It might be more like after the holidays before I have the energy for this. Given the circumstances, I would happily agree to a total disengagement from all Jeopardy! (or, more broadly, trivia- and game show-related articles) until then if TenPoundHammer would agree to same. Actually, if TenPoundHammer wants to do things like add sources or contribute content, I wouldn't see that as a violation of the temporary pact, but no AfDs, speedies, or deletions of content from articles for the time being, please. Robert K S (talk) 06:03, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- That sounds like a pretty reasonable compromise, tho' it would need a point of contact to oversee it. TenPoundHammer - what do you think of this proposal? Mutual disengagement, while you get to add sources? It sounds like a quick way to end this (at least for now) and IMO, Robert is being quite gracious here - Alison ❤ 06:07, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
If you have a moment in your day, could you take a look at the last few exchanges on the talk page, starting about here with Richmondian's claim about a "BLP expert" he is being coy about naming who had "no issues" with including specific details about the victim? Those details are here in Richmondian's reversion. Black Kite reverted on BLP grounds back to this. Your considered view would be appreciated. Bielle (talk) 20:22, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Invitation to participate in SecurePoll feedback and workshop
As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.
For the Arbitration Committee,
Risker (talk) 08:00, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
In case you hadn't noticed
Thank you!!
Both of the Bambifan anon IPs were from BellSouth as they almost always are. 70.146.227.168 is out of Semmes, Alabama (he might be logging on via a proxy; never seen this city pop up before) and 70.146.212.201 is out of Mobile as usual. I just blocked User:The Movie King! for the same basic edit pattern. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:33, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- His two newest ones, one of which is active as I post are and -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 23:17, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
SPI CU cases
For future reference, on an SPI case after you complete a check, can you please change the last parameter in that {{RFCU}} tag to checked? Doing that will uncategorize and make cases easier to track. Thank you, MuZemike 16:45, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Redking7
Howdy. I thought Redking7 was the sock-puppeter. GoodDay (talk) 20:10, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
- You're absolutely correct, GoodDay :) I've just updated the tags now. Thanks for that! - Allie ❤ 23:04, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Another Bambifan101 range to block
So help me, I cannot wait for the Foundation to finally lower the boom. I just blocked 74.247.105.48 for one year; would you please do a rangeblock? The only edits we get out of BellSouth in and around Mobile, Alabama are from this freak. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:29, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
- Yep - will do. I got the note from Collectonian above & I'll look at it soon as I'm in front of a computer somewhere :) Mobile here - Allie ❤ 00:45, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Bless you. Really. Would you shoot me a note on my talk page when all the ranges are blocked? I just want to revel in the fact. :) Seriously, I want to update his LTA page and yes, it'll be a real vacation not having to dodge and parry this twerp. If he shows up elsewhere, you're the first to know. Thank you for all your good work. Warmest regards, PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:02, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Troubles Arbitration Case: Amendment for discretionary sanctions
As a party in The Troubles arbitration case I am notifying you that an amendment request has been posted here.
For the Arbitration Committee
Seddon talk|WikimediaUK 16:40, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
- Cool beanz - that looks like a marked improvement, and much needed. Nice one :) - Allie ❤ 00:16, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Discussion on ArbCom election question pages
Namaste, Alison. As one of the coordinators of the current ArbCom election, I've moved your commentary off Jehochman's questions page to the adjacent talkpage. I realise you feel your comments are of particular importance, but all editors will be treated the same; the questions pages are for questions and answers only. You're more than welcome to post extended commentary either at the relevant talkpage, or at the general discussion page for Jehochman's candidacy. If you have an issue with the general practices here, feel free to jump in at the central Election talkpage. Le meas, Skomorokh, barbarian 20:24, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Oooh
So, how does this RevDel thing work? I haven't used the tools in a while, seems pretty useful... Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:12, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
- RevDel, AFAIK, is only available to oversighters at the moment, but that it's on its way for admins ... or something. See Wikipedia:Revision deletion for the lowdown. Note that I just deleted those revisions (you can still see them as an admin) but they're not oversighted or suppressed - Allie ❤ 00:16, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
- OK, good to know. Thanks for the link :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:20, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
wow
I saw that on Huggle, and you still beat me. J.delanoygabsadds 03:24, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
❤❤❤❤❤
❤ 76.102.99.251 (talk) 06:49, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
noindex
Hi, I am told you removed the Richmond rape from the google search results, good idea, I was wondering, what are the general requirements for that kind of protection and who can do it? Is it the noindex template? Off2riorob (talk) 23:43, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
- It can pretty-much be added by any editor, really. It doesn't work in mainspace, though, and is useful for where there may be BLP or personal info issues that you don't want to make it into Google - Allie ❤ 08:21, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks much for the explanation. Off2riorob (talk) 11:49, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Regisfugit
Hey Alison, I noticed you've blocked Regisfugit for abusing multiple accounts. I have a strong suspicion that Oldenglish77 may also be him; they have similar edits to both 2009 Richmond High School gang rape and San Francisco Giants. I don't have much experience in this area, so I just figured I'd bring it to the attention of an admin who does. Best, faithless (speak) 04:55, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, good catch - that's
Confirmed. He's had dozens of accounts on here now - Allie ❤ 08:16, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
User:Feelin' Fine
Feelin' Fine (talk · contribs) has been blocked as a sockpuppet. They have left a message on their talk page saying they are not, and added the "Team Touchdown" info on it (see diff)
I have removed the "Team Touchdown" crap, but was wondering if the ability to edit their own talk page should be stopped as well?
Regards, -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 08:15, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I've reblocked them. Thanks for that - Allie ❤ 08:19, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
- User:Monochrome Scope just reposted that crap again, apparently they found a new netblock or your block of their previous range expired? DMacks (talk) 08:23, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello! You Have Mail! (AOL)
You have an email re: The past at your Makkie addy.. let me know what you think.. SirFozzie (talk) 05:30, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
- Already replied, Foz. Man, you're slow tonight ^_^ - Allie ❤ 05:31, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
- Blame this bug (and my schedule :P :P :P).. can't wait for 2 am to come around so I can crawl back into bed.. guess I can try to add to the AC question/answers while I wait for the asprin to kick in (Maybe I'll be lucky and it'll put me to sleep at my desk :)... SirFozzie (talk) 05:34, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scroogle (2nd nomination)
Why did you blank Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scroogle (2nd nomination)? [3] --SmokeyJoe (talk) 20:54, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
- I blanked it in deference to the privacy of the site's owner. It's pretty obvious, given the nature of the site itself, that he has a major beef with both Google and Wikipedia. "Wikipedia is not for hurting people", as one person put it, and a little respect and kindness goes a long way. If anyone wants to see the AfD, simply provide this link - Allie ❤ 04:26, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Classical Esther
Thank you very much! I sincerely appreciate your kind help! I'll certainly keep your good advice in mind for future use. Classical Esther (talk) 09:19, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
AE-tan.
Is she based on the creator of Encyclopaedia Dramatica by any chance? --Sooo Kawaii!!! ^__^ (talk) 20:33, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
- Far as I know, yeah. It was created by Mungbean on ED, aka 'fapman' & I think there's more than a passing resemblance to Sherrod. I'd link you the discussion on Thizzlehat, only the site is linkbanned on WP :/ - Allie ❤ 20:46, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Veropedia. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Veropedia (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:52, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Notice
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#FT2-Jehochman and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks, Jehochman Talk 16:08, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Flop
Sadly, no one added any of the references. I said that I would do it tonight but you would have thought that it would have been done by now. This is why pages end up at AfD over and over. I don't know why I'm venting to you about this but thanks for listening. J04n(talk page) 20:44, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I understand. And rather than adding them myself, I'm instead becoming involved in much more productive matters :/ If they're not added in a day or so, I'll likely followup myself and add them. Seeing as I opened, then closed, the AfD. Thanks for the note, though :) - Allie ❤ 20:59, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
- Really sorry about that. Totally understand that this is not productive at all, which is why I am pleading with all concerned to just end it. Jehochman Talk 21:04, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
- 'sokay. I didn't really want to get involved in a big rigmarole myself, all I was doing was just my day-to-day stuff. I've no 'dog in this fight' whatsoever. Right now, I'm spending ages over my statement to ArbCom whereas I'd really rather be here right now :-/ Nearly done, though .... - Allie ❤ 21:10, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
- I know. If it helps, point me to an article (in English) and I'll copy edit it to help make up for lost time. I'm really, really sorry to trouble the community with this nonsense and wish people would spend more time editing and try to get along instead of litigating every nit pickin' detail. Jehochman Talk 21:15, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
- 'sokay. I didn't really want to get involved in a big rigmarole myself, all I was doing was just my day-to-day stuff. I've no 'dog in this fight' whatsoever. Right now, I'm spending ages over my statement to ArbCom whereas I'd really rather be here right now :-/ Nearly done, though .... - Allie ❤ 21:10, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
- Really sorry about that. Totally understand that this is not productive at all, which is why I am pleading with all concerned to just end it. Jehochman Talk 21:04, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Clarification requested
Within this diff [4] I've requested that you clarify your remarks. Jehochman Talk 13:40, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
I don’t appreciate this.
[5].This is neither funny nor is it done in a satirical sense. It’s utterly disgraceful. And I think you know why I’m sending you this message.--Sooo Kawaii!!! ^__^ (talk) 13:12, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- I blocked it for a week, FWIW. There aren't any accounts behind it, so that's all I can do I'm afraid. Just WP:DNFTignore it - Allie ❤ 05:04, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
<----My Administrative Launch---->
Hello my good friend Alison, I hope on becoming a candidate for administrator within the next month or so, and well I wanted to know if you think I am ready, if you are willing to help me take this next step, to help the WikiCommunity. I want to know if its the right time to do so, I have really learned a lot from my whole experiance here in wikipedia, and I feel I am ready for the next step of responsibility. Please let me know what you think, if your are willing to help me take the next step in my WikiCareer, to help others, to guide others like you helped, and guided into learning the rules of Wikipedia (even though I was hardheaded 8]). Your Pal House1090 (talk) 03:34, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ED nonsense
Hi, this is just a suspicion but I have a feeling that IP trolling on the ED page has something to do with the EEML proceedings. I say this because of the location of the IP and because the battleground tone is typical of these people (POV pushing on a subject one doesn't like), and because of the content related to the proceedings on ED. Triplestop x3 19:20, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Checkuser please
Can you please run a check on this guy: Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Trulexicon. A IP block might be useful if possible. ViridaeTalk 04:43, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Done - there are various addresses & left one or two as the abuse isn't that extensive there - Allie ❤ 04:57, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
email coming.
Something interesting I came across on a political article.. need guidance.. SirFozzie (talk) 05:01, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
sorry
i keep trying to apologize, but you keep liberally applying the banhammer. at least rede this before you ban me. im just trying to have a little fun and have some lulz, but you keep ruining it and it makes me sad. i am done now and i hope that you will forgive me and still let me edit just a little. sorry 64.120.174.117 (talk) 06:21, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not your own personal playground. There are rules and guidelines for a reason. If the rules were bent for you, then they'd have to be bent for everyone, which will not happen because all the vandals would go crazy and vandalize a lot of pages, so please respect and follow the rules. - Zhang He (talk) 06:30, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
- I just got back from pizza,[1] but your comment was still here. Yeah, 'sokay :) Just bear in mind that every time you use an open proxy on WP, you open it up to being checked and blocked, and others will get B& too, making you very unpopular. Jes' sayin' ... :) - Allie ❤ 07:26, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
- ^ They really suck & their anchovies were totally gross.
Appreciation
It seems that "barnstars" have been devalued a bit in the 7 months that I have been a member of this project, so I shan't give you one. I would, however, like to express my gratitude and sincere appreciation for both the upgraded move protection on my user page and removing some rather disgusting comments from my talk page. It's nice to know that people such as yourself watch my userspace when I'm not around. I also wanted to thank you for the icons which I shamelessly pilfered from you. :) All the best, @Kate (talk) 07:27, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
- Oh! Thank you :) And glad you like the icons. Truth be known, I stole them from someone else (Deskana or Moreschi, I think). Thanks! - Allie ❤ 07:36, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Too quick for ya!
NOW who's getting slow on the trigger? It's a shame what old age does to one's speed innit? (Grin, Duck, RUN!) SirFozzie (talk) 08:20, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
inbound troll warning
a post on b might cause some problems but nothing that wikipedia can't handle. I am going to watch your talkpage for vandalism in the meantime :) andyzweb (talk) 09:14, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for that! I'd seen the earlier ones but not that one. Cheers - Allie ❤ 09:32, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
- Idiotic trolls are idiotic. Glad to see that everything's under control and I love your log summaries. ;) @Kate (talk) 09:35, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
- Alison would you mind semi-protecting my User Page as a preventative measure against anonymous? andyzweb (talk) 10:15, 1 December 2009 (UTC)