Revision as of 07:01, 12 March 2006 editAAA765 (talk | contribs)22,145 edits →Edits to criticism of Islam← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:57, 14 March 2006 edit undoZmmz (talk | contribs)3,855 edits →Edits to criticism of IslamNext edit → | ||
Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
: Hey Ashmoo, Could you possible please have a look at my last edit in the talk page of criticism of Islam. Thanks --] 07:01, 12 March 2006 (UTC) | : Hey Ashmoo, Could you possible please have a look at my last edit in the talk page of criticism of Islam. Thanks --] 07:01, 12 March 2006 (UTC) | ||
== Naming Dispute== | |||
Hi, I saw your comment in the ] article about a naming dispute. The user in question who springs multiple disputes gives unreasonable excuses for his or her edit, and is not a user who can be compromised with. As a result, unfortunately we had to set up an Rfc for the user here. If you see fit, please leave your comments in that page, in regards the fact the user Aucaman may be difficult to compromise with, or is unreasonable. Thank you] 05:57, 14 March 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 05:57, 14 March 2006
Catalog of Tim Tam vendors?
Are you planning on listing all of the countries in which Tim Tams are sold? I suspect you'll be looking at dozens. If not, why is it relevant that Israel is one of them? — mendel ☎ July 7, 2005 13:37 (UTC)
- My impression was there are only a small number of countries where they are sold. It seemed as relevant as the paragraph about England and which shops they are sold in. Ashmoo 7 July 2005 23:21 (UTC)
- Ah, ok. I would've taken out the bit about which shops in the UK had I noticed it then too! It's not as rare as you'd think, though -- Campbell Soup owns Arnotts now, so they're available in at least some of Campbell's markets (at least Canada, the US, and the UK, and I suspect throughout Europe but I can't confirm that.) Apparently the AU-IL trade relationship is remarkable, though, so I'll resign myself to marvelling that people do Tim Tam Slams with things other than liqueurs and port. — mendel ☎ July 8, 2005 01:24 (UTC)
- I'm surprised that they are available in Canada & the US. If they are widely available I'd support removing the comments about the UK & Israel. Or maybe just making a list of countries where they are sold. The whole article is a bit trivial though, so I'm not going to get too worked up about it. Ashmoo 8 July 2005 01:38 (UTC)
Aisha article
I've been watching over the Aisha article. Your removal of that sentence is fine with me. It was there because Stevertigo came and made extensive modifications and got quite upset if they were removed or changed. I didn't dare remove his bit re "marriage age as part of attack on Muhammad"; I just copyedited it a little. Let's see if he's still watching the article. Zora 07:22, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
Don't try to PC the Sydney riot article
Its fully documented , no room for PC.
Mount Arapiles
I see uve been editing Mount Arapiles. There is a future version User:Deanos/temp that because this user is away for a long time i will probably update as i know and make the arapiles page, if he doesnt respond ...
Maelgwn 00:52, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Kangaroo Culling
Hi. I saw that you removed my edit about why activists believe the kangaroo species are not as well protected. I stumbled upon this viewpoint on an old website called "save the kangaroo". I'll be certain to post the link if I come across it again. <regards>,,,,,Ariele 00:41, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Sarfati
Ash, if you are going to make modifications you may want to take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Jonathan_Sarfati/dispute and implement the consensus ones. JoshuaZ 07:17, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Rove vandal
Hello. I've agreed (at the Rove talk page) to semi-protect the Rove McManus article in future on further instances of vandalism. -- Longhair 07:10, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
Criticism of Islam Edit
Re this edit: if so, then shouldn't the whole paragraph that it was included in be removed? Come to think of it, that paragraph and the mention of Gary Miller, even though it claims to be response, is in actuality not a response to any criticism but an ad hominem attack on Christianity - outside the scope of the article. Do you agree? Just as a note to you, your edits to the Criticism of Islam page have in general have been very helpful, and you are right that much of the article is/was nothing more than Islamic apolagetics. Thanks. Yid613 07:22, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your rationale, I think that I understand it now. Even though Gary Miller's argument is logically fallable, it is still appropriate for inclusion if it is (not surprisingly) what Muslims say, and responses to that still have to be sourced. Thanks. Yid613 20:11, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Criticism removed from Rasha Khalifa
That was me what wrote that, and it was a fair cop. The problem is that there's a huge literature on the human urge to find pattern, but I couldn't find anything to quote that was either broad enough, or talking about textual analysis specifically. A lot of it is on visual pattern perception -- like the tendency to see faces in things. I'm sure the right quote is out there, if I could just find the right search terms. Zora 04:22, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Edits to criticism of Islam
Hi Ashmoo, as I have promised earlier, i will not revert your edits before discussing them on the talk page(I may apply minor changes). But please note that your change to "scientific criticism of Islam" was already discussed in the talk page. So, i'll revert that one. Please discuss it on the talk page. Thanks and have nice times.--Aminz 08:00, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- Hey Ashmoo, Could you possible please have a look at my last edit in the talk page of criticism of Islam. Thanks --Aminz 07:01, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Naming Dispute
Hi, I saw your comment in the Iranian people article about a naming dispute. The user in question who springs multiple disputes gives unreasonable excuses for his or her edit, and is not a user who can be compromised with. As a result, unfortunately we had to set up an Rfc for the user here. If you see fit, please leave your comments in that page, in regards the fact the user Aucaman may be difficult to compromise with, or is unreasonable. Thank youZmmz 05:57, 14 March 2006 (UTC)