| Revision as of 07:55, 19 June 2009 editDoug Weller (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Oversighters, Administrators263,788 edits →Christian Zionism in the United Kingdom: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:10, 21 June 2009 edit undoThe Ogre (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers25,868 edits →White people: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 92: | Line 92: | ||
| This has just been heavily edited. Looking even at the earlier version, what is this with 'References' which have footnotes? References which lead to a sales shop? Most of these 'References' are just external links and should be amalgamated and culled. ] (]) 07:55, 19 June 2009 (UTC) | This has just been heavily edited. Looking even at the earlier version, what is this with 'References' which have footnotes? References which lead to a sales shop? Most of these 'References' are just external links and should be amalgamated and culled. ] (]) 07:55, 19 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
| == White people == | |||
| Hello! You might be inrerested in tha fact that some users are trying to re-add pictures to ]. Thsnks! ] (]) 16:10, 21 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:10, 21 June 2009
It is currently 14:22 where I am
Please place any questions or comments for me at the bottom of this page. Thanks.
Hello. Jewish friend
- The Brights movement seems to be a British thing. I once said, "I seem to be pretty bright (intelligent) but not too Bright (naturalistic thinking)." In other words, I don;t seem to have much cnfidence in my sense of common Sense.
- Can you tell that my typing skills are rusty? I wish I could hire someone to take dictation,
- I would like you to send word to my sister, Dawn Marie Vanderhyde, nvywfe72@ yahoo.com, NAVy WiFE, DMV, &c. She is my durable power of attorney for medical affairs. We've talked enough that she knows I consuder you to be another sister, or at least a tolkienish Elf-friend. Dawn knows who SOPHIA is, anyway. I'm going down the membershio roll at User:Archola/The_Centrist_Fellowship. Dawny Dawny Doo, where are you?
- I am suffering from lung cancer that invaded the human brain and required brain surgery. Trying to coordinate information in my environment is like waiting for the Pony Express. (Coordination is going to be difficult suce the lung tumor invaded my brain through the Cerebellum-Spinocerebellar tract complex. Oh, joy! Not to mention that I heard the doctors here at Skilled Neurosurgery discussing with my sis that they were planning to remove a bone from my skull and let my neck muscles support the back of my head.
Judaism and that Zoro business
Removing that unreferenced and original research section was a very good idea. I'd have done it soon myself. Debresser (talk) 17:55, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
About your revert from born to born. he meant born. I liked his edit very much. Debresser (talk) 18:19, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I do not think I'd revert a proper link ... but it still seems awfully trivial to me. Why do you like it so much? Slrubenstein | Talk 18:34, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
- It is an allusion to the son of a certain souple Yosef and Miriam. Debresser (talk) 18:36, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
- Well, we editors should resist using articles to forward our own views. If the point is tht Jesus was Jewish, well, that point should be made in th appropriate article and with appropriate sources, as needed ... in fact, the Jesus article makes that point. The sentence in question is about all Jews and I have to say I find it a little disturbing, maybe even offensive, to use it to make a point about a single Jew. In any event, the sentence is not about birth, it is about what makes someone a Jew. I still consider it trivial, to link it to the article on childbirth. Every reader knows exactly what the word "born" means in this context, there is no ambiguity. I do not think we should be overlinking. If the article had a paragraph describing different meanings of "born" in the Tanakh, Talmud or Midrash, I would have no problem linking each diferent meaning of "born" to the appropriate articl - but that is not what is going on here. Let's not use edits to make little jokes or allusions. Slrubenstein | Talk 18:44, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
- Of course you are right. But I still think it was funny. I might be making this up, BTW, but that was my first thought. Debresser (talk) 19:04, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Question about quoting people
I'm thinking this is the kind of thing you might know the answer to. SlimVirgin 02:06, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Fascism
Two editors in concert are now removing any reference to Fascism ever being anything other than "right wing" (the four references to "left wing fascism are gone, as are all 12 references for the former first sentence aboiut the political spectrum, and now the OED definition of is as "right wing" is being forced into the lede). I consider this to be violative of the spirit of WP:RS, and I am deeply concerned that those involved are making that article into a hotch-potch as it once was. Many thanks! I also posted at RSN about using the OED instead of any actual text on the subject. Collect (talk) 02:05, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Capitalism
Didn't I say that? I wanted to include Lassiez-faire as what some considered the truest form of capitalism and to show contrasts later in the document. I like your opening and would help you work on it if you wished. Soxwon (talk) 18:38, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
I hope you didn't feel that I was totally redoing your work, I just was trying for a little better flow. What do you think? Soxwon (talk) 16:23, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hmm, what is it that you don't like? I'm sure we can rewrite it to both of our liking. Soxwon (talk) 18:19, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Over, I trust
All the ANIs, WQA, CUs, RFC/Us and RFARs are over, I trust. I sincerely thank you for voicing your position on the RFC/U on me. I did not canvass anyone, and in order to avoid any cliams that I canvassd, I waited until now (the request to reopen the RFC/U seems dead). Again, many thanks! Collect (talk) 12:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Fascism in the political spectrum
The RfC on Fascism#Fascism in the political spectrum has now run one month and there are now two versions of the intro para:
- Most scholars do not find the terms right and left very useful with regard to fascism, which incorporated elements of both left and right, rejected the main currents of leftist and rightist politics, and attracted adherents from both ends of the political spectrum. Hence, fascism can be called sui generis. Some scholars do place fascism squarely on the right or left.
- Most academics describe fascism as extreme right, radical right, far right or ultra right; some calling it a mixture of authoritarian conservatism and right-wing nationalism. However, there exists a dissenting view that fascism represents radical centrism. Moreover, a number of writers highlight aspects of some types of fascist ideology which may typically be associated with the left.
Could you please comment at Talk:Fascism#RfC.
Egypt
Please, have a look to Ancient Egyptian race controversy. The article has been radically changed by User:Dbachmann and friends. This unilateral act is fuelling a controversy.--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka (talk) 12:16, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Christian Zionism in the United Kingdom
This has just been heavily edited. Looking even at the earlier version, what is this with 'References' which have footnotes? References which lead to a sales shop? Most of these 'References' are just external links and should be amalgamated and culled. Dougweller (talk) 07:55, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
White people
Hello! You might be inrerested in tha fact that some users are trying to re-add pictures to White people. Thsnks! The Ogre (talk) 16:10, 21 June 2009 (UTC)