text stringlengths 1 29.3k ⌀ | label float64 0 1 |
|---|---|
" June 2009 (UTC)
I was looking at info about the etymology of Poseidon at our article here:Poseidon, and there is info about don maybe meaning ""god"" (masculine counterpart of Dea), though I found some info that could suggest ""earth"" in that article. See this: In Linear B clay tablets, the form ""PO-SE-DA-WO-NE (""Poseidon"") occurs with greater frequency than does DI-U-JA (Zeus). A feminine variant, PO-SE-DE-IA, is also found, indicating a lost consort goddess"". Further the text says: ""Poseidon is already identified as ""Earth-Shaker""— E-NE-SI-DA-O-NE— in Mycenaean Knossos,[3]"". I notice that ENESIDAONE looks a lot like Enosichthon, ""Earth-Shaker"", but if DAONE meant ""god"" then I guess ENESIDAONE meant ""the god who shakes things up"" ) ? 10:43, 25" | 0 |
If you read my previous comments again I am a new user. And being a new user I have a request that I would like you to honor
DO NOT CONTACT ME AT ALL EVER
Your Incivil behavior and your constant harrasment towards me is not appreciated. You might get a hoot out of it but I dont.
I refuse to try to explain anything to you anymore since you clearly read things the way you wish them to be read.
I understand that you have alot of administrators in your back pocket and thats fine. Use them wisely.
This request comes from me trying to speak with you about your harrasment towards my edits, and your dealing poorly with it. So since there is a clear language barrier between us I ask that you dont contact me anymore. Furthermore I ask that you and your buddies believe dr smoos to be one of them leave my edits alone. If my edits are so POV as you harrased me about and there is an apparent concensus about it then let other users correct it. Maybe they will give a reason for it instead of bringing it to this. I ask you to please review the civil harraasment links you have posted so much, and also to review the 5 pillars of wikipedia. Many rules and guidelines of wikipedia have been broken during this process. I understand that you would want to so badly to contact me again about this statement. ONE TIME AND ONE TIME ONLY. I will read what you have to say, and I will try to remove it from my talk page with no response back to you. I ask that you keep your comment back to me civil and non harrasing. If you feel that me writing this to you is inclivity and harrasing I cant apoligize to you about it because it is NOT. If you feel it is with such passion I ask that you read it again and again until you read it in the correct context, and you fully understand what I am requesting. I do not discourage you from editing just ask that you stop harrasing me and my edits. I will never become a member of wikipedia because of people like yourself. | 0 |
"
hey
can you have look at . it doesn't show how it should.thank you T " | 0 |
Fine...are there even rivers in Africa? | 0 |
"
""Called for?"" No. Appropriate, yes. Apologies are never called for or required, but in a civil world, regardless of the wrongs we feel we are subjected to....if one feels less than proud of behavior it is the usual step...one I do feel strongly about. It would be nice to see Cynwolfe take a different tact, but alas there is nothing to show that will be the outcome here. I will think about how to approach this further. I don't see pressure to make me apologize coming from you. What I see is your pointing out exactly why an apology would be something I would want to do. Having said that, it is more than likely I will extend it. " | 0 |
"
Speedy deletion of The Stoat And Helmet
A tag has been placed on The Stoat And Helmet, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or ""db"" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. |Talk " | 0 |
"::::::Part of my problem with your (and Geogre's) request is that if I accept it and follow it strictly to the letter, it would be pointless, and if I accept it and follow it in spirit, it would be cruel as well as undermining of my major work in Wikipedia.
As I mentioned above, I rarely visit the arbcom IRC channel (which itself is not heavily used even by members of the ArbCom); swearing it off is largely a meaningless act. I could readily stop participating in the mailing list, because I would essentially get the same information via other channels. You seem to think that this is the only backchannel that exists or that I participate in. It's not. It's not even the most important one. For me to accede to the spirit of your demand would require that, inter alia, I cut myself off from personal communication with people like James and Kat people I count as friends because they would likely continue to discuss the same issues with me that we currently discuss from time to time on the arbcom list; my opinions would still enter the discussion, just not as directly. Furthermore, one of the major resources I use for collaboration with the Foundation, and specifically with Danny and Brad which, by necessity is a wholly private resource includes James and Kat as regular participants. Withdrawing from that particular resource would hamper my ability to provide assistance to Brad and Danny, which represents probably the bulk of what I do on the English Wikipedia these days, and the part that I find most fulfilling. I also frequently participate in ""backchannel"" conversation with Kat, James, Dmcdevit (another arbitrator), and occasionally smoddy on the restricted IRC admins channel. Should I also withdraw from that channel? It seems that the you and Geogre, through your joint demand, are seeking to require that I isolate myself totally from the entire ArbCom (Geogre's proposal even requires that I even refrain from public communication with members of the ArbCom; I don't recall if yours does, although I believe it does not). Those people, some of them, at least, are my friends. For you to ask such a thing is really quite heartless. It would be akin to my demanding that you have no nonpublic contact with the myriad of friends you have no doubt made on Wikipedia.
So, you must forgive me: I would rather resign my privileges with honor than accept either of the alternatives left to me: giving you a hollow victory gained through my unethical manipulation of your own ignorance, or the personal harm of agreeing to cut myself off from those I count as friends.
" | 0 |
The Technical discussion/details section should be added next, any suggestions of what to start off with? | 0 |
RFA
Hi Aude, thanks for supporting my RFA! It was successful. Cheers | 0 |
Sources
explicitly criticized
brief mention
brief mention and dismissal
From John D. Hawks | 0 |
Why should I remove the whois? What do you have to hide? | 0 |
Please kindly provide the CAS number of....
Potassium Naphtha - 山梨酸钾222.67.209.154
for the product of
http://www.yiminfood.com.cn/product/show.asp?ID=347&ClassID;=1
222.67.209.154 | 0 |
We were making some headway there but now we're back to where we started. Let me be more blunt, is it a) I can use the word and you cant or b) I regret using the word in the past and promise not to ever use it again. | 0 |
"
Oh my gosh did you make another sock? I'm reporting you right away contribsTALK " | 0 |
"
SPAM
This user account is being used to continuously edit articles for which no edit is necessary.
Furthermore this account is falsely claiming affiliation for the users of the edit he or she claims to have authority over.
This account needs to be disabled immediately to reduce the amount of spam on this website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs) " | 0 |
Accusations of sock puppetry
Accusing me of being a sock puppet about half a dozen times is not going to accomplish anything. If you're so convinced that I am (or other contributors to The Hurt Locker) a sock puppet, please present your case to WP:SPI. Thanks. - | 0 |
Rugby
Does no one know anything about him being a rugby international - surely that should be in there. | 0 |
The deletion review is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010 Christmas special (Doctor Who). The name of the article is by convention (eg 2008 Christmas special (Doctor Who) and 2009 Christmas specials (Doctor Who). There's guidance on this somewhere, but I can't find it at the moment. | 0 |
there is soooo many other photos of cobain that are not just found somewhere and there has to be a better photo that that one, with his LONG hair, honestly he looked better with it. | 0 |
this is what I am talking about, and it's not vandalism if you are deleting info about a family member.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Precious_Roy&action;=history | 0 |
Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. | Talk to Madeline | 0 |
"
Sockpuppetry
Hi Daniel,
How do you think we should deal with editors who have been ""convicted"" of sockpuppetry on Wikipedia but have not been indefblocked? How would others know of the user's past with sockpuppetry? I have run into this problem a few times and no one has given me a good answer. Thanks. BhaiSaab talk " | 0 |
No, not really mad she undid somestuff that I typed. Most of it was opinion. I was just talking with her seeing if she would get mad at me | 0 |
Welcome!
Hello, Mad Munky838, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to Talk:RuneScape, a RuneScape-related article on Wikipedia. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
The introduction to Wikipedia
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Help pages
Tutorial
How to write a great article
Manual of Style
RuneScape task force
The RuneScape portal
The guide to fancruft
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Also, consider joining our Wikiproject. Again, welcome! t c e | 0 |
"
Amazing how you could consider what you warned me first about as personal attack. Have you seen the person in questions User page and Talk page? Have you seen the violent rhetoric they had on there talk page until only recently? And your first warning was completely informal to boot. ""in some situations""? So how does this qualify as an exceptional situation? It does not. And I was not treating this as some kind of ""Free attack"", get real! Remorse? Why the hell should I show remorse? This is Wikipedia, not some court. " | 0 |
, Hanover, New Hampshire, U.S.
The Dartmouth, student newspaper at Dartmouth College
Dartmouth High School (Nova Scotia), Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada
Dartmouth High School (Massachusetts), Dartmouth, Massachusetts, U.S.
University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, Dartmouth, Massachusetts, U.S.
Dartmouth Community College, Dartmouth, Devon, Great Britain
Ships
HMS Dartmouth, the name of eight ships and a shore establishment of the Royal Navy
Other
Dartmouth Dam, Australia
Earl of Dartmouth, a title in the Peerage of Great Britain
Port of Dartmouth Royal Regatta
Category:English toponyms
cy:Dartmouth
de:Dartmouth
fr:Dartmouth
it:Dartmouth
nl:Dartmouth
pl:Dartmouth (ujednoznacznienie)
fi:Dartmouth
sv:Dartmouth | 0 |
It's generally beneficial if the editors have a pattern of similar editing, Fovean Author.. Life.temp has edited this article a total of three times and in a manner inconsistent with LotLE's patterns.. (rants) | 0 |
"
Problem with whitespace in convert
Jimp– You can probably figure out what is going wrong faster than I can, but currently there is something strange going on. It may be due to some recent changes?
{{convert|2|m|abbr=on}} results in
{{convert| 2|m|abbr=on}} results in
{{convert|2 |m|abbr=on}} results in
If the strange behavior is still happening, then the last two will give red ""expression errors"". Thanks! ―Œ(talk) " | 0 |
No problem. You might find Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Light current and Wikipedia:Abuse reports/Tiscali DSL enlightening. Cheers! (talk) | 0 |
Waz up! Don't come here often. 2016SanKarS | 0 |
"
You, escape orbit, have assumed bad faith. Remember the times you falsely called me a ""vandal""? What do you call that assumption, huh?
" | 0 |
"
The precise definition of race is under dispute..
I wrote this to help spread understanding, please make sure to read the definitions of outcrossing on the link.
There is a lot of misunderstanding of genetics and further there is a lot of misinformation that people spread because they WANT you to think that there is no difference between peoples for a political or social agenda, that does not make it so. Humans share 98% of our genetic code with Chimpanzees, yet that 2% defines our differences and is important as is the difference in the human population, no matter how small the difference.
There are obviously differences in the expressed traits between Asian, African and Caucasian. These are different types of humans, if you choose to call the a race/breed or type it's up to you and it's immaterial. My argument has always been that racial diversity should be preserved which is a more neutral position rather than promoting that race mixing and interbreeding is somehow positive.
You and many people that listen to pop culture may think that by interbreeding you are helping humanity and there are lots of myths about how you will create better offspring; offspring that have the best of both parents. This is just a myth told by people who, are trying to say that people are equal, if different. Yes, people are people as Americans we believe that all people have certain inalienable rights but the best position for humanity is for each of the races to exist, separately to be the best we can. If you truly understand the advantages that diversity offers you will agree too.
I personally breed horses. And this is where I'll start telling you a story: the Thoroughbred horse started out as a mixed race horse. It was based on Arab stock and was bred only for speed for many generations, regardless of breed, the horse that ran the race the fastest was bred to other fast horses. The Thoroughbred breeding book is now closed, which means you cannot breed a Thoroughbred to any other breed, because, ANY cross you make outside of the gene pool will reduce the speed of the horse. This is called line breeding, please read this article as a basic ""learn to breed"" guideline: http://www.learntobreed.com/linebreeding.html. Line breeding(inbreeding) is a useful technique as is outcrossing when advantagous to produce quality results, random mixing is like a child finger-painting and does nothing positive.
What Wikipedia has been proposing is that random interbreeding is potentially a good idea and should be treated as potentially positive. Any person who knows about breeding animals will disagree, it's very unlikely that race mixing will result in a positive result unless it was planned for by a geneticist. When you cited the plant hybridization, that's what you were doing citing a hybrid that was designed in a laboratory and there were not human beings or living animals as a result of a genetic mistake. You can't through bad human crosses in the trash like you can with corn." | 0 |
March 2007
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Cunt, you will be blocked from editing. | 0 |
"
Happy New Year
Happy New Year to you too! I hope that 2009 is a good year for you. It would be hard to top 2008 since you became an admin. I don't think that there's anything organized for Darwin Day, but I think you should be bold and do it! I doubt you would get objections to such an important scientist. My time on the 'pedia is now quite limited as I finally found a job. While it wasn't in my field and the pay is low, I'm proud to say I did land a job in this tough economy. Anything is better than no money per hour.
Have you been watching DYK? The DYK bot is down because its owner left. So we're stuck doing manual updates until its new owner can troubleshoot and put it on the toolserver. So please help watch the updates. broil " | 0 |
Do remember that the martyrdoms which have the most lasting influence on Christian art, from St. Lawrence to St. Catherine [of Alexandria], rank from dubious to evidence-free; are there artistic traditions even of spurious martyrdoms of real people, like Clement and his anchor? (To avoid the obvious, I'm not discussing the Crucifixion; putting it under the head of persecutions of Christianity would be an original - although not unreasonable - synthesis.) This may belong in a section or subarticle on Roman Catholic culture, but not history; and I agree sourcing will be a bear. PMAnderson | 0 |
"
Disparity between Traditional Jewish Dates and Academic Dates
User:PiCo, I will desist from making edits in this current article, since I feel my input might be misconstrued or disruptive, and that, of course, would not be my intent. However, please be apprised that there is a vast disparity between the traditional Jewish method of calibrating years based on a carefully guarded oral tradition, as opposed to modern methods used primarily by Christians who rely heavily upon the modern academic methods applied in dating chronology. The two are still reconcilable, but it will take a vast amount of effort and a person of ""long wind"" (patience) and extreme diligence to even begin to explain where the discrepancies have ""crept-in"" to ancient chronologies. The Jews insist that there were only 210 years of slavery in Egypt, although the 430 years mentioned in the Hebrew Bible are merely counted from the time of Isaac's birth, until the departure of Israel from Egypt. You see, ""strangers in a land not theirs,"" really begins with Abraham's seed in the land of Canaan. Anyway, my view is not to interrupt your work, but to let it proceed on course. I would, however, have preferred to see you mention more about the ""other method"" practiced by mainstream Judaism, whether it is accepted or not by Christian or academic circles. This would have given more balance to the current article. I have an inkling that someone will eventually start another article dealing only the Jewish tradition of biblical chronology.
If I might say, for us, the Scroll of Antiochus is considered a reliable source.
CERTAIN FLAWS WITH MODERN SCHOLARSHIP:
I wish to point out something about modern scholarship that I think we should be aware of. Research has been carried out in France by a certain Christian Robin and André Lemaire on the subject of the
Queen of Sheba and King Solomon.
André Lemaire wrote: “The hypothesis of a Sheba in Northern Arabia at the beginning of the 1st millennium BCE (Noth 1968: 223-224; Würthwein 1977: 121; Eph‘al 21984: 88-89, 227-229; Garbini 1984; Sarkiö 1994:190; Mulder 1998: 509-510) has no basis and is generally abandoned (Robin 1992: col. 1109-1110, 1118; Avanzini 1996: 13; Kitchen 1997b: 128.”
He also writes: “The first mention of Sheba in Neo-Assyrian texts is to be dated mid-8th c. BCE with the story of a caravan of 200 camels coming from Tayma and Sheba to Hindanu (Middle-Euphrates) (Cavigneaux – Ismaïl 1990: 339-357; Frame 1995: 300; Younger 2003: 279-282; Holladay 2006: 319-321).”
Contrary to modern scholarship, it should be noted here that, in Jewish tradition, king Solomon did not begin his reign in circa 1,000 BCE, as purported by modern scholarship, but rather in circa 843 BCE, as we find in Jewish tradition. Likewise, in Jewish tradition, the first Temple was destroyed in 422 BCE, rather than in the erroneous date used by scholars of the western world to fix its destruction, i.e. in 586 BCE. Modern scholars totally ignore Jewish tradition and wrongly put historical events at least 200 years earlier, which accounts for the discrepancies in calibrating these important events and not finding historical records to substantiate these events.
The one major flaw in their critical view of Jewish texts is the belief that if they cannot find an archaeological document affirming a certain event mentioned in the Bible, for them it is as though the event never happened. This is a fallacy in logic.
To begin to tackle this tremendous difficulty with modern scholarship and Jewish tradition, we must first lay down a premise that will follow us all throughout this discussion, and that is the fact that historical records have been kept by Jews since ancient times, and they have often preserved these very written accounts of events by marking their dates in the Seleucid Era counting. This is vital, as without which information, it will be virtually impossible to determine the sequence of events and to correctly compare them with dates in the Julian / Gregorian calendars.
The Aramaic ""Scroll of Antiochus,"" known in Hebrew as ""Megillath Benei Hašmonai"" (The Scroll of the Sons of Asamoneus), is a curious document, alleged by Rabbi Saadia Gaon in his Introduction to ""Ha-Eggron"" to have been written by the elders of the schools of Hillel and Shammai in the Chaldaic language, meaning, a document that dates back earlier than the book Seder Olam, composed by Rabbi Yose b. Halpetha in the 2nd century CE. In that book, the ""Scroll of Antiochus,"" we find this remarkable remark, viz., that ""from the Second Temple's rebuilding till the 23rd year of the reign of Antiochus Eupator, son of Antiochus Epiphanes, who invaded Judaea, there had transpired 213 years in total.""
בִּשׁנַת עַסרִין וּתלָת שְׁנִין לְמִמלְכֵיהּ, ב | 0 |
"
Also please take a quick look at this. I can see a number of sources that meet our requirements on reliability that also cite 750 million. — 2 " | 0 |
File:Headcrabhat.PNG listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Headcrabhat.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. | 0 |
2010 (UTC)
Welcome
86.29.137.111 03:50, 1 April | 0 |
"
Gettysburg Address FAR
Gettysburg Address has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare ""Keep"" or ""Remove"" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. " | 0 |
I don't. My frank expressions are only a reaction.
That said, the white space should be changed in the style sheet (if at all) for various reasons (economy, WP:ACCESS, etc.). 193.254.155.48 | 0 |
Hide-and-seek
Why did you undo my edit to the caption on the image in this article? The image does not show children playing; this is patently not true. The image shows an oil painting from the 1800s. Since when have paintings (the physical manifestations of the painters' singular and subjective perception of the world) become accepted as sufficient encyclopedic documentation of a real-life occurence - in this particular instance a moment from a game of hide-and-seek? 92.26.222.89 | 0 |
We really cannot afford to spread unverified information. | 0 |
Wikipedia:Politeness Police
I would welcome everyone's input on this Policy proposal. Cheers. | 0 |
Wiki editors who don´t even know my language, are covering up their editing mistakes and now | 0 |
racisim. Obviously it has failed.]] | 0 |
has anyone seen the South Park episode of this
that episode was hilarious
but btw, PETA is definitely a very extremist group... | 0 |
From now on, you are dead to me. | 0 |
The article Roni siegel has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.
Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. | 0 |
": In any case, it applies at least as ""built up in the mass media by later governments"". His public image is protected by law, supported by the education system and guaranteed by the military.
" | 0 |
I'd also question describing the Wedge as 'popular', or indeed 'comedy'. | 0 |
Above message copied over to Phr's talk page. | 0 |
"
Well, you do have a good point, it basically only led to more wikidrama and more edit wars (and you predicted it...). I don't know if I'd call it spam, but either way, it's completely pointless. (talk) " | 0 |
.
Further discussion Here on this issue | 0 |
go vandercken!! go!! wikipedia needs you besides why are you waisting your time talking in here instead of writing an article? and why do you have a user page full of userboxes are @!$%?*# or what ?190.51.171.27 | 0 |
"
Requested Changes
The current version uses e.g. a BBC source for sorta dubious claims. Neither the lede nor the main text treats various crucial topics, namely
Science of team science Science, technology and society Sociology of scientific knowledge Science studies Sociology of knowledge
Romanticism in science Humboldtsches Bildungsideal Humboldtian science Positivism dispute Crucial issues, not treated at all. We have a separate stubby entry for Wissenschaft btw.
Research Criticism of science Protoscience Merton thesis Mertonian norms
scholasticism Multiple discovery Heroic theory of invention and scientific development
scientific misconduct Research ethics Crucial aspect, not treated at all so far
Science journalism (the current section about Media perspectives is rather amateurish)
Science Wars The Two Cultures White Anglo-Saxon Protestant Dead white European mengender studies The controversies about female or minority perspetives, especially in the STEM fields are neither mentioned and need to be treated properly. Wilhelm Dilthey distinction is crucial, as well Steve Woolgar and of cause Bruno Latour.
* We Have Never Been Modern Laboratory Life Science in Action (for the record, calling books published by the Harvard University Press ""fringe"" needs some courage ;)
That said, the current version is far from being complete. I would refer to improve the article instead of defening the status quo. If you have an issue with my sources, comment them under the reference entry.
Science (from Latin scientia, meaning ""knowledge"") is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about nature and the universe.""... modern science is a discovery as well as an invention. It was a discovery that nature generally acts regularly enough to be described by laws and even by mathematics; and required invention to devise the techniques, abstractions, apparatus, and organization for exhibiting the regularities and securing their law-like descriptions.""—J. L. Heilbron ( ) In an older and closely related meaning, ""science"" also refers to a body of knowledge itself, of the type that can be rationally explained and reliably applied. A practitioner of science is known as a scientist.
In modern usage, ""science"" may refer as well to a way of pursuing or producing knowledge, not only the knowledge itself. Especially in the anglophone world ""science"" is often restricted to those branches of study that seek to explain the phenomena of the material universe.Oxford English Dictionary The German approach of ""Wissenschaften"" in the tradition of Humboldtian science and Humboldtian education ideal is more generic and includes all sort of scholarly endeavours with philosophy still as a common denominator. The The Two Cultures the German Positivism dispute and the US science wars refer to ongoing controversies about the role of natural sciences and the humanities. The controversies refered as well to the longstanding dominance of male White Anglo-Saxon Protestant scholars in e.g. US universities and the use of ""Dead white European men"" as role models. It has lead to various attempts, as in gender studies to involve e.g. female or minority perspectives in science and as well a backslash defending the important role of the classics.Bernard Knox, The Oldest Dead White European Males and Other Reflections on the Classics (1993) (reprint, W. W. Norton & Company, 19 | 0 |
From what I can tell, yes. | 0 |
"== Bsdfrog, you are invited to the Teahouse! ==
Hi Bsdfrog! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join other new editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from other new editors. These editors have also just begun editing Wikipedia; they may have had similar experiences as you. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from your peers. I hope to see you there! (I'm a Teahouse host)
Visit the TeahouseThis message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, 10.68.16.36
Category:Wikipedians who have received a Teahouse invitation" | 0 |
Ah, look, another sock-buddy of TheOldJacobtrite crawls out the woodwork to support his opinionated and personal-editing prejudice. And still they hypocritically defy admin.
Mark Arsten was the Admin who made the decision when TheOldJacobite tried to refer me for vandalism... Electric Wombat made his own views known.
Yes, the BBC appear to have archived off their radio interview and feature broadcast since the original edit. It looks like they do this after 14 days. However, the newspaper articles are still online, as is the download pages that prove that this was a properly released single with a full marketing and promotional plan behind it...(I suppose that you'll next be saying that Amazon and Apple are not credible reference points to confirm the song!!!). The charity's official website also contains a suitable reference that conforms to Wiki policy. Their website is registered with the UK Government's Charity Commission as their official registered website, or are you intending to argue that the Charities Commission of the United Kingdom also fails to meet credibility policy? (it would not surprise me if you did, even though that organization also has it's own Wiki entry and is referenced thousands of times in other articles - editors like you and TheOldjacobite like to pick and choose which reference points based on personal opinion, and not the fact of the matter. That is shown in your logs. Having looked at WP:SONGCOVER for the twentieth time, this entry clearly meets all the criteria, so please stop quoting policy enforcement when the policy is met, otherwise you risk making yourself look more and more stupid every time you delete it or incorrectly quote a policy to which the entry conforms.
TheOldJacobite and his other sock-puppets, or buddy puppets, have referred the entry to admin, for both an (unfounded) allegation of vandalism, and whether the entry met policy criteria. He also asked for the page to be locked, and me blocked, on the basis of the entry - see the referrals for vandalism and page locking request pages...etc. The entry was reviewed and found to be suitable and referenced correctly, even if the BBC programme has since been archived - that is, however, the whole point of the archival retrieval date noted within the reference tag.
The Admin do not feel that the page warrants locking, nor me to be blocked, as I am simply conforming to Wikipedia policies; policies that are so liberally quoted at me by those who then hypocritically contradict the very policy they like to crow about.
Is it any wonder that thousands of people are wholly unsatisfied with the general atmosphere within Wikipedia when a few (almost trolling) editors like to arbitrarily remove information simply based on personal views rather than verifiable links. TheOldJacobite, Sjo and now you, have simply shown that if you are proven wrong, had the policies correctly pointed out to you (later backed up by admin) you STILL will not accept the edit, preferring instead to continue playing childish games in repetitive removal of something to which you have some sort of weird personal issue with.
Your own deletion of this edit, following admin's clear acceptance of the entry is - like TheOldJacobite's and Sjo's behavior - now clearly in breach of Wiki policy and now suitable for requesting a temporary edit block to be placed on your account for, basically, ignoring admin's earlier decision on this matter. | 0 |
"
Mathematics CotW
Hey CSTAR, I am writing you to let you know that the Mathematics Collaboration of the week(soon to ""of the month"") is getting an overhaul of sorts and I would encourage you to participate in whatever way you can, i.e. nominate an article, contribute to an article, or sign up to be part of the project. Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks " | 0 |
paraphrased it for the final result | 0 |
I agree - with some of the finer detail merged with timeline article. | 0 |
"
Thanks, Arabic is a language option but not a content location. Arabic was added in late September 2010. (talk to me) " | 0 |
"
Your Signature
The following is a passage from Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages
=== Images ===
Images of any kind should not be used in signatures.
Many concerns have been raised over the use of images in signatures, and they are considered to serve no use to the encyclopedia project. Images in signatures should not be used for several reasons:
they are an unnecessary drain on server resources, and could cause server slowdown
a new image can be uploaded in place of the one you chose, making your signature a target for possible vandalism and Denial-of-service attacks
they reduce searchability, making pages more difficult to read
they make it more difficult to copy text from a page
they are potentially distracting from the actual message
in most browsers images do not scale with the text, making lines with images higher than those without
they clutter up the ""file links"" list on the image page every time you sign on a different talk page
images in signatures give undue prominence to a given user's contribution
I believe you were not aware of this, but please remove the image from your signature. Thank you, ► " | 0 |
Italo-Ethiopian War support
Hi,
Sorry, what are you doing? | 0 |
. - Yes my croatian brother, you are right, Pavelic was patriot and a good man, and all the Croatians loved him, and still love him | 0 |
HE WAS FORCED TO USE THE BULGARIC CODIFICATIONS AND FIX IDEAS SO THAT THE PEOPLE CAN HEAR HIS VOICE
HE WAS MACEDONIAN REPRESED TO EXPRES OTHER NATIONALITI IN ORDER TO THE POLITICAL CONDITION IN THOOSE TIMES | 0 |
You just don't stop, do you? | 0 |
":: Lol, that's messed up. ""BEO"" ... should've looked at them at been like, ""Because BEO totally sounds like the 'E' comes after 'O', ya ****tard!"" I would've. X-D
Djjames88
" | 0 |
"
In point of fact, MelbourneStar, you agreed on May 14 on the article's talk page that the information could be added to the article on the basis of the credits serving as a reliable source. I don't know what changed your mind and honestly I don't care. You haven't ""tried your very best"". You haven't tried at all. As Ive said at least twice before, if having an independent source is of such vital importance to you, then go find one instead of reverting and complaining. In the time it took you to type out the two messages on this page, you could have found a source that met your requirements. So maybe it's you who'd rather argue? 76.204.89.112 " | 0 |
"
What is an acceptable definition for the term ""basic geography""? Please see the new subsection at the FLC discussion. I've presented a suggestion there. Any suggestions for improving it would be most appreciated. Thank you. " | 0 |
"
To - Tomer - NARRATIVE BY FRANCIS PRETTY, ONE OF DRAKE’S GENTLEMEN AT ARMS - ""From hence we went our course to 36 degrees, and entered the great river of Plate"" http://www.aol.bartleby.com/33/41.html - this took me literally less than 30 seconds to find. " | 0 |
Your Application
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Solar-Poseidon. As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact the just released has even more power. Because of this we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again soon. Thank again for your interest in VandalProof. βcommand | 0 |
Avoiding Edit Wars
Acroterion, I have been trying to avoid edit wars since I was unblocked last October 2008. I try to make articles more accurate, but sometimes it results in stepping on the toes of persons who have a particular point of view. I have learned the lesson from the past, not to push an issue. I have had a few prolonged discussions, but I have avoided edit wars on the main articles.
However, I would like to have your advice on a particular issue. It relates to a comment which I have just left on the talk page of 'Kepler's laws of planetary motion'. I do not intend to press the issue and I do not intend to make any more reverts. But I do feel that there is a matter here which needs to be observed.
I appreciate that phyics is not your topic, although I do know that you are scientific enough to grasp the concepts involved. I'll give you a quick summary. There are two equations involved in the Kepler problem, each with two terms on the active side. A couple of months ago, I was going to try and make major edits to this page, but I got stuck on the issue of agreeing names for the terms in the equations. You can see that discussion further up. There was general agreement about the actual equations, but no agreement on the names of the terms. So I lost interest and went elsewhere.
A few days ago, I returned to add what I considered to be very helpful information on elliptical orbits in relation to Kepler's second law. It was reverted. But it was reverted by a user who has only ever come to physics pages in my time, to revert my edits.
I will now walk away from that page because I don't want a repeat of what happened last July. Interestingly it was during an argument with this same user last July that indirectly led tome getting blocked, albeit that the final straw actually came on the Mozart page.
I intend to tidy up some more of the physics pages over the coming months. I am not asking you to do anything right now. But I would be grateful if you could monitor the situation and provide any advice because I do not believe that this guy is doing these reverts in the genuine spirit of promoting knowledge in physics. David Tombe 86.141.249.136 | 0 |
Regarding Reversion on John Duncan (theologian)
Hi. Yes, I suppose that you are right to revert my edit on John Duncan (theologian). When I read the article initially I believe that I primarily 'saw' that he was already going to university to pursue theological study without taking a more granular look at what the text actually says and integrating in my comprehension what that meant. He is an unusual fellow in that he was apparently an atheist (according to his own conception) who was already studying to become a doctrinal minister which runs counterintuitive to my expectation of those who study theology. Theological students may have some misgivings about their beliefs and doctrine but are not ordinarily 'atheist', or even deist, in their self-description. Thanks for the reversion. Regards, Steve. | 0 |
Btw, I removed my edit requests from the talk page before any replies to them. You've already handled it and I didn't want to unnecessarily clog up the talk page. But if you think they should be returned, that's fine, but they needed to be closed. Thanks. 76.189.109.155 | 0 |
Whoops there goes YET ANOTHER AOL Web Proxy Server . In real terms, HOW LIKELY is it that random AOL users come across this issue and decide to comment upon it? PLEASE open your eyes Joel, she is just making fun of you. | 0 |
"
semi-protect request
Do you know how to put in sem-protects? I'd like on on pseudophilosophy and Patrecia Scott as Alienus is using new sockpuppets to edit these. Thanks.
Hello: this request for semi-protection on two articles is out of process the user making the request is in a content dispute with multiple editors, and has provided no valid evidence, nor requested Checkuser to support the claim that any banned sockpuppets are editing. Editing from anon-IPs is not reason enough; particularly when the request for semi-protection comes from an editor with a who wishes to protect his version of the article.Talk
Most requests for administrative intervention come from editors with an interest in the topic. That doesn't invalidate the request, or change the fact that Alienus is not permitted to edit Wikipedia by the order of the Arbcom. Hope that helps.
There's been no actual evidence that any vandalism or editing by Alienus has occurred at those articles. Claiming an IP address is a banned user without proof is inappropriate, and contrary to semi-protection policy, which states,
Semi-protection should not be used:
As a preemptive measure against vandalism before any vandalism has occurred.
As a response to regular content disputes, since it may restrict some editors and not others (see the protection policy for how to deal with this).
In the case of a static IP vandal hitting a page (blocking is preferable to semi-protection).
...
To prohibit anonymous editing in general.
Talk
I'm pretty satisfied that the thing that is quacking, waddling, and shedding feathers is, in fact, a duck.
When making a claims contrary to WP:AGF, it might be a good idea to actually have evidence. Can you show any edit in the recent history of Pseudophilosophy that was either 1) vandalism or 2) an edit by a banned user? Likewise, can you show that in Patrecia Scott IPs 207.210.106.104 or 128.197.11.30 are the banned user Alienus, as claimed? All I see is a content dispute, and edit-warring by LaszloWalrus and for that you are not permitted to semi-protect an article. In fact, the content in the latter article that LaszloWalrus keeps removing is in the Nathaniel Branden article: ""In 1968, the close relationship between Rand and Branden came to an abrupt end when Rand discovered that Branden was having a sexual relationship with a third woman, actress Patrecia Scott. Rand then expelled Branden from the Objectivist movement.""Talk
Look more closely. Good day.
That certainly is not an answer; it's your responsibility to demonstrate that you're using Admin powers appropriately. If necessary, I'll bring this up at RFC for Admin conduct.Talk
I encourage you to do whatever you think is best. Regards,
Umm, I'm editing Pseudophilosophy and the gentleman in question seems only to remove the sections that he does not support. Most of that is cited material, or documented on Ayn Rand's own page. It is not novel or disputed, just not liked. I think we need to be wary of such edits and protections. If he is doing this elsewhere, that is even more problematic. I have noticed that at least one time he reverted on the basis of 'alienus' from an anon ip, it did not look like a sockpuppet edit, and i think the continued use of this justification is being used as a trope for a campaign. It should be ignored and forgotten.
It's accepted practice to treat anonymous IP edits that c | 0 |
"
RE: ""Critical Reception"" Edits
I liked the intro that you added to the critical reception section, but the inclusion of a reviewers name seemed a bit odd - name's of reviewers aren't usually included in the review section. Also, reviews should be organized (roughly) by the clout of the reviewing publication, i.e. well-known publications come first and continue in decreasing order of popularity. I also think it's important for the opinion of the reviewer to be easily readable, i.e. if a reviewer deems the record ""her best work since [insert album title], it should be included in the summary, not lumped together and simply referenced. If you have any questions/disputes with my reversion, let me know." | 0 |
Request for review of editing history of Article Govind Kumar Singh
Hello could you review of article Govind Kumar Singh revisions ? One single user has removed all references from article . Please check the revision history . User has edited article many times and its vandalism . Please do needful . Thank | 0 |
You're welcome, thank you for the comment, I wasn't expecting a reply for such a minor edit! | 0 |
(UTC)
The use of BCE and CE is appalling. It's like arbitrarily calling the Jewish calendar PCE (Pre-Current Era) or UC (Unused Calendar). 21:22, 11 March 2014 | 0 |
Alrighty. I'll make a proper print-out reading in a week or so and then put it up for PR. Any help is welcome. Cheers!
Isotalo | 0 |
"
Do you see your own contradiction above? Here are the rules ""there is no criticism to Cynefin>>> therefore no criticism allowed on Wiki >>> try to publish criticism in a refereed journal >>> by the way no respectable journal would ever entertain the advancement or criticism of Cynefin, but HBR will advance it!""" | 0 |
adding signature of User:Lukas Upadhya for clarity. | 0 |
local website on Meredith's murder | 0 |
|decline=Evidence of sockpuppetry + disruptive and trolling use of Wikipedia = eminently blockable. — | 0 |
He's been temporarily blocked for trolling on my RfA. I try to not be suspicious but I do find it funny that there is a recent surge in activity from his account when someone he doesn't like nominates himself from adminship. Darth (talk page) (my RfA!) | 0 |
Can you cite your sources for the production info (companion guides, TV guides, magazines, DVD features,...)? That's a thing many people look for when deciding if to merge or delete, because most non-plot non-fan sources automatically satisfy WP:N, WP:NOT#PLOT and WP:RS/[WP:V]]/WP:OR for fiction articles. The last two production points are weak and might count as trivia that can be removed. Still, I would no longer to merge your article version if brought back (since I said I'd only merge/redirect the clear cases), but someone else may try later (in a year, five years or ten). – t•c | 0 |
"
That seems like a good idea. I'll watchlist it, thanks. • " | 0 |
Also when Dave reported me, he claimed my edits were racist, yet he made almost the same comment on the talk page of cantonese people, about northern chinese. | 0 |
Done at 2010 Thai political protests. | 0 |
Why was he banned in the first place and his 2012 and 2011 in kickboxing pages removed? If you can't tell me, I understand, but he seemed to just be trying to contribute. Is there any way I can view the former article to help me create a new one? As you probably know, it's quite time consuming. | 0 |
Thanks for the reply, I can see why it may be interpreted wrong by some people. But he didn't complain on-wiki, so I'm not aware of how he interpreted it or what rationale was made by the blocking admin. Also this block came about 18 hours after the comment was made, which is part of why it was kind of confusing to be given it without warning. So even if was seen as insulting, the block came well after the conversation was over. As far as I'm concerned, I made my offer to help him on a personal level, and that was all. Certainly this was over before the block started. @ | 0 |
You're at it again, Epeefleche, with your continual deletions here. | 0 |
Sequel
I read an article with script writer David S. Goyer who was discussing the film and mentioned that he and Christopher NOlan and begun speculating on who they who choose for a villain and what the theme for the third movie could be... naturally i don't have that link... anyone else read that? 70.252.211.130 | 0 |
"
Mariah Carey WikiProject
Hello! A Mariah Carey WikiProject has been formed. If you'd like to join, please add your name here. Thank you. – (talk) " | 0 |
"
Yes: option-shift-hyphen. Easy as pie. (talk) " | 0 |
The new duke. —
New game! Dick has two sons. Dick's first son's issue fails after a few more generations. Is the next earl the heir of Dick's second son, or a descendant of Tom? — | 0 |
restraWHAT? Learn English!!! | 0 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.