.

Thanks for your comment. I have a much better understanding now to why my contents were deleted. Thanks again!-- Plin 21:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, MichaelMaggs! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Prodego ^talk 00:51, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply

What kind of person can't decide if an "Outdoor Nature School" is about Academics, Music, Entertainment...? Its obviously Academics, as Walden West teaches outdoor nature, and also, like the comment above,(what the hell?) your just one person. The discussion page has two people who disagree with you. And only one of them is me.

• I think you've misunderstood the purpose of the tag. It's not there to query the category of the article, but rather to express a concern that the subject matter may not be well enough known (not 'notable' enough) to be included in Wikipedia. I suggest you have a look at what is said in WP:CORP and try to add some text or links that demonstate notability (these must come from independent sources and not from the Company running the Camp itself nor from people connected with it). -- MichaelMaggs 06:57, 8 July 2006 (UTC) reply

You may like to know that I've moved your tests to User:MichaelMaggs/Sandbox, the correct place for testing. -- Qu e ntin Smith 15:11, 14 July 2006 (UTC) reply

OOPS. I certainly didn't mean for that to happen (ie., the Toronto is Hell reference). I should be more careful with the Show Preview vs. Save page stuff. 137.186.248.248 22:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC) PS (Is this the right way to contact someone who says to. I don't really know how to drive, here.) reply

Feel free to copy. It's all GFDL anyway, but very courteous to ask. I used them myself when I started (and some I still need) but mainly left them there for others. Tyrenius 19:25, 29 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. -- Gogo Dodo 21:21, 2 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Just for future reference re [1]: Administrators can undelete things. Cheers! — Bunchofgrapes ( talk) 23:20, 2 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi. You reverted some vandalism but in doing so you also reverted my edit, too. Too bad I didn't see the vandalism or else I would have undone it myself. Could you restore my edit, which I'm guessing was not removed intentionally on your part, so it doesnt count as a revert of your edit? Thanks. Giovanni33 19:49, 4 August 2006 (UTC) reply

• Oh, sorry about that. I think your edit must have been made seconds before I did the vandalism revert. I've gone back into the article and re-done your edit. Thanks for letting me know. -- MichaelMaggs 20:24, 4 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Michael. Its not problem, I figured it was accidental. Thanks, again. Giovanni33 06:23, 5 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Hey Michael.. um I am kind of new here.. but I created that page Harry Potter and the Secret Chamberpot of Azerbaijan, but if I search it I cannot find it. How exactly can I get that to work? Help a rookie out if you can.--Youtube 06:20, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

• Hi. It's still there - click on this link: Harry Potter and the Secret Chamberpot of Azerbijain. (Note the spelling of the last word!). Someone has now tagged it as non-notable, which means it's liable to be deleted soon unless you can add something to show how it complies with the Wikipedia 'rules' on notability - see Wikipedia:Notability. Though the 'rules' (such as they are) on notability are rather vague, new articles are deleted daily on the grounds that their suject matter is not notable enough. You might also like to have a look at WP:NOT. Hope that helps. And welcome to Wikipedia. -- MichaelMaggs 11:51, 9 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Hey thanks for the help thus far.. anyways, you are right, I DID spell it wrong. I could not figure out a way to change the title.., unless I need to delete and remake. Anyways, this page has a related page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Potter_Parodies

That page is Harry Potter parodies. I just took one of them and expanded/still expanding.

Any more ideas would be appreciated.

• Only an Administrator can change the name of a page. Given that there is already a page for parodies I'd suggest working on that one instead and letting the original page be deleted. You can hurry that up by blanking all the text on that page and adding a note on the corresponding talk page (the discussion tab) that you, the creator, would like the page to be removed. An admin can then do it for you quickly under the Speedy Deletion procedures. -- MichaelMaggs 17:48, 9 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the heads up, very kind of you. Fraslet 19:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for using some of your valuable time to fix the typos on the International Rugby Board. There are four or five of us who have been working on it, and it's tough to spot the typos sometimes. Again, thanks a lot mate! Cheers! hoopydink ^{Conas tá tú?} 17:01, 10 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi there, with reference to your (automated?) edits to Falklands War RegExTypoFix Typos: despatched → dispatched (3). Despatched isn't a typo and is both valid and common in British English [2]. Dispatched, whilst technically valid, looks perculiar to a fair number of people, and if it's been deliberately spelled that way and is valid under the prevailing nationality of the article, I think it's a little harsh to assume it's a typo. Cheers. -- BadWolf42 11:11, 11 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi. I totally agree with you, and think it would be much better if AWB didn't do that. Unfortunately, not only does the program think that 'despatched' is an error, it automatically makes the change without being asked. So far as I can tell, it isn't possible to switch off the automated correction of one individual word: it's all or nothing. I will post a query to the developer, to see if we can get this changed. best regards-- MichaelMaggs 13:12, 11 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Here's the post: [ [3]] Hope it does the trick.-- MichaelMaggs 13:21, 11 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for that, great work. :-) -- BadWolf42 13:41, 12 August 2006 (UTC) reply

With most (but not all) articles I edit, I try to keep the opening sentence or paragraph as parsimonious as possible to give a new reader the subject "in a nutshell" as it were. Heaven knows I can't always get it down to "x is y" but where I can, I try to.

Hence, for example, the box format at the top right. If Bodhidharma's name were given in only one or maybe even two foreign languages, then it wouldn't interrupt the opening sentence too much. But four languages plus two transliteration systems? So I moved that stuff to the right where it doesn't interrupt the sentence and the reader can refer to it if required.

It wasn't a semantic or "political" thing as much as it was a brevity and concision thing. If I stepped on anyone's toes, I'm sorry. JFD 20:48, 22 August 2006 (UTC) reply

First, I belong into one of the NPHC groups, so all of them are not "Social," but "Service." Second, if you looked at the history of "Links, Incorporated," you should have seen that I made the page. Thank you for creating more work for me to do. Bearly541 04:03, 23 August 2006 (UTC) reply

It was [ this] edit where I suggested something may have gone wrong. I see you've corrected it now. -- MichaelMaggs 06:38, 23 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Michael! JFD 17:23, 24 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for letting me know about the Zen Collaboration thing.

JFD 16:48, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply

This information came from the letter that Joko sent to the entire San Diego Zen Center which someone from the center sent to me. Want me to post it here? --Qweniden 21:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Please see my reply here Thanks - Adrian Pingstone 14:43, 19 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I've had another go with the photos in this article. It might be better to put some of them in an image gallery at the bottom of the article. See what you think. Espresso Addict 21:43, 22 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Yes,I like that. Really, we need some more text to have something to embed the photos in! Regards-- MichaelMaggs 07:32, 23 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I will check it out for sure! HEL 12:48, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply

Cheers for the note. I will hopefully get some time at the weekend to compose my thoughts. It is a shame that we don't have a larger group of people involved - perhaps it is a valid criticism of WP - we have more people interested in editing on pokemon & star wars than we do on a fundamental science. I have so far generally stayed out of adding to the debates due to my position. I will either post my thoughts at the weekend or try to structure the discussions a little more tightly to encourage others to contribute (things seem to be meandering a bit aimlessly ATM). SFC9394 20:53, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi, I'll try to help too during the weekend, hoping that work will not get me overloaded... cheers Tatonzolo 07:25, 12 October 2006 (UTC) reply

"entirely fictional character" is 202.20.5.206's [4] choice of words, not mine.

My initial [5] version of the intro read "Bodhidharma is credited as the founder of the Zen school of Buddhism" because it hewed the closest to the source I was citing.

I conceded the inclusion of "legendary" after a brief edit war with Kennethtennyson. [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

My citation of Dumoulin was intended to highlight that the written records and oral traditions about Bodhidharma are primarily hagiographical rather than historical.

It was 202.20.5.206 who characterized Dumoulin as a "Western" scholar who "argues that Bodhidharma was an entirely fictional character".
JFD 01:08, 17 October 2006 (UTC) reply

OK, thanks, I'll have a go at fixing it in the next couple of days.-- MichaelMaggs 06:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC) reply

In the article on Thermae Bath Spa, is it really true that "It is the only natural thermal spa in the United Kingdom" ? I have posted on the discussion page for Thermae Bath Spa. I didnt change the text of the article because there might be something that I am missing or I do not understand.-- Filll 14:09, 27 October 2006 (UTC) reply

The claim is made here, though in view of the Buxton article you found it appears that it's not totally accurate. I have removed the sentence. -- MichaelMaggs 14:45, 27 October 2006 (UTC) reply

For your information.... Bath has the only naturally occurring HOT springs in the UK. Cheltenham, for example has naturally occurring springs but these come out of the ground cold and have to be heated up. In Bath they actually have to be cooled down to be usable! You can google this kind of information quite easily, but yes, Bath has the only naturally occurring hot springs in the UK - others can be found elsewhere in Europe.

I did some investigation and put a link to UK geothermal springs on the Bath article page.-- Filll 00:47, 2 November 2006 (UTC) reply

Hey! I saw that you created a new video game related article- consider joining the Computer and Video Games WikiProject! I have added your article to the list of new articles, and attributed it to you. -- PresN 14:42, 9 November 2006 (UTC) reply

you've come into the middle of a conversation, Michael. 2 years ago, there was this huge discussion where some wikipedians were stateing that bodhidharma came from india through southeast asia to china and spread kalaripayattu (an indian martial art) that ended up being a progenitor of shaolin kung fu. after much discussion, we wrote this article so that we wouldn't have to go through the arguments again. They were quoting a hindu or random websites online. they were using those claims on their article. Kennethtennyson 18:22, 22 November 2006 (UTC) reply

Looks like they still are. Many of the cites in the Indian influence on Chinese martial arts article are dross. -- MichaelMaggs 18:27, 22 November 2006 (UTC) reply

This article makes rather little sense. For a start, where does the following text come from that appears immediately after the first heading? No source is quoted, and it's unclear what the reader is supposed to make of it. How does it link in with the discussion following (if at all)? Is the text meant to set out the disputed claim, which is then addressed line by line? If so, who made the claim? If the disputed claim itself can't be sourced (eg if it was just made by an editor) it shouldn't be in Wikipedia at all, which makes the whole article rather pointless.

Historical texts speak of Bodhidharma, the legendary founder of Chan Buddhism, a Brahmin born in Kacheepuram (sic) in Tamil Nadu, in 522 A.D. arriving at the courts of the Chinese Emperor Liang Nuti, (sic) of the 6th dynasty, as the person responsible for bringing Kalaripayattu from India to China.

He taught meditative and physical exercises to the chinese monks so that they could defend themselves against the frequent attacks of bandits.

-- MichaelMaggs 18:01, 22 November 2006 (UTC) reply

That unsourced text in italic ultimately traces back to this edit.
The article in its current state is a meticulously sourced point-by-point rebuttal.

Both were originally part of the Kalarippayattu page and were split off by Kjrajesh. [12]
JFD 18:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC) reply

I know. wikipedia needs some way for users who have been on for 1 year at least to place POV tags or disputed tags without them being removed for 24 hours. many people have tried multiple times to place tags on various articles but they keep on getting removed by biased people ie freedom skies Kennethtennyson 18:32, 22 November 2006 (UTC) reply

I don't want to muck up anything you've been working on for ages, but it's strange that most of the careful refutations appear in the article Bodhidharma, the martial arts, and the disputed India connection which, by its title, sounds less authoritative than Indian influence on Chinese martial arts. The latter is stuffed full of violently POV statements. Would it not be possible to tackle the main article and to let Bodhidharma, the martial arts, and the disputed India connection die? Having two sound like a POV fork. The refutations also appear to be in reply to some statements that have not in themselves been sourced, which suggests to me I could add some citation-needed tags. But I'm not fully aware of the history here, as may be clear ... -- MichaelMaggs 18:52, 22 November 2006 (UTC) reply

unfortunately, i don't think freedom skies will accept any changes to his article. also the wording "indian influence on chinese martial arts" is sort of POV. What influence are we speaking of? religious vs. actual martial arts influence? in terms of martial arts influence, no one has been able to tie anything. Religious influence you can state if you were willing to use buddhism but then it only applies to one martial arts - shaolin kung fu. Our article has been there for years - before freedom skies came this year. Freedom skies created his article as a platform for his views. If you wish, editing "indian influence on chinese martial arts" might be better. Although i have a funny idea freedom skies will revert your changes. Kennethtennyson

Your interactions with me have been few. Yet you assume hostility based on the opinion of others. Kindly assume good faith, Michael. Freedom skies ( send a message to Freedom skies) 11:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC) reply

No hostility assumed; simply asking that you avoid ad hominem attacks and that you use edit summaries. -- MichaelMaggs 11:20, 23 November 2006 (UTC) reply

Thank You. My actions have their justifications, as drastic as they may seem to you. Kindly judge me on your own personal basis and not on the arguments of others I have to singularly deal with. Freedom skies ( send a message to Freedom skies) 11:24, 23 November 2006 (UTC) reply

In addition if you have any suggestions regarding the final version on Bodhidharma please forward them to me. I will do the same shortly. Regards. Freedom skies ( send a message to Freedom skies) 11:30, 23 November 2006 (UTC) reply

Ta Ma, Daruma, Dhamo, Buddhadharma are names of Bodhidharma in various languages. My friend, there are two versions about Bodhidharma. The first version is the traditional one, which is very often cited in general by relevant authoritties. The second version is the modern school of conflicting theories, which almost never cited when the history of Kung Fu is in question.

BBC and NYT have endored the traditional claims. They have built the articles on endorsement of the traditional claims not on the rejection of it.

You have to understand that the other article ( Disputed Indian origins of East Asian martial arts) which claims to have citations which dismiss the Indian influence has many citations which actually endorse the influence and trace the origins of martial arts according to it, working on it elaborately, establishing connections. I have refrained from even editing that article based on a tactit understanding with JFD that we agreed on not too long ago (you'll find me mentioning it here and mentioning that I did not "mess" with "his" article here . I specifically point the article to be Disputed Indian origins of East Asian martial arts) . Kenny does not honor it. I still honor the understanding and do not interfere with Disputed Indian origins of East Asian martial arts.

This is an article which has many unsourced NPOV statements and flawed citations. They essentially subscribe to a minority side, collecting refernences for which is next to impossible. If I very legitimately disputed their citations their list will almost be wiped out, as will a lot of unsourced points from the article itself. References of any kind in my case are plentiful though. I can always obtain more.

My version is essentialy the majority held version. The citations which I have mentioned here are just the tip of the iceberg. This list took me just about an hour to collect and another one to code in proper pattern. I can get a list of authors thrice as large in a couple of hours, a list of martial artist twice as large, a list of nationally remowed BJJ instiutions crediting Indian influence and more citations from more reputable media publications from around the world. In case of an edit war more than half of the citations from Disputed Indian origins of East Asian martial arts will be completely eliminated. I have already discussed this with Kenny when we were on more civil terms.

Kindly also note that the Indian influence article has what one citation from someone of an Indian heritage, his case being particularly intresting I added him. I went out of my way to not mention any author from India on this. JFD's article mentions Chinese people and people who have contributed to the Chinese works. If I dedicated a section to the newspapers and institutions from India on this the list of people involved in supporting my claims would swell manifold. However this is not my intention.

Kindly let the citations stay. This is a request for I am involved in too many projects of now to compile new lists and the old lists serve their purpose of endorsing the traditional claims and rejecting the works of authors writing newer conflicting revisionist theories.

Thank You.

Freedom skies ( send a message to Freedom skies) 16:14, 24 November 2006 (UTC) reply

Kindly forgive the message in a non-condensed form full of spelling errors. I have gone on record on saying that I will remain unassisted from a "not-so-little-cabal" of my own (with whom I have had no discussions and even little interaction during the past few days) on this issue on principle here . A conviction the following of which has come at a heavy price of high taxation and exhaustion, leading to me even overlooking the 3RR on ocassions. Freedom skies ( send a message to Freedom skies) 16:59, 24 November 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your efforts to find a solution for the Bodhidharma issue. I don't think the cabal will listen though.

I direct your attention to JFD and Kennethtennyson, who closely follow me committing harrasment under WP:stalking. Kindly observe this, this, this, this and I can provide a lot more.

If you take a look into the record you'll see that when I make an edit into any article first. The group follows me there and stalks me. Kennethtennyson has contributed next to nothing in any actual article in which he stalks me. All he does is, walk in here, violently revert and then log out.

Kindly note Kenny tried to fake the content in the Encyclopedia Brittanica citation , remove a citation and a section without any explaination whatsoever , removes an entire section without one word of explaination and fraduelently claims that the citation has anything to do with Sengchou and Huiguang .

Judging by the cabal's recent actions i also see that the coming days hold excessive exhaustion for me. This is just the tip of the iceberg . I told you all this because I want to shed a light on the cabal's intentions.

Extending regards.

Freedom skies ( send a message to Freedom skies) 21:49, 24 November 2006 (UTC) reply

User:Clamster5/Invite Clamster5 23:47, 24 November 2006 (UTC) reply

You might have taken this page off of your watch list. If this is so, I ask you to have a look at the latest ploy to end the dispute, and perhaps cast your vote. –M ^T 19:16, 25 November 2006 (UTC) reply

I accomadate them due to excessive exhaustion. Thrice, more perhaps and yet I am the stubborn, combative, not reasonable one? I have been bending head over heals when a long drawn out argument, complete from assistence from my own cabal would have surely exposed the flaws in the Han cabal's arguments and would have gotten the admins to interfere and mediate. Kindly do not press for more accomadations as I have made too many already and am too tired to singlehandedly work in so many directions. I bet JFD is going to be full of glee when he reads this.

Anyways, I extend my best regards as always.

Freedom skies ( send a message to Freedom skies) 16:06, 26 November 2006 (UTC) reply

Kindly note my friend, the reason behind the Kanchipuram mention:

The Dharma Master was a South Indian of the Western Region. He was the third son of a great Indian King....His ambition lay in the Mahayana path, and so he put aside his white layman's robe for the black robe of a monk....Lamenting the decline of the true teaching in the outlands, he subsequently crossed distant mountains and seas, traveling about propagating the teaching in Han and Wei.

The son of a king resides in the capital, The capital of the pallava empire was kanchipuram. a very general idea of what I mean can be found here

---

Observe from the following correct paragraph, my friend, the misinterpretation of the Yang Xuanzhi quote that places him in Persia:

Tradition holds that Bodhidharma's chosen sutra was the Lankavatara Sutra, a development of the Yogacara or "Mind-only" school of Buddhism established by the Gandharan half-brothers Asanga and Vasubandhu.

Historian Jeffrey L. Broughton, describes Yang Xuanzhi's account Bodhidharma which appears to indicate towards peoples of Persia. However, India at the time was under the influence of the Kushan Empire and the subsequent influence of the inheritors of the Kushan empire, Kidarite Kingdom. This kingdom encompassed a substantial portion of the Central Asian reigon and included people of Central Asian Indo Iranian ethnicity. Bodhidharma speaks of his time in India in this early mention as well.

In addition he has half brothers from the ancient INDIAN kingdom of Gandhara, if he was not an Indian how did he have half brothers and a Sanskrit name?. My Mahaparivara (clan) too, traces it's lineage back to Gandhara and I am one of Indo Iranian ethnicity as well. [13]

Misrepresentation of facts by the Han cabal?

Do you not think that the historians across the world are privy to this and that's why I can find abundant citations endorsing my claim ?

---

My knowledge that they have this on their agenda and then pretend to have the cheek to call me every derogatory thing under the sun from a POV pusher to a militant is what feuls my outrage on this.

---

I don't intend to even bring that up though. I have been known to be very steadfast on tactit understandings and I will not violate first. I will though in case an edit war is imposed upon me by the cabal but never pre-emptively.

---

I pay only for being alone. The cabal has so many members that they asign Kennethtennyson for unexplained reverting and JFD takes care of other things ensuring that I am exhausted and demoralized to submission.

---

Freedom skies ( send a message to Freedom skies) 17:40, 26 November 2006 (UTC) reply

How is my edit to Eating vandalism? It is no more vandalism than the passage reading: While the process of eating varies from species to species, in humans eating is performed by placing food in the mouth and then swallowing it, with chewing often occurring between these actions. Eaten food is then digested. 66.214.220.134 19:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC) reply

It was the rather self-evident caption that caught my attention, and I'm sorry if I Hit 'revert' too quickly. -- MichaelMaggs 19:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC) reply

Hey, I mean no disrespect to the work you do on here, but your recent message "thank you for experimenting..." was not needed. I was merely trying to revert someone elses vandalism on the page. If you look at my edits, you will see that I do this frequently, and this may just have been an error on my part. jstupple7 19:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC) reply

No problem; thanks for letting me know. -- MichaelMaggs 19:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC) reply

If you read "Sumit" you will see that it contains unsourced statements; hence, I flagged them. Please reply here, not on my userpage. Thanks. 38.100.34.2 23:24, 28 November 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for letting me know. The statements you've flagged look like clear vandalism, though, and I've removed them.

hi, i actually did not try to experiment with this article, i just translated it into german for the german wp. and whislt translating, i discovered that the link to Archangel (religion) ist misplaced and it should say Archangelsk (the city in russia). an i placed the link to the german article. i do not have an account on the english wp. if you want to take a look at my work in the german wp, look for "Benutzer:John Tuttle" (without the "").

greetings from Cologne, Germany, -- 81.173.248.137 22:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC) reply

Ok,sorry. Thanks for letting me know. -- MichaelMaggs 22:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC) reply

no problem, man. glad i could help. -- 81.173.248.137 22:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC) reply

Replied. — Doug Bell  ^talk 01:48, 30 November 2006 (UTC) reply

Replied again. — Doug Bell  ^talk 18:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC) reply

And again. — Doug Bell  ^talk 10:51, 2 December 2006 (UTC) reply

Do you want to move forward on this? It's been a few days since I last replied. To create a template I will need some requirements of what fields you'd like to include, is this to go on the talk page or in the article (usually would be a talk page thing), etc. Please respond on my talk page with any information about the template (or a link to where this is discussed). — Doug Bell  ^talk 21:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC) reply

Yes, sorry. I hadn't forgotten, but have been a bit busy with RL for the last few days. I'd like to give it a bit more thought before deciding, but I'll try and get back to you by the weekend. Many thanks for reminding me. -- MichaelMaggs 22:12, 5 December 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the heads up! I'll be watching. -- Gphoto ^talk 14:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC) reply

Thought you might want to know about this, it has the same goals as Wikipedia:WikiProject Photography, but is better organized. -- Gphoto ^talk 18:35, 30 November 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi Michael,

Thanks for the comment. I did not see Template:Reqphotoin before I created the page. I agree that there are a number of different photography efforts scattered around and we really need to do something to tie them together. At the very least I think it would be a good idea to a link to Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in x for every location x in WP:PMS. Maybe we can modify the template to say something like "A photograph could greatly improve this article. If you live in {{{1}}} and would like to help Wikipedia by taking photos for this and other articles, please visit Wikipedia:Photo Matching Service"

Thanks again, 21:44, GabrielF 21:46, 30 November 2006 (UTC) reply

That's odd. You reverted an edit I made at Taiwanese people. Was it automatic? I moved content to Taiwan's identity crisis where it was more relevant. — Nrtm81 11:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC) reply

My mistake - sorry. -- MichaelMaggs 11:40, 1 December 2006 (UTC) reply

lol, no problemo :) — Nrtm81 11:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC) reply

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Nicholas II of Russia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. MichaelMaggs 19:49, 8 December 2006 (UTC) reply

Excuse me, are you saying that I vandalized the article?-- Barbatus 19:53, 8 December 2006 (UTC) reply

That last edit added the words "he married me!". Was that a mistake? -- MichaelMaggs 19:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC) reply

Aha. I've tried to retrace back to the good version, but, apparently ... Anyway, I've just placed a request for "semi-protection" of the article.-- Barbatus 19:59, 8 December 2006 (UTC) reply

Ok, no problem. I think we both tried to revert at the same time. Seems to happen soemtimes. regards. -- MichaelMaggs 20:01, 8 December 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi Michael. Thank for the 'heads-up' on Black Rat eradicaion on Lundy I will also correct my edit to the Shiant Isles page accordingly (the only other place in the UK where Rattus ratts can be found.) Dhmellor 07:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC) reply

Kindly take a look here and vote if you support this article being merged into Bodhidharma, the martial arts, and the disputed India connection. Cheers and a Happy New Year. _{Freedom skies|  talk}  06:28, 31 December 2006 (UTC) reply

Actually, I removed that line as early as 16:33, 13 January 2007. Certain editors (JFD included) insisted on putting that line back since it represented Chinese Taoism. I'm almost completely inactive these days and you have users like A Ramachandran who'll revert to Chinese Taoism as a founding influence for some reason, at all costs. _{Freedom skies|  talk}  05:14, 20 January 2007 (UTC) reply

JFD reverted it again to the Taoist version, Chinese nationalism ? _{Freedom skies|  talk}  17:57, 20 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Freedom skies:

• "The science of medicine originates in Ancient India" [14]

• "Ancient India is widely considered to be the origin of martial arts" [15]

• "if the archealogical survey near Dwarka completes the unearthing of an undersea civilization which might be the oldest in human history, thereby making India the cradle of human civilization." [16]

Nationalism?

I've removed the references to China and Japan and attributed the Taoist statement to Huston Smith by name.
JFD 18:23, 20 January 2007 (UTC) reply

You'll note that JFD has reduced himself to more monstrocities of posts like this one, you'll notice that Kennethtennyson followed JFD mindlessly and reverted to his version, you'll notice that JFD did not care to elaborate the extent of his POV but chose to reduce himself to an attempted smear campaign. The points JFD mentions are nowhere to be found in the finished articles Indian nationalism and it's subpages. You will notice the overly malicious content in the finished Yi Jin Jing article though, I'll provide a list of points about JFD's Han Chinese nationalism on as much a a hint as well.

_{Freedom skies|  talk}  04:25, 21 January 2007 (UTC) reply

The points JFD mentions are nowhere to be found in the finished articles Indian nationalism and it's subpages.
Thanks to the vigilant Wikipedians who deleted them, not to Freedom skies.

Which leaves the question of why Freedom skies is adding such blatantly POV material to Wikipedia in the first place.
JFD 19:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Argument ender:- An introduction to Zen Buddhism By Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki (page 31). JFD knows my policy on getting more citations, on request or provocation, whichever extended first. _{Freedom skies|  talk}  04:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC) reply

An introduction to Zen Buddhism By Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki (page 31).

Buddhism in its course of development has completed a form which distinguishes itself from its so-called primitive or original type—so greatly, indeed, that we are justified in emphasizing its historical division into two schools, Hinayana and Mahayana, or the Lesser Vehicle and the Greater Vehicle of salvation. As a matter of fact, the Mahayana, with all its varied formulae, is no more than a developed form of Buddhism and traces back its final authority to its Indian founder, the great Buddha Sakyamuni. When this form of the Mahayana was introduced into China and then into Japan, it achieved further development in these countries. This development was no doubt due to the Chinese and Japanese Buddhist leaders, who knew how to apply the principles of their faith to the ever-varying conditions of life and to the religious needs of the people. And this elaboration and adaptation on their part has still further widened the gap that has already been in existence between the Mahayana and its more primitive type. At present the Mahayana form may be said not to display, superficially at least, those features most conspicuously characteristic of original Buddhism.
....
In India two Mahayana schools are known: the Madhyamika of Nagarjuna and the Vijnaptimatra or Yogacara of Asanga and Vasubandhu. In China more schools developed, the Tendai (t'ien-tai), the Kegon (avatamsaka), the Jodo (ching-t'u), the Zen (ch'an), etc.

How does Suzuki here refute Huston Smith's statement that "Buddhism processed through Taoism became Zen"?
How do the views Suzuki expresses here even conflict with Smith's position?
JFD 17:26, 22 January 2007 (UTC) reply

This appears to be a private argument that I'm not party to. Could you please both take it to the relevant talk page? Thanks. -- MichaelMaggs 20:17, 22 January 2007 (UTC) -- MichaelMaggs 20:17, 22 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Of course. Sorry to clutter up your talk page.
JFD 20:28, 22 January 2007 (UTC) reply

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Zen. For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk) This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Hi Michael, I have addressed the issue in the Bowing page and have added an old photo taken outside my home in Seoul, South Korea. Regards, ( Seong0980 03:08, 30 January 2007 (UTC) ) reply

Thanks. I've removed the photo request tag. -- MichaelMaggs 07:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Looks liek someone beet me to it, but I just updated and verified the link is on Special:Watchlist] now. Thanks, — xaosflux ^Talk 01:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC) reply

The diff I gave was to my userpage, doesn't that count? Or must it be to talk or contrib pages? I'd appreciate a clarification, and thanks for notifying me. | AndonicO ^{Talk · Sign Here} 16:22, 2 February 2007 (UTC) reply

Like that? (below the fake new messages bar) | AndonicO ^{Talk · Sign Here} 19:18, 2 February 2007 (UTC) reply

Yes, that's fine. I've fixed up your vote. -- MichaelMaggs 23:10, 2 February 2007 (UTC) reply

I also gave a diff to my talk page (or at least thought I did). Could you kindly advise me how to do so properly so that I may do so without problem in the future? Thanks for your help. Feel free to use my edit page--thanks again! Measly pawn 15:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC) reply

No problem. If you could post a note to you talk page confirming that you, Measley Pawn, have voted on Commons POTY, I will fix it for you. -- MichaelMaggs 19:17, 3 February 2007 (UTC) reply

I believe this is what you wanted... I Measly pawn voted for POTY on Commons. Measly pawn talk - Measly pawn 20:23, 3 February 2007 (UTC) reply

OK, done. -- MichaelMaggs 22:56, 3 February 2007 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your help! Measly pawn 04:10, 4 February 2007 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the warning. I tried the POTY vote again. Miguel Andrade 05:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC) reply

The various Zen, Chan, Seon, Thien, etc etc articles have been merged and I'm going to do some of the tidying up.

I do not want this to escalate into another edit war with Freedom skies.

Both he and I hold you in high regard so any intervention on your part towards the end of heading off an edit war would be appreciated.

I've already given Freedom skies the heads-up.
JFD 18:53, 8 February 2007 (UTC) reply

Happy to do what I can, but I'm afraid I'll be away from tomorrow until the end of next week.-- MichaelMaggs 22:45, 8 February 2007 (UTC) reply

I will add the early Mahayana Buddhism section that I mentioned in the merge proposal to the article as well.

Kindly watch over both our contributions. My understanding is that the Bodhidharma mention will retain it's status quo and neither I nor JFD (and Kenny) will touch it. I welcome JFD's eagerness for tidying up the Zen article. The article can definitely use tidying up.

_{Freedom skies|  talk}  15:21, 9 February 2007 (UTC) reply

I would prefer waiting for you and Saposcat to oversee and help in our editing the article. Refraining from editing till you return and can contribute comfortably is not going to be a problem. _{Freedom skies|  talk}  15:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC) reply

I agree that Zen could do with some tidying up. I'll contact you and JFD to let you know when I'm back - probably around 20th Feb. -- MichaelMaggs 17:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC) reply

Wow - I had no idea that my 12 year old son took it upon himself to edit the Jeanette Rankin article. (He has a research paper on her due this Friday.) I'll speak to him and hope that will be sufficient to prevent any further vandalism of Wikipedia on his part. It took me 10 minutes to figure out how to leave this message on your page. I guess I should have asked my son..... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.62.157.131 ( talk) 08:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC). reply

Please could you stop removing the Chav Issues section from the Yeovil entry. It was my girlfriend's first contribution to Wikipedia and as a true Yeovilite she knows what she is talking about. Thanks in advance

aka_joey

Thanks for the message.

It looks like a pretty interesting website.

Cya.

--Windozer64

Please don't delete my facts. They are not vandalism. Please don't let the wikistapo keep me down.

regards, 4~'s.

I didn't vandalise the bring me the horizon page. It is actual fact. It used to say on their hxcmp3 page. Beer not Bombs

The article Amanita muscaria, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup. If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page. If you do not want to receive bot-generated messages on your talk page, please consider using the nobots template on your user talk page

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Zen, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.

Hello,

I've requested an arbitration regarding the conduct of Freedom skies.

Can I trouble you to write a brief statement at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Freedom skies?

A brief account of Freedom skies' conduct, particularly at Talk:Bodhidharma/Archive 2, will suffice.

Thanks.

JFD 04:20, 17 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Freedom skies. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Freedom skies/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Freedom skies/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, - Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 02:58, 20 March 2007 (UTC) reply

I've added the photograph you asked for. Hope that helps. -- MichaelMaggs 20:50, 21 March 2007 (UTC) reply

WOW! I cannot believe that you found a link extinguishers to photograph. That really helps the article. Thank you. -- Jreferee 20:56, 21 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi Michael. I just wanted to make sure I understood your comments regarding this image. I saw your initial comment and updated the image to include copyright information (I took the picture and have intended to release the copyright to GNU). I saw your comment "I've deleted this as a copyright violation", which must mean you have deleted it from the list of images in copyright violation, and not that you have deleted the image because of a copyright violation. Please let me know if the image requires more info from me, and thanks for your tireless improving Wikipedia! - Armaced 18:48, 2 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi Armaced. I've actually deleted the version of that image that was on Commons, as it is I'm afraid a copyright violation of the printed design on the box. Even though you took the picture, and may be prepared to license your image, copyright in the cover design and printed layout still remains with the copyright owner - probably the company, and it's that that you've infringed. As the image is also on Wikipedia, though, you can still see it here. Admins here may possibly allow the picture to stay if it can be argued that fair use applies, but that's not allowed on Commons. (I'm an Admin on Commons, not Wikipedia). -- MichaelMaggs 20:35, 2 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the clarification, Michael. I submit to your authority regarding wiki Commons copyright practices. I am not entirely sure how the image got there in the first place, as I only intended to upload it to Wikipeadia. I do find it surprising that this would be considered a copyright violation under any terms, however, and since it is in my nature to probe shades of grey, I am going to ask a few questions. Feel free to ignore them if you wish, I know you must be busy, but I have to ask. Since this was a picture that contained a box, and not an attempt to directly reproduce the box or it's cover image, is it a copyright violation to have any copyrighted item in a picture? What about a picture of my son opening a box of Lego's on Christmas, with the box mostly unwrapped? My Dad standing in front of his 1998 Ford truck? My wife reading a new novel, with the cover clearly visible (..or even part of the text of a page)? My daughter eating Cheerios with the box in the picture? Brands surround us, and it seems unfair that copyright law would extend any where near any of these conditions.

Please understand I am not challenging your actions. I understand that your organization prefers to err on the side of caution. Thank you for your time. - Armaced 23:29, 3 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi Armaced. Copyright is pretty confusing, I agree. If you take a photo of a 2D copyright work, like a printed design on a box, without consent of the copyright owner (usually the company) that's normally a copyright infringement. There are some exceptions, though of which Fair use is one. It's also OK if the design is insignificant within the overall photo, as with the example you gave of your son opening a box of lego. It's a matter of degree: a closeup photo of the design printed on the lego box is not allowed; a photo in which the design is incidental is OK.

The rules are different when considering a photo of a 3D object. If the object is of some 'work of art' like a sculpture or a toy model of Superman, in which copyright can exist in its own right, taking a photo in which that object is prominent is infringement. Such a photo of a copyright 3D object is sometimes called a "derivative work". For more details, see the very good article at Commons:commons:Derivative works. Once again, though, if the object is insignificant you should be ok. It's also quite ok to take photos of 3D objects in which copyright has already expired (eg an old piece of sculpure), or which are not capable of attracting copyright as a 3D work (eg a gun, the shape of computer, a sofa, a truck). Having said all that, the detailed rules may differ somewhat country by country.

I expect your photo on Wikipedia was picked up by someone who thought it was good and who copied it across to Commons. Generally, it's better to upload to Commons when you can, as that allows images to be used on other Wikis, not just the English Wikipedia. But on Commons you can't rely on the Fair use copyright exemption, so there will be a few images which are OK here but which are not allowed on Commons. Do feel free to post any queries you have on copyright issues to the Commons Helpdesk where there are lots of nice people who can help :) -- MichaelMaggs 15:32, 5 April 2007 (UTC)- reply

Thanks for taking the time to explain this to me, Michael. - Armaced 23:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Yeast seems to be going well - must be getting close to nomination..Someone nominated Amanita phalloides for GA which is on hold. With some good articles I've been able to expand it quite a bit. Still need to get some more info on some of the toxins but am keen for more input. All feedback appreciated. cheers, Casliber | talk | contribs 21:57, 13 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi Michael,
Personally I think the file size is fine for any educational purposes. And sorry I'm not willing to provide a higher res version until Wikimedia allows non-com licensing. We are an enc not a stock website! I find it ironic that wikimedia doesn't even license it's logos under the GFDL and this montage I made is probably going to be deleted because of it. So sorry, can't help you, but I'm flattered you considered it. -- Fir0002 11:44, 14 April 2007 (UTC) reply

This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.

• Freedom skies is placed on standard revert parole for one year. He is limited to one revert per page per week, excepting obvious vandalism. Further, he is required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page.
• Freedom skies shall select one account and use only that account. Any other account used may be indefinitely banned. Pending selection of an account Freedom skies may not edit Wikipedia.
• Violations of paroles and probations imposed on parties of this case shall be enforced by blocks for an appropriate period of time. Blocks and bans are to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Freedom skies#Log of blocks and bans.

For the Arbitration Committee -- Srikeit 18:40, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply

You vote [17] is not very conclusive, please amend to state support or oppose. Stefan 15:42, 19 June 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi Michael - it's from a Great Spotted Woodpecker (assuming the photo is somewhat magnified; is it about 8-10 cm long?). - MPF 20:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Thanks. That would make sense - I've seen those about. (The feather is 9cm). -- MichaelMaggs 20:19, 28 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Now how did I miss seeing you'd already put the length in with the first query??? ;-) Might be as well to put it on the photo page (or better yet, re-take the photo with a ruler next to the feather? - something like this: Image:Teidepumice.jpg) MPF 20:26, 28 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Leave it with me for a few days! I'll see what I can produce! It will be simillar in style to that used on Douglas, Isle of Man. Jza84 12:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC) reply

Thanks, that would be a great improvement. -- MichaelMaggs 15:58, 20 September 2007 (UTC) reply

Hello again! I'm glad you gave me a nudge about this map - I had produced something and forgot to complete some of the inset work! I'm not sure if it is what you had in mind (do please let me know if you spot anything you think could improve or even correct this image), but it is found at this Wiki Commons entry. I've took the liberty of uploading it to the main Lundy article - no offense if you wish to revert it out of course. I'll understand! Hope it's well recieved. -- Jza84 · ( talk) 22:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC) reply

An image uploaded by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:Bouncing ball strobe edit.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Chris B • talk 14:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I just quoted something you said in the archives of Talk:Bath, Somerset concerning its naming. I thought you should know (for your right to reply), and I'd like you to invite you to join the discussion. -- Oldak Quill 12:40, 25 November 2007 (UTC) reply