Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:32, 23 June 2006

Babajobu is on temporary wikibreak to attend to real life.

• User:Babajobu/Archive1, 23 June 2005 – 12 December 2005
• User:Babajobu/Archive2, 12 December 2005 – 03 February 2006

Tired of tawhid

Here's a poem from a recent New York Review of Books issue:

Pagan Litany -- poem by Patricia Storace
published in the New York Review of Books, 
2006-01-12

Unknown gods we drove away, we invoke you.
You who are not named, but are not nameless,
Pardon our arrogance. Return to us.
Let the myriad altars we destroyed surge up again,
Ocean of gods, and lave the world with generous prayer,
Restore, we beseech you, your manifold blessings.
Let no one be called infidel unless
He seeks to harm another.
Let the curse of idolater be reserved
Only for the self-righteous,
Whose tyrannous faith brings war,
And permits any cruelty
In the service of its self-deity.
Let the charge of blasphemy fall
Only on the self-anointed,
Ventriloquists of divinities.
Once again, let no god be abominated,
Declared a devil by another's partisans,
Let none be despised, but all honored.
Terminus, god of border markers, return from Rome,
Teach us again our limits. Mark off the finite from the infinite,
Let no man claim the deaths he causes are the will of God,
That the bodies at his feet are the butcheries of angels.
Show the women their own deaths in the tortures they inflict—
Their children will tremble at the sight of them,
And drown on their own mothers' milk.
Abattur, come with your scales from Persia;
We need your judgment.
Anat of Canaan, goddess of war, wear your ostrich feather crown;
You alone knew the purpose of war, not to destroy other creatures,
Each born as it is, already in its shroud—
But to fight death.
Pattini, Lady born of a heavenly mango, share with the starving
Your miraculous rice, protect us from epidemics,
Both those we endure, and those we devise.
O Ptah, who created us in Egypt on a potter's wheel,
Make us serviceable and lovely.
Nu-gua, who made us in China of yellow clay,
Do not shatter us.
Huracan, who made us in America of cornmeal,
You who live simultaneously in eternity and time,
Watch over us in heaven,
Nanse, Our Lady of Sumeria, Queen of Divination,
Tell us the awful truth—that this world is a faithful record
And clear interpretation of our dreams.
Ometeotl, glorious Aztec, born of your own thought,
Keep us unfinished ones ever-thinking,
Revealed always by what we have caused to exist.
Patrons and Givers of Gifts, we summon you.
Juturna of the springs and wells,
Quench our thirst.
Egres, who first gave turnips to the Finns,
If we scorn your gift,
We repudiate the world.
Dua, god of daily grooming,
Reviver of mankind,
Patron of perfume and the sacred bath,
It is your vocation also to wake the dead,
Your therapy through which they remember
How to use their limbs. Remind us of the
Resurrections hidden in our days,
Celestial incarnate in quotidian.
Cao Guo-jiu, Patron of actors,
Of all that is both true and false,
Sustain us in belief,
Protect us with doubt.
Hintubuhet, Androgyne,
Maker of Marriage,
Butterfly of both sexes,
Bless those who seek devoted love.
Tenenit, refresh us with the golden beer
Brewed first in your sky-blue lapis vat.
Marunogere, Maker of genitals,
Thank you.
Arhats, enlightened ones,
Lend us your heavenly eyes,
So we might glimpse other worlds,
Read other scriptures, so those who
Know nothing of the earth they inhabit
Will not dare again to speak to us of heaven.
Return to us, Pantheon,
Abundant in divinity,
Without you, we cannot be human.
Winged Nari, from the heaven of dead children,
We petition you: have mercy on us.
Ran of Scandinavia, goddess of the drowned,
Lift the breathless gently in your nets,
Pray for us.
Freya, weep for us your golden tears.
Mayan Ixtab, Goddess of Suicides,
Show those in torment your inhuman mercy;
With compassion beyond blessing,
Receive them in your Paradise.
Greek Eirene,
Whose liturgies were never stained with blood,
Grant us peace.

Zora 03:03, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

"Empty Change"

Babajobu,

I did not make an empty change to the Misplaced Pages entry "Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy". I corrected a misspelling of the word "public."

Thank you, Moveforcloture

Muhammed cartoons

The best I've found by way of discussion is a short section on the article's talk, and a bit on AN. In neither place do I see any argument advanced that suggests protecting the page, other than "i hate vandals, especially when they all come at once". Indeed, on AN, I see one admin say that even if George W. Bush were mainpaged, we should unprotect that. I don't see vandals as being more important than having mainpage-linked articles freely editable to new users, some of whom actually do come in good faith. I can also see, from the log, three or four admins unprotecting in recent hours. -Splash 04:04, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Indeed; the featued article was briefly protected earlier when it came under a genuinely dangerous attack. See how the cartoons' page goes, I guess; keep it unprotected when possible, and protect it briefly when something needs to be fixed or while blocks are being applied, plus a few minutes for boredom to set in. One finer point: I think it's fine to semiprotect an article you're involved in in cases of plain-and-simple vandalism. Since semi shouldn't ever be used for a content dispute, you'd never be making a content decision. Still, appearances matter. -Splash 04:14, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

ok thank you I was think I think is new poll :) Qatarson 14:01, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Hezbollah Threat

Babajobu, I'm not sure if you had ever had contact with anyone from Hezbollah or even the Muslim Brotherhood. However I can tell you that being told to work out an issue w/ _______ is a direct threat, implying (at least in my country) that you can end up beaten up, even over the smallest things. (eg, talking to the girlfriend of a Muslim Brotherhood member)

- where ___ implies Muslim Brotherhood or any other offshoot organization.

Cheers, —This user has left wikipedia 15:01 2006-02-03

obviously u have no clue what you're talking about: a Muslim Brotherhood member wouldn't *have* a girlfriend! ;) Rajab 19:51, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Jyllands-Posten's apostrophe controversy

Babajobu, as you are a self-professed grammar-nut, I have a quick question... Should the title of of the Misplaced Pages page "Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy" have an apostrophe after "cartoons" so as to indicate possesiveness? Hence: Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons' controversy. Or, perhaps, Jyllands-Posten's Muhammad cartoon controversy? Note... I am NOT a grammarian. Keep up the great work.--Snorklefish 17:08, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

hey havn,t u got tired from this talk page ... hehe .. anyway i got ur notes ..thanks --Unfinishedchaos 23:41, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

which link u mean , if u mean the links i have added in the talk page , I have added the most important english ones to the paragraph wich is in the article right now , others were arabic ones ... anyway there is a copy of these links in the talkpage archive3 ... tc --Unfinishedchaos 23:49, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

ahh this sentense is remained from my previous message when i pasted the text here ... anyway have u seen the jordanian caricatur in the talk page , that is expression of how arabs think about this issue , if u find that propriate we can put it in the opinions in muslim worlds section . i will try also to find some arabic opinions that support denmark . --Unfinishedchaos 23:58, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

i believe in ur speech , but that is what ppl see here , as encyclopedists , we have the duty to transfer the opinion of this side to other side and oppositely , maby that can lead to more understanding --Unfinishedchaos 00:06, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Poll

I'm terribly sorry. I somehow thought that was so heavy and caused some of the problems people had when trying to edit. I figured the poll could go on anyway, since I provied a link to it. But I'll put it back. Sorry. :( (Entheta 01:11, 4 February 2006 (UTC))

Ok, I've fixed it back now. I personally likedit better when it had its own section so the talk page could focus on.... talk, but what do I know? :) (Entheta 01:17, 4 February 2006 (UTC))

Don't be a dick - avoiding offense

Lotsofissues made a very good point on the discussion. If somebody uploaded a porn picture of your sister wouldn't you remove it too? Even if it's only a minority who are strongly offended by the pictures there should be at least a warning given! That's the spirit of WP:DBAD Rajab 12:32, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

At the moment any Muslim who casually clicks on the front page will get here, become offended & engage in the edit war. I believe that if the picture was further down (just like you said) then much less Vandals would be attracted to this site. Unfortunately there are probably too many people from your side who fall under WP:DBAD to achieve this. We tried it a few days ago but it didn't work... Rajab 12:58, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Muhammad

Hello, you left a message on my talk page about the cartoons. I don't accept your argument that by clicking on the descriptive title of the article a muslim should know that they will then be confronted by the cartoons. They may strongly suspectthat they will, but Misplaced Pages does not have illustrations for all articles. To my mind there is no harm in providing one more layer of protection. For those of us who wish to see the cartoons (when the story blew up, I certainly did) it is clearly about as easy as something is possible to be, merely to click through to an image. For those who don't wish to see them, they can follow the whole story without doing so. --bodnotbod 15:06, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

there really is no valid argument against adding that extra layer of protection. Unfortunately these people prefer to violate WP:DBAD because it gives them pleasure to offend us Rajab 15:42, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Babajobu said : "I will try to propose a site-wide policy of moving offensive images below the fold " ... actually that is exactly what i was thinking in today .... actually a poll like the one held in Muhammad's Cartoons is useless cause the result is obvious already ...but the wise step is to write proposed policy to cover all offensive pics in all wikipedia articles : pics in Piss Christ ,Bahá'u'lláh , Anti-semitism , Blackface , and muhammad's cartoons .. by this way I think we have better chance to solve the problem ... I hate to see some ppl quit cause of this crisis . --Chaos 16:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I did not say "I will try." I said I would support it. Don't misquote me. Babajobu 16:25, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

sorry ... so why u don,t begin writing such proposed policy , I think that is the only wise step in the current state . --Chaos 16:56, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Why don't you? Jacoplane 02:59, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Agree with Jacoplane. I don't have a strong desire to see such a policy implemented, I only said I would be willing to support it. If someone else wants it, they should get to work. Babajobu 08:03, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Heh, I need to get back to important things, like fixing Forgotten Realms stubs. :D Not this political crap. Kyaa the Catlord 10:05, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

TS Plus

Babajobu, can you please look at the entry from today on my talk page? I came across an entry that maybe should have been deleted along with the TS Plus page, but I'm not sure whether it calls for a merge, delete or redirect, and I see you in the history of that page, as well as the deletion of the TS Plus article, so thought I should ask you how to proceed ?? Newbie alert :-)) Sandy 23:42, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Dave Sim Tangent

Hey Babajobu, thanks for the note. I will probably post a few paragraphs from Tangent onto the Dave Sim page and hope that covers it. There are a couple of other sites that have printed the full essay, so I should be able to link to that. Many thanks!

re:Oceansplash

Even though I don't support unblocking him I won't stand in your way if you are willing to act as a sort of unofficial mentor to him and teach him how to be a good contributor. Jtkiefer ---- 17:01, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

limits of free speech

Baba, I take back everything & plead you to remove those japanese drawings - they are even much worse than the jilland posten cartoons Rajab 21:28, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages widow

Help yourself to Misplaced Pages widow although it is kind of "stubby". I started it in the Main namespace but it was pretty quickly VFD'd as a neo so the folks didn't get much of a chance to improve. Have at it and let me know where it ends up.  ;-) hydnjo talk 22:04, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

My new baby refuses to sleep unless she's sitting iin front of Misplaced Pages with me! I wish I'd thought of this 12 hours ago ;-) Stephen B Streater 11:43, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

This is Sophie :-) I shot this video on my mobile phone and edited and pblished it in FORscene. Stephen B Streater 10:52, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Sean Black's user page

Hey, Babajobu. I just noticed that you made this edit to Sean Black's user page. Since humor is notoriously easy to misinterpret on the Web, I'm not sure whether you added that as a friendly joke or as a personal attack. I hope it's the former, and that if it is Sean will take it that way. I'm guessing that it is, because of the "rouge admin" (although I don't really get that running gag either — obviously it must originate from somebody's misspelled accusation back in the depths of Misplaced Pages history). I'm just being over-cautious, I suppose, and would like some reassurance that you're not actually upset about something that Sean did. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:16, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh, good. I'm glad that it was a joke — I just wasn't sure. That explains the "courtesy vandalism" edit summary as well, which was baffling me. That's what I get for avoiding IRC! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:22, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but no.

I'm gone for good. There is absolutely no point in remaining, even with me gone the edit warring and nonsense by proislamic editors continues all over, and anyone who speaks up against them is slapped away or completely removed.

They've won. They can have it. As far as I am concerned, this behavior by certain of your admins is proof positive that the wikipedia experiment has failed.

Goodbye. Queeran

Another Esperanzial note...

Hi again Esperanzians! Well, since our last frolic in the realms of news, the Advisory Council has met twice more (see WP:ESP/ACM2 and WP:ESP/ACM3). As a result, the charter has been ammended twice (see here for details) and all of the shortcuts have been standardised (see the summary for more details). Also of note is the Valentines ball that will take place in the Esperanza IRC channel on the 14th of February (tomorrow). It will start at 6pm UTC and go on until everyone's had enough! I hope to see you all there! Also, the spamlist has been dissolved - all Esperanzians will now recieve this update "newsletter".

The other major notice I need to tell you about is the upcoming Esperanza Advisory Council Elections. These will take place from 12:00 UTC on February 20th to 11:59 UTC on February 27th. The official handing-over will take place the following day. Candidates are able to volunteer any time before the 20th, so long as they are already listed on the members list. Anyone currently listed on the memberlist can vote. In a change since last time, if you have already been a member of the leadership, you may run again. Due to the neutrality precident, I will not vote for anyone.

Yours, as ever, Esperanzially,
--Celestianpower 09:00, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
(message delivered by FireFox using AWB on Celestianpower's behalf)

The link you gave says more than 3 times, implying that three times is acceptable. What is it? --210.54.12.72 05:58, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Break

I am being "kicked out" I will stay for few more days but I am glad ArbCom is banning me because I have to break my "wikippdia addiction" this is a crazy place to change one word one must guard it forever . Edit war are inevdaable but thy are not allowed and at th end they ban only the pro-israel party.

Have you seen my ArbCom case ?

Zeq 15:50, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

e-mail me please

It's not about the image

Baba, I have no problem with the image being on the page. It's not about that. The so-called vandalism was when somebody replaced the entire page with text that said something like respect our religion"

That page is being run by two or three editors who are sitting there day and night rolling back all edits by anyone who's views don't align with there's. There is no supermajority that says minor edits not involving the image don't belong -- there are bad faith editors bullying anyone else from contribution, advancing their own opinion on talk pages and not responding substantively to intelligent discussion. They are in fact advancing their point of view. I suspect they vandalized the page to get it locked in to their preferred version, so their version can be forked around the world without reference to occassions when lawful nations have passed laws regulating speech. The result is a skewed version of revised history that casts anyone who beleives in the rule of law as backwards, while these geeks try to impose their own law under the guise of sharing knowledge.

Contrary to Wales self-important claim, this is not "undoubtable good" -- it is an assault against human knowledge. Pei235 17:07, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Pei235 aka PaxTerra blanking pages

Babajobu, please have a look at . Thanks! Netscott 18:18, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry meant to say have a look at the bottom of his talk page... Netscott 18:31, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

As an administrator do you have any way to check what IP address users post under? I suspect you'll find that almost all of those sock puppet (and PaxTerra) have the same IP (or at least are in the same subset). I'm sure beyond a reasonable doubt that they are all the same based up the statements he's making in his defacements. PaxTerra, MX44 and myself were conflicting in the past 24 hours about the subject of Julius Steicher and Der Sturmer being part of Comparable references for Jyllands. Netscott 18:43, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Kings of Rome

WRT to the length of the reigns of Kings of Rome, you're right that the average length of reign is 34 to 35 years long. However, at least according to professor Garret Fagan, this is unusually long, at least it's longer than any known historically documented royal dynasty, including the modern Royal families of Europe.

34-35 years is not average life span, it is the length of their average reign. Presumably they spend a number of years in "their father's shadow", and one or two are likely to have short careers - especially the last King of Rome - Vedexent 09:06, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Recent LJ Drama Closure

I plan on taking it to deletion review if I can't get some more info out of you first really quick, but I guess it can't hurt to ask a couple questions, since you deleted "by a hair," most notably whether you took the prior consensus keep into account as well as the verifiability situation that was dealt with at the article's talk page. Many of the verifiability issues were without merit given the guidelines at WP:OR and WP:Verifibility, most importantly the notes about primary sources when some felt - incorrectly - that they were secondary. Just curious if those were weighed in the overall decision and whether, if not, they affect your judgement at all. Thanks in advance. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEME?) 04:44, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Jeff, I figured this would end up at deletion review however it was closed, and if you'd like to take it there I encourage you to do so. I'd be interested in the results. I did examine the prior keep vote, though a prior AfD does not alter the guidelines or criteria used in closing any subsequent AfDs. However, I do personally feel that later AfDs probably should bear a slightly higher "burden of proof" if they are to succeed, so this was one variable that pulled me in the direction of a "no consensus" judgment. As for verifiability, clearly the existence of the site and its various features are verifiable, but that's not the issue. What are sorely lacking are reliable secondary sources that characterize and describe LJ Drama. Without those, the article's prospects were very poor, and its potential scope extremely narrow. Regardless, the AfD met my typical definition of a supermajority for delete (normally I look for 66% of all good faith, reasoned votes), and I didn't find adequately extenuating circumstances to outweigh that supermajority. Babajobu 05:00, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I'll be sending it there anyway, but it's good to get into your head a bit about it. Thanks! --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEME?) 05:35, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Advice requested

Hi Babajobu!

Do you have time to read all the talk pages and articles you delete?

If so, you will know that I have recently been working on an article for FORscene, a product my company makes. The product seems to easily satisfy the guidlelines on notability, with multiple independent press articles from around the world, but not the independence criterion (as I wrote the first version of it myself). I did notice two other ids had already started improving the article before it went, though one may have been a bot. The deleters didn't seem to want to discuss the merits of the article very much.

Is there a standard way to kick off a product article without falling foul of the VSCA police?

---

Thanks for your help - I've left my reply in my Talk section. Stephen B Streater 14:12, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

---

Thanks again. Stephen B Streater 12:36, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

---

Are you waiting for anything from me? Stephen B Streater 02:36, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

---

You might like to add this recent review to your notability points:

• Another FORscene review (requires Greek fonts)

It's all Greek to me ;-) though apparently it is very complementary. Stephen B Streater 07:23, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

---

Roman K. Kovalev

Is the fact that there's a long list of publications mutually exclusive with it being a stub? Isn't an article still a stub by virtue of the fact that there's pretty much no biographical information (which someone on stub patrol might be in a position to add)? What are the criteria? Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 16:13, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Dunno. My only thought was that if it's in the stub group, someone might chance across it and have relevant knowledge to add re biography. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 16:49, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, biographical details of an up-and-coming prof in the field of Eurasian steppe history seem like a rather esoteric topic for the sort of riff-raff who do stub sorting, but who knows! ;)

LOL. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 18:21, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Amstrad CPC AfD

Hi,

You recently closed the above AfD with a verdict of no consensus. Of the four votes to keep, only one shows any interest in the actual topic. One was from a new editor and simply said "keep" with no reason, the other two use reasons to keep that are actually contrary to WP policy. The four votes to delete and original nomination all give some kind of rationale and show knowledge of WP policies and style.

I was just wondering if you would share your thoughts on why this article is acceptable for inclusion? The article breaches WP policy on several counts, notably:

• Excessive redlinks
• Bluelinks which are linked to articles completely unrelated to that topic in the context. (like "The A-Team" links to the TV show, not any Amstrad CPC game)
• Lists should contain significant and substantive information that would not otherwise be held in a category. This list does no such thing and a separate category for this topic already exists.
• List is seriously incomplete, containing only games with titles that start with A, B, I, U, V, W, X, Y, Z and numbers.

Despite being listed at AfD no-one seems motivated to respond to the cleanup tags or improve this article. This is serious listcruft and allowing it to remain on WP is, IMHO, not constructive. I am genuinely interested to hear your thoughts. Thx, Deiz 00:37, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Deiz, AfD is about whether a particular topic is appropriate for Misplaced Pages and not about the current state of the article. If there are excessive redlinks or inappropriate bluelinks, or if the article is incomplete, these are content issues and can be remedied through normal editing processes outside AfD. In determining whether an article topic is suitable for Misplaced Pages, the closing admin's responsibility is to determine whether there is consensus on the issue, rather than to decide which side is right. Rationales contrary to Misplaced Pages policy should not be viewed as contributing to the consensus, but I don't really see that here: for the most part the debate seemed to be about whether or not this list served a function separate from that of a category. I saw no consensus on this issue (certainly no supermajority) so I closed it as a no consensus. You can request that the decision be reviewed at Misplaced Pages:Deletion review, if you like. Hope this helps, and if you have any other questions, please do let me know! Babajobu 07:31, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with your content point for normal articles, but not for lists. Your reply seems to acknowledge this page as an article, which it clearly is not. As the closing admin I'm sure you looked at the list - does it serve a purpose separate to the existing category? Will it in the future? I honestly can't see why this belongs in an encyclopedia. Listcruft is spreading like wildfire and it only takes a few partisan souls with an interest in the topic to guarantee No Consensus - this trend is not good and I believe admins should be much stricter and bear in mind the specific guidelines governing lists and not articles when looking at lists, per WP:NOT:

• Misplaced Pages is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files. Misplaced Pages articles are not:

Mere collections of internal links, except for disambiguation pages when an article title is ambiguous, and for structured lists to assist with the organisation of articles.

This page therefore fails WP:NOT. I remain convinced this list is not a valid Misplaced Pages page and will be submitting this list for deletion review as per your suggestion. I appreciate you have acted in good faith and are a solid admin but believe you have incorrectly interpreted the nature of this article and the relevant WP policies. Deiz 15:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Your message on #autowikibrowser

Hi. I saw the following lines in IRC today (times are UTC+1).

 * Babajobu_ has joined #AutoWikiBrowser
 <Babajobu_> Hello!
 <Babajobu_> Anyone in here notice a problem with AWB?
 <Babajobu_> It's not organizing cats or interwikis
 * Babajobu_ has quit IRC (Client Quit)

I assume this was you.

We have now a project at sourceforge. You might consider submitting a bug report here. Click on "submit new". Thanks. --Adrian Buehlmann 20:59, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I do not think we disagree

I think we are on the same page for the image at oral sex, I agree with you that it is a good image and that it is illustrative. --KimvdLinde 03:23, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Math of Quran

Hello Babajobu, u deleted an article while its been voted for deletion Math of Quran, and the article had significantly changed since it was first voted for deletion and we had not reached a consensus on the new article. Many admins were of the point of view that it should be kept. please restore the article until a consensus is reached. I hope you believe in democracy and not dictatorship(or should I call it blind adminship ;-))..(Mystic 08:28, 1 March 2006 (UTC))

• Hi again, thanks for your reply on my talk page, an admins job is not to just delete articles that had been in AfD for a number of days, but to consider the fact that the article had changed since it was voted for deletion, the reason why it was put to delete was because it did not have any reference at all, but the new article I had put all references with 'Verifiable Sources' so its not original research. In fact I had consulted this with admin user:King of hearts and he said its okay to cite the quran, bible, or the tora. because majority of the world believes in them. (Mystic 15:34, 1 March 2006 (UTC))
• Thanks a lot for posting the contents on my user page, I have re-created the article Mathematics of The Quran, I appologize for my previous comment that you are not democratic, I am sorry. Lets see whether my article stand a chance this time.. Thanks again (Mystic 08:57, 4 March 2006 (UTC))

FYI Mark Sweep went on all userpages of Pro-cannabis Wikipedians and subst their templates

This is deeper than a bad category delete. He invaded the userpages of certain users- just Pro-Cannabis Wikipedians- to prevent them from adding themselves to a list, which was not violating any policy. This is what is so fundamentally wrong with the userbox policy, nevermind the rogue actions in advance of it— forcibly preventing people from associating because an admin dislikes the basis of association.

BTW, here is what they joined to say,

These Wikipedians are pro-cannabis, and oppose the bigotry and oppression suffered by cannabis users, whether they use cannabis or not.

Thanks for your help last night. This, BTW, is why I didn't realize you had restored the template— the category hadn't shown on my userpage.

StrangerInParadise 13:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Jesus Article

Thanks for coming by! We need all the help we can get. That having been said: the small minority phrase has been and is being documented. see talk:Jesus/Cited Authors Bios and notes 2-3 on the main article.

I do hope that having you bring it up here doesn't start another 3 archives full of two sides warring it out. We were kind of hoping to move on.

Since you're here now, may I ask a favor? Please monitor the discussion. If either side has their apologists slinging mud again, would you ask them to quit it? I've tried to moderate the discussion with no success. Also, please be ready for someone to insist the paragraph is POV because it doesn't agree with him. I've typed until blue in the face that it is the opinion of scholars that counts, not the opinion of the editors. --CTSWyneken 15:43, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Another user getting 'the treatment'

There's a user USer:I_AM over at Palestinian Exodus being put through the same treatment I was.

Just thought you might want to know, if you're still around. Queeran

I'm back

Cheers, mate

StrangerInParadise 01:32, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Drunk notice

I saw the notice being in a similar state I find myself to be the most amusing person on the planet and left a reply worthy of any great comedian.

Thank you for your contributions to Misplaced Pages!

—-- That Guy, From That Show! 2006-03-05 06:28Z

StrangerInParadise

As the block of StrangerInParadise was discussed at some length on WP:AN/I; could you please explain your unblock there? Thanks, Mindspillage (spill yours?) 07:29, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

You said in your unblock (which I didn't reblock) that it needs discussion - I noted it on WP:ANI for discussion and on Stranger's talk page pointing there. Others have found the spamming templates he was using and was advocating that others use for spamming, so my view of him has actually gone down ... please join in the ANI discussion - David Gerard 13:15, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

I have replied to all. You did the right thing, though I see their point about the annotation. On the other hand, David Gerard cut enough corners, you have nothing to apologize for. BTW, check out WP:RFAR#Guanaco, MarkSweep, et al.

StrangerInParadise 07:16, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Something you should read

This is something I very recently posted on another user's talk page in response to his supportive comments. It is refering to the user Raphael1.

I appreciate your willingness to help, but I think this guy is beyond hope. He constantly mixes the definitions of words, such as the difference between 'insult' and 'offense,' and he constantly omits or twists (in his mind) key words in the existing policy he quotes. As a psychology major, I find his behavior fascinating and disturbing. Haizum 14:17, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

I feel like there has to be some sort of protocol for dealing with this type of person. To me, a debate is emperical, meaning that if the discussion is purely factual and logical with no fallacies, then the debate will end in one of two ways; either both sides finally agree on the same thing, or one side will end up being flat out wrong.

The problem with this philosophy is that if a person doesn't understand/accept what a fallacy is, or doesn't fully understand the language they/others are using, then they essentially become immune from the progressive forces of logic and cogent debate. I find it very disruptive. Haizum 14:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

At some point I'm going to suggest arbitration. I'm getting tired of his games. Haizum 16:22, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Also, please see: Talk:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy/Arguments Thanks. Haizum 16:27, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

LOL, thanks for the backup. what the heck are you talking about? Haizum 20:20, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

LOL, way to end that 'argument' with a bang. I'm just glad I'm not the only one that had to deal with him. Haizum 12:49, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Hunter Ellis

I've put this article up for deletion review, after re-writing a stub focused much more on his non-Survivor notability as a TV host, which was then speedy deleted as a recreation of deleted content. Since you commented on the initial AFD, I thought you might want to participate in the discussion here as well. -Colin Kimbrell 17:27, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! :)

Howdy Babajobu,

I'm just dropping in to express my appreciation for the kind remark you left on my talk page during my absence. Even when frustrated, I knew I'd return sooner or later: Curing my wiki-addiction is beyond my power, especially since (of all possible addictions) it is among the most socially beneficial. Besides, there are some signs that a more peaceful and productive order is being actively shaped by wiser users, among whose numbers you highly rank. :)

On a separate note, AN/I indicates that you had a pleasing Saturday evening! I do hope the joy endures, and that Sunday brings no retribution for you. Best wishes and cheers!, Xoloz 18:50, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Template:RFM-Filed

Welcome back

Can you look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation#Machsom_Watch

NPOV out earth-based-life-centrism!

Hilarious and correct! I love it. Thanks for your commitment to the pedia. Noah

Muslim Rajputs

Thanks for your contribution on this page. Any help you can provide, please feel free to update as accordingly. Many thanks again --Raja 21:40, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Lolicon

There is another stawpoll on the disputed offensive image currently underway at Talk:Lolicon. Hipocrite - «Talk» 21:00, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #1

Islamophilia

The new Islamophilia article may benefit from your attention. --Germen (Talk | Contribs File:Nl small.gif) 13:48, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Censorship

A revised version of the proposed policy against censorship is now open for voting. Will you kindly review the policy and make your opinions known? Thank you very much.Loom91 09:50, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #2

Old Skool Esperanzial note

Since this isn't the result of an AC meeting, I have decided to go Old Skool. This note is to remind you that the elections are taking place now and will end at 23:50 UTC on 2006-04-29. Please vote here. Thanks. --Celestianpower 20:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #3

Missing?

Hey man! Where have you been? I hope you are doing well after the bad days. Talk to you soon. -- Szvest 20:53, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Mate! Could you please have a look at Ali Sina when you have a time? Regards. Szvest 19:38, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Category:People killed by or on behalf of Muhammad

Whitewashing history attempt at Misplaced Pages:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_June_16#Category:People_killed_by_or_on_behalf_of_Muhammad - the reasoning boggles my mind. Apparently citing the hadith is "original research". -Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 13:41, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

A short Esperanzial update

As you may have gathered, discussions have been raging for about a week on the Esperanza talk page as to the future direction of Esperanza. Some of these are still ongoing and warrant more input (such as the idea to scrap the members list altogether). However, some decisions have been made and the charter has hence been amended. See what happened. Basically, the whole leadership has had a reshuffle, so please review the new, improved charter.

As a result, we are electing 4 people this month. They will replace JoanneB and Pschemp and form a new tranche A, serving until December. Elections will begin on 2006-07-02 and last until 2006-07-09. If you wish to run for a Council position, add your name to the list before 2006-07-02. For more details, see Misplaced Pages:Esperanza/June 2006 elections.

Thanks and kind, Esperanzial regards, —Celestianpower 16:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)