Talk:Obsidian Eternus

"( I'm adding this person's history to warn the furry community that "Obsi" is into forcing dogs into sex and preys on children. )" does not imply a good intent. Is there valid information in this article? --GreenReaper^(talk) 20:49, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

---

In reply to GreenReaper's post, yes, all of this information is, infact, valid, despite the fact that it may seem to be used in a demeaning way. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pyr0t3ch (talk • contribs) .

Some supporting evidence would be helpful. --Douglas Muth 02:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

"Due to their defending of the internet, Ph00kedUp managed to save Yahoo! from Brian's pedophilic tendencies" Ah... I dare-say that Dmuth got a point there, on the "demeaning" angle ^-^ Spirou 03:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I see alot of evidence to support those claims on the article. Then again, I don't know how anybody could word that in a nicer way. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.238.170.119 (talk • contribs) .

Some links would be helpful. --Douglas Muth 03:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Weasel wording hurts this article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.238.175.138 (talk • contribs) .

rm -f blatant_trolling

I could find no concrete proof of any of the claims mentioned. Hence I've removed all those claims, and the real name of the player, until it can be verified that the player intends for his real name to be included. I'm tempted to call it "vandalism" but it seems more intent on creating drama, under false pretenses. So. It goes. 216.41.139.60 17:49, 2 January 2007 (UTC) Edit: Forgot this wiki software doesn't auto-sign.

Sounds reasonable to me. --Douglas Muth 19:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)