Jump to content

User talk:Jmabel/Archive 28

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27Archive 28Archive 29Archive 30→Archive 35

my advice

Example:
If I say: You are a germannnnnnnnnnnnnn! is this anti-German?
If I say: You are a romaniannnnnnnnnnnn! is this anti-Romanian?
If I say: You are a britishhhhhhhhhhhhh! is this anti-British?
Answer: Of course not.

Joe! If someone will tell you: You are a Germannnnnnnnnnnnnnnn! Do you start an RfC?

My first impresion is that I think you had overreacted.

Joe do you accept anti-romanian remarks?

My advice for you Joe is to accept Anittas's appology. But at the same time to start an RfC against all the Anti-Romanian fellows that in this debate has offended also Anittas labelling him as "sperm". Let's be honest and tell the whole truth. I don't like double standards. -- Bonaparte talk 17:00, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

My guess is that you have never been on the receiving end of racist or ethnic violence. I have. And I have been saying for days that people should take this to RfCs rather than insulting each other on the talk pages. I am practicing what I have been preaching. -- Jmabel | Talk 17:59, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
I am sorry for you that you've been receiving racist violence. Others as well have receive it. Just look above. Anittas was labelled also in a outrageous language. But you didn't answer my questions. Please.-- Bonaparte talk 18:18, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
If you're comparing excessive consonant use with violence, it must of been extreme. I'm surprised you're still alive. - Xed 18:21, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
Xed, the last time someone addressed me that way, it was followed by a punch in the face. And the time before that, it was being yelled by a crowd of teenagers throwing rocks at me as I ran from them. Both of these occasions were about 35 years ago. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:28, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
Perhaps someone will throw an imaginary rock thru your imaginary screen after an imaginary slight. It's really sickening you're comparing consonants to violence. You should apologise immediately to all concerned. - Xed 18:32, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm telling you also this Joe! -- Bonaparte talk 18:50, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Now, are you willing to forget about this whole issue and go further?

Hello Joe, there were moments when you helped me. You and the buddy Just zis Guy, you know? helped me when I was illegal blocked by Mikka. I still remember this and I thank you. But, for God sake! I think is good now to forget about whole this issue and to accept it in a "assume good faith" approach. Now is more important to be ended. Only when you reach an agreement you can go further. I've seen that you've taken too personaly and nevertheless this had a major impact on your feelings. I still belive that your influence is good on what's happening to the Romania's related articles. Your help is welcomed! In fact if you want to help me to extend my latest article related to Romania's integration in EU you're welcome [[1]]. Now I have to admit that I admire the way you defended your point of view, but I expect the same force when you'll start defend the truth and to fight also against what is also known as Anti-Romanianism.

Thank you, Bonaparte.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Bonaparte (talk • contribs) 13 Nov 2005

Orioane's RfA

Hey Joe! Thank you very much for your support on my RfA. There were no negative or neutral votes and the result was (28/0/0). I couldn't have made it without your help, and I think I improuved a lot especialy thanks to your remaks. Thanks also for the kind words you said about my in the RfA, I've really appreciated it. I hope we will continue to colaborate, an I want you to know that I always wait for your comments and also the eternal copy-editing (sorry for that). I will be leaving for Romania this weekend, and I think we will hear again in January when I hope to find again my inspiration. Until then Happy Holidays and good luck in your job hunting ;). Mihai -talk 20:58, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Koncenii = sperm?

Just to clear things up in case you care (which I have a feeling you might not),

"koncenii" does not mean sperm, neither in Russian, nor in Romanian, nor in any of the weirdest speeches of Moldova.

Bonaparte has said it means this even though he knows no Russian; Russian speakers like Mikkalai have told him he is wrong; even his best friend "Just another Tag" told him he was wrong but he continues to believe "koncenii" means sperm.

Yes, I called Anittas and Bonaparte "koncenii", but it doesn't mean "sperm". As Mr Tag so nicely pointed out, "koncenii" is just a word for a foolish person. --Node

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.35.52.232 (talk • contribs) 14 Dec 2005 I am guessing this is User:Node ue, but I'd really appreciate that people sign in when leaving messages on my user talk page, so that I know they are not forged. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:30, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Ahh, yes, it was me. Sorry. --Node 00:52, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

"Koncenii" comes from Russian and mot-a-mot signifies "finished" (in sexual plain). Well, is not sperm, but is linked with sperm :)

A propos, Jmabel, what do you think about Moldova you find the "Romanian" links normal? I am just tired to correct and remove this excess of Romanian information, comparisons, images etc. serhio talk 10:52, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Take care. Being labelled as "konceni" brings you automated blocking. I was blocked by mikka for being labelled by other as "koncenii". That was one of his brute force measure. (Abuse of power privileges. Bias of course and for no reason. Instead of blocking the other guy who labelled us). Appearingly, after so many bias measures from him, user:mikkalai left Wiki on 1 January 2006. Bonaparte talk 15:11, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Reference for population

Hi, my reference is the I. N. E. (Instituto Nacional de Estadística, http://www.ine.es).

Greetings,

--Darabuc 06:44, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Paleoliberalism

Excellent work on converting Paleolib's apparent mixture of OR and POV into a really interesting and increasingly well-referenced article. - Just zis  Guy, you know? [T]/[C] AfD? 10:39, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Kragujevac- istorija grada

Oops. My bad. I added the {{copyvio}}, and added to WP:CP, but forgot to blank the article. I also should have checked the date and tagged it for speedy as {{db-copyvio}} since it was < 48h. Jamie 04:47, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Footnotes reminder

A while ago you expressed interest in Wikipedia:Footnotes. As that article was updated through a renaming process, you might not be aware of changes during recent months. I invite you to read the article again in case it is now more useful. (SEWilco 08:46, 15 December 2005 (UTC))

Catalan negationism

Joe, i've stumbled upon this article. Besides not getting a single fact right, it's the first time i've ever heard about the concept. I don't know what to do with the article. Can you, as administrator and interested in all things catalan, have a look at it and flag as you may deem appropiate ?

By the way, many thanks for your careful editing of my sorely written contributions (It seems my english is not as good as I thought), and all your input in between. I wish you many luck getting a new contract. --Wllacer 12:19, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Moldovan language

Would you be so kind to make the changes initially proposed by Danutz and to which there is a consensus since you are an Admin? Please. Thank you.

Peace. Shalom. Bonaparte talk 15:27, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

EffK is forced to Abandon a Corrupted Wikipedia

I refer you to my response of a few moments ago at 15 December [[2]],http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/EffK/Evidence#3_December_2005 EffK 01:54, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Process

Which of my edits in particular do you think go against "bulk consensus"? Bogdangiusca and Ronline both recognised the validity of Dyer 1999 as a source for examples of colloquial usage (in private communications).

Besides, your process seems only to provide for the removal or reworking of existing content, not the addition of new content or expansion of existing content.

Node 09:59, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Ahh and, I'm not sure about this, but I'm thinking "reverting on principle" rather than because you have real objections to the majority of the edits counts as WP:POINT. --Node 10:00, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Not at all. I am reverting because you are subverting the consensus process. If I don't revert you, clearly one of the many people who have been spouting venom at you will. This page had to be protected recently because of edit wars. I've tried to establish a way to move forward without that. I'm making no judgment on content in reverting, but I am making a judgment that you are editing against consensus. -- Jmabel | Talk 10:03, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
How am I subverting the consensus process? Most of the content I added was totally uncontroversial, being taken from a reputable source (with permission) which was already discussed between myself, Ronline, and Bogdangiusca and decided to be reliable. The way consensus works is that if you don't like something, you say so. "Just a tag" indicated a problem with using examples from El Noel, thus I commented them out. Consensus is not reverting all changes. Besides, why did you revert my changes but not Chris's? Yes, he discussed them with Constanteanu, but Chris and Constanteanu are two people out of the entire crowd. And again, how does your process allow for the addition of new content? --Node 10:11, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Ahh, and, by judging that I am "editing against consensus", you are automatically making some sort of judgement about the content (ie, that it is contrary to consensus). I find it doubtful that "just another tag" would've had any justification for the replacement of examples from Dyer with his own contrived examples... Replacement of examples from El Noel he could make an argument for (he pointed out that El Noel's "slovarik" includes some phrases which are vulgar or include cursewords, and said that this makes the source invalid; while I disagree it's certainly an argument to be considered), but I can't think of a possible argument against examples from Dyer, considering that Dyer himself seems to've gotten the examples from research and from consultation with other experts, and also considering that Dyer is an expert who has published a number of peer-reviewed articles on the subject of language in Moldova (that is, Daco-Romanian, in both colloquial and official forms, though more recently he's done some work on Bulgarian in Moldova) --Node 10:16, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Read my remarks on Talk:Moldovan language. They are the only response you will get. -- Jmabel | Talk 10:18, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Jmabel, you never answered my main question. How are people supposed to add new content through your process? As I noted on Talk:Moldovan language, I have no problem with using your process to work out the kinks with already-existing content. But it provides no clear path for the introduction of new content. --Node 10:29, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
You add issues by adding to the appropriate list. You propose material by adding it (or a summary, or an appropriate link if the material is already elsewhere) to the talk page. You or anyone else may feel free to copy this comment to the page; make it clear that you are copying. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:18, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Jmabel, please come back :)

Could you please at least rv the last edits and block the page as it was ? Node instead of talking everything out (i.e. say: I will modify this that and that, who agrees ..) just modifies things to the way he likes it. Please block the page to the way it was, we can still try to sort out of the matter in the talk page instead of reverting everything. Just a tag

Since this was added anonymously I am replying here. Please take an account and please stop signing with something that looks offhand like a link to a user page and is actually a link to a nonexistent article in article space. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:32, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Revert and protect? Absolutely not. You can rv as well as I, but I cannot block this page because I have been an active participant in it and the issue does not appear to be vandalism as defined by Wikipedia:Vandalism. And besides, as I said, I am not going to touch that page again until January 1, and would appreciate not being asked again. Nor should any other admin revert and protect in a case that does not involve vandalism: except for protection against vandalism ({{v-protected}}), we are supposed to protect as is, regardless of who edited last. If there is a fight, and we are acting in our admin capacity, we are not supposed to take sides. So you can ask an admin to protect but, barring vandalism, not to protect a particular version.
Obviously, I don't like how Node is dealing with the page. Nor do I like how several other people are dealing with it. I think Node's conduct on this page merits an RfC. But I don't think it merits incivility, which I consider a worse offense. I am walking away for a time because there is clearly a fight going on, and one side is being uncivil and the other is being a total maverick, and I don't participate in Wikipedia in order to be a playground monitor. I suggest that WP:3RR be strictly enforced to at least slow down the edit war, but I also suggest, again, that everyone follow the sort of process I laid out and you might even improve the article instead of sending it careening between versions. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:32, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

deeceevoice arbitration

You might be interested in Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Deeceevoice

-Justforasecond 18:51, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar

Hello, I've been at some point involved in the conflict on "Moldovan language" and I was peeking in from time to time. I have to say that I really believed you will finally manage to end this dispute. Anyway, I left this page rather bitter (I had invested a lot of time in it). If you are a bit sad, too, here is a barnstar from someone who understands. Cheers, Dpotop 22:19, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

For your effort on the Moldovan language page, I award you this barnstar!

Malay / Indonesian

Hi there! You asked about a cite about Malaysian and Indonesian - the info I got was from my studies (not very in-depth, admittedly) with both languages, but it is also confirmed at the Indonesian language. I quote "Indonesian is a standardized dialect of the Malay language that was officially defined with the declaration of Indonesian independence in 1945, and the two languages remain quite similar." Surprisingly, the people of that region don't seem to care that Indonesian is considered a separate language when linguists see both as one - but there are differences. Also, I just noticed that you are from the Seattle area. Whereabouts, if you don't mind me asking? I live in a rural area of Pierce County. --Chris S. 02:09, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Heh, I've never heard of Wedgwood. I won't make the meet-up, though, I'm sorry. Classes start again on the 4th, so I'll be swamped again. I plan on moving to Seattle, though, in the fall of 2006 if/when I get accepted to UW. So most likely sometime after that time. --Chris S. 02:19, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


Romanian population

Do you actually agree with all those very very high numbers User:NorbertArthur and User:Bonaparte are putting. They very clearly present themselves to be nationalists and continuously add only the highest numbers from the most random webpage they can find. A million Romanians in Spain and Italy? Those numbers are quite frankly unbelievable -- if there in fact were that many then information on them would be more readily available than just on those webpage and Romanian biased pages. I say we put a tag on the page concerning factual accuracy. Antidote 23:17, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I personally suspect that the numbers are too high, but agree that they are stated by citable sources (at least the US and Italy numbers; offhand I don't think I've followed through on the number for Spain). I was last in Spain in 2002 and Italy (other than changing planes) in 1996, so that if there has been a recent and enormous influx of Romanians, I wouldn't necessarily know. On the other hand, I find it very disingenuous when people use numbers like this to boost the total number of Romanians. Clearly, if there has been a recent and enormous flow of Romanians to Spain and Italy, it has corresponded to an equal reduction of the number elsewhere, mainly in Romania, Moldova and perhaps Ukraine. -- Jmabel | Talk 23:23, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Would you agree to put up the factual accuracy tag though? Antidote 23:25, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure what tag you mean by "the factual accuracy tag", and since you don't say what article is involved (similar issues have arisen several places), I have no easy way to follow this up. But, in general, if something is accurately cited from a reliable source, it can go in an article. That you or I may personally think the cited source got it wrong isn't worth much; citable criticism of the source would be another matter. -- Jmabel | Talk 23:33, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
What do you mean what article? We're talking about the Romanians article and the "totallydisputed" tag. Sure, it may be correctly cited, but there are places on the internet that spew a lot of untruths. Are we allowed to use absolutely any source on the internet? It would make wikipedia a pretty unreliable and easily biased source of information. Clearly, the two users now have a virtual monopoly on the page, putting only sources (many of which are purely Romanian) that present huge numbers. I don't see why we have to act helpless to this just because the sourcse are "cited". If the numbers seem to big (which I doubt any onlooker wouldn't disagree with) then something has to be done. Antidote 18:11, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
  • "absolutely any source on the internet"? Of course not.
  • The citation apparatus of the article is so messed up that I can't tell, in general, what is supposed to be cited from where. People have been very sloppy. A few months ago what was there was all accurately cited.
  • I don't see the source for these high numbers for Italy or Spain. That isn't to say it doesn't exist, but I don't see it. As I say, right now, the citation apparatus is a mess.
  • For the U.S., the source [3] looks pretty decent to me. All of the information in it that I know anything about independently looks accurate, so if it is a fraud, it is a very subtle fraud. Caveats:
    1. It is clearly a commercial source, from someone with reason to maximize their numbers.
    2. They are not meticulous about separating US and Canadian data, but since the population of the US is about 10 times that of Canada, that may not be a big issue.
    3. It is not a count of ethnic Romanians, it is an attempt to count the potential audience for Romanian-language programming. Their figure of 1.2 million includes, for example, "about 200,000-225,000 Romanian Jews in both America and Canada, mostly living in New York, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, Miami, Philadelphia, and Washington DC." If you look through what they have to say about various ethnicities, you get down to a number more like 900,000 ethnic Romanians.
    4. As I've said many times, US Census data for ethnicities must be taken as a very conservative estimate. I don't see anything terribly suspicious about claims that for a particular ethnicity it may be off by a factor of 2 or 3. I'd guess that it is off by a comparable factor for Armenians or Serbs, for example.
  • I'm not sure what your problem is with the sources being "purely Romanian". Why should that be any less acceptable than using (for example) American sources in articles about America or Mexican sources in articles about Mexico?
  • At some point I may really try to approach this all with some serious research time. Yes, some people seem to be editing for polemical reasons rather than trying to get accurate information, but, with all due respect, I'm not certain that is the case only for the people who are trying to find high numbers and challenge low ones.
  • Feel free to quote me on this; please link back to my comment in full, which you should do by linking the diff of this edit, since I periodically archive my talk page. I'll add that permalink immediately after I save the edit.
Jmabel | Talk 19:33, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Permalink for the preceding bullet list of remarks: http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jmabel&diff=31875115&oldid=31870511 - Jmabel | Talk 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Gene Sequencing Costs

On Genetic Engineering someone guess that the human genome at 3billion base pairs and at 1/10c per base pair would cost $6 million to sequence. The maths appears to be wrong probably because when you sequence DNA you do both strands. So $3 million each strand is $6 million. But the whole maths is too simple. I dunno where the 1/10c figure comes from. You might get a company to supply DNA sequence at this cost. But does this take into account making your DNA libraries, putting the sequences together to make a genome map. Filling in the GAPs in the sequence? Does it take account of the need to have multiple passes of the genome to be sure you have accurate results. The cost of sequencing a genome is how much it costs to complete the project and I doubt it is 1/10c per base pair. I think this bit should be dropped from the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ttguy (talk • contribs) 16 Dec 2005

Great

I was googling on Anittas, in order to find more info on Anittas (the Hittie King), and then saw the second result: your RfC on me. That's just bloody great. If someone googles my name and finds that RfC, they will think that I hate Jews, or something. I use this nickname in other places, too. WTF, dude! What have you done? Can't you edit that RfC and add a HUGE disclaimer on top of it, saying that your acussations against me were false and that you retract them all? I did what you wanted and stroke through the text on my talk page. Please return the favour. --Anittas 00:07, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I tried to find the thing about someone telling you that you didn't understand complex Ro culture, etc., but I couldn't. Just tell me who said it, because it seems it got to you really good. However, it's not nearly as serious as the RfC. Thanks for adding the disclaimer. It's not the best disclaimer I've ever seen, but it will have to do. --Anittas 01:16, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
I've replied to Anittas by email, providing the URL since I have no desire to link to a screed. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:04, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

hi

Could you add this article, Lilian Cristina Aya Ramirez, to your watchlist? For self-apparent reasons, it urgently needs some work. Thanks, Viajero | Talk 03:59, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

SlimVirgin rfc

Hi Joe, please look at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/SlimVirgin2. Thanks IZAK 04:53, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Paleoliberalism

I had to stop by and say how impressed I've been to see your diligent scholarship in Paleoliberalism. I know you'd (rightly) nominated it for deletion, which failed, but now you're executing a "save" with your hard work. That shows not only good editing but also good sportsmanship, if the term may be applied. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia; they're appreciated. Cheers, -Willmcw 10:46, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Mungiu-Pippidi

Hi. Just to let you know that there is now an article on Alina Mungiu-Pippidi, her Romanian Academic Society and The Evangelists. Ronline ✉ 07:07, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikipediology

I'm thinking that given the current problems it would be appropriate for WP:WPY to host a discussion on Wikipedia and Race. Please get back to me with your ideas. -JCarriker 07:37, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

We are getting a response -JCarriker 06:40, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Tedernst and car sharing template

I saw you posted a question about the template on someone's talk page. Maybe take your questions to the template's talk page? I removed the external links and would be happy to talk about it there. Tedernst | talk 18:10, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Nathan Birnbaum

Nathan Birnbaums wiki was rewritten by me and no longer draws heavily on that article. So the remark is no longer needed. Killerdark 01:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Radhanite

This FAC is being opposed by a POV pusher who has consistantly tried to downplay Jewish contributions to history (while simultaneously shrugging off or sweeping under the rug Muslim atrocities against Jews and others, see, e.g., al-Andalus and Banu Qurayza). Please review the article when you are able and weigh in on the FAC page, or not, as you feel appropriate. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 05:55, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment on the vote page. However, you didn't actually vote support. If this was intentional, no problem, just wanted to make sure.Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 14:44, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the comment on the vote page and the unnecessary (but appreciated, reasonable and understandable) explanation. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 19:07, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Oops

It seems we made modifications at the same time to the article 1, please feel free to undo my rv if you wish. --Just a tag 08:47, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

I would like to wish you and your family a Merry Christmas and a Happy Hanukkah, and all the best for the New Year. Guettarda 17:51, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Great edit

re: Labor unions in the United States

"Wikipedia MoS style does not scatter reference sections through the article"

I was thinking that the way it was set up before didn't look right![4]

Great edit, thanks for all your work on this wikipage! Travb 19:48, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Translator list

Actually, there's only one Wikipedian willing to be a translator. I am user:atheistrabbi, I was posting for several weeks and then forgot my password. If you have the ability, or know someone who has the ability, I'd appreciate if the account got deleted. Also, despite my recent conversion to GNU Linux and Mozilla Firefox, I still have know idea how to type Hebrew alphabet in Wikipedia. I definitely am not in the mood of cut-and-pasting or typing awfully long character strings. I need to be able to either type on the keyboard or click around in the little box downstairs like when I'm writing in the Greek alphabet. Also, I need to figure out how to configure my browser so that the vowels go under the letters instead of being counted as a character in and of themselves; it makes it really difficult to read. Once that little hurdle is out of the way, I'm more than willing to contribute in any way necessary. In addition to being a native speaker of Yiddish, I work as an independent researcher and translator of Yiddish-language materials. And yes, I do take requests. Daykart 01:49, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

answer

Hello Joe! Would you be so kind do answer me, as American, to my question posted on [5] please? Thankx. Peace. Shalom. Bonaparte talk 11:08, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Leftist vs Left-wing

Hello. Oddly, I find "leftist" far more pejorative than "left-wing". I live in the UK, so perhaps things are different here. But whenever I see someone railing against the left on American websites, they almost invariably use the term "leftist" ("this is typical leftist propaganda...", that sort of thing). Left-wing seems a perfectly factual description to me, but of course people probably have their own perceptions about the neutrality of these terms. I'm not really sure how to decide between the two now, any ideas? Anyway, I was actually trying to make the labeling of his political views sound less critical! By the way, I think it might be an idea to delete "radical", would you be OK with that? Cadr 14:15, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Date linking

Hey, Joe. Would you mind adding George Washington Dixon to your watchlist? I've got a date linker who's reverted me once on whether all dates in the article should or shouldn't be linked (they shouldn't), and I'm going to have spotty access the next few days. Will you keep an eye out for date overlinking? I'd appreciate any feedback you've got on the article, too. Thanks . . . . -- BrianSmithson 22:57, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

That was me. :) I won't revert it again though, so you don't have to watch it. See for my explanation here [6] Happy Holidays! Garion96 (talk) 23:07, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Giordano Bruno

Well, if you wish to reapply the category go ahead. I tend to believe in avoiding category clutter, in that a person should be added to a category only if their "claim to fame" is in that category. So if a person would not be encyclopedic solely based on their activity in category X (even if it was a lifelong passionate interest or even profession of theirs), then they shouldn't be added to that category.

For example, William Herschel was an accomplished musician and composer and music teacher and bandleader, and made his living in the field of music (until he discovered Uranus and became famous and the king paid him a salary to devote himself to astronomy). However, his musical compositions are forgotten today; his claim to fame is astronomy. Accordingly, we don't classify him under the musicians or composers category.

-- Curps 05:01, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

You got issues

Seriously, dude, you got issues. I don't know. Maybe it's a middle-age crisis, or something. First, the RfC, then about me wanting Romania influencing R. of Moldova, and now you remove a message from someone who wished you a Merry X-Mas. Dude, relax! So you're a Jew. So what? I'm not religious, but I still celebrate X-Mas. Don't take people's well-wishes for granted! That same user wished the same to Raul, but instead of giving him a teddy bear, he got a bike.

About R. of Moldova: of course I want us to influence them and have them re-unite with us. Every sane Romanian would want this. Telling Bogdan and other Romanians to go against such an opinion will do you no good, since they don't disagree with me. At best, they disagree with the way I express my self, but that's where it ends.

Merry X-Mas, dude. Or whatever you celebrate. It starts with H, or something. Hanalulu, Hananaka, perhaps. --Anittas 03:14, 25 December 2005 (UTC)


I'm done with Deeceevoice arb for now

I've made a comment at the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Deeceevoice/Workshop and now I'm done. This is a lynching, I called it what it was, and now I'm moving on. It's a shame, though, that all this has happened.--Alabamaboy 03:17, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Southern contributions award

I, JCarriker, award your the Southern contributions award for your contributions to Dixiecrat and for fighting ethnic and regional stereotyping against not only Southerners but all human beings. Noramally I did give a couple of ethnic dishes but since almost everything we eat either isn't kosher, clogs the arteries, or both, have a jar of parve Mayhaw jelly and one Peach and one Dewberry cobbler. -JCarriker 06:03, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

+Twenty pounds of Caddo Lake Cat and User:Jmabel/awards hides those annyoing little barnstars. I can't give anymore awards I've ran out, but I can't guarantee anything in the future. :) -JCarriker 06:12, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Armenians in Romania

Thanks a lot, but I did very little. Most of the info is on one of the sites I referenced in external links (the Divers one). I paraphrased it anyway, but it looks to be generically available info (it is not in the content of the magazine itself, but in a general presentation; also, it seems to rely on outside sources as well). Tell me what you think about Greeks in Romania.Dahn 08:55, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

I know that his first recorded name was Caragiali (in a rendering nearer to modern Greek, that should be Karagiali). I think his family had immigrated to the Principalities a generation, perhaps two, earlier. He never did shy away from pointing out his origin, and I think he spoke Greek as his first language (I shouldn't say "first" - perhaps "initial" describes it better). It's perhaps apocrypha¹, but I read somewhere that, since Mateiu was so keen on preserving the Middle Ages and the taste of the old days, he had started drawing up an absurd genealogy for his family (this part is for certain); Caragiale would have acted surprised, and he would have said/written to Mateiu saying "Your grandfather was a Greek pastry cook; you want genealogy? Check out your head: yours to might've kept the flatness given by years of carrying the tray and using your hands at the same time". His father was the only one of three brothers that did not stay in theater.Dahn 09:20, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

¹The story, of course - not their Greek originDahn 20:48, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

re: editing

i don't know, must be something in the software,
as all i did was correct the spelling of Peirce.
could be i use several browsers, some a bit old.
Jon Awbrey 11:24, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Re:

I agreed with Asbestos to replace the link from the old username to the new username on old pages. I apologize for the W talk page fuck-up...this was my bad with the intention to search and replace old username to a new username but somehow something else ended up there. Sorry about that! Rananim 21:45, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Just as long as you fix it back, no problem on my end. As you know, I agreed to abide by whatever you and he agreed to. I'm sure you understand why, in the circumstances, it is him rather than you I've been checking in with to make sure that the agreements are being abided by. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:48, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Carlos Mastronardi

This article lacks sources, please provide them.TheRingess 22:33, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

No, I do not dispute anything in this article, I simply hit random article, and thought I noticed that there were no references (although, upon rereading, there did seem to be some in the body of the article), so I tagged it as unreferenced. Looked at the history, noticed that you had an interest in this, and thought I would request sources. Congratulations on a job well done. TheRingess 04:22, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Anittas

Hi Joe! I've written to Anittas telling him about my views on the subject. I'm not one who believes in the union between Romania and Moldova, since it isn't really in the interest of Romania either. I've told him about all this. Thanks, Ronline ✉ 07:09, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

DYK

Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Wildwood Flower, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

You mention on the Maradona (scam) talk page that you were plagiarized. I added a response there on how to report it.RickReinckens 17:41, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

DYK

Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article 1966 New York City transit strike, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Gurubrahma 18:13, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Fascism in the political spectrum article

Hi there, I just noticed that you put the word "fascism" back into the Political_spectrum#Left_and_Right section of the "Political Spectrum" article and placed it on the right, where it had been until an anonymous editor moved it to the left. The reason I removed it altogether was that in its early days its German incarnation National Socialism made quite a few pronouncements in favour of collectivism, especially agrarian collectivism. Actual policy, once the movement was in power, was the opposite, of course. (I'm not familiar with Mussolini's Italian fascism at all). The fact that nowadays the word "fascism" is used as a derogative synonym for any totalitarian ideology doesn't help either.

I'm not going to revert anything or move anything around, it's just that the issue isn't straightforward. Pilatus 01:20, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

RJII trouble

Hi. I need to combat some POV-pushing, and I thought you might be willing to help. User:RJII is editing altruism to include a discussion of Hitler as an exponent of altruism, and keeps removing comments from both positive right and negative right noting the controversial nature of those concepts on the grounds that the comments are "bizzare" an he doesn't understand them. -- Mihnea Tudoreanu 02:03, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Travesties page

Thank you for the nice welcome post in my talk page, I'm grateful. Is the edit I did on the Travesties page alright? I looked a few other pages and saw that synopsis usually comes before other factoids, although switching that around made my copy edits a little harder to see. Maybe I should have done the edit in parts. Anyway, thank you for your interest and I look forward to any insight if I performed any major gaffes. Thanks. Leontes 03:31, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Views on Categorization

Hi, Taking your suggestion, I will draft a new policy about categorization.

I understand your third position, and I agree with the examples you mention. I find it very frustrating when articles are filed in obscure categories and then removed from the population of the parent category. However I question the need for listing the examples as a "third option". I believe the situation you mention falls under the "other cases where duplication is also acceptable." If anything, I'd like to simplify the language on the categorization page to the most general terms and direct the discussion to the talk page. If we try and get all the details posted on the categorization page we risk splintering the discussion. So I'm hoping that you might find is some more general phrasing acceptable, and could perhaps perfect the previous "two option" language. -- Samuel Wantman 07:14, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Your opinion

Hello Joe!

Would you be so kind to add your comentary on http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#arbitrary_use_of_power_privileges Your opinion counts. Bonaparte talk 08:53, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Has been deleted. It's about this http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=32977559
==arbitrary use of power privileges==
There are two very important aspects that some Administrators continue to ignore them:
  • the illegitimate use of Admin power for private purposes, (eg. gain position in debate talks)
  • arbitrary use of power privileges
Again there has to be the rule of law rather then rule of rulers, there are some constraints of the arbitrary use of power, and has to be implemented the rule of law rather then rule of rulers.
I am against the arbitrary use of power privileges. Bonaparte talk 08:48, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

That was all but was considered not appropiate to this forum. Bonaparte talk 21:34, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Triumph of the Will (Nomination)

I tossed in a few more Riefenstahl quotes, including (Thank God for the AP!) the one about anti-Semitism in Triumph. Any other suggestions? Palm_Dogg 09:39, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

  • No specific suggestions. Hope you don't mind my not voting to support, I only do that if I've really had a chance to study the article, which in this case I have not; this was an omission I noticed at a casual reading. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:33, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Don't mind that at all, and appreciate your help. I'd love it if you could take a closer look, but just from scanning your Talk Page I'm guessing that isn't going to be very high on your priority list. Thanks anyways. Palm_Dogg 21:38, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Mediation in Perpignan article

Hello, first of all, thanks for your additions in my recent contributions.

When you have time, I would like to ask you for your experience and mediation in a ongoing discussion in Perpignan article. Thanks! Toniher 14:11, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Ti-Grace Atkinson

Just a little question - where did you get your information on Atkinson which you left on the talk page? I'm trying to expand the article more. Greatgavini 20:03, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Just wanted to say "thanks" for the information. You're an inspiration! (Well, I can't think of many who would take time to write such a huge list!) - Greatgavini snail mail

21:30, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

08:36, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Portuguese Communist Party

The classification of Salazar's regime is questionable and a controversial issue, but it had several fascist characteristics, in the same way that many non-communist regimes are regarded as communist, why can't be the portuguese regarded as fascist? Was Franco a fascist? I think it was. You can be considered a fascist if you have a militia and a political police, like PIDE, if you support corporativism, if you take communism as the country's biggest enemy as Salazar did, if you have only one party, if you send troops to aid Franco in the spanish civil war along with Italy and Germany, if you have a concentration camp for political prisoners, Tarrafal, if you call your national day the "day of the race", if you send 10.000 soldiers to die in colonial wars, just to keep the empire in the 1970s, etc... Every member of the resistance is called anti-fascist in Portugal. Their organization is the Union of the Portuguese Anti-fascists, the "fascist regime" is present everyday.

But anyway, if that is the only objection to the FA status, I can change fascist for right-wing dictatorial or something, and anti-fascist for "member of the resistance". Thanks anyway for your work on the article. Afonso Silva 00:01, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

It's not clear from the above: are you asking for my personal view or are you asking what I think Wikipedia should say? Personally, I define fascism broadly enough to include both Franco and Salazar. Personally, I think it's too bad they got to live out their lives as free men and to die in their beds. But it is not Wikipedia's role to opine and condemn, but to narrate facts and to indicate the range of well-informed opinion. And scholars vary in their views of whether Salazar and Franco should be considered fascist. So we should report that.
By the way, I did not say I had thoroughly studied the article and that I was sure it is almost ready to be featured and that I have only one issue with it. In fact, I merely skimmed the article, made some copy edits, and had this issue leap out at me which I felt was large enough that it should be addressed before it could possibly be appropriate to feature the article.
Do let me know if and when this change is made, and I will withdraw my objection. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:17, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I'll include something like "fascist leaning", or "fascist influenced" regime along with the other definitions, and remove the reference to fascism where it is possible. I'll do it right after this. About any other objections, I just thought you've read it all, sorry. Afonso Silva 00:26, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

It's done, I've added a end note with the Salazar article clarification of the issue and avoided the term in the text. Regards! Afonso Silva 00:44, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikibooks:errata

(responding to your comments on Wikipedia_talk:Reliable_sources#Blogs) Have you seen the Wikibooks:errata project? --DavidCary 07:37, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Rananim

Hi Joe,

I did agree that he could switch his old identity entirely over to his new identity. Why he keeps editing your archives without the courtesy of dropping you a note, I don't know. I'm kind of on break right now, but I'll shoot him an email, and get him to correct whatever it was that he did to the Wesleyan Talk page. From his comment on my talk, it sounds like it was an accident.

Happy New Year,
User:Asbestos (151.44.86.123 14:19, 30 December 2005 (UTC))

George Reeves

IF you are not an alternate persona of those other guys, THEN I apologize. There has been this "edit war" with this character who keeps inserting this editorializing about Reeves death, and when you deleted my neutral comments that discuss the questions about his death, but left in his "in dispute" nonsense, I jumped to the conclusion that this moron had struck again under yet another guise. Wahkeenah 17:20, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Reply

Well, blame Wakheenah for this, this person needs to loose this war and should not allowed to post here, feel free to add what you want to Reeves, but it goes to show ignorance of this site, they deleted your stuff which was accurate, but people like Wahkeenah can not buy it...

  • I sincerely apologize. You are an outstanding contributor, and I will be interested to read more of your work. Meanwhile, maybe you can see from the above, the kind of thing that I and some others have been dealing with. I am reluctant to post a Royal Flying Corps against another user, hoping instead they will just get bored and go away. Wahkeenah 08:42, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Shining Path

Thanks for your feedback to my comments on Talk:Shining Path. I plan on editing the article page sometime, but I am not going to do it now, as I am on vacation. In fact, I am ashamed to have even checked wikipedia on vacation. I just wanted to say thanks. Also, I am currently in Lima, and I can tell you that all the newspapers here have screaming headlines about the return of the Shining Path. The new attacks might change things, such as support for amnesty of military human rights abusers. I guess we will see. --Descendall 21:47, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jmabel/Archive_28&oldid=1081146584"