Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:39, 15 November 2006

Welcome!

Hello, LSLM, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Junes 08:45, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your comment at Talk:Latin peoples

Please see Misplaced Pages's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. —Khoikhoi 02:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Ismael76

ok chill out veritas. dont report me, its a waste of time over such a small matter. I suggest we talk about it here before we take it any further. I am watching your page you can answer me here directly.--Ismael76 18:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I left you a message in your page. Veritas et Severitas 18:40, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok we can talk here from now on. Its ok if u cant cancel the reporting, the thing is I have been involved in reporting people in the past and its really a waste of time especially when involving reasonable people. By the way that final revert was just a joke. Im sure we can come to some consensus although we should better keep the discussions in our personal talk pages rather than making fools of ourselves in the article talk page. We should perhaps start off with a list of things on which we agree and then go on to things on which we dont so as to discuss them peacefully.--Ismael76 19:13, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, if you are the one behind that final revert, you are going a bit too far. I am an adult, I do not know if you are a kid, I hope not, but your behaviour is very strange if you are familiar with the basic Wiki rules. I have always refrained from attacking you personallly in the article talk page, it is not my style, but your refusal to accept just a normal and verifiable contribution is quite strange. Let me ask you and do not be offended. I know that you are Spanish. If you want we can continue in Spanish. I think that you are from Ceuta or Melilla or from the extreme South of Spain, probably with some North African background. Tell me, Am I wrong? When you asked me about my origins I had no problems to answer it, though you have been trying to use it against me later, not very elegant, by the way. In any case I do not have to hide it. Veritas et Severitas 19:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Well that is a good analysis of my user contributions. Perhaps you are right that we should put our personal issues in the open. I was born in Ceuta although I no longer live in Spain. I have "north african" background although my family is jewish not muslim. I originally started contributing to this article, having randomly come across it, because I was baffled by the ignorance of certain users who expressed racist views, making sweeping statements over who is and is not white and starting sections on "white history and civilisations". I started watching the article, privately believing the whole thing should be deleted as unencyclopedic. I admit I am suspicious of you since I also checked up your user contributions, much of which consist of defending the Europeanness of Spaniards and minimising any non-african or other influence, and I have noticed you have come into conflict with other users over this. I dont think that "White people" article is a suitable place for defending positions with such racialist connotations. Anyways, I am sure we can set aside our personal issues and find a consensus on this point in question.

--Ismael76 20:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, Ismael, If I am something is an Anti-Racist. I admit it, I do not have neutral feelings in this area. I hate racists, they are the worst plague in this planet, so do not get me wrong. I have been contributing also sometimes here. One of my lines has been to fight some clearly racist attitudes and comments. I have been defending and introducing for a long time that the term white is just a colloquial term for caucasian, that it does not equal European, and that North Africa and the Middle EAst is also a natural area of habitation for white people. All those comments have often been erased by simple people (and I think racist who think that they are not white for whatever reason, and so on). At the end I have been able that the reference to the Middle East and North Africa are in the World Distribution Section, not exactly how I made it, but at least recognized, and I will get back to it, because I think that it is still tendentious (the reference to the "broad US Census"). By the way it was me who erased the section on white nationalism, discussing it first, of course, and I have been insiting that to include white nationalist criteria here is absolutely inacceptable, etc.

Anyway, as you say, let us not concentrate on the messenger, and let us concentrate on the message.

Often I have come across references to Iberia and Spain that are simply wrong in my opinion and according to reputable and verifiable sources. If Lithuania has 1000 miles of roads and people insist that is has 2000 of 500, I will insist that it has 1000, it is just like that. Yet, I understand that other people may have other points of view, and as long as they support them with reputable proof, I am ready to respect that. That is how Wiki works. What I think you do not realize is that it is you who is trying to delete my contributions continuously, even though my contributions are all according to Wiki rules and standards. It is not me who is insisting on deleting yours. Mine and yours represent two perspectives, supported by documentation. It is as simple as that. Sorry, again, but I think that your behaviour is not being appropriate and I think that you can understand that. Veritas et Severitas 23:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Setting aside the main point in question, what I meant is that the "White people" article should not become a battleground over how much north african admixture is to be found in Spaniards. Considering there must be dozens of genetic studies on this issue, many seemingly contradicting each other, it would make no sense to include all of them, or to argue cases. The article should barely mention iberia at all.

Anyways we may soon have to leave this discussion on hold for a couple of weeks. I am moving home soon and wont really have time to access the internet.

--Ismael76 10:36, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Racist!

Your attitude really is disgusting and racist. I have read your comments to Gibnews.........you really are pathetic. Gibrlatar was not "stolen" by anyone.

Gibraltar is not, and NEVER will be a part of spain. Not even a little bit. Not now, not ever. So you and your racist, fascist comrades can dream on, but DEMOCRACY and FREEDOM will prevail. You should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.120.236.92 (talk • contribs)

Verifiability

You really need to calm down and stop insulting other editors. It is a policy on Misplaced Pages to assume good faith. I really don't understand why you cannot accept that your citations are not reliable sources. I have pointed you to the correct guideline (in science avoid citing the popular press. I urge you to find better sources for your edits. You should be using either the original book, which you do not appear to own or have read (so how do you know what it says?) or scientific papers published in peer reviewed journals. I have had many problems with newspaper articles in the past, they rarely accurately report science in my experience, and newspapers always report scientific theories as if they are fact, rather than evidence for a particular point of view. I would like report what Bryan Sykes has actually said himself, rather than what a journalist thinks he has said. I have ordered Sykes's book and will read it when it arrives, I can then cite it in the article, please do not include extremely unreliable newspaper reports. Here's an example of how poor the journalists are at reporting science. The original paper: Y Chromosome Evidence for Anglo-Saxon Mass Migration. What a journalist said about it :English and Welsh are races apart. So the journalist said almost the oposite of what the original paper said. Since removing very much mis-reporting of science by newspapers from wikipedia I have become extremely sceptical of the way newspapers deal with issues relating to science. In this case something very complex is being investigated by scientists, but journalists want a simple easy story. What I am saying is we should include Sykes research, and not what a journalist says about it. Alun 06:18, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I do accept that Sykes is a reliable source, and also that he is undoubtedly a world leader in this field. When I get his book it will represent a reliable source from a wikipedia standpoint. In actual fact I have been following this for some time and the evidence for an Iberian origin for western Europeans is very strong, and getting stronger all the time. At the moment I feel a bit like I am battling on two fronts. I feel like Epf wants to dismiss the genetic work, because he doesn't like the way it is going (I think it largely goes against what he believes), but that you want to include all of the research as if it's concrete proof. This may be unfair to Epf and to you, but it's just how I feel at the moment. I've had a difficult day reverting Epf's edits to Welsh people and trying to convince him on his talk page that he has not understood a certain paper. Briefly the paper uses autosomal as well ans Y chromosome and mtDNA samples, but Epf keeps saying that only Y chromosome and mtDNA have been used. He is contradicting what is written in black and white in the paper. I cannot even revert his last edit because I have reached my three revert limit for that article for today. So I've had a bad wiki day and am feeling a bit under siege. So it was nice to get your message. Let's see what Sykes himself says and include it in the article when we have read his book. Sorry if I came accross as a bit aggressive. Alun 17:58, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

The terminology used by Wale et al. is totally obsolete. I really could gather little more than anything from it. Please contrast with this paper by Capelli et. al, specially with this graphic, that shows that English are intermediate between the native core (Basques, modern Celtic peoples) and the Denmark-Frisia area (but closer to the first ones on average).

Also, the gradation could be of "recent" origin (Anglo-Saxons, Vikings) or older (Maglemose culture, for instance). In any case only some coastal areas of the North Sea (York, Norwich) are neatly closer to Denmark-Saxony than to Wales-Ireland-Basque Country.

I made for my own use this clinal reconstruction of British of Nordic-Atlantic ancestry (based on the Capelli paper). I've uploaded it to ImageShack, so you can have a quick visual reference. Legend would be: Red is 100% Atlantic (Basque-Irish), Blue is over 50% Nordic (Danish-Saxon; Norwegian in the case of Orkney and not painted Shetland), cyan is 40-50% Nordic, and the rest goes on estimated 10 percentual points per color strip. Notice that this only talks of Y-chromosome (paternal) lineages. --Sugaar 09:25, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

English people please do not use newspapers as citations for science

Please do not use newspaper sources for citing science. I have asked you not to do this before. I cannot understand why you have done it again. These are not reliable sources of information for science. You claim to have a copy of Sykes's book, in which case why don't you cite Blood of the Isles? I cannot accept these newspaper sorces as reliable, and indeed they do not constitute such according to wikipedia guidelines. I do not have a problem with inclusion of the work of Sykes's and of his conclusions, but please use a reliable source, for example the book itself rather than crap articles from crap newspapers, I mean come on, one of them is the Daily Mail, one of the worst newspapers ever published. I would also suggest that if you want to make reference to Iberian paleolithic people going to the British Isles by boat, you make it clear that this is a theory, do not say that they probably went by boat, say that they may have gone by boat. I also urge you to read the how to guideline on footnotes, this is the referencing system used in the English people article, and you should always follow the system an article already uses, your introduction of a different referencing system is confusing, and results in several different references having tha same numbers. All the best. Alun 05:28, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Your Personal Attack

Your accusatory statement against User:Dark Tichondrias on this edit in "His (Dark Tichondrias') continuous attempts to try and use this article to promote Neo-Nazi ideology...is disgusting...Neonazis come back " because it implies that the person you are directing your statement to is a "Neo-Nazi", making it against Misplaced Pages's policy on personal attacks.--Dark Tichondrias 05:16, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

White People

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to White people, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages.

You may delete uncited or incorrectly cited meterial. But deleting whole cited sections (population section) is considered vandalism. Thulean 13:44, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

LOL. Almost exactly the same they placed in my talk. It's clear it's a concerted effort to take over the article.

• Veritas, you may want to comment in the RFI that that Thulean has opened against me. --Sugaar 20:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Personal Attack

Please stop. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people as you did at Talk:White_people/Mediation#The_particular_dispute_discussed_here, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Thank you. Thulean 14:45, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people as you did at Talk:White_people#Thulena_position, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Thank you. Next time I'll be reporting you. Thulean 19:28, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Report him, LSLM. He has already been warned for harassing me with his bogus threats. This harassment has to stop. --Sugaar 21:32, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Due to your repeated personal attacks, you've been reported. Thulean 21:46, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes report me too, I hope people will finally uncover you. Veritas et Severitas 23:14, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Thulean continues to attack White people pages he wont stop he needs to be taught vandalesson.--Euskata 01:01, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, Thulean's report does carry some weight. It does not matter if you detest something another person believes in, it does not justify breaking Misplaced Pages's policies on no personal attacks and civility. I don't want to see anyone in this dispute get blocked over these concerns, so please work on the mediation and try to do so without having to refer to another editor or another editor's beliefs in a deragatory manner. Shell 17:53, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Your Civility

Your statement on this edit where you said "I hope that some administrators can block this guy" is against Misplaced Pages's policy on civility which asks users to not call for blocking other users.--Dark Tichondrias 01:11, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Tell that to your friend Thulean who's been spamming all us with threats of block of his own creation. --Sugaar 12:02, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Your message on my talk page

I have responded to your message. I c e d K o l a 04:25, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Personal Attack

Please stop. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people as you did at Talk:White_people#United_States_Census_Bureau_language, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Thank you. Next time, I'll report you again. Thulean 23:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Your Civility

Your statement on this edit which you took credit for on this edit with the statement "Is there a way here in Wiki in which finally people with such horrible agendas can be banned?" is against Misplaced Pages's policy on civility. This policy suggests users don't call for the blocking of other users.--Dark Tichondrias 02:13, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

• Due to your continued personal attacks, you've been reported:

Thulean 16:28, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Seriously, I know how heated of a dispute this is and I understand you feel frustrated with the process of reaching consensus, but labelling other editors and disregarding their input because of these labels isn't helping the situation at all. Shell 18:39, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Oppenheimer

Hi I'm currently reading ppenheimer's book. It's excellent, he has a comprehensive iblyography and notes, and uses previously published peer reviewed scientific papers. It has a very comprehensive feel to it. I haven't read Sykes book yet, but looking at the appendices and index it doesn't have the sort of comprehensive or academic feel of Oppenheimer's work. Still we can cite both and I suspect there will be many areas of agreement. All the best. Oppenheimer certainly argues strongly for the Iberian origin of most people from the British Isles, though he mentions a paleolithic contribution from the Balkan refuge to England. Alun 07:33, 15 November 2006 (UTC)