Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:45, 3 October 2004

• Talk archive 1: February 13, 2004–June 6, 2004
• Talk archive 2: June 6, 2004–August 29, 2004

Feel free to leave me a message.

Ripley

Hello, Everyking ! You seem to like the Ripley article so much. Why don't you come to Misplaced Pages:Collaboration of the week and vote for it ?  :-) Cheers ! -- PFHLai 23:35, 2004 Aug 29 (UTC)

Enver Hoxha

I like some of the re-workings of that article, I'm sorry if I caused trouble but I'm very new to this whole NPOV policy. So long as you state that Hoxha was a Communist leader I'm fine...because I've watched Albanian Propaganda films and it states that Hoxha is a Communist leader. Thanks ^_^--Gustuv 22:03, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Just Wondering

Heard that you live in Augusta (thought I was the only one). What part of this lonely town you editing from? MattSal 01:39, Sep 3, 2004 (UTC)

B-Movie Bandit

With all due respect, I am THRILLED that the Bandit is blocked and I fail to understand your opposition to blocking him. There has been more consensus on this problem than any other in recent memory. I have better things to do on this site than play janitor to a moron and I'm sure you do too. The nightmare is over and all of us have won. I genuinely appreciate your concern and your willingness to propose solutions. - Lucky 6.9 17:09, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Joseph Smith Jr.

Thanks for keeping an eye on the article. Good revert. Tom 02:33, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Trial of the Sixteen

A view of someone from the outside is exactly what I needed. What do you find POV and what can be done to correct that? ] 19:35, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

Well, that was my problem - how to write an artcicle on Soviet crime, without stressing the word crime too much. The problem is that those politicians (the elite of the Polish society) were indeed invited for a conference and then imprisoned and tortured. It's similar problem to that of the Great Purges - that article seems anti-stalinist too, but how could it be corrected without resorting to commie propaganda, which seems even worse POV..? I don't know. Let me know should you have any suggestions. ] 19:48, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

Minor change to Stalin article

I notice that you reverted my change to the "Death of one man" quote. Can you please explain why this was done? There has been a long discussion at Talk:Famous_non-quotation as to why this was changed. One Salient Oversight 05:57, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hoxha again

The People's Socialist Republic of Albania was a country with a socialist system led by a communist party that claimed to be guiding the country through the long-term transition to communism. Say that in the article than...I will be staisfied. Also I have watched many albanian propaganda films which refer to Hoxha as "A Marxist-Leninist Guide" Not a leader (although I know behind the scenes I know he was the de facto leader).--Gustuv 01:04, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Also would you know any wikipedian Communists? I can't find any here--Gustuv 01:06, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, I going to read some Hoxha's writings when I find the time, Honestly I've read nothing from Hoxha (I've read mostly Marx, Lenin, Engels and some of Mao)--Gustuv 01:24, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

In that case I wasn't too sure...He could be considered De-facto leader in some case but in others he could be considered the genuine leader.--Gustuv 01:37, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Mistake

Sorry it was in the original article.. you just edited the link. My mistakeMozzerati 14:06, 2004 Sep 11 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your support re: my adminship. Jayjg 18:54, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

OK Soda

Thanks for correcting my spelling and grammar constantly. I guess I'm more dependent on the squiggly lines in MS Word than I thought... --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 20:53, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the Tropical Cyclone edits

Sorry if some of it was a little sloppy. I'm sick as a dog. If you are in an editting mood, feel free to have a run at s and s too ;) (the latter was completely incorrect use of the term arctic cyclone, so I had to edit it.. then I had to write about polar lows. Guess that'll teach me :P) -- 24.150.30.69

Context

Thanks for catching that. If you were watching my edits like a hawk, you'd have noticed that about a quarter way from the end of the list, I started keeping that in, as I suddenly realized that saying U.S. state was better than saying American politician. And in some unfortunate cases, I eliminated both. Thanks, I guess I'll have to go on another cleanup run. :) --Golbez 20:19, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)

I preferred "American politician" to "U.S. state of Alabama", but the former seemed .. I dunno. Not all these men are politicians; for example, if I were stubbing presidents, would I have marked Eisenhower or Washington as a politician? Furthermore, most non-stubbed articles don't say he's a politician. But, the most non-stubby Ala. Gov., George Wallace, does say as such. I guess I think US State is a better marker. Furthermore, it brings more exposure to a well-designed article. :) But I'll look around. Maybe there's room for both. --Golbez 20:33, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)

Rudolf Bultmann

I'm interested in why you think this a personal of view. How would write about the change in gospel interpretation and why changes in biblical scholarship are not looked forward to? And why they change at all? Charlie Turek charlesturek@comcast.net 24 Sep 2004

The parts of your contribution that are POV are bolded: "The recognition that the gospels are the preached reinterpretations of Jesus' life and teachings by the early Christians is growing. The clues, the similiarities, differences and literary art within the gosple stories had been overlooked in favor of restricted traditions and biblical ignorance. Even biblical scholarship must keep up with science and our growing knowledge about the peoples of the ancient past and their literary skills and methods."

If you can find a way to say all that that isn't redundant with what's already in the article and isn't so POV, that's fine. You just need to be careful not to state opinion as fact; it's not that I personally disagree with what you wrote. Everyking 20:00, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. I might come up with something. It won't be easy. I would like to show where modern biblical scholarship is today due to the fine detective work of Bultmann, Raymond E. Brown, and others, and the clues that caused it to happen.

      Charlie Turek   24 Sep 2004

Date Styles

I am sorry about changing the date styles on a number of articles to the ISO standard. I was under the impression that only those dates written in this standard would change according the a user's preferences (ie 17 February 2000 or February 17, 2000). Hence, I thought I was helping. I now know that is not the case, and shan't bother doing it anymore (unless the date is incorrectly formatted). Those edits I did were pointless, but they should be okay. Again, my mistake, sorry. Joseph Philipsson 20:41, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

gingrey

thanks. the community will need to deal with this user with regard to some other articles to0. Alteripse 20:05, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Dr. Michael M. Krop High School

Thank you for voting KEEP. Thank you for your support. Greatly appreciated!--AAAAA 22:06, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Theodore G. Bilbo

Thanks for fixing that. Don't know how a simple, garden-variety edit somehow resulted in the wipeout of the entire bottom of the page. Thanks again.

Rlquall 16:48, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:U.S. Southern wikipedians' notice board/USSCOTW

The Southern Collaboration of the Week board is now up. Please vote or nominate other articles. The first voting ends on October 3. Mike H 14:20, Sep 30, 2004 (UTC)

Copyright

1.) Go to www.bookrags.com They're saying, I quote: "free book notes, essays and literature study guides online" 2.) Go to http://www.bookrags.com/cgi/cite.php?type=bio&id=david-dinkins "How to Cite this Biography"

Read it. They write, that I (Misplaced Pages) can cite them, because it's free. Please respond to this. It's for the good of the game, because David Norman Dinkins was the first African-American mayor of New York and still on Misplaced Pages there is very little article on him.

                  Please help!

User:Darwinek 18:04, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Poland

Why are you preventing me from removing the gross distortions introduced into People's Republic of Poland by the well-known communist apologist User:172? Adam 11:59, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• From January 1942 on, the Soviet-oriented Communists and left-wing socialist groups gained influence in Poland. The Polish Workers' Party (PPR) and its military wing developed from their ranks.
  • • This is rubbish. They did not "gain influence." They were imposed on Poland by the Soviets.
  • Western-oriented politicians such as Stanislaw Mikolajczyk
    • This is a snide slander, typical of 172, intended to suggest Mikolajczyk was an agent of the West instead of a Polish patriot.
  • Soviet-oriented parties held the balance of power, especially the PPR
    • This is a distortion. The communists were not "Soviet-oriented," they were Soviet-controlled, and there was no other pro-Soviet party.
  • It must be said also that the Polish government-in-exile in London could not help the Polish cause.
    • I wrote, "It must be said also that the Polish government-in-exile in London did not help the Polish cause." which makes much more sense. (I'm not certain that this was 172's edit, by the way)
  • This text has been removed: "They imposed themselves on the country through a reign of terror against the main non-Communist party, Mikolajczyk's Polish Peasant Party (Polskie Stronnictwo Ludowe PSL), and also against the veterans of the wartime Home Army (AK) and of the Polish armies which had fought in the west. They also resorted to systematic vote-rigging, both in a referendum in June 1946 which legitimised the provisional government and in the January 1947 legislative elections, which returned a massive majority for the Communist-controlled "Democratic Bloc." "
    • You think this is a neuteral edit?
  • For example, there was strong suspicion that the U.S. rigged the 1948 Italian elections because it looked like the communists were on the verge of victory.
    • This is both untrue and irrelevant. But it is striking evidence of the political bias which 172 is trying to insinuate into the article.

Adam 12:45, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)