User talk:Sam Spade/ - archive/Mai 2005 2

Evacuation of East Prussia

Sam, I need your help with a vandal who keeps redirecting the article to Ethnic clensing of east prussia. User:83.109.129.153 --Chammy Koala 19:41, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Looks like it wasn't vandalism to me, I agree w the redirect, but doing it the way they did ruins the page history. Sam Spade 20:28, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

You left a list of links on my new userpage, and I want to thank you. I'd actually gone seeking that information before my first edit. I found endless paths and branches about the technical underpinnings of Wiki, but was unable to ferret out the underlying precepts and assumptions of the medium itself. I found every detail about the body but nothing on the soul.

Even the links you posted (and the river of information those tributaries led to) only give a vague idea of what Wikipedia really is. In a way, textbooks and catechisms abound, but the axioms and tenets upon which they are based are never really discussed.

In large measure, it seems that those who wrote the new users tutorials and articles may have forgotten what it was like to actually be a new user. Unfortunately, by the time that I have developed the competence required to edit those pages, I will have succumbed to the same fate. An interesting paradox.

Again, Thank You, Kevin Wells 16:26, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

A few examples of nubes "lending a hand" as it were ;) Cheers,

Sam Spade 21:08, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Haham hanuka

Please add your comments and sign your name in the section titled Users certifying the basis for this dispute for his repeated reverts adding Category:Socialist parties to National Socialist German Workers Party, and any other vandalism by him that you know of. Thanks. --brian0918 ™ 21:47, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I agreed w him on those edits, see the talk page. Sam Spade 20:05, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Centre page

The article is I fear still not accurate . The papal takeover was far more than the other editor allows , and earlier. Do see link I put on Pope Benedict XVI talk page . There is much to be done and short of my re-writing simply to protect the copyrights , and you then guarding the expansion - well it'll have to be all you .... and the Kaas page is out of order . are we gonna have to wait for the V ?Flamekeeper 21:48, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC) It's a drag the whole shoot as the differential or POV NPOV out there in cyberspace is schizoid. The state of denial is up to now utter. If the Law-contradiction with its use in humanae vitae doesn't get the response then its just down to our own moral response. That would appear to reside in the question of whether the wikipedia is allowed by default to promulgate propaganda as fact . You and I go back to the Nazi page and think of the state of it ...What else can be the response but to push back in ? Its about the level of rat-catching for thrills -I just left a note on Heinrich Bruning's talk page-instead of the dispute word . Its not so much a whitewash as what Ive called it there-"stripped down history". It amounts to the same , and I can't see anything different to how the Centre Party was or Kaas is. Impasse. Flamekeeper 23:47, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Indeed. Sam Spade 21:08, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is it that from the get-go the wikipedia used hired academic minds to upload from print encyclopedia ?..., So, last year this Pope was saying all over the States that a catholic would be guilty of formal co operation with evil ..voting for Kerry .Plus ca change , plus c'est la meme chose . Does anybody care that if history repeats itself ,then next time the artificial intelligence will step in as victor ? Should we look forward to it - the "king computer" ? I guess the deal is already being negotiated , huh?Flamekeeper 09:18, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Answer to Str1977 censorship on discussion Theology of Pope Benedict XVI . Flamekeeper 22:40, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Brahmin page move.

I put the comment about voting because it's more or less standard procedure for pages listed on WP:RM. I know the articles (Brahmin and Brahminism) were just merged, so I just wanted to make sure everyone involved with the article agreed with moving it to Brahminism. A question, if the article should be at Brahminism, why wasn't the contents merged to that page to begin with? Lachatdelarue (talk) 23:54, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I wanted to preserve the edit history, and besides, Brahmanism was just a stub, whilst brahmin is massive. Sam Spade 20:04, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Schrödinger's cat

I was going to leave this on the Schrödinger's cat talk page but decided it would be better to leave it on your talk page.

I find it very rude that you twice ignored our edit summaries, directing people to the talk page if they disputed the removal of El_C's cat (Meow2), and put Meow2 back in. I am confused why someone who appears to contribute a lot to wikipedia would disregard everything said on the talk page and put Meow2 back in without saying a word.

It appears the image is back up. If you think it should be included in the article please discuss it on the talk page. commonbrick 03:51, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why its rude that i don't agree w you, and I did discuss it on the talk page, as you must know by now. Sam Spade 21:08, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that you don't agree with me. It's that you put Meow2 back in twice, ignoring the edit summaries to discuss on the talk page if the edit is disputed. The second time you tried to put it back in the image was deleted, only after the image was gone did you post on the talk page. You put the image back in the second time on April 30 @ 8:57. You posted on the talk page on April 30 @ 11:11. commonbrick 22:10, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What you are doing now is what I was referring to as rude. Please discuss on the talk page if you want the picture there. The only thing you have said for why you think Meow2 should be included is: "All articles need pics..." The two main points that have been raised are that not all articles need pics and Meow2 is not relevant to the article. commonbrick 22:55, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I obviously disagree, but if you find a better image, so be it. Sam Spade 04:19, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Here it is, my first talk message ..and it's a kind welcoming one! User:Dunemaire (sig added by Sam Spade 21:08, 1 May 2005 (UTC))[reply]

Hooray! Sam Spade 21:08, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Haham hanuka

I left out one of the notable frauds he's currently committing on English Wikipedia. His user page is an extensive list of random Hebrew and English words, the purpose of which is meant to pull in people from search engines. He also committed this act on the Hebrew Wikipedia, and the admins there explained what he did (translation):

This page contained, until September 30, 2004, a list of words whose purpose was to pull in random surfers from the internet. This list could've caused Wikipedia heavy damage, for search engines do not act with forgiveness towards attempts to cheat them. Because of this, [an admin on Hebrew Wikipedia] was forced to clean out this page, and to lock it.

In the Hebrew wiki, this fraud led to his page appearing as sixth or seventh when searching for common words in Hebrew. They didn't take this lightly, and neither should we. --brian0918 ™ 19:21, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that was a normal technique of crappy websites and pornsites. Its not allowed? One edit summary even suggested it is illegal? Sam Spade 21:08, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pandeism train wreck VfD

Hi, I was wondering if you'd care to throw your two cents in on the official train wreck (mostly my fault, I'm afraid) called the Pandeism VfD? bd2412 T 03:50, 2005 May 3 (UTC)

Sure thing, Cheers, Sam Spade 06:11, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :D bd2412 T 09:47, 2005 May 3 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks man! I was here for a while, I really didn't intend to sign in, but someone started to vandalize an article I was contributing to, so I signed up.

Thanks anyway.

Joe - www.jpfo.org

Great, glad to have ya! Sam Spade 06:11, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wot!?!?!? Your brain really melts and regenerates every 30 seconds!? WOW! You're the PHOENIX!!!!

Boy, for a second I thought it was a marinated tortoise! Lucky it ain't the case! Peta would burn you on the stake (or steak?) for that!

Joe - www.jpfo.org

Revision

Revision striking Ben talk and P XII!!! Called for protection ,Sam . Flamekeeper 08:54, 5 May 2005 (UTC) Retrieved the question from the bin , tidied it and placed it on theology (ben ) page .Flamekeeper 06:44, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Germany

Out of curiosity, are you willing to say what part of Germany you are in? If not, I quite understand. Guettarda 15:33, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The eifel. See User:Sam Spade/Info. I see your in Oklahoma? Is it as bad as I imagine ;) ? Its actually entirely possible I may end up there some time or another. Thanks for your polite and neutral talk page presense btw, Cheers, Sam Spade 15:52, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've only seen Niedersachsen - Braunschweig area mostly (which is where my mother is from). I was rather worried about coming to Oklahoma - both in terms of the politics (I've had people walk out of class when I talk about evolution) and the sheer insularity. In some ways its better than I expected, in other was worse. The "no handguns allowed" stickers on the buses and fast food outlets were quite a shock. The tornadoes make me uncomfortable. And I was shocked by the paucity of coffee shops and bagel places. On the other hand, the people are friendly, the strong American Indian presence adds character...and all I have to compare it to is Michigan...I have never spent that much time in big, culturally vibrant cities. Oklahoma City isn't too bad, and from what I have heard Tulsa is an interesting place (though I haven't gotten there yet).

As for neutrality - I try, with varying levels of success. I'm a middle child. Writing something npov about someone you despise (Eric Williams) is both challenging and humbling. On the other hand, I have strong opinions and I do get worked up about things. I still have a way to go. I suspect I differ from you quite strongly politically, but your approach to neutrality (and failures, which attract a lot of attention) have influenced the way I try to deal with things. Guettarda 17:39, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose your referring to Prussian Holocaust? I don't feel I have by any means failed in that matter, altho a new solution has occurred to me. The page ought to be a disambig, due to the previous usage of the term in WWII, referring to the burning of a Belgian library and general sack of the town of Leuven:

The destruction of Leuven and especially its library provoked an international scandal. Amongst many others Sir Arthur Evans protested in a letter to The Times:

'Sir, may I be allowed to voice the horror and profound indignation at the Prussian holocaust of Louvain. (…) The holocaust of Louvain should at least have the effect of electrifying all the more intellectual elements of our country with a new vigour of determination to overthrow the ruthless regime of blood and iron imposed by Prussian arrogance on 20th century Europe.' (The Times, september 1st , 1914).[4]

As far as all the handwringing about usage of the term, the word "holocaust" is greek, and has been used to describe many incidents other than those of Nazi Germany. While it would be far more politically correct for me to allow this, and dozens of other matters drop due to their edgy quality, the very reason for my love of books of reference is the purity and neutrality of information, as clean from propaganda as possible. I am well aware complete success in NPOV is rather an impossible goal, but best to aim for perfection, than for some lesser, attainable mark.

Now if you didn't mean Prussian Holocaust, I'd be very curious as to what you ment by "failures, which attract a lot of attention". My personal politics aside, I'm here to do whats best for the reader, and for future readers, and for myself as a reader, providing them (us ;) factually accurate, cited, NPOV info, or the closest thing to it which I can!

Glad to hear you like OK, if I were there I'd prob be @ tinker AFB, which I believe is pretty close to OK city. Have you seen the horrible news from OK today, btw? I'll say a prayer.

Cheers,

Sam Spade 20:29, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Failures" - actually the mess between you and Felonius was what came to mind. Not failures at NPOV - but it left you outside of what seems to me to be your "self-imposed code of conduct" (probably necessary, since the community cuts you less slack than a lot of people). I realise I am a little sloppy with language - I use a word that makes sense to me in my head, since all the caveats are there (in my head) and then I say it out loud (or worse yet, write it, where all the nuance is lost) and it ends up meaning something quite different from what I intended. I'm a bit of an aspie, I think, but then half the people here probably are.

I stayed away from the whole "Prussian Holocaust" - emotionally I have a connection with that stuff (I have an East Prussian aunt and a great-uncle who died on the Wilhelm Gustloff). My gut feeling is that I prefer it to the wishy-washy "evacuation of East Prussia"... but I know my opinions are not NPOV, they are purely emotional. Of course, the fact that the idea attracts the neo-nazis makes me even less comfortable...not much profit in agreeing with people who feel you shouldn't exist.

Tinker is between here (Norman, Oklahoma) and OKC. You're in the military? Hadn't realised that (though I suppose it's a logical guess for an American in Germany). Where are you from originally? That's one thing that's very different between the north/east and the south/west. Most of my non-greek students are either in the military or have been in it. Most people have lots of relatives who served. Even the liberals have served. In Michigan I was much less conscious of the military - although, granted, that was pre-9/11. But OK still is nowhere near as militarised as Puerto Rico. That was a real eye-opener. Very different to home - colonised people don't feel much need to serve in the coloniser's army. Independence just means that the coloniser is closer to home. Trinidadians just don't feel any sense of ownership of their government. That is perhaps the thing I like best about Americans - they are the first people I have come across who feel like they own their government. It may be delusional (big business owns the government) but there's still more hope.

As for news from OK - do you mean the "Precious Doe" story? Leaves me without words. I have a 15-month old niece. Can't imagine what drives people to hurt a child. Can't imagine the sort of world in which 4 years pass and no one even knows the child is missing (mother and stepfather means there must have been a father). Guettarda 23:54, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, "Precious Doe". On the upside, I've heard the world isn't really getting worse, but rather that were simply getting more news. Either way, the sheer amount of malevolence, apathy, and inefficiency in this world is mindbogglingly shocking. Something must be done!

As far as FM, that actually didn't violate either my personal morals, nor wiki policy. I sent him the note via email intentionally, so as to keep the flame off site. It was a one time, one sentance flame, and one I felt pretty sincere about. A few people have enquired as to if I'll apologise, but outside of what I've already said to him (an apology of sorts ;) it would be dishonest for me to retract the sentiment. I found him to be a very bad person, due to his efforts to slander me, and to force me off of a talk page based on my loving God. Not to be too grandiose, but my theism is something I am far from ashamed of. People who are here to debate in an underhanded and vulger manner, and whose goals within articles are to present an unbalanced, and intellectually dishonest lack of neutrality, to say they are unsympathetic in my eyes is an understatement.

As far as holocausts, I feel very strongly that suffering occurs in every life, in every culture, in every race. Nobody has a monopoly on suffering, nor on compassion. Every race I can think of has been systematically abused by another, and nearly without exception they have in turn abused another systematically (the san bushmen stand out as a possible exception to this last ;) The attempts by certain identity politics advocates to present a paradigm wherin their demographic is martyred, and mine (based solely on skintone, not even the deeds of my ancestors) is to be tarred with the brush of collective guilt, this sort of reasoning is alien and unacceptable to me. In short, things are rough all over, and I can only be guilty for that which I have been around for, taken part in, etc... Personally, I've never persecuted anybody based on their demographic, much less tried to commit genocide or ethnic cleansing. So in summary, airing the suffering of germans promotes an egalitarian interpretation of history in my eyes, rather than an offensive one. I don't try to quantify the suffering, or say one peoples (or persons) woes are more intense than anothers, rather my goal is to give each their place under my spotlight of reason. Very nice talking to you,

Sam Spade 00:48, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Slander

Sam, about your recent comment made above about me:

"I found him (FeloniousMonk) to be a very bad person, due to his efforts to slander me, and to force me off of a talk page based on my loving God. Not to be too grandiose, but my theism is something I am far from ashamed of. People who are here to debate in an underhanded and vulger (sic) manner, and whose goals within articles are to present an unbalanced, and intellectually dishonest lack of neutrality, to say they are unsympathetic in my eyes is an understatement."

You're mistaken. Factual statements must be false to be slander. Considering the absolute absence of evidence for what you say it is your statement that constitutes slander.

Since factual statements must be false to be slander and evidence is something each of my statements about you enjoys an abundance of as you well know, claiming that I've slandered you is a nothing more than misinformation or a lie. Which is it? You're entitled to your opinion about me, such as it is, but you are not entitled to engage in actual defamation of character at wikipedia. So, unless you can cite an actual instance of me actually doing what you allege (and you can't, because I haven't) you should apologize (unlikely) and not make any similar statements about me again; they are factually false, and I will defend myself against defamation by you. FeloniousMonk 09:12, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free, but don't edit my talk page or other parts of my user name space, and kindly take them off your watchlist. Thanks.

Sam Spade 12:25, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hey, thanks for the friendly message. I actually have been reading a long time, even discussion boards and stuff, but just started trying to make some small contributions here and there.--BlueSunRed 23:46, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to hear it! We could use more informed and thoughtful users such as yourself! Sam Spade 00:48, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

HELp SIR

THE MARXIST CHRISTIAN SICKOS ARE BACK AT IT SIR. THEY HAVE HIJACKED THE ANTI-SEMITISM, NAZI MYSTICISM, HOLLOW EARTH, South Carolina House of Representatives AND JOE BESSER PAGES AND THE OTHER THREE PAGES ORIGINALLY MENTIONED IN THE DOCUMENT. I HAVE ATTEMPTED TO REVERT THEM TO THEIR ORIGINAL STATES BUT HAVE BEEN ATTACKED BY THE ANTI-SEMITIC PRO-ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT MARXIST CABAL AND I DONT THINK I CAN FIGHT THEM ANYMORE, THEY HAVE JIMBO WALES ON THEIR SIDE. I NEED HELP. PLEASE REVERT THESE PAGES TO GET RID OF THE DISGUSTING VOMIT-INDUCING POV ORIENTED MARXIST RACIST CRAP THAT EXISTS NOW. SMARTERCHILDTHREE OUT.

P.S. WHAT IS YOUR OPINION ON ECONOMICS?

-SmarterChild3 06:06, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit history doesn;t show you even editing those pages? My opinions are @ User:Sam Spade/Theoretical Biases, have a look. Sam Spade 12:31, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hinduism bashing

I am not a Hindu basher but the dispute with regards to the article guru is very bitter and probably will not go away in the coming months. I wrote many articles about Hinduism without inserting any critical material. Andries 08:59, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

bad faith?

Sam Spade wrote at User talk:Irpen#bad faith?:

Why are you accusing me of bad faith? I am perfectly willing to discuss whatever you like, wherever you like, so long as you are polite. And I havn't commited any sort of copyright vio! I found that accusation quite disturbing. Sam Spade 23:46, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

First regarding the copyvio, the version you persistently reverted the article to duplicated the text from this site. I did not say you were the first to introduce this text to the article. However, even reverting to the copyrighted text is a copyvio edit. Chammy Koala responded there that the author of the site gave his permission to use his text word for word in wikipedia. I take Chammy's word that this is indeed the case and I agree that this was not a copyviolation then. However, nowhere in the article with the copied text the permission of the author of web-site was acknowledged, so I had no way to assume there was one.

Your statement about your being perfectly willing to discuss issues is not confirmed by your edits of this indeed a highly controversial topic. While the discussions were ongoing on its talk page, you ignored them and kept reverting to the version that many users were trying to improve. I see repeated reversions of controversial topics and ignoring the discussion at the talk page as bad faith edits. Please correct me if I am wrong. Irpen 01:32, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

Will do, early and often. Sam Spade 01:34, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to do that, go ahead. However, so far, your edits at Evacuation of East Prussia are notable by your ignoring the discussions at talk page and inability to provide serious sources, if any at all. I will welcome your edits if you start making them constructive. Irpen 03:18, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

Look mr. 3 months, I've been here going on 2 yrs, w over 20,000 edits (#43 in total edits btw). If you review my edit history I think you'll find me making use of talk pages (too often, if you ask some). So in summary, if my edits arn't constructive, God help the project. As far as cites, look @ Evacuation of East Prussia#References. Sam Spade 12:45, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is ridiculous, Sam. First of all, the number of months as an argument makes as much sense as some other claims I've seen you were making. I hope most of your 20000 edits haven't been as disruptive as what I've seen in the pages that happen to be on both our watchlists. And indeed God help the project if they were. I did not say you were not using the talk pages. I was saying you were often making edits either ignoring what anyone but you was trying to say or just unloading a bunch of irrelevant stuff in response. I respect your commitment to Wikipedia and I am sure, so much work you put in less controversial articles made them much better. If you just take a breath and simply reread your responses at, for example, talk:Evacuation of East Prussia you will see the obvious lack of diligence, to put it mildly.Irpen 21:11, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:requests for comment

With the May Day dispute nearly resolved, what do you think you are doing now? Are you 100% positive you are not trolling? You cannot change my RFC! That is no neutral text, but a request I considered necessary, and you are simply not in the position to void this! -- 790 07:12, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

you submitted a duplicate RfC. There should only be 1 RfC per page (or less ;). Sam Spade 12:14, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

seems to be my fault. What is it with May Day now, do you still dispute neutrality or can we return to normal? -- 790 16:08, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have no dispute at this juncture, thanks for asking. Sam Spade 20:56, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Human

The self-consciousness of human beings, their resultant curious and introspective nature, and their dominance over other animals have given rise to attempts to explain human nature in both materialist and spiritual terms.

Religious people don't believe that it is our brains or anything about our brains that gives rise to, for example, the Christian story. To them, God is simply bigger, older, and more important than us. He gave us this story.

What we currently have in the article is a naturalistic, human-centric explanation of how religions originated: we thought them up.

When I bring this up on the talk pages, SlimVirgin replies that if we weren't curious and introspective, then the religious stories would never have arisen. That summary of the origin of religious narrative does not seem compatible with the Christian story. (Or the Jewish, or the Muslim, or the Hindu, etc.) --goethean 17:29, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hows this? Sam Spade 17:43, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Let me think about it. Thank you for your help. --goethean 18:01, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, and question

Thanks for leaving your greeting on my talk page. I have a question: is this particular article (Michael P. Hill) sufficiently autobiographical to be considered for deletion? It's been around since last year. Emiao 01:46, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a die-hard inclusionist, so I may be the best possible person to ask! You're thinking of "vanity page", a concept I personally disagree with. I happen to think that every single verifiable person is worthy of a wiki article, and well worth the disc space. I also happen to think VfD is one of the worst parts of the wikipedia. Anyhow, I gave that article a clean up, let me know what you think ;)

Cheers,

Sam Spade 01:52, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nice, thanks. I personally do believe in vanity pages, but in the meantime someone has recommended this for deletion. Emiao 06:38, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the welcome links

Trouble with a user

Hi Sam,

after some searching whom to ask, I thought that I contact you, as you left me a welcome message, when I first joined Wikipedia.

The user Sarcelles got a permanent blocking in the German Wikipedia about half a year ago: de:Benutzer:Sarcelles. The reason was spamming the German wikipedia with substubs about Chinese towns and continuing to do so after several complaints. He then for a short time moved on to the French and Italian Wikipedias, who complained that he wrote in poor quality and that he was writing in a language he did not know well enough. He then moved on to the Low Saxon nds: Wiki, where he again produced articles in great number and poor quality. He keeps starting stubs and never finishes them. After several complaints I threated to block him for two days if he continues. (I am one of the admins of nds.) He continued and was blocked for two days and was not heard of after that. I just discovered that he now moved to the English Wiki.

he keeps producing substub quality articles like Bochum-Linden
he does not check the preview before saving, e.g. England where he added some religious communities, among them the Latter Day Saints. About that group we have a long article in Wikipedia, but under a slightly different name.

I do not know how to proceed from here. I just want some Admin to know about this situation. Over several months he edited about 1000 of the articles of nds: and I have already spend several hours on checking these articles and correcting or deleting them. I think some Admin of the English Wikipedia should keep an eye on him. This user has already caused a lot of trouble.

Kind regards,

Heiko Evermann 19:39, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is, I'm an inclusionist (scroll up, to my last conversation)~! So unfortunately we don't agree about sub-stubs, deletionism, or the concept of being bold. Sam Spade 20:24, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]