User talk:Seb az86556/archive20

Fendlera rupicola

On the history page of Fendlera rupicola you wrote

"(I wish there was some bot to catch these; we've had this one before en:) " about the appearance of "nv:Chʼil ntłʼizí

I received an email about that time that I did not understand at all saying:

The Wikipedia page Choyoołʼįįhí bichʼįʼ yáshtiʼ:Cwmhiraeth has been ályaa on 31 Yas Niłtʼees 2011 by Seb az86556, see http://nv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choyoo%C5%82%CA%BC%C4%AF%C4%AFh%C3%AD_bich%CA%BC%C4%AF%CA%BC_y%C3%A1shti%CA%BC:Cwmhiraeth for the current revision.

This is a new page.

Editor's summary: naaltsoos áyiilaa. ('{{subst:Yáʼátʼééh}}' bikáaʼgi hólǫ́)

Contact the editor: mail: http://nv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:EmailUser/Seb_az86556 wiki: http://nv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choyoo%C5%82%CA%BC%C4%AF%C4%AFh%C3%AD:Seb_az86556

There will be no other notifications in case of further changes unless you visit this page. You could also reset the notification flags for all your watched pages on your watchlist.

            Your friendly Wikipedia notification system

Was this from you and what was it all about? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:57, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's just our "welcome"-template; you apparently looked at the link. Thanks for stopping by.

That being said, from time to time, I'm manually going through all the pages we have but en.wiki doesn't to check if there something to be linked by now. Is there any other way? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 00:47, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hello you!

I hope you won't mind my templating this message, but as there are several users whom I wish to express more or less the same thoughts to, it seemed appropriate.

Of course it's a shame things turned out how they did with regard to the thread on ANI about Someone65, but no great harm has been done and he will eventually get his comeuppance. I'd like to thank you for your support there - it's been noted :)

Best,

Egg Centric (talk) 17:55, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Y'welcome Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 20:12, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Ghetto Litzmannstadt#Requested move

Hi. Please elaborate on whether you support Łódź Ghetto or Lodz Ghetto. Thanks, --brew crewer (yada, yada) 19:31, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas

Hi Seb, I'm trying to propose a new WikiProject to cover all indigenous peoples of the Americas from ancient times to the present (especially focusing on those areas not covered by WP:WikiProject Mesoamerica and WP:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America. Would you have any interest in this project? If so, please feel free to comment on Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Indigenous peoples of the Americas. Cheers, -Uyvsdi (talk) 21:57, 8 February 2011 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

Thanks for the invitation; however, I am not interested in such a broad-scope project. Moreover, my attitude would most likely run counter towards English wikipedia's WP:NOTCENSORED. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 01:22, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Savage cabinet

Lol :) WaffleStomp (talk) 21:43, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your debate with about wolves

Sorry, I'm not sure I understand you, exactly. Do you know how to speak that langauge? Are you saying there is no such word in that language, or that there is, but that's not what it means, or what? Don't get me wrong, I'm just honestly trying to understand your point about that section. Chrisrus (talk) 02:49, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One guy wrote a book in which he makes a claim; first off, in that source, the word is misspelled, so the author obviously doesn't know much about it. Secondly, even if spelled right, it doesn't mean "witch." Thirdly, the author confuses a completely different concept with the concept "wolf." This one book by a guy who obviously doesn't know what he's talking about is taken as the single source to make a claim. But a well, so be it... And to answer your first question: doo nizhónígo Diné bizaad yáshtiʼ da, tʼáá ałtsíísígo shił bééhózin ndi, áádóó tááʼ shinááhaigo óltaʼdi Diné bizaad baa ííłtaʼ. Hope that helps. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 03:13, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this explanation. You convinced me that you know what you're talking about and your concerns should be looked into. But first I'd like say that if you follow his page you'll see he generally does supurb work and not "junk". The way I read what wrote here tonight, it seems maybe your debate is with not with Mario per se but the source he used for the article. Anyway, be that as it may, thanks for pointing it out and I'll report back to you. Chrisrus (talk) 04:46, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. Of course it wasn't about Mario; it was about the whole endeavor in general. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 06:43, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't easily access the Lopez book of Wolves and Men or find out much about him. He seems to have written a pretty well researched book but doesn't seem to be or know that much about Navaho language or culture. Lopez must have gotten the information about wolves in Navaho culture from some other source and then added it to the book. It should be tracked down to the source and corrected.

I'm always skeptical when authorities say that the native peoples of this and that place "Revered as a god" some kind of animal that the author is advocating for, but this is different. It's plausible-sounding. I think you will agree that how the wolf is/was seen in Navaho culture is an appropriate thing to include at that point in the article, but if we can't get it right, we can live without it.

I tried to find an online translation or bilingual dictionary to prove it one way or another, but couldn't find one easily.

Thanks for your help and for being nicer recently. I know things can be very frustrating at times.

I haven't decided what to do next. I'm open to suggestions. Chrisrus (talk) 14:52, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Spell:nv

Seb,I noticed you've recently used spell:nv to change Navajo words to a consistent orthography. Is this a spelling bot? If you created it, mega kudos! The only downside I notice is that it appears to render words in a slightly smaller font than standard Wikipedia text. Ahéhee'! Ahéhee' User:WAlanDavis / (talk) 02:49, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Peter Orullian

Hello Seb az86556. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Peter Orullian, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Being an author published by a notable publisher is probably just barely enough to satisfy A7. Please consider AfD. Thank you. -- Lear's Fool 03:12, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Israel section on Settler_colonialism

Hi Seb, you just reverted me saying "stick to sources or take it out entirely"... I don't understand your concern. I didn't add anything at all. What I did was remove a few words that are not supported by any source and were factually incorrect. Would you please take another look at the change I made and if you agree it is more accurate, please revert your own revert? The fact that "Jews have lived in Palestine as a minority population continuously since ancient times" is a false statement can be logically proven by having a single example of Jews being a majority at any point in history. Today Jews are a majority, ergo, the statement is incorrect. It is also incorrect historically, as the Jewish Kingdoms of Israel and Judea prove. A more in depth discussion is possible... but for now, will you please revert your revert so that it simply reads "Jews have lived in Palestine continuously since ancient times" without making any logically false claims. I would not suggest removing the line all together as it is relevant information. Look forward to hearing you response. The talk page suggests the entire section should go (with no new comments since 2007)... which is a separate issue. It would be great to have your thoughts on that as well. Oboler (talk) 06:35, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Malcolm Springer

I think I set a personal records for tags, and the sad thing is, they're all valid. Did you see the editor's talk page? It's not the first time they created this. Take care Seb, Drmies (talk) 03:26, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Wilspaul

Hi, it seems that he is sockpuppeteering again. I have requested an investigation here. You are invited to comment. 122.167.13.207 (talk) 14:43, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry! I forgot to log in. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 14:45, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your 'edit'

I don't know why you chose to bury a historical article about the Hebrew Christian movement of the 19th and 20th century. I don't know which gang in which corner decided to disregard truth because they didn't like it. I'm surprised someone of your caliber would stoop to join such disregard of verifiable information. --DeknMike (talk) 04:44, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It may look like an edit war, but all I'm doing is restoring an article from reverts to a similar but different article. You yourself participated in the activities. Your edit war notice says to take it up on the talk page, but it also was eliminated, so there is no forum for discussion. What would you suggest? --DeknMike (talk) 04:47, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for referring to my "caliber". I don't know about the topic, but I do know that this whole exercise (for better or worse) operates by consensus. I had a glance at the discussions, and it appears that you do not want to accept the modus operandi here, e.g. talk about it and reach that consensus. Your labeling others' edits as "vandalism" isn't really helping your cause in this context; one of Jayjig's edit-summaries pointed to the relevant discussion @ Talk:Messianic Judaism; you should continue to participate in it rather than reverting; maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong — but either way won't help you much if you don't manage to convince others. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 04:50, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is it common practice to talk about one article on another article's page? Why would I talk about the Jewish Holocaust on the Romani page? They were both targeted by the Nazis for extermination, so the topics are related, but are not the same. Jayjig and his buds made that decision while I was away from the computer after extensive attacks on anything I wrote, and seems to be following me around the site to obliterate anything I write.--DeknMike (talk) 05:05, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you have a point... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 05:07, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I was just coming to discuss this. I was concerned because Seb, you said, "As far as I can tell, you've lost an argument and are warring against consensus. So don't call it vandalism just because you disagree." However, there is no such discussion on this page, nor any history of a merge discussion. It doesn't matter too much where the discussion is held (in the case of merge discussions, they're normally held on the target page), but there needs to be clear notification on all involved pages so that all editors can discuss as needed. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:53, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yvonne Chouteau

I wondered why you removed her from the Shawnee Tribe and Native catagories since she is a well known Shawnee and Native. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Odestiny (talk • contribs) 08:17, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Hi Seb az86556! Thanks for this. --Shirt58 (talk) 08:50, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CoA and flag of Western Sahara

Hello,

Thanks for requesting the protection of these two pages.

However, I see that you reverted my edits on both pages before the protection request. I want to advise you that the issue on these articles is proposed to be discussed on WP:NPOV [1], and that there is one user (Reisio) who is forcing the acceptation of his PoV, despite the discussions on the articles' talk page, where most users are sharing the idea that a strict respect of the WP:NPoV is required on these pages [2].

I think that, before reverting an edit, warning the editor and requesting the protection, it is important the be aware of the issue and the discussions of the Talk Page which are linked with it, and which seems to be consensual excepting for two users: Reisio, which is the one who reverted all these edits that were made by many users and which claims that I can't contribute since I'm Moroccan (which is, in my opinion, an infringement to WP:NPA), and another user, Koavf, who was warned and can't contribute on Morocco/Western Sahara related articles, for extreme PoV, following a decision made by the administrators.

Regards,
Omar-Toons (talk) 17:23, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I just saw that the edit was made by a script.

Regards,

Omar-Toons (talk) 17:53, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are edit-warring. Period. Stop it. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 20:02, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]