User talk:Bluerasberry/Archive 8

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 → Archive 15

Page Triage newsletter

Hey all. Some quick but important updates on what we've been up to and what's coming up next :).

The curation toolbar, our Wikimedia-supported twinkle replacement. We're going to be deploying it, along with a pile of bugfixes, to wikipedia on 9 August. After a few days to check it doesn't make anything explode or die, we'll be sticking up a big notice and sending out an additional newsletter inviting people to test it out and give us feedback :). This will be followed by two office hours sessions - one on Tuesday the 14th of August at 19:00 UTC for all us Europeans, and one on Wednesday the 15th at 23:00 UTC for the East Coasters out there :). As always, these will be held in #wikimedia-office; drop me a note if you want to know how to easily get on IRC, or if you aren't able to attend but would like the logs.

I hope to see a lot of you there; it's going to be a big day for everyone involved, I think :). I'll have more notes after the deployment! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 20:00, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue Five

Stop by for a tasty glass of wiki-iced tea at the Teahouse, today!

Hi! Welcome to the fifth edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!

  • Guest activity increased in July. Questions are up from an average of 36 per week in June to 43 per week in July, and guest profile creation has also increased. This is likely a result of the automatic invite experiments we started near the end of month, which seeks to lessen the burden on hosts and other volunteer who manually invite editors. During the last week of July, questions doubled in the Teahouse! (But don't let that deter you from inviting editors to the Teahouse, please, there are still lots of new editors who haven't found Teahouse yet.)
  • More Teahouse hosts than ever. We had 12 new hosts sign up to participate at the Teahouse! We now have 35 hosts volunteering at the Teahouse. Feel free to stop by and see them all here.
  • Phase two update: Host sprint. In August, the Teahouse team plans to improve the host experience by developing a simpler new-host creation process, a better way of surfacing active hosts, and a host lounge renovation. Take a look at the plan and weigh in here.
  • New Teahouse guest barnstar is awarded to first recipient: Charlie Inks. Using the Teahouse barnstar designed by Heatherawalls, hosts hajatvrc and Ryan Vesey created the new Teahouse Guest Barnstar. The first recipient is Charlie Inks, for her boldness in asking questions at the Teahouse. Check out the award in action here.
  • Teahouse was a hot topic at Wikimania! The Teahouse was a hot topic at Wikimania this past month, where editor retention and interface design was heavily discussed. Sarah and Jonathan presented the Teahouse during the Wikimedia Fellowships panel. Slides can be viewed here. A lunch was also held at Wikimania for Teahouse hosts.

As always, thanks for supporting the Teahouse project! Stop by and visit us today!

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. SarahStierch (talk) 08:24, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

BBC quote

Just to let you know, I found a great quote by you in a BBC source, I added it to my user space. That's a great attitude to have! Were you aware of the Level one user warnings RFC? What do you think of those? What is your actual method upon seeing a vandal. Ryan Vesey 04:58, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Your assistance would be appreciated

You've edited the dudesnude page before when there has been an issue I don't feel I can be fairly seen to be impartial on (as a dudesnude employee). I've added something to the talk page about misrepresentation of a reference which I believe unfairly portrays dudesnude with regard to our attitude to safer sex. I'd appreciate your taking a lookAdagio67 (talk) 10:37, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:16, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Fall 2012 Online Ambassador Program

Look at you being way ahead of me. :) Thanks! JMathewson (WMF) (talk) 20:49, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

New Pages newsletter

Hey all :)

A couple of new things.

First, you'll note that all the project titles have now changed to the Page Curation prefix, rather than having the New Pages Feed prefix. This is because the overarching project name has changed to Page Curation; the feed is still known as New Pages Feed, and the Curation Toolbar is still the Curation Toolbar. Hopefully this will be the last namechange ;p.

On the subject of the Curation Toolbar (nice segue, Oliver!) - it's now deployed on Wikipedia. Just open up any article in the New Pages Feed and it should appear on the right. It's still a beta version - bugs are expected - and we've got a lot more work to do. But if you see something going wrong, or a feature missing, drop me a note or post on the project talkpage and I'll be happy to help :). We'll be holding two office hours sessions to discuss the tool and improvements to it; the first is at 19:00 UTC on 14 August, and the second at 23:00 on the 15th. Both will be in #wikimedia-office as always. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 15:42, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Translated Hindi article

Hey Lane, just want to let you know, I just uploaded an article to the Hindi wiki here Peter.C • talk • contribs 00:09, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Also, I just uploaded another article here.Peter.C • talk • contribs 02:18, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
For your vision of Wikipedia MistyMorn (talk) 18:10, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

designing contents

Mr. Rasberry,

I am new to wikipedia but I want to learn about it. Could you please tell me how to design table of contents?

ThanksNandanupadhyay (talk) 13:31, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Look at the table of contents now. See how your addition is now at the end? Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:32, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for participating in my RfA. I appreciate your sentiments and I hope I'll continue to see your name pop up around Wikipedia.

Take care. =) Kurtis (talk) 16:47, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Add teahouse to welcome template?

As you were involved in a previous discussion regarding this issue, I am informing you of a new discussion proposing that the Teahouse be linked from the Welcome template(s). The discussion can be found here. KillerChihuahua?!? 23:51, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

I replied. Blue Rasberry (talk) 01:21, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Takes America/Seattle

Wikipedia Takes America/Seattle needs you. Please sign up to participate, and discuss a date and meeting location. And maybe volunteer to be the organizer. I've been tagging articles needing photos for Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Seattle, Washington. Thanks! --Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:25, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

No, but I might explore this with you. I have never seen this tool before. It seems to be checking for members of a category, and I presume that adding a member to the category would instantly put it on the map when the tool were called.
Here is the template which automatically adds the category when someone toggles the image-needed field. Here is the category itself, and here is some info about the tool and its creator. It seems like this version of the tool has not been touched since 2007. Thoughts?
There was a time when you wanted some Wikipedia information which I could not understand because it had to do with coding. I met the coordinator of volunteer coders for Wikipedia because she lives in NYC. Her name is Sumana and she is a nerve center for connecting people to the resources they want. Her page is here - mw:User:Sumanah. She has been very friendly to me and I think that if she could help you then she would.
Is that helpful to you? I am going to get some Seattle people to join in this September event as it seems that I will be participating in person with the NYC group. Thanks for starting it. Let me know if you have ideas for what more I can do. Blue Rasberry (talk) 01:20, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
I saw that you just added the UW Department of Global Health, but it did not appear on the map. I presume the article also has to have GPS coordinates. Blue Rasberry (talk) 02:29, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of List of politicians in India charged with corruption for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of politicians in India charged with corruption is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of politicians in India charged with corruption until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. GiantSnowman 11:27, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Ping

Hi. In case you're not watching meta: m:Talk:Wikimedia Medicine#Conference call. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 00:31, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Contragestion

I'm not sure that I understand your position. Clearly there _are_ sources. The notability criteria are clear about notability not being temporary. It's a naturally occurring phenomenon which is a real concern for people who are getting fertility treatments to aid in reproduction. Clearly the topic applies to nonhumans since one of the more recent articles applies to hamsters. Therefore it is notable and cannot be merged with birth control. It's not clear if my adding to your talk page here is inappropriate (that I ought to have said this at the contragestion talk page instead) if so, I apologize. OckRaz talk 08:07, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

It is appropriate that you came here and I am glad that you did. Please continue to talk through, but do not revert the contragestion page against community consensus especially without talking first. I am watching Talk:Contragestion and since the discussion is started there then let's continue this conversation there, unless you for some reason want to talk only to me. The point you raised above seems of interest to everyone, though. Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:37, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

"The references used to source this content are not sufficient to establish notability. Would you like to talk about the references? If so, choose two of them which you think are best and I will look at them with you."

Yes, please.
Thank you for your offer to help. I was feeling frustrated. Sometime in 2009 there was a contragestion page that I helped with. Someone posted an AfD notice and then there was a lot of unpleasantness with people arguing that giving it a page was inherently a violation of NPOV because it ought to be considered merely a form of contraception. I believe that the result was merge and delete. There was material there for a while but eventually it was edited away. In early 2011 I saw that someone had created a new contragestion page. I thought about asking the creator of that page about what's happening now, but s/he is blocked for copyright violations. (If I understand the notice, the copyright violations occurred on an article about copyrights, which I find quite amusing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SasiSasi#Copyright_concerns ) Anyway, I tried to improve the article a bit, but it's not a subject I'm familiar with so I may not have done a great job.
Maybe you can help me understand some comments from the merge discussion at BC (birth control). First, why would someone argue that separate articles are the "result of POV fork"? It seems to me that trying to force it into another article is what's problematic, not the other way round. I made this graphic to illustrate the point: http://i.imgur.com/xv31u.png
What's the opposite of a POV fork? A POV shotgun marriage?
There were also comments saying that it would be clearer and easier to read if incorporated into the BC article, but if that was the reason for the merge, then how does one explain that the word 'contragestion' no longer even appears on the page? If there were a MOA (method of action) section that dealt with the topic on the BC page as there was after the deletion in 2009, then that would make more sense, but given that there is no MOA section, I can't help but suspect that this was a kind of backdoor deletion - especially since the redirect no longer even points to the page where the topic was supposed to be merged.
I have a proposal. I'll go back and look at the article and improve what I think is problematic, and then afterward I'll share the result with you. You can tell me if you think it still needs improvement and if so in what areas. My hope is that if we both think that it is in good shape, then the redirect can be replaced with the new version and if at that point people want to make the argument that it should be merged, then the discussion can take place on the talk page for contragestion rather than BC. To be perfectly honest, I'm not comfortable with having the discussion of the fate of the page occur on a page whose editors deleted the content based on source quality and never bothered to replace it. If the desire to merge was genuine, then I don't understand why there's now no MOA section. To me, this suggests that some sort of social/political bias is at work on the BC page.
Please let me know what you think of my proposal. I came to your talk page when an orange bar popped up as soon as I logged in to let me know that there was something new for me to look. What causes that? Also, where can I put material while I work on it? Is that what the sandbox is for? If I put something there, then can you see it too? OckRaz talk 14:06, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
I do not like your proposal at all because it involves you doing work without first establishing that the work should be done. The article content is problematic because the sources are problematic, and if you work on the article content without first considering the sources then your work may not matter at all.
There is no particular bias about what the article content except that the sources are improper. You are writing a huge amount of content without responding to the only concern which anyone is expressing - the sources. The reason why the editors who deleted the content never bothered to fix the sources is because they are volunteers who are not interested in doing difficult work on request for other people who make requests but are not willing to help. If you want other opinions then I can help you get those from third parties but they also will ask you about the sources because that is what happens thousands of times a day every day here.
If I could make a counter proposal, please present an article which gives an overview of contragestion and which is specifically about contragestion. Such an article is what indicates notability. If such an article does not exist then I recommend that you not proceed with your proposal. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:33, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
I don't understand how someone can say that they're going to merge something which they think has no notability. If they believe it lacks notability because there are no sources, then they can nominate the article for deletion. If they think that it is notable but the sources used in the article are flawed, then they can post a notice on the article about the quality of the sources. That has nothing to do with doing difficult work on request. That has to do with being disingenuous. A consensus to merge is not a consensus to delete and the one shouldn't be used as a shortcut for the other.
I also don't see how it makes sense to argue that a topic ought to properly fall within the scope of a larger article and then let the editors of the larger article be the ones who make the determination. If you want to know how to pronounce "Arkansas River", you'll not get an unbiased answer by asking only people from Arkansas. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkansas_River#Pronunciations)
"present an article which gives an overview of contragestion and which is specifically about contragestion. Such an article is what indicates notability" - Can you give me a source for that? I agree that that would be sufficient to establish notability, not how it's necessary when there are references which define the term, articles which employ the term, and articles which deal with the phenomenon. OckRaz talk 16:16, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
I told you something incorrect because I thought it would help you understand. There are other ways to indicate notability. See WP:Notability. The merge is in place because it is the idea which was proposed and which got consensus. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:20, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
"there are references which define the term, articles which employ the term, and articles which deal with the phenomenon" - I know I can provide those. Would that be sufficient? OckRaz talk 16:23, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Definitions do not indicate notability, so exclude anything that only gives a definition. Employment of the term does not indicate notability either - if an article is about X, but it mentions topic Y, then that does not indicate notability of Y because the article is not about Y. "Articles which deal with the phenomenon" may or may not indicate notability. Articles which are about the topic certainly would. Having at least one recent article about a topic of medical or scientific interest is expected per community norms.

It is unusual for notability to be difficult to determine. The usual case is that it is very clear whether people are publishing on a topic. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:41, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

The problem is that contragestion is the term for the phenomenon, and the phenomenon is something that people publish about, but the term is seldom used. There's no difficulty in finding articles dealing with failure to implant. In humans there's 'recurrent implantation failure' and in rodents there's research on the Bruce Effect. Anyone can get references to articles like that with no effort at all. OckRaz talk 17:10, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
PS: That outdent thingy is cool.OckRaz talk 17:11, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Then why not create an article on the "Recurrent implantation failure" if that is the term being used? Perhaps you could even have contragestion link to that article. The most popular term is the correct choice for the article title. If you say that "recurrent implantation failure" is contragestion but the source does not equate these two, then that is WP:Synthesis because there is no way for a reader to verify the correctness of the information. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:31, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
"Then why not create an article on the "Recurrent implantation failure" if that is the term being used?" I might do that, although that isn't what I had in mind originally because it wouldn't include the term as birth control. Here's something. You tell me if it has value: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3659795 OckRaz talk 18:56, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
There are two problems with this - it is from 1987 and it is in French. It is quite all right that the information is in French, but that it is not a good argument that "contragestion" is the best English-language word. Also, notability is not temporary, so if this is a concept of perpetual interest then there ought to be a recent English-language article on it. If the concept is a historical concept then it should be framed in that way by some other article. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:28, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
I'd like to take some time to think about all of this and maybe go to the library. Can I revisit this with you again in a few days? OckRaz talk 07:59, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
If not me, then anyone else on Wikipedia, and if not in a few days, then I will still be here a year from now. If you want second opinions about anything then feel free to check in with the Teahouse as well. Thanks for the chat! If you find more then let me know. Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:29, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow

In this issue:

  • Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
  • Research: The most recent DR data
  • Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
  • Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
  • DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
  • Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
  • Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?
Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->

--The Olive Branch 18:52, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello

Because you were a participating member of the Deletion review for Category:Gay Wikipedians, I've contacted you to let you (and all others involved) know about and participate in the current category discussion. Thanks for your participation! Ncboy2010 (talk) 17:07, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Article titles

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Article titles. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reference desk advice

Given your comments here I thought WP:ANI#Is the Reference Desk even necessary? might interest you. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 17:24, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for remembering me. I commented in that thread here. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:49, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue Six

Hi! Welcome to the sixth edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!

  • Teahouse serves over 700 new editors in six months on Wikipedia! Since February 27, 741 new editors have participated at the Teahouse. The Q&A board and the guest intro pages are more active than ever.
A lovely little teahouse nestled in Germany from Wiki Loves Monuments
  • Automatic invites are doing the trick: 50% more new editors visiting each week. Ever since HostBot's automated invite trial phase began we've seen a boost in new editor participation. Automating a baseline set of invitations also allows Teahouse hosts to focus on serving hot cups of help to guests, instead of spending countless hours inviting.
  • Guests to the Teahouse continue to edit more & interact more with other community members than non-Teahouse guests according to six month metrics. Teahouse guests make more than twice the article edits and edit more talk pages than other new editors.
  • New host process implemented which encourages anyone to get started as a Teahouse host in a few easy steps. Stop by the hosts page and become a Teahouse host today!
  • Host lounge renovations nearing completion. Working closely with Teahouse hosts, we've made some major renovations to the Teahouse Host Lounge - the main hangout and resource space for hosts. Learn more about the improvements here.

As always, thanks for supporting the Teahouse project! Stop by and visit us today!

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. EdwardsBot (talk) 00:05, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Bhanwari Devi

I have refactored you comment at Talk:Bhanwari Devi#Requested move, because it confused me. I have also made a second requested move at Talk:Bhanwari Devi (Jodhpur)#Requested move and copied your explanation over to that page with the addition of "Support". Please have a look at what I have done and modify as you see fit. -- PBS (talk) 14:03, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Everything is cool - thanks for doing that. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:59, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Esperanza

Hi. The shortlist of deleted pages on the Esperanza page is merely the tip of the iceberg - The coffee lounge had 53 pages of MySpace type chat at the time of nomination; there were games and challenges which don't even show unless you dig through the (now deleted) archives. You're not an Admin, so you can't see the acres and acres of useless fluff which was about 90% of Esperanza; let me know if you want to see it, and I'll email you the Coffee lounge page at the time of deletion and you'll get an idea of what I mean. KillerChihuahua?!? 22:18, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Takes Seattle! September 15

This is a reminder that Wikipedia Takes Seattle! is Saturday, September 15. We will be taking photos from the list National Register of Historic Places listings in Seattle, Washington for the Wikipedia:Wikipedia Takes America contest. And also from Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Seattle, Washington, though there's no contest for that.

We're meeting at Oddfellows Cafe + Bar at Oddfellows Hall (Seattle, Washington) 1525 10th Avenue at 9:00 AM. There's still time to organize an after party as well, but it's up to you to nominate a place and time. Hope to see you there. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:04, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

GAPPS page: Edit request

Hi Bluerasberry-Thanks for creating the article about WGHA. I work for the Global Alliance to Prevent Prematurity and Stillbirth, an initiative of Seattle Children's, and have created a page in my sandbox. I do not want to violate POV. Would you be willing to edit and publish if appropriate? Thank you! CaseyCalam (talk) 21:46, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Done... have we met? You did very well for someone with no other Wikipedia activity. How did you find my Wikipedia page? Did I meet you at a Kelly Edwards social media meeting? If you want to do more on Wikipedia then I want to help you. I am very interested in biobanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:59, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Fantastic, thank you so much. I don't believe that we have met, but I did attend one of Kelly's biobank and communication meetings. I found your page when I saw that you published the WGHA page. CaseyCalam (talk) 23:03, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Well then you must work with either Vaughn at Genetic Alliance or Elizabeth at Baby's First Test. Wikipedia is the world's most consulted source of health information and I feel strongly that it is the cornerstone of increasing awareness about biobanks and genetic testing among all populations who use the Internet as a source of information. If you or any colleague of yours ever wants to talk Wikipedia I would be keen on doing something more. I am tickled that you made the GAPPS page, and it is critical that someone do that, but Wikipedia is popular as a source of information on complicated topics like genetic testing and not because it is an organizational directory. Let me know if you ever meet the person who does educational outreach on "genetic testing" - Wikipedia is the first returned search engine result for that and any other related terms, and a lot of inquisitive people are being lost by this route for lack of outreach and insufficient article development. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:31, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Refs

I add a ref to every line I right. People come and complain that that is overlinking so I have hid some of them. It makes it so much easier when I go back because I know what ref supports the text in question. And people do not at [citation needed] templates. :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 13:09, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

I just noticed and re-added it. I also have had people complain to me about overlinking because I put a ref on every line as well. I think that this is a good practice and I will start doing it myself. I use citation needed templates when most of a paragraph has a reference but some parts to do, so that no one assumes that the unreferenced part is related to the referenced part. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:13, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Invitation for discussion

I invite you to discuss about a threatening message recieved from a registered user saying I have commited copyright violation and reverted his undo on my contribution twice. Infact i would tell you to do thorough research on how it became a copy and paste as i had done the work myself from the external written material resources not cyber and it took 5 days,discussing with users like Sphilbrick,not to disgust anyone but frankly saying is a waste of time and completely useless.you can point out extracts of what is written to show copyright similarities if you like. otherwise if u dont have time leave a yes or no comment on my talk page. --Johnyjohny294 (talk) 05:37, 15 September 2012 (UTC) or leave it completely--Johnyjohny294 (talk) 05:37, 15 September 2012 (UTC)Please keep an eye on Sphilbrick behaviour and asess him and his blocking policy if u dont mind--Johnyjohny294 (talk) 05:37, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

I replied on your talk page. Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:30, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:Bluerasberry/Archive_8"