| Revision as of 21:44, 20 August 2005 editHijiri88 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users37,389 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:14, 21 August 2005 edit undoGavin the Chosen (talk | contribs)664 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| ::::Are you trying to say that you are the only one in that discussion who isn't "clueless"? I would call that a personal attack (or a series of them, given the number of people being insulted), as well as being factually inaccurate. I have never loost to you - on one occasion you found a sneaky way around the rules and I decided to be mature and not press the issue any further. The only reason you appear to have won in this case is that you changed the article in the first place and have stubbornly reverted any attempt to fix it. I refuse to enter into an edit war with you, so I let you away with it until you admit you are wrong. You have not cited a piece of real evidence supporting your claim except for your personal dislike of most dictionaries and true mythologists, your warped definition of the word based on an assumption that all "-ology"s refer exclusively to the academic study of something (again contradicting major dictionaries), and your accusations that the other uses are "slang". If you would only cite some real evidence - perhaps a definition given by some expert other than yourself as the only true one - I would at least take your claim seriously (though the opinion of any one writer, even if it is supported by you, cannot change the fact that "mythology" most often refers - and, if not that, can sometimes refer - to a collection of myths, and can be readily pluralized). You refer constantly to "people in the field", but the only specific you have given on this - beyond it not encapsulating Joseph Campbell and the like - is "classical authors", whom I would not consider reliable sources on anything. After being asked to refer to some '''specific''' people who would agree with you, you didn't respond, and have yet to respond after over three weeks. I, on the other hand, have cited a number of dictionaries (including one specifically devoted to the field of mythology) and authors who use my definition as well as the plural "]" (link to an article that explicitly uses the word in a manner with which you cannot argue - and your perversion of the main "]" article makes a piece of advice at the start grossly misleading). Even if it were not the proper definition, it is still widely used, and is recognised by all good dictionaries. If it has a special definition within its field, does Misplaced Pages not grant room to use the more widely held meaning, regardless of its origin? Come back and continue the argument in the appropriate discussion page. You have 48 hours before I fix the problem, forcing you to revert my edit and return to the table to argue you case. ] 00:54, 20 August 2005 (UTC) | ::::Are you trying to say that you are the only one in that discussion who isn't "clueless"? I would call that a personal attack (or a series of them, given the number of people being insulted), as well as being factually inaccurate. I have never loost to you - on one occasion you found a sneaky way around the rules and I decided to be mature and not press the issue any further. The only reason you appear to have won in this case is that you changed the article in the first place and have stubbornly reverted any attempt to fix it. I refuse to enter into an edit war with you, so I let you away with it until you admit you are wrong. You have not cited a piece of real evidence supporting your claim except for your personal dislike of most dictionaries and true mythologists, your warped definition of the word based on an assumption that all "-ology"s refer exclusively to the academic study of something (again contradicting major dictionaries), and your accusations that the other uses are "slang". If you would only cite some real evidence - perhaps a definition given by some expert other than yourself as the only true one - I would at least take your claim seriously (though the opinion of any one writer, even if it is supported by you, cannot change the fact that "mythology" most often refers - and, if not that, can sometimes refer - to a collection of myths, and can be readily pluralized). You refer constantly to "people in the field", but the only specific you have given on this - beyond it not encapsulating Joseph Campbell and the like - is "classical authors", whom I would not consider reliable sources on anything. After being asked to refer to some '''specific''' people who would agree with you, you didn't respond, and have yet to respond after over three weeks. I, on the other hand, have cited a number of dictionaries (including one specifically devoted to the field of mythology) and authors who use my definition as well as the plural "]" (link to an article that explicitly uses the word in a manner with which you cannot argue - and your perversion of the main "]" article makes a piece of advice at the start grossly misleading). Even if it were not the proper definition, it is still widely used, and is recognised by all good dictionaries. If it has a special definition within its field, does Misplaced Pages not grant room to use the more widely held meaning, regardless of its origin? Come back and continue the argument in the appropriate discussion page. You have 48 hours before I fix the problem, forcing you to revert my edit and return to the table to argue you case. ] 00:54, 20 August 2005 (UTC) | ||
| ==arbitration== | |||
| since you remain incivil, as per your RFC;'s ending, in which you promiosed to try not to bve incivil, which has failed, a request for arbitration is being processed about you currently. that is all.] 02:14, 21 August 2005 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 02:14, 21 August 2005
I periodically go through and clean out the old comments... This is because they refer to old situations or that the comments are otherwise no longer relevant.
Note: If you are here to leave personal attacks, false accusations of vandalism, a long tirade about why your cat photo or article about yourself should be left alone as you and only you wanted, nonsensical rationalizations of why vampires, ancient astronauts, werewolves, "creation science" and so on should be treated as completely real and so forth, do not bother, as I'll either just remove them right away or simply point you to the appropriate Misplaced Pages policy which you should have read in the first place.
Otherwise please add new comments below.
New discussion
Mythology
I am reposting your last message and my response, as the latter was deleted with any reply. Please do not take this as a personal attack. I would merely like a response. elvenscout742 21:44, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- All your objections have been answered and totally destroyed. You and your "everyone"s again is always just a rationalization for you thinking you are right when proven wrong and then taking a couple of clueless people's confused responses as if you had a real consensus. It's always the same with you. It's simple, if you get rid of the correct definition, I will put it back, and if you try to fight me over it, you will lose. Again. As you always do. Because you are wrong, and your bullheadedness does not magically make you right. DreamGuy 18:15, August 19, 2005 (UTC)
- Are you trying to say that you are the only one in that discussion who isn't "clueless"? I would call that a personal attack (or a series of them, given the number of people being insulted), as well as being factually inaccurate. I have never loost to you - on one occasion you found a sneaky way around the rules and I decided to be mature and not press the issue any further. The only reason you appear to have won in this case is that you changed the article in the first place and have stubbornly reverted any attempt to fix it. I refuse to enter into an edit war with you, so I let you away with it until you admit you are wrong. You have not cited a piece of real evidence supporting your claim except for your personal dislike of most dictionaries and true mythologists, your warped definition of the word based on an assumption that all "-ology"s refer exclusively to the academic study of something (again contradicting major dictionaries), and your accusations that the other uses are "slang". If you would only cite some real evidence - perhaps a definition given by some expert other than yourself as the only true one - I would at least take your claim seriously (though the opinion of any one writer, even if it is supported by you, cannot change the fact that "mythology" most often refers - and, if not that, can sometimes refer - to a collection of myths, and can be readily pluralized). You refer constantly to "people in the field", but the only specific you have given on this - beyond it not encapsulating Joseph Campbell and the like - is "classical authors", whom I would not consider reliable sources on anything. After being asked to refer to some specific people who would agree with you, you didn't respond, and have yet to respond after over three weeks. I, on the other hand, have cited a number of dictionaries (including one specifically devoted to the field of mythology) and authors who use my definition as well as the plural "mythologies" (link to an article that explicitly uses the word in a manner with which you cannot argue - and your perversion of the main "Mythology" article makes a piece of advice at the start grossly misleading). Even if it were not the proper definition, it is still widely used, and is recognised by all good dictionaries. If it has a special definition within its field, does Misplaced Pages not grant room to use the more widely held meaning, regardless of its origin? Come back and continue the argument in the appropriate discussion page. You have 48 hours before I fix the problem, forcing you to revert my edit and return to the table to argue you case. elvenscout742 00:54, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
arbitration
since you remain incivil, as per your RFC;'s ending, in which you promiosed to try not to bve incivil, which has failed, a request for arbitration is being processed about you currently. that is all.Gavin the Chosen 02:14, 21 August 2005 (UTC)