Hi UserJChap2007, you are right that I am from California. My intent is to have this discussion in a more open, and relevent space: Talk:Unitarian Universalist Independent Affiliate organizations. As far as contributing to CUUPS is concerned, I don't know much of the organization. I know who they are, but not enough to add much to the article without first researching. I thank you for your suggestion. In turn, may I suggest that rather than forcing users such as myself to deal with AfDs and the threat of losing information, you instead switch your focus to adding content to the Wikipedia? Sure even watching the recent changes list as a member of the CVU would be more productive. I hope to see you there,    ::OK, I'll talk about the UUA stubs on that talk page.  However, I'm also concerned about your sock puppetry.  I was talking to you as both Canaen and HellaNorCal for a while and was under the impression that I was dealing with two separate people. I only happened to find out by accident that this was not the case: . I shared my concerns above and you have given a completely unsatisfactory response. ::In addition, the fact that you have edited one of my comments thusly to remove mention of sock puppetry from the header does not instill a lot of confidence that you intend to be forthright about this.  Using two separate accounts to edit in the same narrow topic (and especially to create so many stubs in that topic) is fairly suspicious.  I strongly urge you to do the right thing voluntarily and identify the  and  accounts as being owned by the same RL person, as recommended by WP:SOCK.   ::To respond to your concerns about my editing patterns and the nomination of articles in AfD:  ::These are the first articles I have nominated in quite some time.  I only noticed these particular stubs because I had been editing a crappy, POV essay called Unitarian Christianity, whose only purpose had been to show that the UUA and Trinitarians were all wrong.  I am currently proposing that it be merged, not deleted, into Unitarianism, per a suggestion from another editor on its talk page.  Also, let me bring to your attention Wikipedia: Articles for deletion/Starbucks Workers Union.  I don't say this to be defensive, but merely to suggest that someone who is not really a deletionist took a look at the numerous substub articles you created (many of which were six months or more old, by the way and still hadn't been expanded) and saw that they did not in fact convey information, but only a link.  If you had wanted them to not be deleted, you could have written them so that they actually contained infomation and provided reliable sources for such information.  If you could not find reliable sources, you could have waited to write the article until you could find such sources.    :::If you must know, I share my computer. My room-mate and I are both UUs  go figure. We share one computer, and both have an interest in Wikipedia. Once in awhile, one of us will forget to log in with our own account. Normally that would just result in an anonymous comment, but in this case it can result in a comment signed by the wrong username.  :::Thanks for pointing out these things. I admit I do have a tendency to jump to conclusions; I simply have very inclusionary thoughts as to Wikipedia. We'll talk more about it on the relevant page.    == Unitarian Universalist Youth Conferences Article ==  I noticed on your user page that you are interested in YRUU related articles. And as a result of this, I would like to know if you would like to help me improve the article I created on the subject of Unitarian Universalist Youth Conferences.   