User:Phase4: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 00:52, 23 December 2007 view sourceRlevse (talk \| contribs)93,195 edits sock← Previous edit		Revision as of 22:23, 5 January 2008 view source PJHaseldine (talk \| contribs)1,181 edits Reinsert Phase genesis and add Non-Admin tagNext edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{User wikipedia/Non-Administrator}}

	{{sockpuppetproven\|PJHaseldine\|blocked}}		{{sockpuppetproven\|PJHaseldine\|blocked}}
	==Introduction==		==Introduction==
	This is the Phase4 user page. From ], ] action on user and talk pages for Phase1 and Phase2 was transferred to the relevant Phase4 page. Phase3 was skipped.] 21:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)		This is the Phase4 user page. From ], ] action on user and talk pages for Phase1 and Phase2 was transferred to the relevant Phase4 page. Phase3 was skipped.] 21:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

			==Phase genesis==
			The ] article describes the ] strategy of ] and of its development of nuclear weapons. Phase1, 2, 3 and 4 were sequential tactics of this SA over-arching strategy. Hence where we are now: Phase4! 21:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
			{{AWWDMBJAWGCAWAIFDSPBATDMTD}}

Revision as of 22:23, 5 January 2008

This user is not an administrator on the English Misplaced Pages. (verify)

Template:Sockpuppetproven

Introduction

This is the Phase4 user page. From February 17, 2006 action on user and talk pages for Phase1 and Phase2 was transferred to the relevant Phase4 page. Phase3 was skipped.Phase4 21:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Phase genesis

The South Africa and weapons of mass destruction#Nuclear_strategy article describes the finite deterrence strategy of apartheid South Africa and of its development of nuclear weapons. Phase1, 2, 3 and 4 were sequential tactics of this SA over-arching strategy. Hence where we are now: Phase4! 21:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

This user is a member of the

Association of Wikipedians Who Dislike Making Broad Judgments About the Worthiness of a General Category of Article, and Who Are in Favor of the Deletion of Some Particularly Bad Articles, but That Doesn't Mean They Are Deletionists

AWWDMBJAWGCAWAIFDSPBATDMTAD

Est omnino difficile iudicare inclusionis meritum cuiusdam rei in encyclopædia cum ratio sciendi quid populi referat incerta sit, sed nihilominus aliquid encyclopædiam dedecet

It is generally difficult to judge the worthiness of a particular topic for inclusion in an encyclopedia considering that there is no certain way to know what interests people, but some topics nevertheless are not fit for an encyclopedia.

This motto reflects the desire of these Wikipedians to be reluctant, but not entirely unwilling, to remove articles from Misplaced Pages.