![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
perhaps there should be an etymology and history section, in the same manner as the page on the word nigger ?
I don't think Jap is an abbreviation which some people consider to be offensive, it is primarily a racist slur which has its origins in an abbreviation. Nowadays it is used almost exclusively as a racist slur.
The page on the word nigger starts by saying it is a racist slur, then moves onto an etymology section.
I may edit this page in the future, to make it the same format as the nigger page, please contact me if you think they should not share the same format or if you have any other suggestions regarding the jap page Sennen goroshi 03:23, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I see your point. I also think that nigger was once an acceptable term in some countries, the term nigger brown was used without causing offence at one time. I guess it depends where you come from, jap is pretty offensive to me (living in Japan) and in Japan nigger isnt really used to offend people at all.
It might be nice if there were some verifiable sources regarding how offensive certain racial slurs are, I know there is one for obscene words but this doesnt concentrate on racial slurs. Sennen goroshi 14:20, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Sorry! I had am emotional reaction. That is the only time I have reverted a page in 27,000+ edits on Wikipedia, other than removing unquestioned vandalism or self-reverting because of a mistake. I was just very hurt that you removed the names, since other names are on there with fewer edits. I read the rules carefully on the page before I added the names. There was no mention of an edit limit. But I have realized for a long time that things are arbitrary here. It is your decision to allow other editors to be listed with fewer edits and not mine. So be it. It is your page. Regards, -- Mattisse 16:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
If there is a rule, then enforce it for everyone. For some reason you removed my entries while allowing others to be added before and after mine that had less that 1000 edits. -- Mattisse 21:47, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, Cúchullain; I'm quite partial to it. :) María ( críticame) 12:09, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
We've edited the same articles before, and I saw you post on Maria's talk page, so I figured I should drop this note here too. Me and a few other people, we're trying to get next year's Wikimania to Atlanta, and we're asking people if they can help, whether it be in online capacities or actually to help with preparation, setup and staffing next summer in Atlanta. Whatever you can do is appreciated. If you can do something, go to "Southeast team" about halfway down the page, click the link, and sign your name to "outside Atlanta." Here's the generic template I've been dropping on people's pages, which may or may not apply to you personally (it was originally geared toward Georgia contributors). Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 23:40, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi! I noticed your involvement on U.S. South-related articles, categories and WikiProjects, and I wanted to let you know about a bid we're formulating to get next year's Wikimania held in Atlanta! If you would like to help, be sure to sign your name to the "In Atlanta" section of the Southeast team portion of the bid if you're in town, or to the "Outside Atlanta" section if you still want to help but don't live in the city or the suburbs. If you would like to contribute more, please write on my talk page, the talk page of the bid, or join us at the #wikimania-atlanta IRC chat on freenode.org. Have a great day!
P.S. While this is a template for maximum efficiency, I would appreciate a note on my talk page so I know you got the message, and what you think. This is time-sensitive, so your urgent cooperation is appreciated. :)
Some people are selective they would like to see only lists of their own domination, what do u think does this list warrant deletion or should we let it stay? [1]-- יודל 13:47, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
So i tried to update the ref tags with more info like you requested on the discussion page and somehow it got all messed up in the ref list at the bottom of the page.... uhh what the hell happened??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by CrazyRob926 ( talk • contribs) 00:43, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Jacksonville, Florida has received some heavy editing recently. Would you please read over the article and make any necessary changes. Thanks. -- Jreferee ( Talk) 19:05, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Sir Gawain is now up for GA status. Wrad 03:54, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
You ain't the boss here. ANd i have just as much right to edit here as you do. Since when do you get the high and mighty desire to decide what's right and wrong around here? I'm a huge James Gunn fan. So I'm not out to harm the guy. But I'm a bigger wikipedia fan. Hence, I looked into your little edit war. It seems this is all about some quote. Well... according to wiki, a direct quote is preferred over your intrepretations of the quote. Your intrepretation is not NPOV. But a quote is NPOV. So stop trying to decide what's right or wrong. A sourced quote is superior to your opinion about it. If you don't like it, then find a quote that counters it. Otherwise, it's stays. K? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ogabadaga ( talk • contribs) 16:32, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
You've already violated the 3RR rule on the James Gunn article. Please be more careful in the future or you will be reported. Jauerback 20:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Here is the quote from the swamp outlaws: DESCRIPTION OF THE OUTLAWS
HENRY BERRY LOWERY
Henry Berry Lowery, the leader of the most formidable band of outlaws, considering the smallness of its numbers, that has been known in this country, is of mixed Tuscarora, mulatto, and white blood, twenty-six years of age, five feet nine inches high and weighing about 150 pounds.
He has straight black hair, like an Indian: a dark goatee, and a beard graceful in shape, but too thin to look very black. His face slopes from the cheek bones to the tip of his goatee, so as to give him the Southern American contour of physiognomy; but it is lighted with eyes of a different color--eyes of a grayish hazel--at times appearing light blue, with a drop of brown in them, but in agitation dilating, darkening, and, although never quite losing the appearance of a smile, yet in action it is a smile of devilish nature.
His forehead is good and his face and expression refined--remarkably so, considering his mixed race, want of education and long career of lawlessness.
A scar of crescent shape and black color lies in the skin below his left eye, said to have been made by an iron pot falling upon him when a child.
His voice is sweet and pleasant, and in his manner there is nothing self-important or swaggering. He is not talkative, listens quietly, and searches out whoever is speaking to him like a man illiterate in all books save the two great books of nature, and human nature above all.
[p.13] The color of his skin is of a whitish yellow sort, with an admixture of copper--such a skin as, for the nature of its components, is in color indescribable, there being no negro blood in it except that of a far remote generation of mulatto, and the Indian still apparent. http://www.skarorehkatenuakanation.org/files/The_Swamp_Outlaws.htm -- Roskerah 02:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Further to our edit conficts in the aforecited article, I have employed
præternatural instead of the close-cognate supernatural for specific reasons:
Namaste in
agape
Walking my talk in
Beauty
B9 hummingbird hovering (
talk •
contribs) 00:42, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
I hope we don't get into a silly situation over this, but please look at [2] Ghmyrtle 07:07, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Image-Fountain of Youth St Augustine.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. SmileToday☺( talk to me , My edits) 16:28, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello - please stop undoing my addition of a relevant (NOT SPAM) external website on the Yezidi people and their traditions. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mercurius anonymous ( talk • contribs) 16:33, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Huh? On the James Gunn page I added a known fact well documented by the press about his first film. If you are a filmmaker, and your first film was a box office bomb, then that is certainly worth mentioning. Dozens of sources back it up. If you don't like it, then we should probably remove the part of the article that praises Gunn for having an 84% favorable rotten tomatoes rating. Or should we? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxador ( talk • contribs) 03:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm inclined to agree with you about possible sockpuppetry. The refuters are all lined up at the door. Not to mention what seems to be an attempt to write differently. I just looked at Fearedhallmonitor's previous talk page contributions, and they're more "normal" than his current spiel. It's why I was inclined to push for the EW citation's exclusion. — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 22:45, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I add www.gradale.com link to External Links area. But you deleted it. This website will reveal the real location of the Holy Grail. Could you undo it. I created this website to give the real information. www.gradale.com link is not a spam.
Best Regards, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferhatkanarya ( talk • contribs) 11:30, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank you , but why do you remove this link? It is only an advertisment of a BBC programme :
The Holy Grail, an episode of In Our Time (BBC Radio 4), a 45 minute discussion is available for listening at the page.
My web site is created to give information and its development cycle continues. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferhatkanarya ( talk • contribs) 20:51, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I have a real problem with this page, and I see that you have commented on it. I prefer " Saints no longer in the universal calender" or something of this nature. I strongly assert that it is still right and proper for Catholics to pray to these saints and ask for their intercession. No where i have ever heard that it is no longer proper to do so. A doctrine allowing "decanonization" would be in direct opposition to the doctrine of infallibility. I hope that we can enter into some kind of dialog and rectify this gross mischaracterization of many of these saints. Die4Dixie 03:07, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello! We are currently working to gather support for our new WikiProject Jacksonville. If you are interested in joining the WikiProject, feel free to come by and add your name to our list of members. Thanks! - Jaxfl 16:54, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
You might want to click on that image and read about its use. As a person of Celt descent,I recognize the cross, and don't have an problem with it.Unfortunately, a person has taken exception to my user name because of an editing disagreement, and has used it to attack me as "racist". The cross has been appropriated by Stormfront( there is an article on them on Wikipedia), and the image has certain legal restrictions in the EU. Thanks for you kind interaction about the saints. Die4Dixie 17:51, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
And thanks for the links to the quides and How To's. I contribute so rarely that I forget the rules and syntax between times!
(BTW, I just looked at your user page. I read The Cattle Raid on a snowy night in Glasgow thirty-odd years ago. it was good to be reminded of it.)
Wes Pacek 23:12, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi Cuchullain,Would you please present your view at
Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Asma_Barlas re the textbook in question
[3] and re the "consensus (edit-war-forced-consensus?)" version
[4]. Thanks in advance. --
Aminz 09:39, 7 October 2007 (UTC) BTW, I wasn't sure if this comment was addressed towards me
[5]. It seems a bit like I am invited to a challenge. Well, to be honest I don't know what definition of "historian" is meant here and I am not sure why I have been invited to such a challenge when there is a reliable source that clearly backs up that statement and several instances of webpages arguing that Aisha was older than nine years old has been provided (e.g. Maulana Ali; The Iranian center for Research in Islamic culture and sciences
[6]; Understanding-islam.com,
Al-Mawrid Institute of Islamic research
[7], etc etc). To my mind, it is not the business of wikipedia editors to prove the factuality of statements from reliable sources; it is the business of the publisher (in this case, the university of texas press). What I can see here, forgive me if I am wrong, is applying double standards; not because of wikipedia rules but because of the subject we are writing about.
This is not the type of source whose reliability is usually questioned in wikipedia. Again, if my reading of
WP:Verifiability is correct (i.e. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth.), I shouldn't be challenged to prove the factual correctness of a source. --
Aminz 10:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Sorry! I was a bit upset last night. -- Aminz 07:36, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
The page just moved to this location and formerly at Colonial history of the United States of America looks to be the result of a cut-and-paste move, made by User:172 in July 2003, of the page that was formerly at Colonial history of the United States but has now been deleted. So, it would be good if you could perform a history merge. Spacepotato 02:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
I thought you removed the tag because it was totally disputed (i.e. both factual and neutrality). And I don't want to edit-war on that as I think you are a reasonable and level-headed editor. Would you please reply to my comment here [8] dated at 10:49, 11 October 2007 (UTC). I am all for talking :) Thanks -- Aminz 06:57, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Please excuse me if this is a stupid question (I'm pretty new here) but what does the "rv" that you recently used in your edit summary mean?
(In our article on Vanuatu you changed my wording of "Vanuatu was first inhabited by [[Melanesia]]n people. [[European ethnic groups|Europeans]] began to settle in the area in the late 18th century and in 1906..." to the rather less precise and more ambiguous "Vanuatu was first inhabited by [[Melanesia]]n people. [[Europe]]ans began to settle in the area in the late 18th century and in 1906...") Alice.S 22:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying both the abbreviation and the reason for the revert (and for taking the trouble to copy both to my own talk page)!
I would slightly disagree with you that these were all national government sponsored and organised expeditions - some of the very first landings were by privateers that would have been executed by their respective (European) governments if they had been caught - but no matter. There was also a distinct feeling of European ethnic superiority and solidarity amongst the colonisers which many Vanuatuans feel is still relevant. Alice.S 21:23, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi there! please check the official page of the San Marino-Montefeltro dioceses [9] ...and there are at least other 6 St. Marinus Nicola Romani 22:23, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Sir, If you've a moment, can you take a look at the edits that have been made today to the Sir Gawain article, and see if you can make heads or tails of it? I am, to be quite honest, at a loss to figure out what these new users have done, but there are several changes that have been made---sections added, deleted, readded, reformatted, etc. And, again being completely honest, I do not know enough on the topic to know what is of value and what is not. I am hoping you will have better luck. Thanks. Cheers! --- RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 01:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I've had my eye on it. I've even tried to strike up a conversation with a few of them, but to no avail. Their edits are for the most part pretty good, so I've left it alone to see what comes up. It's getting so that it needs to be reorganized now, though. I'll have to dig through it to find the good stuff and figure out how to get it all together. I really appreciate that they add good refs with their additions. That really helps. One editor even added an entire section with an odd ref format, then deleted it and added it back a bit later with a ref format in line with what the article was already using (roughly). I really wish they would talk to me. Those are the kind I like to work with, but oh well. Wrad 07:20, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for mopping up! - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦ ♫ 23:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
I have invited User:Til Eulenspiegel to discuss "primary topic-nesss" on Talk:Magog. Cheers! -- JHunterJ 12:48, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
to be back. Thanks for the warm welcome on my return. Pastordavid ( talk) 19:32, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Chuchullain - I obviously have an axe to grind with the McAffee crowd, but it is a legitimate one. If my edits over on their advertisment page in Wikipedia were not appropriate, I apologize. But I am requesting your assistance in also making the article more balanced. The fact of the matter is that McAffee is affecting hundreds of small businesses with their heavy-handed methods. Competitors to my website, or any other, can sign up as a reviewer, give us a nasty review, and get us "blacklisted" by them.
My site is a B2B site. To register, one must be a travel agent, per our Terms. How can an organization like McAffee fraudulently register on our site and then accuse us of spamming them by when we send them the very materials for which they registered?
The article in Wikipedia is a shill for McAffee. Such articles have recently garnered notoriety for Wikipedia. I would hope you would assist in bringing a more balanced editorial voice to the article. Respectfully Rbe2004 ( talk) 19:02, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I don't understand something... the Rhiannon page says references are wanted, but when i put in one, the book THE LOST YEARS OF MERLIN, you removed it. Why?
Howard —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.91.112.132 ( talk) 19:32, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
OK, that makes sense, but then why are the novels THE SWORD OF RHIANNON and MAD MERLIN cited, neither of which seem to deal with the actual legendary personage of Rhiannon?
Howard —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.118.15.14 ( talk) 03:43, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I left a comment for you re the version you were reverting to, long ago on the talk page. Could you please take a look at it. Thanks -- Aminz ( talk) 02:52, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Also, would you please provide more information regarding this edit of yours [10] (e.g. the exact quote). What part of the book is Rubin referring to? And why is it on topic. Can we for example quote Edward Said's remarks ( [11]) whenever we quote anything from any western scholar of Islam? you see where I am going... Cheers,-- Aminz ( talk) 03:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
In the second category must be cited his Hayāt Muhammad (1934), a life of the Prophet of Islam which is respectful of the most reliable Muslim tradition and at the same time conforms with the requirements of modern learning-notably echoing La vie de Mahomet ¶ of E. Dermenghem, Paris 1929, and The Life of Muhammad of Sir William Muir, Edinburgh 1923 (see A. Wessels, A modern biography of Muḥammad , Leiden 1972). After having dealt with the sīra of the founder of Islam, Haykal also applied himself as an historian to the biographies of its first three so-called “Orthodox” caliphs: Abū Bakr (1942), ʿUmar (1945), and ʿUt̲h̲mān (only to be published in 1964, after Haykal's death). Finally, let us mention the account of his own pilgrimage which he wrote in 1937, Fī manzil al-waḥy . In all his work, Haykal appears as a man endowed with a great capacity for work and assimilation, capable of constantly starting afresh...
I can see why you've changed some of the German vandalism, but why remove the link to Tim Pollard's Robin Hood Homepage? It's not spam, is of interest and relevance and is certainly valid as the Wolfshead Bowmen or the TV series fansite. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.219.119.130 ( talk) 12:53, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi Cuchullain, I hope you might take time to answer my query (and please forgive me for asking, but I'm new around these parts) - what was the issue with the link(s) removal, please? Was it because it was deemed commercial, irrelevant or did it (or they all) breach a code? I genuinely believed that people may find relevant interest in a link to the page of a long-term Nottingham based and officially recognised Robin Hood performer, and maybe more so because of the links with other towns with legendary heroes. Kurgan5 ( talk) 22:29, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Cuchullain, I'm afraid (in my opinion anyway :-}) you've thrown the baby out with the bathwater. The intro was not eliminated, but was incorporated into the article according to WP style, whereby the intro should be concise and the article material banded into appropriate headers. I also took care to cut out repeated and irrelevant material, to correct some errors, and to sort the fiction section into centuries so that it was easier to see what was going on. I haven't restored my interim version but suggest that you might agree to my doing so and then I would be delighted to work with you to polish it up. In the form you have left it it is really all over the place. Best regards, -- Smerus ( talk) 17:16, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for that with the decanonized saints.What about a catagory like "Category: Saints no longer On Roman Catholic Liturgical Calendar'? If the "decanonized" group feels so strongly about it. 168.18.163.150 ( talk) 22:22, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Just saw your amplification of the Doon (lai) discription on the Doon disambiguation page as well as the modifications to the Doon (lai) page. I altered your changes a little because I feel that the connection with the particular Doon de Mayence of the Charlemagne romances is a bit of a stretch (origins and characteristics, differing) though there's surely a common base in Celtic folklore. I left the link with Bayard, however, as I do think that's a clear match. Did Bayard belong to Doon? That's not in the Bayard article and perhaps should be.
Please check out my changes and see if it works. Feel free to let me know if you disagree. Portia1780 00:48, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
I added information about Merlin being a main character in Jack whyte's A Dream of Eagles series, and you reverted the changes stating that this was not mainly related to Merlin. I totally disagree with this since the bullet I added was in the "Fiction about Merlin" section.
For your information, this series tells the story of Arthur from the days of his great-grand fatherup to his final days, and half the series is teld by Merlyn (from the days he was a teenager to the day of Arthur's coronation as High King of Britain). So, can you tell me why you removed this appropriate entry? Thanks.
Help please Cuchullain Arara, Paraíba.-- 201.43.220.88 23:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
So do you think we should bring it to WP:RPP? After all, histories are nothing to joke about. TheBlazikenMaster ( talk) 20:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
I must object you here. The appropriate term would then be saints from the teritory of present Croatia or Italy. Just saying Croatian or Italian is a national definition and at that time there were no such nations, everything was still a part of Roman empire. If you find a more suitable category, you are welcome but those two are simply wrong. Regards. -- Tone 20:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
perhaps there should be an etymology and history section, in the same manner as the page on the word nigger ?
I don't think Jap is an abbreviation which some people consider to be offensive, it is primarily a racist slur which has its origins in an abbreviation. Nowadays it is used almost exclusively as a racist slur.
The page on the word nigger starts by saying it is a racist slur, then moves onto an etymology section.
I may edit this page in the future, to make it the same format as the nigger page, please contact me if you think they should not share the same format or if you have any other suggestions regarding the jap page Sennen goroshi 03:23, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I see your point. I also think that nigger was once an acceptable term in some countries, the term nigger brown was used without causing offence at one time. I guess it depends where you come from, jap is pretty offensive to me (living in Japan) and in Japan nigger isnt really used to offend people at all.
It might be nice if there were some verifiable sources regarding how offensive certain racial slurs are, I know there is one for obscene words but this doesnt concentrate on racial slurs. Sennen goroshi 14:20, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Sorry! I had am emotional reaction. That is the only time I have reverted a page in 27,000+ edits on Wikipedia, other than removing unquestioned vandalism or self-reverting because of a mistake. I was just very hurt that you removed the names, since other names are on there with fewer edits. I read the rules carefully on the page before I added the names. There was no mention of an edit limit. But I have realized for a long time that things are arbitrary here. It is your decision to allow other editors to be listed with fewer edits and not mine. So be it. It is your page. Regards, -- Mattisse 16:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
If there is a rule, then enforce it for everyone. For some reason you removed my entries while allowing others to be added before and after mine that had less that 1000 edits. -- Mattisse 21:47, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, Cúchullain; I'm quite partial to it. :) María ( críticame) 12:09, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
We've edited the same articles before, and I saw you post on Maria's talk page, so I figured I should drop this note here too. Me and a few other people, we're trying to get next year's Wikimania to Atlanta, and we're asking people if they can help, whether it be in online capacities or actually to help with preparation, setup and staffing next summer in Atlanta. Whatever you can do is appreciated. If you can do something, go to "Southeast team" about halfway down the page, click the link, and sign your name to "outside Atlanta." Here's the generic template I've been dropping on people's pages, which may or may not apply to you personally (it was originally geared toward Georgia contributors). Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 23:40, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi! I noticed your involvement on U.S. South-related articles, categories and WikiProjects, and I wanted to let you know about a bid we're formulating to get next year's Wikimania held in Atlanta! If you would like to help, be sure to sign your name to the "In Atlanta" section of the Southeast team portion of the bid if you're in town, or to the "Outside Atlanta" section if you still want to help but don't live in the city or the suburbs. If you would like to contribute more, please write on my talk page, the talk page of the bid, or join us at the #wikimania-atlanta IRC chat on freenode.org. Have a great day!
P.S. While this is a template for maximum efficiency, I would appreciate a note on my talk page so I know you got the message, and what you think. This is time-sensitive, so your urgent cooperation is appreciated. :)
Some people are selective they would like to see only lists of their own domination, what do u think does this list warrant deletion or should we let it stay? [1]-- יודל 13:47, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
So i tried to update the ref tags with more info like you requested on the discussion page and somehow it got all messed up in the ref list at the bottom of the page.... uhh what the hell happened??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by CrazyRob926 ( talk • contribs) 00:43, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Jacksonville, Florida has received some heavy editing recently. Would you please read over the article and make any necessary changes. Thanks. -- Jreferee ( Talk) 19:05, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Sir Gawain is now up for GA status. Wrad 03:54, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
You ain't the boss here. ANd i have just as much right to edit here as you do. Since when do you get the high and mighty desire to decide what's right and wrong around here? I'm a huge James Gunn fan. So I'm not out to harm the guy. But I'm a bigger wikipedia fan. Hence, I looked into your little edit war. It seems this is all about some quote. Well... according to wiki, a direct quote is preferred over your intrepretations of the quote. Your intrepretation is not NPOV. But a quote is NPOV. So stop trying to decide what's right or wrong. A sourced quote is superior to your opinion about it. If you don't like it, then find a quote that counters it. Otherwise, it's stays. K? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ogabadaga ( talk • contribs) 16:32, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
You've already violated the 3RR rule on the James Gunn article. Please be more careful in the future or you will be reported. Jauerback 20:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Here is the quote from the swamp outlaws: DESCRIPTION OF THE OUTLAWS
HENRY BERRY LOWERY
Henry Berry Lowery, the leader of the most formidable band of outlaws, considering the smallness of its numbers, that has been known in this country, is of mixed Tuscarora, mulatto, and white blood, twenty-six years of age, five feet nine inches high and weighing about 150 pounds.
He has straight black hair, like an Indian: a dark goatee, and a beard graceful in shape, but too thin to look very black. His face slopes from the cheek bones to the tip of his goatee, so as to give him the Southern American contour of physiognomy; but it is lighted with eyes of a different color--eyes of a grayish hazel--at times appearing light blue, with a drop of brown in them, but in agitation dilating, darkening, and, although never quite losing the appearance of a smile, yet in action it is a smile of devilish nature.
His forehead is good and his face and expression refined--remarkably so, considering his mixed race, want of education and long career of lawlessness.
A scar of crescent shape and black color lies in the skin below his left eye, said to have been made by an iron pot falling upon him when a child.
His voice is sweet and pleasant, and in his manner there is nothing self-important or swaggering. He is not talkative, listens quietly, and searches out whoever is speaking to him like a man illiterate in all books save the two great books of nature, and human nature above all.
[p.13] The color of his skin is of a whitish yellow sort, with an admixture of copper--such a skin as, for the nature of its components, is in color indescribable, there being no negro blood in it except that of a far remote generation of mulatto, and the Indian still apparent. http://www.skarorehkatenuakanation.org/files/The_Swamp_Outlaws.htm -- Roskerah 02:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Further to our edit conficts in the aforecited article, I have employed
præternatural instead of the close-cognate supernatural for specific reasons:
Namaste in
agape
Walking my talk in
Beauty
B9 hummingbird hovering (
talk •
contribs) 00:42, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
I hope we don't get into a silly situation over this, but please look at [2] Ghmyrtle 07:07, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Image-Fountain of Youth St Augustine.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. SmileToday☺( talk to me , My edits) 16:28, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello - please stop undoing my addition of a relevant (NOT SPAM) external website on the Yezidi people and their traditions. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mercurius anonymous ( talk • contribs) 16:33, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Huh? On the James Gunn page I added a known fact well documented by the press about his first film. If you are a filmmaker, and your first film was a box office bomb, then that is certainly worth mentioning. Dozens of sources back it up. If you don't like it, then we should probably remove the part of the article that praises Gunn for having an 84% favorable rotten tomatoes rating. Or should we? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxador ( talk • contribs) 03:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm inclined to agree with you about possible sockpuppetry. The refuters are all lined up at the door. Not to mention what seems to be an attempt to write differently. I just looked at Fearedhallmonitor's previous talk page contributions, and they're more "normal" than his current spiel. It's why I was inclined to push for the EW citation's exclusion. — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 22:45, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I add www.gradale.com link to External Links area. But you deleted it. This website will reveal the real location of the Holy Grail. Could you undo it. I created this website to give the real information. www.gradale.com link is not a spam.
Best Regards, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferhatkanarya ( talk • contribs) 11:30, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank you , but why do you remove this link? It is only an advertisment of a BBC programme :
The Holy Grail, an episode of In Our Time (BBC Radio 4), a 45 minute discussion is available for listening at the page.
My web site is created to give information and its development cycle continues. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferhatkanarya ( talk • contribs) 20:51, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I have a real problem with this page, and I see that you have commented on it. I prefer " Saints no longer in the universal calender" or something of this nature. I strongly assert that it is still right and proper for Catholics to pray to these saints and ask for their intercession. No where i have ever heard that it is no longer proper to do so. A doctrine allowing "decanonization" would be in direct opposition to the doctrine of infallibility. I hope that we can enter into some kind of dialog and rectify this gross mischaracterization of many of these saints. Die4Dixie 03:07, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello! We are currently working to gather support for our new WikiProject Jacksonville. If you are interested in joining the WikiProject, feel free to come by and add your name to our list of members. Thanks! - Jaxfl 16:54, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
You might want to click on that image and read about its use. As a person of Celt descent,I recognize the cross, and don't have an problem with it.Unfortunately, a person has taken exception to my user name because of an editing disagreement, and has used it to attack me as "racist". The cross has been appropriated by Stormfront( there is an article on them on Wikipedia), and the image has certain legal restrictions in the EU. Thanks for you kind interaction about the saints. Die4Dixie 17:51, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
And thanks for the links to the quides and How To's. I contribute so rarely that I forget the rules and syntax between times!
(BTW, I just looked at your user page. I read The Cattle Raid on a snowy night in Glasgow thirty-odd years ago. it was good to be reminded of it.)
Wes Pacek 23:12, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi Cuchullain,Would you please present your view at
Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Asma_Barlas re the textbook in question
[3] and re the "consensus (edit-war-forced-consensus?)" version
[4]. Thanks in advance. --
Aminz 09:39, 7 October 2007 (UTC) BTW, I wasn't sure if this comment was addressed towards me
[5]. It seems a bit like I am invited to a challenge. Well, to be honest I don't know what definition of "historian" is meant here and I am not sure why I have been invited to such a challenge when there is a reliable source that clearly backs up that statement and several instances of webpages arguing that Aisha was older than nine years old has been provided (e.g. Maulana Ali; The Iranian center for Research in Islamic culture and sciences
[6]; Understanding-islam.com,
Al-Mawrid Institute of Islamic research
[7], etc etc). To my mind, it is not the business of wikipedia editors to prove the factuality of statements from reliable sources; it is the business of the publisher (in this case, the university of texas press). What I can see here, forgive me if I am wrong, is applying double standards; not because of wikipedia rules but because of the subject we are writing about.
This is not the type of source whose reliability is usually questioned in wikipedia. Again, if my reading of
WP:Verifiability is correct (i.e. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth.), I shouldn't be challenged to prove the factual correctness of a source. --
Aminz 10:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Sorry! I was a bit upset last night. -- Aminz 07:36, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
The page just moved to this location and formerly at Colonial history of the United States of America looks to be the result of a cut-and-paste move, made by User:172 in July 2003, of the page that was formerly at Colonial history of the United States but has now been deleted. So, it would be good if you could perform a history merge. Spacepotato 02:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
I thought you removed the tag because it was totally disputed (i.e. both factual and neutrality). And I don't want to edit-war on that as I think you are a reasonable and level-headed editor. Would you please reply to my comment here [8] dated at 10:49, 11 October 2007 (UTC). I am all for talking :) Thanks -- Aminz 06:57, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Please excuse me if this is a stupid question (I'm pretty new here) but what does the "rv" that you recently used in your edit summary mean?
(In our article on Vanuatu you changed my wording of "Vanuatu was first inhabited by [[Melanesia]]n people. [[European ethnic groups|Europeans]] began to settle in the area in the late 18th century and in 1906..." to the rather less precise and more ambiguous "Vanuatu was first inhabited by [[Melanesia]]n people. [[Europe]]ans began to settle in the area in the late 18th century and in 1906...") Alice.S 22:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying both the abbreviation and the reason for the revert (and for taking the trouble to copy both to my own talk page)!
I would slightly disagree with you that these were all national government sponsored and organised expeditions - some of the very first landings were by privateers that would have been executed by their respective (European) governments if they had been caught - but no matter. There was also a distinct feeling of European ethnic superiority and solidarity amongst the colonisers which many Vanuatuans feel is still relevant. Alice.S 21:23, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi there! please check the official page of the San Marino-Montefeltro dioceses [9] ...and there are at least other 6 St. Marinus Nicola Romani 22:23, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Sir, If you've a moment, can you take a look at the edits that have been made today to the Sir Gawain article, and see if you can make heads or tails of it? I am, to be quite honest, at a loss to figure out what these new users have done, but there are several changes that have been made---sections added, deleted, readded, reformatted, etc. And, again being completely honest, I do not know enough on the topic to know what is of value and what is not. I am hoping you will have better luck. Thanks. Cheers! --- RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 01:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I've had my eye on it. I've even tried to strike up a conversation with a few of them, but to no avail. Their edits are for the most part pretty good, so I've left it alone to see what comes up. It's getting so that it needs to be reorganized now, though. I'll have to dig through it to find the good stuff and figure out how to get it all together. I really appreciate that they add good refs with their additions. That really helps. One editor even added an entire section with an odd ref format, then deleted it and added it back a bit later with a ref format in line with what the article was already using (roughly). I really wish they would talk to me. Those are the kind I like to work with, but oh well. Wrad 07:20, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for mopping up! - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦ ♫ 23:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
I have invited User:Til Eulenspiegel to discuss "primary topic-nesss" on Talk:Magog. Cheers! -- JHunterJ 12:48, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
to be back. Thanks for the warm welcome on my return. Pastordavid ( talk) 19:32, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Chuchullain - I obviously have an axe to grind with the McAffee crowd, but it is a legitimate one. If my edits over on their advertisment page in Wikipedia were not appropriate, I apologize. But I am requesting your assistance in also making the article more balanced. The fact of the matter is that McAffee is affecting hundreds of small businesses with their heavy-handed methods. Competitors to my website, or any other, can sign up as a reviewer, give us a nasty review, and get us "blacklisted" by them.
My site is a B2B site. To register, one must be a travel agent, per our Terms. How can an organization like McAffee fraudulently register on our site and then accuse us of spamming them by when we send them the very materials for which they registered?
The article in Wikipedia is a shill for McAffee. Such articles have recently garnered notoriety for Wikipedia. I would hope you would assist in bringing a more balanced editorial voice to the article. Respectfully Rbe2004 ( talk) 19:02, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I don't understand something... the Rhiannon page says references are wanted, but when i put in one, the book THE LOST YEARS OF MERLIN, you removed it. Why?
Howard —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.91.112.132 ( talk) 19:32, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
OK, that makes sense, but then why are the novels THE SWORD OF RHIANNON and MAD MERLIN cited, neither of which seem to deal with the actual legendary personage of Rhiannon?
Howard —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.118.15.14 ( talk) 03:43, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I left a comment for you re the version you were reverting to, long ago on the talk page. Could you please take a look at it. Thanks -- Aminz ( talk) 02:52, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Also, would you please provide more information regarding this edit of yours [10] (e.g. the exact quote). What part of the book is Rubin referring to? And why is it on topic. Can we for example quote Edward Said's remarks ( [11]) whenever we quote anything from any western scholar of Islam? you see where I am going... Cheers,-- Aminz ( talk) 03:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
In the second category must be cited his Hayāt Muhammad (1934), a life of the Prophet of Islam which is respectful of the most reliable Muslim tradition and at the same time conforms with the requirements of modern learning-notably echoing La vie de Mahomet ¶ of E. Dermenghem, Paris 1929, and The Life of Muhammad of Sir William Muir, Edinburgh 1923 (see A. Wessels, A modern biography of Muḥammad , Leiden 1972). After having dealt with the sīra of the founder of Islam, Haykal also applied himself as an historian to the biographies of its first three so-called “Orthodox” caliphs: Abū Bakr (1942), ʿUmar (1945), and ʿUt̲h̲mān (only to be published in 1964, after Haykal's death). Finally, let us mention the account of his own pilgrimage which he wrote in 1937, Fī manzil al-waḥy . In all his work, Haykal appears as a man endowed with a great capacity for work and assimilation, capable of constantly starting afresh...
I can see why you've changed some of the German vandalism, but why remove the link to Tim Pollard's Robin Hood Homepage? It's not spam, is of interest and relevance and is certainly valid as the Wolfshead Bowmen or the TV series fansite. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.219.119.130 ( talk) 12:53, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi Cuchullain, I hope you might take time to answer my query (and please forgive me for asking, but I'm new around these parts) - what was the issue with the link(s) removal, please? Was it because it was deemed commercial, irrelevant or did it (or they all) breach a code? I genuinely believed that people may find relevant interest in a link to the page of a long-term Nottingham based and officially recognised Robin Hood performer, and maybe more so because of the links with other towns with legendary heroes. Kurgan5 ( talk) 22:29, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Cuchullain, I'm afraid (in my opinion anyway :-}) you've thrown the baby out with the bathwater. The intro was not eliminated, but was incorporated into the article according to WP style, whereby the intro should be concise and the article material banded into appropriate headers. I also took care to cut out repeated and irrelevant material, to correct some errors, and to sort the fiction section into centuries so that it was easier to see what was going on. I haven't restored my interim version but suggest that you might agree to my doing so and then I would be delighted to work with you to polish it up. In the form you have left it it is really all over the place. Best regards, -- Smerus ( talk) 17:16, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for that with the decanonized saints.What about a catagory like "Category: Saints no longer On Roman Catholic Liturgical Calendar'? If the "decanonized" group feels so strongly about it. 168.18.163.150 ( talk) 22:22, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Just saw your amplification of the Doon (lai) discription on the Doon disambiguation page as well as the modifications to the Doon (lai) page. I altered your changes a little because I feel that the connection with the particular Doon de Mayence of the Charlemagne romances is a bit of a stretch (origins and characteristics, differing) though there's surely a common base in Celtic folklore. I left the link with Bayard, however, as I do think that's a clear match. Did Bayard belong to Doon? That's not in the Bayard article and perhaps should be.
Please check out my changes and see if it works. Feel free to let me know if you disagree. Portia1780 00:48, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
I added information about Merlin being a main character in Jack whyte's A Dream of Eagles series, and you reverted the changes stating that this was not mainly related to Merlin. I totally disagree with this since the bullet I added was in the "Fiction about Merlin" section.
For your information, this series tells the story of Arthur from the days of his great-grand fatherup to his final days, and half the series is teld by Merlyn (from the days he was a teenager to the day of Arthur's coronation as High King of Britain). So, can you tell me why you removed this appropriate entry? Thanks.
Help please Cuchullain Arara, Paraíba.-- 201.43.220.88 23:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
So do you think we should bring it to WP:RPP? After all, histories are nothing to joke about. TheBlazikenMaster ( talk) 20:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
I must object you here. The appropriate term would then be saints from the teritory of present Croatia or Italy. Just saying Croatian or Italian is a national definition and at that time there were no such nations, everything was still a part of Roman empire. If you find a more suitable category, you are welcome but those two are simply wrong. Regards. -- Tone 20:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC)