User talk:Wikidudeman/Archive 3

....and thanks for the barnstar! How nice of you. Appreciated!  :-) - eo 23:21, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks for the barnstar that you gave me.GreaterWikiholic 16:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I'm writing to thank you for the Barnstar as well. Seems that others have beaten me to the punch. :) In any case, many thanks for the award. Cheers, Redux 19:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I would like to talk to you in an off-wiki way, msn? - Respond on your talk-page please. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.241.47.175 (talk • contribs).

You can E-mail me if you want. Though I would prefer we have discussions here. My E-mail is listed on my main user page under "E-mail". Why do you want to talk privately? Wikidudeman ^(talk) 05:30, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Sign your name by adding ~~~~ to the end. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 05:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Could you please give me the name of your hotmail since this is an ip. I´ll explain then. --207.195.246.7 07:11, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 128.241.47.175 (talk • contribs

I don't have hotmail. I have an E-mail address at Yahoo. Click here to E-mail me You can E-mail me there if you want. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 07:12, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I noticed you voted twice on this RFA, with identical reasons, so I reverted your second vote. If this was in error, please revert me. Thanks! Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 08:05, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Oops. I apologize. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 08:08, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

First of thanks for the welcome. Since yourself is into bodybuilding I have a question regarding growth hormones. Are the kind of GH that bodybuilders use illegal? Do they have a prescription? I have been thinking of buying this one [7] I found on the net. What do you recommend? Although I am only 15, I have a major interest in building up my size quick and I know the side-effects, and I do workout and diet. I would appreciate your answer.--Wikikidboy 13:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

The growth hormones that bodybuilders use (The kind that works at least for what they are using them for) are illegal in the United States without a prescription. Prescription are limited (or are supposed to be) to people with health problems, meaning that doctors can only legally prescribe growth hormones to people for medical purposes. Where the majority of pro-bodybuilders get their growth hormones I can not say, simply because I do not know. The link you provided is a growth hormone but I would not recommend anyone use any drug simply because I'm not a doctor and I would not recommend you use that specific drug (I would recommend you do not) simply due to your age. There is no way to predict how someone who is not fully grown will react to any number of drugs, especially growth hormones, thus I would not recommend you use them unless your doctor thinks you should for medical purposes. Moreover, I try to keep my talk pages reserved for discussions directly related to Wikipedia articles, so if unless you have something to say related to a specific article or Wikipedia in general I would suggest you E-mail me. I also would suggest you not E-mail me for any information that is out of my field of knowledge, especially that relating to medical matters because I am not a doctor. I however would advise one thing, that unless your doctor prescribes you a steroid or growth hormone for medical purposes (which is unlikely to happen if you don't have some medical defect) you should not use them, especially at your age. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 13:18, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer. That ip requesting your E-mail above was me. I simply wanted to ask you this also and the other thing too, thats why the E-mail request. But just a note its not my real ip, I have an anonymizer program to keep me private since I dont have an antivirus program, but anyway, thanks for taking your time to answer.--Wikikidboy 13:25, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Do you still want me to request an edit be made to that article you inquired about via E-mail? I never got a response as to what the specific edits were. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 13:29, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I will send the wordpad.--Wikikidboy 13:33, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I made a request for unprotection for Brock´s article on WP:Unprotect, it would be good if you made a comment.--Wikikidboy 14:50, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I requested that already and it failed, I don't this will accomplish anything. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 14:51, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Well atleast make a comment, it´s been locked for a month or so now.--Wikikidboy 14:53, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

It will fail with or without my support and I don't see the point. I apologize. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 14:58, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Well I´ve seen your discussions, I can tell ur sick of it, but Im going to try and step in now atleast. One single admin that dosent have a single contribution to that article except beefing with an user can´t decide the faith of it.--Wikikidboy 15:00, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

This page will not be unprotected while still targeted by the banned sockpuppeteer, Verdict (talk · contribs). Note that Wikikidboy (talk · contribs) is yet another abusive sockpuppet of this vandal. --Yamla 16:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the Barnstar. It's my first. :) -- AdamBMorgan 15:23, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 15:27, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you - happy to oblige! --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 15:36, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I have tried to expand the Electromagnetic therapy article with a listing / survey of some of the non-quackery machines involved. If you could, please have a look at the table and edits that I've done there.

Thanks for any references, citations, or formatting assistance that you might provide for that article. Oldspammer 04:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi! Its a good idea. I agree with you. We could combine all race articles into a single page. But, wouldn't it be too lengthy to include, all the available details, of all the races? What do you think? Thanking You, Altruism^{To talk} 05:37, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I see how combining all of them has it's merits, but to stop an absolutely huge article, you would have to delete content, which lowers quality. You could consider a template, which lists, and links all the articles together, making it easier to improve expand and find them. Cheers, Dfrg.msc 06:38, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

See Talk:Nordic theory for my response. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 23:08, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi -- I saw you just moved Controversies about the word niggardly to Niggardly. This reversed a move done in March that had the consensus of the editors on the page at that time. Would you consider returning the page to the "Controversies" name? You can see the discussion at Talk:Niggardly#Requested_move. Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 13:23, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, I see the discussion further up this page, and I see you don't support the return to the original name. FYI, I'm going to open a discussion at WP:RM; and I'll start the appropriate discussion section at the article talk page. Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 13:25, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Several editors thought about the name for that article and made the move to the longer version, as can be seen on the talk page. I suggest in the future you check the talk page before taking such an important step as renaming an article. "Niggardly" already redirected to the longer name. I'm changing it back, with the consensus that we already established, and I invite you to comment on the talk page if you'd like to try to change the minds of the other editors. It seems to me that we all had open minds and wanted to do the best thing for the readers, so you might convince the rest of us. Noroton 16:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, now I see two other editors have made the same complaint. You should have taken this to the talk page. Noroton 17:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Not only did two other editors take the time to complain here on your talk page about your rash action regarding the Controversies about the word niggardly article, but two other editors then got involved in the details of switching it back the way it was. All as a result of your not looking carefully at the article first (hardly any of it is about "niggardly" as a word, almost all of it is about the controversies, including the top paragraph). I've rewritten the top paragraph, just moving phrases around, not even adding or subtracting more than a few words, so it should be clearer what the article is about, but if you'd looked harder you'd have seen that anyway. Try to show a little more care next time. Noroton 17:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Norton, The fact that you had to change the article to suit it's current name means that I was justified in re-naming it to begin with. I was simply being WP:BOLD when I changed the name. I had read the talk page and saw that the only discussions were a few months old and the consensus was only 2-3 people. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 22:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I apologize for my tone. I wrote that when I was particularly angry. I do think you should have looked over the article more before changing the name. On the other hand, I agree that the way the top paragraph was organized was misleading. Best wishes, Noroton 00:05, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Replied at the talk page. I respect your work here on WP, and more than that, I respect you as a person, But I must disagree with you in regards to this issue. Good luck with it, though! Let me know if you want input on anything else, I would be glad to help! Happy wikiing!  DangerousNerd  talk 17:17, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Wow, awesome! Thanks a lot man! WLU 00:19, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the edit to my user page - someone else ended up trying something different (apparently it's a surprisingly difficult thing to do). I'm going to try out both on my Mac at home and see which one chokes the browser. Much appreciated. WLU 20:37, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

FYI, the edit you tried on my user page didn't work on my mac, though thanks for the attempt. For future reference, Rfwoolf's edit did seem to work on the operating systems and browsers I've tried it on. WLU 23:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:16, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Sure, it's on my watchlist. WLU 10:56, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Ask for a deal and the devil has his price - Talk:Anabolic_steroid#Popular_misconceptions_re-write_for_tone and User talk:WLU/Steroids section. I've not done a detailed read-through of the talk page yet, so I may be duplicating someone's old work. WLU 11:51, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I'll provide input when you finish it. Feel free to copy all you want from the original version. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 17:07, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello. I've answered your comments at talk:list of sexually active popes. Michael Hardy 21:14, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I've added it to my watchlist. Tim Vickers 22:03, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Testosterone, great, a page with lots of text but little solid content. My least favorite! Tim Vickers 02:42, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I think it needs a major rewrite. I'd be willing to contribute some time to it if you decide to as well. It would take quite a while for me to do it alone. It's one of the key articles concerning chemistry and pharmacology and seems to be in terrible quality. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 02:44, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the message to Mike33. My concerns about a merge, is that I think that critism should be kept outside of main articles, introduced with a few lines and wikilinked to another mainspace article. This is one of the worste articles I have seen, mainly because it has been feuded over. All I would want to see now is a merger between 3,4,10 well written wikified articles that balance correctly what critics say and what adherents disagree with. I have no problem with editors being protective but statements like I wrote it are unhelpful. Mike33 01:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

If it could be merged into the current article without sacrificing valuable content would you support the merger? Wikidudeman ^(talk) 01:12, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes of course. I haven't made a decision in the strawpoll yet, but would like to see a three paragraph joint entry to be merged first though. Mike33 02:06, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry about Adam, I'm sure he meant well, but he did seem to over-react a little. I think he detected a bit of what he saw as copyright violation and wrongly concluded that all the article was copied from somewhere. This happens more often than you would think! His comments about the biochemical mechanisms section has resulted in it being substantially improved, so his input to the article has actually made it a bit better. Funny how these things work out. :) Tim Vickers 18:37, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I guess so, though now it's taken a lot of my Saturday to make sure the article wasn't deleted and that it's integrity was restored and kept that way after numerous barrages of tags and notes. Thanks for your help in clarifying the Biological mechanisms section, I'll have to add some more content to the History section so it has less emphasis on the United states, It would be great if there were other editors from other countries putting information in that section though. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 18:56, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

As a side issue, I have found in dealing with even very controversial subjects such as evolution and stem cell research that if you discuss an editor's comments calmly and without making any personal comments that it's usually possible to deal with issues relatively simply. Acting in what people may perceive to be an aggressive manner will usually just get their backs up and make everything more difficult. I know you probably feel that the article is being "attacked", but other people might see this from a very different perspective and have genuine concerns about the text. I've put quite a lot of work into this article recently and tried to help as much as I can, however the kind of abrasive comments you are posting on the talk page is not making our task any easier. Could I ask you as a personal favour to please cool it a bit with other editors? All the best Tim Vickers 19:04, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't remember making any personal attacks, I don't believe I did, I was however very concerned after the article was deleted. In the summary he put "Oops" after he had deleted it and I had the impression that the entire article as well as it's history were lost forever. I wasn't aware that it along with it's history could be restored so I thought it was a much bigger concern than it actually was. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 19:09, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's happened to me a couple of times as well it is scary, however anything that can be done by low-level users like editors and admins on Wikipedia can also be undone. As a general rule of thumb, any time you use capital letters for emphasis on the internet, people assume when they read it that you are angry. This is strongly discouraged in places like talk pages and edit summaries. See All_caps#Internet. Tim Vickers 19:15, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I was using it for emphasis. I shouldn't have been that worried to begin with, I agree. However now that I know that deleted pages can be restored along with their history I will know in the future. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 19:20, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Ah, that's the reason why people kept telling you to calm down. People who spend a lot of time on the internet all tend to immediately think all caps=angry. Tim Vickers 19:23, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I spend a lot of time on the internet, Just not in Chatrooms or on internet forums where caps would be thought of as angry. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 19:25, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi, in response to your inquiry on my talk page I've listed some of the sentences I've found where there is inadequate or no support on the WP:GA/R page.Jmkleeberg 12:06, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Since we're switching to inline citations, can you add this instead of the typical ref tag on the draft?

<div class="references-small"> {{reflist|2}} </div>

It makes the list much smaller and may help considering there's so many in that article [8] --Nealparr ^{(talk to me)} 01:46, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 01:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. --Nealparr ^{(talk to me)} 02:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

		The Paranormal Barnstar
		This Barnstar is hereby awarded for bravery in draft writing, courtesy of Nealparr, who didn't want to do it himself and take the hits.

--Nealparr ^{(talk to me)} 04:53, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Wonderful! Wikidudeman ^(talk) 04:57, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

thanks for noting the tools. i see your the one on the brock dusccion. if your an admin or know any you can see that i did a changei want on it so ifyou see it and like it you can just do it thanks... --Rekatj2 23:15, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

sorry i wrote bad there i was talking about the brock lesnar page and on the talk ive noted a change ive done see it out if it is better than the current.--Rekatj2 23:19, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 02:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're having a hard time understanding about my suggestions. I said, in my first sentence, it looks fine. I think it's an acceptable new draft of the article. I'm not militant about having the pseudoscience criticism mentioned in the intro, just so long as it is mentioned in the Criticism section. Other than that, I didn't see anything I was worried about. Looks acceptable. VanTucky 16:13, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Great! Wikidudeman ^(talk) 16:17, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I just caught something I object to: The last two paragraphs (per consensus with Nealparr and Martinphi - see the talk on Annalisa's suggestions) should be removed in entirety. NPOV strongly discourages giving point - counterpoint in the same section. Besides which, the statements about naivety (of both critics and amateur proponents), clearly violate NPOV. VanTucky ^(talk) 19:55, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

With all due respect, Sir, it seems like you didn't pause to even check the Minnesota Stretching Crew article against the one you claimed it was redundant of. They're two completely different teams/topics, despite the similar name. As I understand Wikipedia's policies, there was no basis to put it up for deletion. user:ScreenwriterJeb

It could still be merged with Brock Lesnar or any other numerous pages. It doesn't need to be a separate article. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 21:31, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I am out of town, but should return, & be back on normal schedule late tonight or Saturday. - LuckyLouie 13:18, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I do not think your automated removal of links such as a link for the word "menopause" is helpful. The tool you are using may know that "postmenopausal" redirects to menopause, but that does not help a person who might only see "menopause" further down the page. --JWSchmidt 04:06, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

It was linked additional times, there's not much of a need to link the same word numerous times per WP:MOS-L. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 05:59, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Wikidudeman! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Daniel 10:04, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Great job with repairing the anonymous edits. The person undid your work again. And I reverted the edits. Cheers, Dogru144 14:14, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Please READ WP:CSD and speedy deletion tags BEFORE you use them. Image:AABofficeA.jpg has NOT been tagged as unknown source for over 7 days, which is a requirement for an i4 deletion. -N 15:40, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• Your cavalier attitude towards established policy appalls me. And it is not an invalid license tag, a COI editor probably did take that picture himself. -N 12:46, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

The article seems to have been RR'd at least 3 times today, and more, if one includes a partner IP address. Can block proceedures be initiated? Dogru144 20:25, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

If it's true, report him. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 03:40, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

What do you think of the external links being added by this guy: example? The animations are useful, but it's spammy. I don't know if I'm being overzealous in my interpretation of WP:EL. I've dropped him a line on his talk page but I'm still on the fence about removing the links completely. He's popping them into a bunch of articles, but they are appropriate and useful. WLU 23:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

The animation strikes me as indecent for some reason. It's not that big of a deal anyway. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 03:42, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Indecent? That's an... interesting choice of wording :) You're suggesting the animation is not sufficient to keep it on the page then. That fits with my interpretation of WP:NOT (how-to guide), so I think I'll pull them and leave a note on his talk page. Gracias. WLU 04:05, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for that barnstar, Wikidudeman. A Train^talk 05:43, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I thought it would be best to create a new page otherwise the current Benoit article would begin to get overloaded, that's why I created a new page. Hopefully we'll come to a conclusion with the article now up for deletion. Thanks. Davnel03 08:49, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not saying I necessarily support a deletion, however I would prefer a consensus be hacked out for a final measure as to whether it should exist or not. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 08:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, OK, just wondered. I'd keep an eye on the deletion process though, incase non-registered IP's attempt to vandalise the page. Davnel03 08:57, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Were your remarks in the form of mediation or casual interest?Tcccfriends 17:07, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I came from RFC. Not mediation. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 09:58, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:24, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - what did I do to deserve it? Neil ╦ 15:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Great work on the RFA's as well as numerous articles which I've noticed you contributed to including Professional wrestling articles. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 15:04, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks as well! --Kbdank71 15:08, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Likewise, thanks. I've been her for a while, but I've never been given a barnstar before. What did I do to deserve it? Cool Hand Luke 20:37, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello Wikidudeman, thanks for the userpage design barnstar! Was there anything in particular you liked about my page, or just the overall effect? It took me a long time to get the page to look the way it does now, so the recognition is greatly appreciated! Thanks again! --Kyoko 20:48, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear Wikidudeman, I want to thank you for the great award you so kindly left for me on my talk page. Recognition for my work here is something which I both appreciate, and which serves to encourage me to continue with my work. Once again, I thank you, and I hope that you have a nice day. Kind regards, -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 05:35, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, I was looking for a prettier way to do this, but I'm not very artistic, so I'll just say thank you for your support in my RfA, which was closed as successful. I look forward to serving the community in a new way. Take care! -- But|seriously|folks  09:08, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Do you have more Brock Lesnar stuff like that picture on the talk page? Anything you have from the internet i would like you to give me links to them, thanks.--80.216.144.212 14:09, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

No. I have that old flex magazine but that's it. There used to be a website called "Brocksolid.com" which had a bunch of images and information which you could see. The website shut down about 3 years ago but you can see it's archives through the waybackmachine. Here [[9]], [[10]]. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 14:20, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you i never saw that site.--80.216.144.212 14:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

It shut down about 3-4 years ago. It has some interesting older images and information. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 14:26, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm still wading through the hundreds of changes on my watchlist that I accumulated during my block. I won't get to any recent ones until later tomorrow or Monday probably, but I'm pretty thorough and I will correct them eventually. User:Isotope23 is familiar with the issues we're hitting against if you want to bring them up with him - his comments circa my block indicated that ANI was the place to go. WLU 12:26, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Just letting you know that it ended up as no consenus, and the discussion has been closed. I'm going to try and extend the article with suitable references etc. Davnel03 11:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your participation in my recent unsuccessful RfA. I am very grateful for all of the advice, and hope that it will help me grow as an editor. Happy editing! Sincerely, Neranei ^T/C 11:43, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your support in my unsuccessful RfA. I appreciate the trust you and the WP community have in me; however, this time around things just didn't work out. TomStar81 (Talk) 21:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your support in my successful RfA. I appreciate the trust you and the WP community have in me. Thanks especially for the kind words. Carlossuarez46 22:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

okay bro, english might not be your first language though you seem to speak it pretty well but what I said wasn't offensive, nor mean, just the way he acts. it's between me and him and i'm someone who strives to pacify the community. I just cant stand these people w/ too many edits whose head hyperinflate and they think they can become admin without any hierarchical approval such as how this guy used to be with all of wikipedia and the newbies. take care. Abdelkweli 14:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Telling someone to "Get a life" would be not assuming good faith due to the fact that whatever edit they made, wouldn't warrant such a comment. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 14:40, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

It was not Vandalism. It really means "fuck!" in Korean. It was made for blame Moon hee jun. Break! -> 브레이크!->뷁!. There're any reason to use insult words to redirect. -- Lanism 15:51, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 15:53, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Check this. [11] You see that images and rude words? -- Lanism 15:58, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't know what you're talking about. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 16:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

뷁 is derivative of 'Break'. 'Break' -> '브레이크'(Korean) -> 뷁 -> 쀍!. Moon Hee Jun pronounced it wrong. Since then, the people, hate him, used to blame him. -- Lanism 16:10, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually it doesn't mean "fuck." It's just one of the negative expressions in Korean language. --에멜무지로 (Emelmujiro) 15:18, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

shouldn't the controversy redirect go to the criticism section of the main article, just so that people looking for such an article don't think that info on the topic simply doesn't exist? VanTucky ^(talk) 22:54, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Sure, I fixed it. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 22:58, 17 July 2007 (UTC)