Gastrich? Questionable. Harvestdancer 16:06, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Have no fear! I've been a registered member of wikipedia since 2004. I've made many (minor) anonymous edits, as I have a terrible habbit of not logging in. I have no idea who Gastrich is. My contribution to Arbustoo's talk page was in response to some edits he made to the Oxford Graduate School article. A good friend of mine (Jreichard) (70.60.172.222) typically maintains that article though he didn't create an account until recently. Arbustoo, as far as I can determine, is an unwitting vandal at best and a rabid anti-christian zealot at worst. I've removed his "sock puppet" accusation from my user page as I am no such thing. I also removed the sock-puppet accusation from Jreichard's user page as well. I know him personally. Rest assured, he is certainly not this Gastrich fellow.
I'd rather this page NOT degrade into some disgusting USENET flame war. If anyone reading this doesn't like what I've written here please Remove this post -- don't reply to it. --Drichardson 23:08, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- Vandalism is correct. Please stop removing cited information from the article page.[1] And it would be helpful when accusing a user of something to explain what that something is in relation to.Arbusto 01:40, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
- I've never edited the Oxford Graduate School entry. On your talk page other users have pointed out your anti-christian viewpoints. I have no problem with you being anti-christain, but at least take the time to research before you edit. Wikipedia is not a place for you to push your religious agenda.--Drichardson 18:48, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
- Removing your post, on your talk page, would be vandalism. Flame warring or edit warring results in blocking of users, as does vandalism. I suggest you read up a bit more on WP policies. KillerChihuahua?!? 01:41, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
- This sort of nonsence is exactly what I didn't want to happen on my user page. All I wanted to do was ask Arbustoo to STOP editing the OGS entry. He habitually adds incorrect information, misspellings, gramatical errors, and bias to the page. If he would edit responsibly, I'd have no problem with his editing.--Drichardson 18:48, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
- Damn those rouge admins! Just zis Guy you know? 08:18, 9 March 2006 (UTC)