rev_id
int64 37.7k
700M
| comment
stringlengths 5
10k
| year
int64 2k
2.02k
| logged_in
bool 2
classes | ns
stringclasses 2
values | sample
stringclasses 2
values | split
stringclasses 3
values | attack
bool 2
classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
30,951,497
|
== Kade's Comment == Then why won't you remove Kade's comment? It's about as constructive as mine was.
| 2,005
| false
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
30,952,104
|
==Complaint Against AnonymousEditor== Hello everone. I want to complain against AnonymousEditor. Please advise what I should do. This man is impossible to work with. From the day one he has been reverting everything I post in wikipedia in mattters of minutes. In this last case I just posted an opinion about Sina made by a Persian political activist. He removed it. But the derogatory and insulting comments about Sina made by Muslims are most welcomed. Can anyone who has more understanding how the Wikipedia is administered tell me how to deal with this matter and end this bullishness? Thanks
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
test
| false
|
30,952,263
|
OceanSplash 11 Dec. 2005 19:00
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
30,953,148
|
::Striver if you think that's an important article, could I ask you to first WP:Be bold and create a draft of it? My sense is that it's unlikely to survive calls for its deletion, but that's only one man's view.
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
random
|
train
| false
|
30,957,546
|
`::I already wrote my comment about the article in the above section without making any changes. What I added to the article is a new input. This article contains plenty of insulting and disparaging remarks about Ali Sina made by Muslims who called him “Islamophobe”, “a rabid anti-Islamic zealot”, ``mischievous liar``, a man running a “well organized campaign of hate and deceit”, who is “re-hashing polemic orientalist material”. All this is okay because they vilify Sina. But no one is allowed to posts a single comment made by someone who is on his side. Is this article created to bash the man or tell both sides of the story without taking side? With this much disparaging comments about Sina, where is the positive comment about him? Now I am going to put back the comment and please do not remove it until others have their say too. We already know where you stand and how much you hate Sina. Let others speak too please. OceanSplash 11 Dec. 2005 19:51 `
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
dev
| false
|
30,958,971
|
The views of all sides are not given. Show me one single comment on Ali Sina made by one of his fans. All we have are views of his enemies. This is neither a fan club for Sina nor should it be a bashing club against him. You are the only one who is in violation of the rules of Wikepedia AnonymousEditor and I am willing to take this case to the attention of the administration. I have had enough of bullishness and abuse. You have proven to be a cyber militant with a agenda and no commitment to impartiality. OceanSplash 11 Dec. 2005 20:04
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
test
| false
|
30,960,094
|
Hello Karl: I want to file a complaint against AnonymousEditor. I am tired of being bullied by him all the time. See Ali Sina Talk. Do you know what is the procedure? Thanks.
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
test
| false
|
30,960,233
|
OceanSplash 11 Dec. 2005 20:15
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
test
| false
|
30,968,481
|
*Wikipedia right now is in the fight for its life to regain credibility after the Seigenthaler incident and it is users like you, who selflessly fight to maintain decorum and NPOV that keep the beliefs and hopes that Wikipedia was founded on alive. For this, I'm proud to support you in your efforts to become an administrator and will be glad to have you working towards truth, civility and credibility.
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
30,973,266
|
:I can't seem to find any deleted articles you contributed to, nor have you made any edits to Wikipedia other than this comment. Sorry, but I don't knwo what you are taking about.
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
random
|
train
| false
|
30,976,676
|
` :What I meant is, look specifically at the one where he edits is reverted than the anon IP reverts to his verison again - after he is accused of vandalism he (as the anon) says ``*I* have never vandalised, look at my contributions`` etc.. In the Catwoman article history - By saying this he is saying he is also DrBat, because he is saying he as DrBat is not a vandal`
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
30,976,987
|
`=RE: my user name= Is there a rule against having too long a username? I mean I know it doesn't necessarily look ``tidy`` but surely there are no other problems than that? `
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
30,978,607
|
::That's wrong! I don't know how you got that wrong, but it is wrong! ::His next edit with the anon IP was less than an hour after his previous one as DrBat: he WAS editing while banned with that IP ::See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zatanna&action;=history ::Less than an hour after the ban for 3RR got made started editing with again! ::*2005-12-10 18:21:12 DrBat (why?) - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zatanna&oldid;=30840103 ::*2005-12-10 19:13:44 200.162.245.104 - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zatanna&oldid;=30845
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
dev
| false
|
30,979,653
|
==your article== It was a sourced quote! sourced, I tell you
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
random
|
test
| false
|
30,980,776
|
`Getting a professional vBulletin or Invision Power Board would be a great idea, Wikipedia is not so suited towards debates and discussions because of the fact that talk pages are well, not very organised definitely not as much as forums with easy to read different threads and forum subsections, and the fact that people can edit other peoples' posts I think it would be a really good idea too and would encourage a lot more debate and contributions/growth to Wikipedia `
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
30,983,042
|
== What Volumes? == For whoever noted that there was a three-volume edition of Dangerous Visions and a two-volume edition of Again, Dangerous Visions (or whoever can answer me this)What do you mean by this, and if so, where could I get it? Please reply on my talk page, at . Thanks, .
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
test
| false
|
30,996,785
|
:::This is clearly getting ridiculous. Snape knew how to cure Scermptsa – a spell mentioned only in the HBP's book, clearly not a spell mentioned or taught in school. Who would know it? The creator of the spell, Snape. He also knew about Levicorpus. He is also extremely suspicious when he Slughorn praises Harry as a great Potion-maker, and knew that his old book was still in the cabinet. Harry says it himself: Snape didn't say anything because he would trip up Dumbledore. :::The book is assigned to all sixth years. We have no proof at all that Lily ever befriended Snape – we see her defend him, but Snape rebuffs her. Lily calling herself a Half-Blood when she is clearly a Muggle-born? And Prince? That seems ridiculous. The book also contians a lot of Dark Arts spells %ndash; Sirius says that Snape knew more curses in his frist year than half of the seventh years. lily in the Dark Arts? Not probabe.
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,001,534
|
` -``Supernatural`` has an incorrect pronounciation. The latter mentioned above, pronounced 'when-di-go', is the correct and generally accepted version.`
| 2,005
| false
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,005,362
|
` :: I am trying to decide whether to laugh or sigh. :: . . . :: Yeah. Laughter it is. Good gods. Can we say 'persecution and inferiority issues'? Preferably without Barbie-pink text? :: ;) :: → `
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,007,900
|
` :the ``thumb`` command automaticaly resizes large images into smaller thumbs (so a small resized version of the pic will appear and link to the full size). If you can find larger versions you can upload them right on top of the current pictures and you won't have to change anything. And I'm going to sleep. `
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,012,207
|
on this page, along with an explanation of why you believe this block to be unjustified. You can also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list. Please be sure to include your username and IP address in your email. Do not erase this page or any of the warnings on it. Doing so is also considered vandalism. |} —
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
random
|
test
| false
|
31,012,655
|
==Shadow and Rouge== How do you know Shadow and Rouge have a brother-sister relationship? anon
| 2,005
| false
|
article
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,025,622
|
Sources for claim US government accepts customary international law: *State Department has publicly stated they accept the VCLT as customary international law, even though the United States has not ratified it *State Department has publicly stated they agree with most of the UNCLOS provisions as binding on US under customary international law, even though the US has not ratified it *US has ratified the UN charter, which endorses the existence of customary international law
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,032,742
|
==A Moldavian== I am a Moldavian, and I can explain better what is a Moldavian. As a Sicilian is an Italian, a Bavarian is a German, so the same: a Moldavian is a Romanian!
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,032,933
|
Jmabel, what kind of site is this? A serious one, or a bad joke? This site must have true informations and not stupid jokes like Node do it!!!
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
dev
| true
|
31,042,465
|
His first response was the standard idea that the blast doesn't necessarily lose energy by doing work (causing destruction), since the debris will pick up some of the energy and carry it outward as flying bricks, panels and glass. However it is clear that the blast loses energy by the work done in breaking walls, which is irreversibly lost in warming up the rubble. If each house destroyed takes 1 % of the blast energy, then the energy after destroying 200 houses on a radial line outward from the explosion is down to just 100(0.99^200) = 13 % of what it would be over desert. This is valid for wood-frame houses. Brick and concrete buildings absorb far more energy per building destroyed, so in a modern city the blast pressure would fall very rapidly indeed. This is non-scalable, so it is most pronounced at high yields with large destruction radii computed for open terrain. Brode did concede, when presented with Penney's data, that this effect is not taken into account in American blast calculations at present. See http://nigelcook0.tripod.com/ for further data.
| 2,005
| false
|
article
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,042,757
|
::I've been trying to get to the bottom of this for the List of British MPs not elected from a major party. Beattie should be independent Labour; he did not join the Irish Labour Party until later. But I've come to the conclusion that both lists contain errors and will try to check Craig for his list. ''''
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,043,434
|
== AfD vote removal == Please be aware that it is common (and courteous) practice to go through the page history and find out who made an unsigned comment and then place that information after the comment rather than simply striking out that vote altogether.
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,048,340
|
==NAMBLA Talk Page== I've responded to your remark. Cheers,
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,050,678
|
and UK local elections, 2004
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
random
|
test
| false
|
31,059,740
|
== Students' Union / Association sabs list deletion == *I've started a discussion on as this involve all the union's page. Please go there to provide your opinion if you're interested.
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,064,812
|
== Singular vs. Collective vs. Plural nouns == I've changed a few of the most egregious instances in which it is used as a singular noun (referring to the organization itself rather than the individual members) but with a plural verb. In some instances it's rather ambiguous, though.
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
test
| false
|
31,067,548
|
`Seigenthaler is and has been and probably will again go on some talk show and again make the statement, probably several times, that ``Wikipedia is totally irresponsible`` even though he admits that changes in registration have been made and the article was taken down. The discussion pages are proof of concern for accountability and the actions taken prove responsibility. He is the one making the libelous statements and I believe he even said ``don't use Wikipedia`` on Washington Journal Friday the 9th. On accountability, to enhance accountability even further, why wouldn't we have full registration, or does the current mode provide enough traceability? `
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,068,325
|
` ::Fair enough...not going to worry too much about it, but it is rather bothersome. Although, it is my understanding that since the article deals with a subject that is primarily of American interest, it is American English conventions that are to be used. Certainly, when the subject is not of any specific interest to speakers of a particular form of English, then there's no reason to go about changing it; it should just be left as originally written, unless someone changes the substance of it and uses the form with which he is accustomed rather than what was originally written. However, that is not the case here. ::Furthermore, without context those examples you cited are useless. Whether ``Indianapolis Colts`` is a plural or singular noun depends on whether or not it's being used to refer to the entity itself as distinct from the individuals that make it up, or whether it's just being used to refer to the individuals collectivelly. :: BTW, quit adding stuff. This is the second time I've got an edit conflict while trying to reply to this D `
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,068,506
|
/br>You can comment here.'''
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,074,430
|
Glenn, first of all the Freestylefrappe is not TERSELY saying, he has already blocked me without any warning. Have you seen his version of Kumanovo article? He is talking only about murdering, blood, terrorism and nothing about the city normal life. Of course, there were moments in the Kumanovo’s history when a terrorist attacks took place, but Kumanovo is most of the time a quiet ordinary Macedonian town that doesn’t deserve such descriptions. It is the same as if you write an article about London not mentioning St Paul’s catedral, Westminster, Tower bridge.. and writing only about recent terrorist attacks in the London underground. Talking about copyvios, I noticed that FreeStyleFrappe is using text written by Christopher Deliso You can check that on: http://www.serbianna.com/columns/deliso/ http://www.popovashapka.com/terrorist_bombing_in_kumanovo.htm Are you sure he has permit for doing that? Of course, I will not stay calm until he stops vandalizing the Macedonian towns.
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
test
| false
|
31,074,709
|
Glenn, first of all the Freestylefrappe is not TERSELY saying, he has already blocked me without any warning. Have you seen his version of Kumanovo article? He is talking only about murdering, blood, terrorism and nothing about the city normal life. Of course, there were moments in the Kumanovo’s history when a terrorist attacks took place, but Kumanovo is most of the time a quiet ordinary Macedonian town that doesn’t deserve such descriptions. It is the same as if you write an article about London not mentioning St Paul’s catedral, Westminster, Tower bridge.. and writing only about recent terrorist attacks in the London underground. Talking about copyvios, I noticed that FreeStyleFrappe is using text written by Christopher Deliso You can check that on: http://www.serbianna.com/columns/deliso/ http://www.popovashapka.com/terrorist_bombing_in_kumanovo.htm Are you sure he has permit for doing that? Of course, I will not stay calm until he stops vandalizing the Macedonian towns.
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| true
|
31,074,946
|
== Vandalizing the Macedonian towns == Freestypefrappe, I will not stay calm until you stop vandalizing the Kumanovo page talking only about murdering, blood, terrorism and nothing about the city normal life. Of course, there were moments in the Kumanovo’s history when a terrorist attacks took place, but Kumanovo is most of the time a quiet ordinary Macedonian town that doesn’t deserve such descriptions. It is the same as if you write an article about London not mentioning St Paul’s catedral, Westminster, Tower bridge.. and writing only about recent terrorist attacks in the London underground. Talking about copyvios, I noticed that you are using text written by Christopher Deliso. I found that on the following sites: http://www.serbianna.com/columns/deliso/ http://www.popovashapka.com/terrorist_bombing_in_kumanovo.htm Do you have permits for doing that?
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,075,076
|
== Vandalizing the Macedonian towns == Glenn, first of all the Freestylefrappe is not TERSELY saying, he has already blocked me without any warning. Have you seen his version of Kumanovo article? He is talking only about murdering, blood, terrorism and nothing about the city normal life. Of course, there were moments in the Kumanovo’s history when a terrorist attacks took place, but Kumanovo is most of the time a quiet ordinary Macedonian town that doesn’t deserve such descriptions. It is the same as if you write an article about London not mentioning St Paul’s catedral, Westminster, Tower bridge.. and writing only about recent terrorist attacks in the London underground. Talking about copyvios, I noticed that FreeStyleFrappe is using text written by Christopher Deliso You can check that on: http://www.serbianna.com/columns/deliso/ http://www.popovashapka.com/terrorist_bombing_in_kumanovo.htm Are you sure he has permit for doing that? Of course, I will not stay calm until he stops vandalizing the Macedonian towns.
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,075,186
|
== Vandalizing Macedonian towns == Glenn, first of all the Freestylefrappe is not TERSELY saying, he has already blocked me without any warning. Have you seen his version of Kumanovo article? He is talking only about murdering, blood, terrorism and nothing about the city normal life. Of course, there were moments in the Kumanovo’s history when a terrorist attacks took place, but Kumanovo is most of the time a quiet ordinary Macedonian town that doesn’t deserve such descriptions. It is the same as if you write an article about London not mentioning St Paul’s catedral, Westminster, Tower bridge.. and writing only about recent terrorist attacks in the London underground. Talking about copyvios, I noticed that FreeStyleFrappe is using text written by Christopher Deliso You can check that on: http://www.serbianna.com/columns/deliso/ http://www.popovashapka.com/terrorist_bombing_in_kumanovo.htm Are you sure he has permit for doing that? Of course, I will not stay calm until he stops vandalizing the Macedonian towns.
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,082,808
|
` Thank you. I've posted an Associated Press article that appeared on the news wires today, on the discussion page for nitrites. The article validates my concerns about Wikipedia. I imagine you'll edit it out, or delete it. I suspect that the general public 'gets it' about Wikipedia, too. It's regrettable that the folks who are the most knowledgeable about, and best able to use, the intracacies of Wikipedia's rules and regulations are also the people best equipted to use that knowlege to stifle newbies, and/or those who are less computer-savvy, who may make mistakes, or who haven't even yet heard about what a 'sock puppet' is, or RR32 rule, or whatever rules you and heah used to stifle my contributons. I doubt you'll 'get it', nor do I care. But, at the end of the day, just maybe there's a chance that you'll actually understand the damage you do by your holier-than-thou attitudes, and arrogant computer-geek power-plays. This is in no way meant to be a personal attack`` on you or heah, or anyone else who edits in Wikipedia. It's simply the reaction of an ordinary guy, based on his observations and experiences after being stifled by those who dissagreed with his edits. You and heah, in addition to not agreeing with my edits, clearly have the superiour knowledge of how Wikipedia works, which made it easy for you to throw down obstables to my postings, make false allegations of wrong doing, and activate Wikipedia's rules to either threaten to ban me or block me, or as you did, to actually ban or block me. But the more important issue and problem is for Wikipedia itself; namely, that this kind of censorship is akin to the autoritarion rulers whose people are only allowed to see or read whatever the rulers deem suitable which will, as I've said before, only serve to further diminish the already tarnished reputaton of Wikipedia. `
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,083,961
|
Headline text FUCK YOU
| 2,005
| false
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| true
|
31,084,135
|
YOU FUCKING SUCK I HATE YOUR FUCKING SITE IT SUCKS ASS!
| 2,005
| false
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| true
|
31,085,414
|
` ==Esperanza elections== Hi This is a quick note just to let you know that there's an election under way at Esperanza. If you'd like to become a candidate for Administrator General or the Advisory Council, just add your name here by 15 December 2005. Voting begins at 12:00UTC on 16 December. You've received this spam because you signed up for it here. To stop the spam, pop over and remove yourself and you'll never hear from Esperanza again! ➨ E `
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
random
|
test
| false
|
31,087,522
|
` Glenn, it is not true that I’m removing FreeStyleFrappe’s additions all the time. You can simply check this if you visit the History tab on Kumanovo article. His “version” of the page and my info only appended to his info is commented with the following text: OK FreestyleFrappe, I will leave your ``violence`` texts, yet I'm not sure why it is so important to you to have only bombs, blood and killing in an article for a normal town like Kumanovo). I meant that the things were fine than, but on 8 December 2005 FreestyleFrappe again removed all my additions. I’m trying to understand that everybody has different view on the same thing, but still I cannot understand how somebody wants to describe Kumanovo with the following paragraphs: Econony, Violence, Narcotics!? Not to mention the following “FreestyleFrappe version” sentence: Also notable is the private practice ``Otodent``, located in Goce Delcev suburb, which offers different medical services like ENT and dentistry. The founder and the director is Dr. Milenko Trendafilovski. (you can simply check this on the current version of Kumanovo article) Does he know how many private dentistry services are present in Kumanovo? Is that npov? Just for your information, I’m now blocked user by his majesty FreestyleFrappe (just because I write similar comment as my first reply to you). Please understand that I’m normal citizen of Macedonia, I have many friends in Kumanovo, they live, study and work there and they are really surprised how his native town is described on Wikipedia. Bitola `
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,093,649
|
: Yes I did, if Wikipedia can not be trusted with something as simple as, quite literally, 1, 2, 3, then it has a very serious problem, and the slashdot article happened to be just about this. I do not give importance to a comment receiving a high or low rating on slashdot as that can too often be just a measure of the biases of some modders. I think I have abided by wikipedia policies that content must be based on verifiable sources and the others who caused me much inconvenience haven't. Wikipedia is a public resource and I see no reason why I should shy from making this issue public when it's ontopic on another site and a poignant example of a problem. ()
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,094,389
|
You can check the list of blocked users on the following address: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Ipblocklist
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
test
| false
|
31,094,566
|
` == Examples of errors in this version == These are examples, not a comprehensive list. While typing it I had the very off-putting feeling that I had already done this several times, evidenced here. It hasn't worked with you, you're still unreasaonble, but I do it anyway for emphasis, and for the benefit of others. * ``The term ``Arabic numerals`` is actually a misnomer`` ** This smacks of political revisionism of the worst kind; what is known in English as the Arabic Numerals are the Arabic Western Numerals, not even the Arabic Eastern Numerals. Yes, they are derived from ancient Indian numerals but nonetheless they are the Arabic Numerals. Look here, the norm is that when people in English say Arabic Numerals they are referring to 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, those are the Arabic (Western) Numerals, they are not referring to १, २, ३, ४, ५, ६, ७, ८, ९, and other varities of Indian numerals, modern or ancient. They are known in English as the Arabic Numerals, that's a fact, I will not accept a revisionist statement that counters a fact so early on in the text the article, the article must start with the factual. I'll accept it under a revisionism section much later on, but it must be balanced there with opinions counter to it (counter to the counterfactual). * ``... what are known in English as ``Arabic numerals`` were neither invented nor widely used by the Arabs.``, ``In the Arab World—until modern times—the Arabic numeral system was used only by mathematicians. Muslim scientists used the Babylonian numeral system, and merchants used a numeral system similar to the Greek numeral system and the Hebrew numeral system. Therefore, it was not until Fibonacci that the Arabic numeral system was used by a large population.`` ** What reliable sources do you have that they were not widely used by the Arabs? Why don't you cite reliable sources? Here's evidence that they were The numerals though were already in wide use throughout the Arab empire, as Avicenna who was born in 980 tells in his autobiography that he learnt them, as a child, from a humble vegetable seller. He also tells that when his father, in Bukhara, was visited by scholars from Egypt in 997, including Abu Abdullah al-Natili, they taught him more about them. J J O'Connor and E F Robertson point out: He also tells of being taught Indian calculation and algebra by a seller of vegetables. All this shows that by the beginning of the eleventh century calculation with the Indian symbols was fairly widespread and, quite significantly, was known to a vegetable trader. * ``The first inscriptions using 0 in India have been traced to approximately 200 CE.`` ** Why don't you cite reliable sources?! Here, I'll cite some: According to Professor EF Robertson and DR JJ O'Connor, ``The first record of the Indian use of zero which is dated and agreed by all to be genuine was written in 876`` on the Gwalior tablet stone. This is also verified by Professor Lam Lay Yong, an an Effective Member of the International Academy of the History of Science ``the earliest appearance in India of a symbol for zero in the Hindu-Arabic numeral system is found in an inscription at Gwalior which is dated 870 AD``. According to Menninger (p. 400): ``This long journey begins with the Indian inscription which contains the earliest true zero known thus far (Fig. 226). This famous text, inscribed on the wall of a small temple in the vicinity of Gvalior (near Lashkar in Central India) first gives the date 933 (A.D. 870 in our reckoning) in words and in Brahmi numerals. Then it goes on to list four gifts to a temple, including a tract of land ``270 royal hastas long and 187 wide, for a flower-garden.`` Here, in the number 270 the zero first appears as a small circle (fourth line in the Figure); in the twentieth line of the inscription it appears once more in the expression ``50 wreaths of flowers`` which the gardeners promise to give in perpetuity to honor the divinity.`` The Encyclopaedia Britannica says, ``Hindu literature gives evidence that the zero may have been known before the birth of Christ, but no inscription has been found with such a symbol before the 9th century.`` I'll accept mention prior to the Gwalior tablet, in fact, the article needs it and I'm planning on doing it once I'm no longer distracted by your nonsense, but such mention must be well-phrased so as not to mislead and contradict scientific consensus, and the phrasing must be limited to the exact intent of verifiable and reliable sources. * ``However, it is
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
dev
| false
|
31,095,307
|
::: I have violated the WP:3RR. Thanks and regards. ()
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,100,585
|
` * I have major mis-givings how the show is going to present ``space`` to the cadets once they ``launch`` I understand the plan is to install large cinema-like screens outside the craft. However surely no-matter how big and impressive these screens its going to obvious that they are 2D images?`
| 2,005
| false
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,102,987
|
` : What are you talking about when you say ``unless you finally decide to read what others say, there's no point replying to any of this``?! I request that you be specific, please. As for your reply there, I had already responded to it before you wrote the above. ()`
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,105,739
|
` == Let's take a good pause, please == Let's keep ``disputed`` tag on both versions of the article as things stand, keep them linking to each other or even both on the same page, let's call it a pause, because this is such a waste of time and I have better things to do with mine. I think before we work on any content we need to work out a method for discussing things between us and coming to agreement over them, or at least accomodating acceptable disgreements and showcasing them where needed. I think it would be better, instead of fighting over two versions and reverting endlessly, that we agree on facts on a point-by-point basis, and discuss the verifiable and reliable sources of each. This is demanded by Wikipedia policies anyhow, that content must be based on verifiable and reliable sources. This would perhaps be my main suggestion, and I request that everyone here please make comment on how we could make this work. No content, not for now, but just process. What process would you suggest and what would you find acceptable procedure. Regards. ()`
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,106,950
|
`*I think the distinction between the Co-operative Group as an individual society and the wider Co-operative movement is an important one. It is often mistakenly thought of as a single ``Co-op`` company when it is in fact made up of many constituent societies. Don't merge `
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,111,034
|
==User page thanks== Thanks for reverting my user page. I had expected it but not quite that much.
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,116,083
|
` {| class=``Talk-Notice`` |- | | style=``text-align: center`` | This article was nominated for deletion on December 6, 2005. The result of the discussion was keep. An archived record of this discussion can be found here. |}`
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,118,471
|
`:: Kindly please stop lying if you wish me to stop pointing out your lies. It's very rude and disrespectful when I spend my time citing verifiable and reliable sources and you just lie outright, nevermind content, but on just simply what's happening here, and here's an example of just how you just now did it before requesting that I stop calling you ``liars``; from ``Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#December_8``, I quote your statement and my reply to it: :: QUOTED: ``I hope that now since all editors have reached a consensus on the article, and have tried to explain you in clearest possible words the difference between numeral symbols and numeral system, you would play a more constructive role. Thanks. :: QUOTED: Why are you lying again here? yes, lying! As you had been doing for quite some time now and as I have pointed out. The dictionary defines a lie as ``1. A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood. 2. Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.`` First of all, ``all editors have reached a consensus on the article`` is a demonstrable false statement that you should know is not true and that we're having this exchange here is evidence enough that it isn't, nevermind others. Second, here's your other BIG lie, you say others ``have tried to explain you in clearest possible words the difference between numeral symbols and numeral system``, Oh really? why don't you tell everyone here that it is I who made the clearest distinction and as far as I remember and see on the page I was the first to make it between numeral symbols and numeral system, and you should know because you have been around. I clearly distinguished in my first post between the Arabic Numerals (1, 2, 3, 4...) and the Hindu-Arabic Numeral system in a paraphragh that begins with ``- For a start,`` Talk:History_of_Indian_and_Arabic_numerals#RFC_2 and you should especially know, not just because youhave been around, but also because what you quoted above happens to be just the paragraph under it! And again I made the distinction in ``the clearest possible words`` when I proposed here, as my first(!) point in an suggested outline, Talk:History_of_Indian_and_Arabic_numerals#Suggested_outline.2C_please_consider_and_discuss ``differentiate a specific numeral script (eg, Arabic Western, Arabic Eastern, Devanagari) from the numeral system (ie, Indian-Arabic, which includes many numerals scripts), the rest of the article should maintain this, it should also keep in mind what the readers may have searched for when looking up this article and cater for those needs (eg, is the reader looking up the Arabic Western numerals script or the Indian-Arabic Numeral system?)``, and then again , who prefers my version and is against yours, made the same disctinction Talk:History_of_Indian_and_Arabic_numerals#What_this_page_is_about. The dictionary defines a liar as ``One that tells lies`` and ``a person who has lied or who lies repeatedly``, if you want me to stop calling pointing out your lies stop lying! ()`` :: As for blocking, kindly please stop threatening me! Wikipedia makes it clear what how ``personal attacks`` as per the blocking policy are defined Blocking_policy#Personal_attacks_which_place_users_in_danger. I'm entitled to identify your ``lies`` as defined in the dictionary and entitled to characterise your evident and demonstrable biases, all of which are of high relevance to the content of this article. `
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,122,323
|
The Tags I put them there after seeing edits by a user called basically saying this artist was the greatest thing ever it seems.
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
dev
| false
|
31,122,492
|
Sorry for not signing!
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,122,743
|
When you say Macedonians, do you mean the Slavs? I'm Macedonian and I'm neither Slav or Greek! - Svetlyo
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
test
| false
|
31,129,815
|
` Wow! I just saw tonight's news article on Wikipedia that played on FOX News. (Earlier, I'd posted here the AP article on Wikipedia from Dec 12, 2005.) In what has become a huge coincidence, the very day the media begins reporting on the dangers of Wikipedia, happens to be the day immediately after the very week I discovered misinformation and falsehoods being posted on this page about nitrites, and then tried to edit them by attempting to add more accurate information, but then was attacked and harassed by another person who disagrees with my edits and was ultimately blocked and threatened by a purported Wikipedia administrator. As was reported in the news today, people can go to http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/ to learn more about how Wikipedia functions, and where the dangers exist. The folks at wikipediawatch report that, what's happening in Wikipedia, is that any collection of citations that may APPEAR balanced is all that anybody expects. If the title or snippet in a link itself contributes to this impression, then the full text is not researched by anyone. This is exactly what has been going on in this nitrite page. As a result, it truly is, as wikipediawatch reminds us, ``garbage in, garbage out, garbage back in...`` and after a few cycles of this, it all turns into `` a big, stinking heap``. Truly, as the news media warned today: ``Don't believe eveyrthing you read on the Web, especially on Wikipedia!`` The following two posts, found in a wikipediareview blog, sum up my experiences this past week, after having been harassed, threatened and finally blocked, after I attempted to add to the body of knowledge about nitrites/poppers. They demonstrate how dangerous Wikipedia based on its current model really is: ``Wikipedia's procedural faults, complete anarchy as regards contributions, and sometimes-bizzare social rules do not teach people to become good researchers or writers... it teaches them how to be good Wikipedians, or to get the hell out.`` - Jason Scott ``. . . when it comes to history and politics, Wikipedia can claim whatever it wants by shutting out those who actually know something about a certain topic. In that way, Wikipedia can rewrite history as it sees fit - which may have nothing to do with reality or the actual facts.`` - SummerFR Finally, this post on a board, discussing wikipedia, really sets it out well: ``Any moron can pretty well say anything they want on any topic, which is fine for a News Group or a Forum but not an Encyclopedia. In my opinion a reference source should be authoritative enough to end arguments not start them. I believe that Wikipedia could better serve the internet community if they checked their facts first before publishing the article. Instead, we have a situation where the cart is placed before the horse and we end up with what is left by the horse.`` Nuf said.`
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
test
| false
|
31,137,885
|
` :``Consulados`` back then were merchant guilds and not diplomatic entities as we recognize them now. The first one was established in Sevilla and had the monopoly of trade with the Americas until the one in Cádiz was formed (ca. 17th century). Therefore these are two archives from two different entities, they just happen to be stored in the same place nowadays. | | Esperanza `
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
random
|
dev
| false
|
31,140,976
|
Why would expounding on the article now not be allowed? If there was a problem and it could be fixed, why won't the ability to fix it be hindered? You still have not answered my first questions about you labeling the article nonsense. Just because my name is the same as one of the band members does not mean I am being vain. It could be a coincedence. I think that its protection now is irresponsible wiki etiquette.
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,147,790
|
` ::I'm sorry, but any ``LiveJournal friends`` are irrelevant to this topic. If you are referring to myself telling Nidara that I had asked some people to review the article, yes, I did. However, 1) they weren't friends, and 2) the didn't ``pile on``; they simply reviewed it and commented on it. I don't see what you're trying to accomplish by pointing this out. Have you filed the RfC yet? I will if you have not. `
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,150,396
|
` == Edit summary == When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labelled ``Edit summary`` under the main edit-box. It looks like this: : The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature. When you leave the edit summary blank, some of your edits could be mistaken for vandalism and may be reverted, so please always briefly summarize your edits, especially when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. :I do, when I'm doing anything more than grammar. The only exception to this would be on Clan Fraser of Lovat, of which I'm the only editor at present, and I didn't think to add edit summaries. Otherwise, I believe that I have done so. If you have any particular situations in which I have failed to do so, I'd be happy to explain myself; I'd much appreciate it. ::See it for yourself: Green bars are for edit summaries, red bars are for edits with no summaries. :::That's quite a nifty tool there. I'm fully aware of edit summaries. I don't provide edit summaries on my own talk page, or my User Page. I also don't usually provide them on other users' talk pages. In earlier editing, I didn't take the summary seriously; if you're referring to anything from several months ago or more, I do apologize. Like I said: if you have any particular situations where you believe I missed one, please bring them up to me. I would sincerely like to know. Otherwise, I don't see what you're trying to accomplish here. ::::I think the link speaks for itself. As for what I'm trying to accomplish, I think my original comment explained just that. :::::If you were trying to just helpfully remind me, I thank you, though I don't think it was needed. I saw the page; it didn't say anything to me, except that I finally know my edit count. If you really want to get a point across to me, I suggest you do so blatantly. If your original comment explained your motives, then we are done here. == Your ``nonsense`` page == If you are interested in archiving your old talk, you may want to review Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page. Accusing other editors of ``defacing`` your talk page for politely reminding you of Wikipedia policies against personal attacks does not demonstrate good faith on your part, and will only make you look bad. I suggest you move the archive to a more appropriate name like . Furthermore, making negative comments about discussion by other editors, and claiming that their edits ``are not worth reading`` shows that you aren't interested in abiding by WP:NPA, WP:CIV, nor WP:EQ. If you want to improve your working relationship with other editors, it might help to avoid incivility. :I'm not interested in archiving my old talk as of yet, but thank you for the suggestion. I use ``nonsense`` in a lot of ways other people do not, because I find a lot of other words to be boring at present. Likewise, instead of ``cool,`` or ``awesome,`` or ``that's interesting,`` I'm currently in the habit of referring to things as ``nifty.`` It's something I do. I know how to archive a talk page, I've done it before. I still do not consider suggesting ignorance to be a personal attack, because I've grown up in a rather intellectual atmosphere. I'm not going to change just because a few people are offended at my words. I thought that this was resolved by now. I have quite decent relationships with other working editors; it seems that a particular user and myself simply do not get along. It is regretful, but something which seems to be. If someone takes offence to my creation of a Nonsense page, they can bring it up to me personally, as you have done, and I will explain. That's another thing that I do. My other option would be to straight-out delete your ``reminders of policy,`` just like another particular user has done with mine in the past. I think you know why I don't do that. When all is said and done, it's my talk page, and I'll do what I like with it. ::I think you have avoided my point. Other editors (including myself) may perceive your comments as petty attacks. Your response seems to show that you just don't care about civility or treating other editors with a modicum of respect. The edits in question most certainly did not ``deface`` your talk page, nor could they be considered nonsense in the true definition of the word. Describing the discussion as ``worthless`` comes close to violating the spirit of WP:NPA. While I don't think you are directly making a serious personal attack in this instance, you cannot use your talk page to attack other editors. Again, please read WP:CIV. :::I have not avoided your point. Other editors may percieve all they wish, but if they're not willing to bring it up to me, then it isn't serious enough to be dealt with. Generally, I don't retain high levels of respect for people who simply percieve without making sure of things. I believe I explained the labelling of ``nonsense`` it's akin to miscellaneous in its current usage on this page. Language is a living, fluid thing; especially where I come from, you can't tie things down to set defenitions it's all about context. I didn't say that the content of the page was worthless simply that it was probably not worth reading, since it is irrelevant by now, and probably doesn't have anything to do with the reader. I still do not view anything on that page as a reminder of policy. I view this as a better solution than ``Strike offensive words or replace them with milder ones on talk pages`` as suggested by WP:CIV. I have left all words undifferenced, and simply moved them to a place where I do not have to see them when I'm looking for a new message. They simply aren't serving any purpose for me. :::My talk page essentially serves as a tool for others to leave me messages, whatever they may be. It's much easier for me to not only get the messages faster, but to respond to them civilly and cooly if I do not have to review certain discussions that do naught but aggrivate me. `
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,153,463
|
` ::Please refrain from assuming things that you do not know, particularly in reference to other people. To suggest that I am so intollerant is highly offensive to me. So is suggsting that I have any ulterior motives, or that I follow any sort of dogma. A continuation of this will result in my reporting you for making personal attacks, as well as harrassment. I don't like using Admins this way; it's not very conducive to building an encylcopedia. However, at present, you are preventing me from that very task, and so in this instance it is. This will not go to me Nonsense page, because I brought the issue up here, on your talk page. I therefore regard this as the place to discuss the issue. Again, please refrain from attacking me. It doesn't get either of us anywhere. `
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,158,572
|
` ::::Thank you for filing the RfC. Please do not mention Good Faith to me. Review your own talk with me on the subject if you wonder why. I didn't know it was your summary: It was unsigned, as it should be. I simply updated it. I added the current situation, and a time. Judging by the fact that it was at the top of the section, I figured it had been filed awhile ago a new RfC should've been placed at the bottom of the section. Once more: any user who comes in here from that community is not neccessarily my friend; I simply put out an ad for more people to come in and edit. If you note, I made damn sure to tell people to keep things neutral: ``Remember though, this is an encyclopedia; don't go about posting propaganda...`` Are you saying that attracting new editors to Wikipedia is a bad thing. I didn't tell them what to say; I suggested ways to get their words heard, as anyone would do for a newcomer. If you are attempting to aggrivate me, I must again ask you to cease; it doesn't get either of us anywhere. `
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
dev
| false
|
31,159,304
|
December 2005 (UTC) Only if two sentences remain: one for, one against, as I discussed above. 03:35, 13
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,160,863
|
` == Just a little thank you == Thank you, Nidara. The nonsense that's been going on at Wikipedia is quite unfortunate, and I've noticed you've done nothing but contribute to the process of getting the article back up and running. It's great that you've jumped right in, acknowledged that you don't know all the policies, and earnestly set yourself to learning of them when you were aware. It's just nice to know that you're out there, doing your thing. `
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,164,823
|
` : You're a liar! You have been lying all along including today, and right here above! , please see the following examples of lies from just today, and here I'll quote what I wrote to him earlier: :: Kindly please stop lying if you wish me to stop pointing out your lies. It's very rude and disrespectful when I spend my time citing verifiable and reliable sources and you just lie outright, nevermind content, but even on just simply what's happening here, and here's an example of just how you just now did it before requesting that I stop calling you ``liars``; from Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#December_8, I quote your statement and my reply to it: :: QUOTED: ``I hope that now since all editors have reached a consensus on the article, and have tried to explain you in clearest possible words the difference between numeral symbols and numeral system, you would play a more constructive role. Thanks. :: QUOTED: Why are you lying again here? yes, lying! As you had been doing for quite some time now and as I have pointed out. The dictionary defines a lie as ``1. A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood. 2. Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.`` First of all, ``all editors have reached a consensus on the article`` is a demonstrable false statement that you should know is not true and that we're having this exchange here is evidence enough that it isn't, nevermind others. Second, here's your other BIG lie, you say others ``have tried to explain you in clearest possible words the difference between numeral symbols and numeral system``, Oh really? why don't you tell everyone here that it is I who made the clearest distinction and as far as I remember and see on the page I was the first to make it between numeral symbols and numeral system, and you should know because you have been around. I clearly distinguished in my first post between the Arabic Numerals (1, 2, 3, 4...) and the Hindu-Arabic Numeral system in a paraphragh that begins with ``- For a start,`` Talk:History_of_Indian_and_Arabic_numerals#RFC_2 and you should especially know, not just because youhave been around, but also because what you quoted above happens to be just the paragraph under it! And again I made the distinction in ``the clearest possible words`` when I proposed here, as my first(!) point in an suggested outline, Talk:History_of_Indian_and_Arabic_numerals#Suggested_outline.2C_please_consider_and_discuss ``differentiate a specific numeral script (eg, Arabic Western, Arabic Eastern, Devanagari) from the numeral system (ie, Indian-Arabic, which includes many numerals scripts), the rest of the article should maintain this, it should also keep in mind what the readers may have searched for when looking up this article and cater for those needs (eg, is the reader looking up the Arabic Western numerals script or the Indian-Arabic Numeral system?)``, and then again , who prefers my version and is against yours, made the same disctinction Talk:History_of_Indian_and_Arabic_numerals#What_this_page_is_about. The dictionary defines a liar as ``One that tells lies`` and ``a person who has lied or who lies repeatedly``, if you want me to stop calling pointing out your lies stop lying! ()`` : In addition, I did *not* start the POV fork (Alternative views on Arabic numerals). : In addition, you are being misleading and also lying about the following ``I replied to his comment at Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#December_8, and at 22:08, asked him on Talk:Arabic numerals to respond to my comment at Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#December_8. At 22:09 he said he had already replied on that page. I replied at 22:10 saying he hasn't. At 23:38 he posted a reply on Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#December_8, and then posted a message on Talk:Arabic numerals claiming that I was blatantly ``lying`` at 22:10 when I said he had'nt replied. Obviously, anyone who would look at the timings will take a second to figure out the truth.``... Why do you not mention that you replied to someone else on Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#December_8 at ``deeptrivia (talk) ``, which I later on found and I replied to you at ``csssclll()``, which you should be aware of because you replied at ``Thanks. deeptrivia (talk) `` but you don't mention this above!! ~Why don't you mention it?! You came to Talk:Arabic numerals within less than 5 mintutes and you posted at ``deeptrivia (talk) `` ``, unless you finally decide to read what others say, there's no point replying to any of this.`` which misled me and gave me the impression that you did not see my reply half an hour before your post, which I told you that I had replied, and then when you insisted that I didn't I went over and replied again, that might've been an honest misunderstanding on both our parts, but here's where you're being not only misleading above but lying yet again; I demand that you prove your following claim above ``and then posted a message on Talk:Arabic numerals claiming that I was blatantly ``lying`` at 22:10 when I said he had'nt replied.`` Where on Talk:Arabic numerals did I claim that you were blatantly lying at 22:10 when you said I hadn't replied??!?! And again on that page you lied when you said ``I asked you to reply at 22:08. At 22:09 you said you had already replied. I said you haven't at 22:10. You replied at 23:38, and then claimed that I was ``lying`` at 22:10 when I said you haven't replied.``, where did I say at 22:09 that I replied? That's a lie. and where did I claim in my 23:38 reply that you were lying at 22:10 when you said I haven't replied?!?! That's another lie. : , please check this out and see for yourself what kind of people I had been inconvenienced by. Regards, ()`
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| true
|
31,165,995
|
` :Thank you for your request. :# It is not a campaign. :# Feel free to read the post. Skinwalker hunted it down through google, and posted it on the Veganism Talk Page. :# I have read that page. I was trying to attract attention to the article, yes. That community is full of knowledgable folk, and is an excellent resource for finding things out. Many, many people are members. I'm sorry if you view attracting others to Wikipedia as a bad thing. I did not order them to do anything. They aren't friends. I was bringing in outside voices. I have argued consistently on many topics with many of them, and I repsect the community as a good place for discussion. I do not converse with any of them other than in that community. What you see on that page is all that has happened between me and any of them in regards to Wikipedia. If you see a distinct problem with it, please let me know. None of them are meatpuppets, and I expect they'd all be fairly offended at the accusation. Feel free to contact them; they probably have contact information on their Live Journal User Info pages. Again, thank you for your request. I'm sure that you are only doing what you think is best for the encyclopedia. `
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,166,891
|
==== I see you have experience with editor Dominick. If you have anything relevant to add to this complaint about his tactics, please do so: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Dominick#Evidence_of_disputed_behavior Thank you.
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,167,414
|
`, 13 December 2005 (UTC) ::::Viriditas, I know your position about my page. I have tried to explain it to you. I use Nonsense very lightly, and explained this to you. I appreciate your reminders, I really do. However, they aren't incredibly relevant anymore. especially to others. I can access my Nonsense page whenever I like, as can anyone else if they've a mind to read its contents. My edit summary of ``nonsense`` was because the edit invovled my nonsense page. If it truly is that big of a deal to you, I will change my words. However, I sincerely wish you to know that I am not trying to offend you with those words. 08:03`
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
test
| false
|
31,167,872
|
` Since has decided to threaten me, I will not edit the Request again. However, I strongly suggest that: #You add a date to it. The Project Page asks you to do it. #You follow the other guidelines as well: :* To request other users to comment on an issue, add a link to the Talk page for the article, a brief neutral statement of the issue, and the date. :* Only with the date, don't list the details, and don't submit arguments or assign blame. :* On the Talk page of the article, it can help to summarize the dispute. Thank you. `
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,168,088
|
` December 2005 (UTC) ::::I don't think it's neccessary. We could use a simple, tastefull opening line to the section. I do want to get other information in, but I find those tags to give off the wrong impression. Escpecially for this situation. 08:14, 13`
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,168,797
|
Hi there, Your edit on the Siegenthaler article was blatant, blatant vandalism, and I've blocked you for 24 hours for it. If you'd like to come back and make productive edits after that, feel free to do so.
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,176,796
|
:Hmm, if you're going to go down that line then we'd better explain why the tactics were different. Napoleon could afford battles where he lost 30,000 men as his armies numbered in the 100s of thousands. Wellington struggled to get 30,000 troops and could never afford to take risks. With regard to persuit, it is in good measure a feature of cavalry reserves; Wellington had few enough for use in battle let alone to keep fresh for the persuit.
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,178,251
|
==== Hello, JLeigh, I am hoping you will pay a visit to this page and act as a witness to Dominick's attitudes and tactics with regard to the Traditionalist Catholics entry. Thanks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Dominick
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,179,958
|
` :::::You can twist and bend it all you want. Doesn't change the facts bub ;) :See where I'm getting? Now, I will edit this article once more and should you revert it, I will be taking it up with higher authorities. Thanks for your understanding in the issue! :Furthermore, they don't need to identify themselves as muslims when they have declared Islamic JIHAD, you fool. :::Again, I ask you to please provide a reputable source indicating that any of the hostage-takers ever declared a Jihad - as I said, it seems they never said the bare prayers to even be devout Muslims, in fact I haven't yet seen any reference to any of the hostage-takers saying a single word in Arabic, which would be odd for a ``Islamic Jihadist terrorist``, to say the least (bounties) :::::I provided proof. Look up. And of course you wouldn't see anything in the press to indicate their Islamic religion, after all, it was John Williams and his aide (who drew pictures of Osama) instead of John Muhammad who terrorized Washington D.C. some time ago... `
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,180,707
|
==VMORO== Nationmaster is a website mirroring Wikipedia. As for the Factbook - Eurostat, the UN and the Bulgarian national statistics give completely different numbers for the population of Bulgaria as at 2005. So we are going to include five different numbers or what? Third of all, the Factbook does not state the number you keep posting - it is a number which you have calculated yourself. Thank you very much but estimates by Antidote have no place in any article here. It's quite evident you are engaged in trolling and there are many other users who notice that.
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
test
| false
|
31,184,268
|
:Because it has a major Polish population and Czechs don't even know there is something like Zaolzie. -
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,185,432
|
, 13 December 2005 (UTC) Well, officially you are still F.Y.R.O.M, you haven't won the name yet 13:13
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,189,093
|
== Stabby McPenis == * Stab ** Stab stab stab
| 2,005
| false
|
article
|
blocked
|
test
| true
|
31,195,715
|
` You have been temporarily blocked from editing for vandalism of Wikipedia. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may come back after the block expires. `
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,197,021
|
23 delete, 11 keep, 3 projectify. I'd count that as a pretty clear no consensus. If you are bothered by the decision, you can rasie it at WP:DRV, but there's not much chance they will say the closing was incorrect. -
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,198,561
|
` ::, I left you a little note on the page you mentioned. `
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,198,766
|
I'm not very fond of you pegging me for editing things when in fact I hardly use your website. Stop trying to get me to join up to bolster your numbers and find a more effective way of harrassing people and/or keeping them in check, jerkoff.
| 2,005
| false
|
user
|
blocked
|
test
| true
|
31,201,682
|
::You are...I support using sources that are outide of the federal opinion...you know, those sources I cited earlier...the ones that are from even relatively liberal medias
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,213,327
|
`. However, it would help if ``Capitalization`` was spelled right, which was done today`
| 2,005
| false
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,214,650
|
` == Unprotection == Hopefully things have cooled down. Unless there are objections, I'm going to unprotect in roughly 50 minutes (if I don't fall asleep). Please be aware that, now that everyone's been properly warned, 3RR will be in strict enforcement mode. A violation of 3RR will yield at least a 24 hour block. Any sock puppets will be considered the same as the ``main`` user and will be blocked accordingly as well and who/what is a sock puppet will be based on the judgment of mine or any other administrator. In this case, I've made a judgment call about one IP being a sock puppet, and I stand by that due to the overwhelming amount of evidence. :Well, I fell asleep. I've just unprotected the article. Play nice, folks. Hope you had a nice rest. I feel like the little boy who was punished for something he didn't realize he'd done. I didn't have any idea of what a sock puppet was, and barely do now, even after reading about it (I'm not very technically inclined. I even use a Macintosh because I'm such a computer-dufus. =) ). At any rate, I promise not to sock puppet again (I think. I'm not sure how you do it, but if it was because I forgot to sign in each time I edited, I promise not to make that mistake again. Or at least I hope I don't or, it's off with my sock puppet head!). I understand how you more experinced Wikipedia folks can find fault with, and have little patience with someone like me. But, I beg your indulgence as I try to learn how to make a meaningful contribution to Wikipedia. Kind regards, `
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,217,022
|
they are required to train to be airborne qual, as are most special ops soldiers
| 2,005
| false
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,217,215
|
::As far as Muslims are concerned any criticism of Islam is hate speech. I have been a Muslim for five years and know perfectly the hatred that Muslims have for apostates and the level of intolerance towards their critics. Been there, done that myself, without even being aware of it. It all seemed normal to do. Today I find myself on the other side of the fence. Quoting opinions contrary to those believed by Muslims is not hate speech. The Quran is filled with hate speech. Look at the article Ali Sina for example: that is hate speech. The very language is despiteful. My every contribution to Islamofascims, Islamofobia and Ali Sina are removed. The only reason is because they are not in agreement with Islamic creed. We must not allow Wikipedia to be converted into an Islamic tool of propaganda. Both views must be expressed equally. Take the example of Sina’s page. There we have six comments made by anonymous Muslims calling him all names including a mischievous liar, a rabid anti Islamist, Islamophobe, etc. In the paragraph that said “Ali Sina is a controversial personality” I quoted an example of how diverse are the opinions of Sina’s fans from those of his foes. This is not to agree with those opinions. Muslims resisted this example tooth and nail, with all inane and invalid excuses. I made it clear that this is not an endorsement of those views and the notability of the people making those allegations or praises are not important. They are just a sample of what people say about him. It goes from one extreme to another. I think both examples should be stated so the claim that he is a controversial is supported with these examples. Why Muslims do not want to have any mention of what Sina’s fans say about him and only the insults of his foes are mentioned? Any fool will see this article is written by people with an axe to grind against it subject. ::Since I joined Wikipedia, every contribution I made was removed and reverted and incidentally those who removed them were invariably Muslims. Am I not allowed to put the two together and conclude that this is Islamic zealotry at work? 13.Dec. 2005 18:20
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,218,133
|
Your constant accusations seem make me view critical your neutrality-if the term is misused it should be mentioned in specific chapter, and not spread throughout the whole article.
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,224,088
|
==Ok, This Isn't Working Here== I'll make an rfc in a bit, let's see if we can resolve this dispute there. Until then, nobody touches the article.
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
dev
| false
|
31,224,379
|
Why don't you change the Israel's site and you do it for my country? Do you know more about the difference between Republic of Macedonia and Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia? U.N. don't recognise FYROM as RoM, why do you force this recognision? I'm from Bulgarian Macedonia and since the end of Yugoslavia I have to change the name of my region, cause some other people want to monopolise something that they don't have (less than 50%) and historically don't deserve. At least they can give the opportunity for others to use the name Macedonia. How can I describe my region? Macedonia (Bulgarian), bordering Macedonia? Am I Macedonian, or not? NA dthen if Macedonian I'm not Bulgarian? I can be Bulgarian Macedonian and they can be Slav Macedonians and Greeks can be Macedonians but they don't want to and you support them, they want to monopolise the name.
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,224,725
|
, 13 December 2005 (UTC) I'm from Bulgarian Macedonia and since the end of Yugoslavia I have to change the name of my region, cause some other people want to monopolise something that they don't have (less than 50%) and historically don't deserve. At least they can give the opportunity for others to use the name Macedonia. How can I describe my region? Macedonia (Pirin), bordering Macedonia? Am I Macedonian, or not? And then if Macedonian I'm not Bulgarian? I can be Bulgarian Macedonian and they can be Slav Macedonians and Greeks can be Macedonians but they don't want to and you support them, they want to monopolise the name. I suggest that we change the name of teh country to FYROM 19:20
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,230,427
|
== Relax guy == Randy Jilek is making me write all these bad things.
| 2,005
| false
|
user
|
blocked
|
test
| false
|
31,241,721
|
::Ok, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Millwall F.C. Go nuts, guys. I'll try to wrangle up more people.
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,243,368
|
` ==Trolling by Bogdan and Constantzeanu== Bulgar necropoles have been discovered on the following sites: Topola, Durankulak (Dobrich region) and Istria, Obarshia Noua, Izvorul, Sultana in present-day Romania. And this is according to a source from the 1960s, perhaps many more have been found after that date. Should I also remind you that the first Bulgarian capital (Pliska) lies around 50 km from the boundary of Southern Dobruja. As for the ``Romanian majority`` in northern Dobruja, we have talked at length with you about this, Bogdan, and such a thing did not exist AT ALL until the beginning of the 20th century and even then the Romanians had ONLY a relative majority. Third of all, I want to ask: what the hell does ``Cadrilater`` do in the category ``Historical Romanian Regions``? The fact that it was ruled for 22 years by Romania and subjected to intensive colonisation does not make it a ``historical Romanian region``, the category falls, sorry. `
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
train
| false
|
31,243,422
|
Yeah, I saw the edits he was making and kept telling him they were inappropriate, but all he wants to do is to complain about you, and not try to reach consensus. |
| 2,005
| true
|
user
|
random
|
train
| false
|
31,245,281
|
This is the text about D. in 1911 Encyclopedia: *DOBRUDJA (Bulgarian Dobritch, Rumanian Dobrogea), also written DOBRUDSCHA, and DOBRUJA, a region of south-eastern Europe, bounded on the north and west by the Danube, on the east by the Black Sea, and on the south by Bulgaria. Pop. (1900) 267,808; area, 6ooo sq. m. The strategic importance of this territory was recognized by the Romans, who defended it on the south by Trajans Wall, a double rampart, drawn from Constantza, on the Black Sea, to the Danube. In later times, it was utilized by Russians and Turks, as in the wars of 1828, 1854 and 1878, when it was finally wrested from Turkey. By the treaty of Berlin, in 1878, the Russians rewarded their Rumanian allies with this land of mountains, fens and barren steppes, peopled by Turks, Bulgarians, Tatars, Jews and other aliens; while, to add to the indignation of Rumania, they annexed instead the fertile country of Bessarabia, largely inhabited by Rumans. After 1880, however, the steady decrease of aliens, and,the development of the Black Sea ports, rendered the Dobrudja a source of prosperity to Rumania.
| 2,005
| true
|
article
|
blocked
|
test
| false
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.