Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:23, 26 March 2006

Welcome!

Welcome!

Hello Шизомби, 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 have any questions, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Extraordinary Machine 23:50, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

The Illuminatus! Trilogy

everything in the article needs to be expanded:

• more about publishing history of original novels individually. article doesnt say when it was first published.
• more from the mouths of wilson and shea about their thoughts on the novels, how they collaborated in writing it, why they chose their weird narrative styles etc
• more criticism, literary and popular, about the trilogy, who liked it, who hated it, and why, has its popularity and influence declined or increased over the years?
• plot needs a going-over - should be much more detailed than it is (its why i came to the article in the first place, to find a simple expln. of the complex story).
• plot details could be wrong - were the nazis gonna be reawakened after all the festival-goers were killed, or were they supposed to kill the festival-goers?
• themes must be greatly expanded - all the atlantis stuff, the submarine, the heavy numerology references, the dillinger dying words etc are barely mentioned
• significance of titles are not mentioned.
• how did its earn its reputation? i keep seeing it mentioned as a counter-culture post-modern classic, but who said it? why is it so popular and still in print today?
• what about the millions of things influenced by it? like The KLF. what about the thousands of things its influenced by, like H.P. Lovecraft?

actually, theres so much i'll stick the above on the talk page too.... Zzzzz

where are you getting your release history info from? i'm wondering cos i dont see your changes on the locusmag or isfdb pages, and it doesnt match up with the covers with years displayed at http://www.rawilsonfans.com/images/book-covers/fiction/index.html can you add it as a source? Zzzzz 18:58, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Hey, that's a cool page. I own some copies of the individuals volumes, but additional ISBNs came from abebooks.com.

do you own the 1975 usa dell editions? otherwise i dont think abebooks is a more reliable source than isfdb and locus (its just a second-hand book market right?). so can i put back the original isbns? also why did you remove the reference to Dell being a Random House imprint?Zzzzz 20:02, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Besides a reprinting of the Dell omnibus, at hand I have Laurel's Oct 1980 1st printing of The Eye in the Pyramid, Dell's Nov 1975 1st and Jan 1976 2nd printing of Leviathan. I have a couple more copies but I'm having trouble finding them (I have a lot of books and they're disorganized). Laurel Leaf Books was a Dell Publishing Co. imprint. I took out the Random House info that I had added because while Dell is at present an imprint of RH, I doubted if it was in 1975 - see Doubleday. Also a couple of the ISBNs you had were longer than usual...? Abebooks allows various bookstores to sell through them; the ISBN information thus comes from several sources. From info there it appears Sphere may have had editions published in the 1970s. Schizombie 20:26, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

i guess the next task is to expand the plot summary somehow (see comment in peer review "the trilogy as it stands seems a bit tame"). hope you can help with that, as i barely remember any details at all... as you seem to know the details well, i'm wondering if you could put a pgraph or 2 about the use of numerology in the "themes" section as well? law of fives, 23 (numerology) etc. i have a feeling this could be a featured article with just a bit more work! cheers. Zzzzz 09:13, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

added reference to disinfo article about wilson criticizing (steve jackson presumably) games exploitation of illuminatus. anything to help expand the article is v. useful (especially the plot summary!). i want to put this one on WP:FAC soon. Zzzzz 21:02, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

i took it off GA as per your comment. 23:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

thx for all your help & contribs... i'm ready to go with WP:FAC now, unless you have any concerns? just tell me go or no-go. cheers. Zzzzz 20:17, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

what did you mean " page number for FU's self-awareness at the end" - you mean when FU realizes he's one of the narrators of the book? if so, its right near the end p509:

"It's the truth," Hagbard said calmly. "I can fool the rest of you, but I can't fool the

reader. FUCKUP has been working all morning, correlating all the data on this caper and its historical roots, and I programmed him to put it in the form of a novel for easy reading. Considering what a 'lousy job he does at poetry, I suppose it will be a high- camp novel, intentionally or unintentionally." (So, at last, I learn my identity, in parentheses, as George lost his in parentheses. It all balances.) "That's one more deception," Joe said. "FUCKUP may be writing" all this, in one sense, but in a higher sense there's a being, or beings, outside our entire universe, writing this. Our universe is inside their book, whoever they are. They're the Secret Chiefs, and I can see why this is low camp, now. All their messages are symbolic and allegorical, because the truth can't be coded into simple declarative sentences, but their previous communications have been taken literally. This time they're using a symbolism so absurd that nobody can take it at face value. I, for one, certainly won't. That thing can't eat us because it doesn't exist—and because we don't exist either. They're nothing to worry about." He sat down calmly. Zzzzz 10:40, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

the illuminatus article is now up for "featured article" status. please go to Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/The Illuminatus! Trilogy to vote Support or Oppose with your comments. cheers. Zzzzz 17:55, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

i think its supposed to be there 5 days, and any actionable objections must be addressed for it to become featured. its annoying that those who objected dont come back & comment on the fixes done to address their issues though.

Math of Quran

Thanks for your useful advice, I have improved this article based on your advice. Please check it, I need to add more info. If you think there is anything that needs to be added please tell me. (Mystic 10:53, 26 February 2006 (UTC))

I appreciate that you're making the effort, though it still needs work - particularly to be understood by somebody who hadn't heard of it before. The title of the page might be better Numerological studies of the Qur'an. If all of the information on the page originates with the one book cited, you might consider renaming the page Quran: The Final Testament (book) along the lines of The Bible Code (book).

The Ringess noted on the talk page for the article that the introduction needs more context. The computer (what computer, what software?) didn't find this on its own; I'm supposing it was Rashad Khalifa who put the numbers in and ran them? Also, it doesn't explain why he picked 19 rather than any of the other numbers in the Quran. I would guess that if other numbers would run, patterns would be found too; the question for many people would be whether those patterns are intentional or accidental, and in either case whether they're significant or not.

Also the quote from Gardner is disingenuous. In his column, Gardner had the fictional pseudoscientist character Dr. Matrix say "It's an ingenious study of the Koran," which was his way of poking some fun at the study. Gardner can be very sarcastic. Schizombie 21:49, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

• Comment Hi Schizombie thanks for your valuable comments again.. I see you have removed my reference to Gardner in the page.. Why do you think he is being sarcastic.. please discuss this on the talk page of the article talk:Math of Quran, I am adding it back till some consensus is reached. Thanks again for your interest and efforts in making this article more understandable and resourceful.
• Since the article has been deleted, my reply:

How many people besides me have a copy of this article lying around?

The article is "Mathematical Games: Dr. Matrix, like Mr. Holmes, comes to an untimely and mysterious end" by Martin Gardner, and begins with a quote from an "anonymous ballad": "The sons of the prophet are brave men and bold,/And quite unaccustomed to fear,/But the bravest by far in the ranks of the Shah/Was Abdul Abulbul Amir." The first sentence reads "Going through my files on Dr. Irving Joshua Matrix, the greatest numerologist in the world, I find notes on many escapades that I have not yet written about in his peripatetic career." In the first paragraph he goes on to describe some of this fictional character's achievements: "I have never told about Dr. Matrix' revival in Bombay of phrenology, which he cleverly combined with the ancient Hindu technique of acupuncture (a method quite different from that of the Chinese). Nor have I disclosed details about his notorious Parisian brothel for dogs and cats, where the madam was a large red-haired chow from Hong Kong, and pets were given free numerological readings on Saturday." "Perhaps someday I shall recount these odd episodes, but this month I must with a heavy heart speak of my visit with the wily old charlatan last April in Istanbul."

"Ingenious" appears on page 22 of the article, after Dr. Matrix tosses Gardner a copy of Number 19: A Numerical Miracle in the Koran.: "'It's an ingenious study of the Koran,' said Dr. Matrix, 'but it could have been more impressive if Khalifa had consulted me before he wrote it'" (emphasis mine). Gardner's account of Matrix' exploits ends as he describes how Matrix was evidently undercover as a Muslim named Abdul Abulbul Amir working for the CIA and apparently died in a shoot-out with a Russian agent.

Now, I think people unfamiliar with Gardner ought to be able to gather from even that much that Gardner was not calling Khalifa's work ingenious, and that he was being sarcastic. Gardner is a serious person, but he is also given to using humor at times, and particularly sarcasm. I understand that some people can be blind to sarcasm, and that understanding of sarcasm can be cultural (and no, I'm not being sarcastic by mentioning that). Gardner, besides having written for Scientific American about mathematics is also a noted skeptic and member of CSICOP. Even if the sarcasm is missed, the fact that it is Gardner's fictional pseudoscientist character who says that Khalifa's work is ingenious and not Gardner who says it is hard to miss. In the WP article on Matrix it states Gardner invented him "partly to provide colorful context to mathematical puzzles and curiosities, partly as a satire of various pseudo-scientific theories." Do you have the article, or did someone give you that quote out of context? I see that the page http://www.submission.org/miracle-history.html mentions this column without mentioning Matrix. Very dishonest of them.

Regrettably, I never met Gardner, but I had read his columns in the Skeptical Inquirer (SI) for many years (he's since retired from a regular column) and his books. He writes about odd things like Fletcherism and makes fun of them. Garder later wrote a two-part article in 1997 in which Khalifa came up again, his column "Notes of a Fringe Watcher" in SI. The first paragraph contains: "it is not hard to understand how the faithful could imagine that their divinely inspired text would contain hidden mathematical structures proving the book's supernatural origins" (emphasis added). I haven't turned up the issue that the second part was in; he only starts describing Khalifa at the end of the first, after Louis Farrakhan. I'll keep looking for it, or go to the library if I have to in order to make it clear what he thought of Khalifa and his work. Schizombie 08:34, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Wow, just took the above submission.org page and went to Internet Archive - they've been making that claim that Gardner found the 19 thing impressive at least since 1997. http://web.archive.org/web/19980612161837/http://www.submission.org/miracle-history.html That's really a really bold lie on their part, since it's so easily proven a lie. Schizombie 09:50, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Good grief, one of his books on Amazon.com has the out-of-context "It's an ingenious study of the Koran" quote listed as an editorial review from Scientific American. I wonder if it might even have actually been printed on the back cover of or inside the book... I wonder if SA could sue for misrepresentation? Шизомби

List of notable Muslim reports - or whatever it's called

Yes, that's a truly horribly article. It didn't get deleted because the inclusionists voted against deletion. Inclusionists tend to believe that almost any article could be salvaged, with enough work, and will vote to keep even in areas about which they know little. Deletionists are more ruthless. The Little-Endians and Big-Endians of WP :)

However, there's one advantage to keeping the article. It keeps Striver busy. When he's busy, he doesn't attack high-profile articles. No user is likely to look it up, so it's just off in its own little eddy, Striver's corner. He loves having his own world where he's in control.

Of course it's just pointless to have the article, when the MSA hadith-search is online , and when Striver is listing only hadith of interest to the Shi'a, under the names that Shi'a use for them.

I believe that sooner or later all that Strivercruft is going to get deleted; it may just take years. Zora 09:06, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Capitalization

hey -- WP style is that the first letter must be capitalized (and if it's not, the software does so), and the rest of the title is case-sensitive. Thus iPod and IPod both refer to the same page, and it's a different page than ipod and Ipod. For more detail, see . bikeable (talk) 02:26, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Sniglets

Ahhhhh you said the magic words! Yes yes pleeeaaase provide direct references to a few choice sniglets from the "official" sniglets books. I've been waiting a long time for someone who actually had the books to come along. It would be outstanding if you could put some into the article. (Enthusiastic enough for you? ;-) ) JDoorjam Talk 15:28, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

RFC

Please comment on my rfc Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Jersey Devil--Jersey Devil 21:33, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I will, and I don't think it was inappropriate for you to have notified me of it since you did quote me after all, though that said I may mention that you did. However, I knew an RFC on you was coming since Striver had in effect announced his attentions in Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Muhammad: The Messenger of God (book), and anyone who saw that could have surmised this was coming as well as I. Esquizombi 22:49, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Double vote

Indeed, there was some sort of an error on my part. Thanks for letting me know. Pecher 20:30, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Thanks for your comment. Bro, you cant expect me to have perfect native english grammar, not even "true" enlish people are always capable of that, and it shouldent surprise you that a Iraninan/Swedish guy doesn't master the language.

I mean, how many Shi'a editors do you see here around? We are 200 000 000, and you only see me and Zereshk. Zereshk masters english (by my standard), but he is busy with the Iraninan articles, so im basicly the only active representative of 200 000 000 people. Try to judge me by that standard.

Being the only guy in the scale, i would judge that i am the best of them all (all one that is.).

I dont say that to imply that i should be given a green card to mess up articles, and let them remained messed up. Rather, try thinking it as i bring views and information that would not be here otherwise. Sure, i dont do that in a perfect way, maybe not even in a good way, by your standards, but im all you get from the Shi'a point of view.

All other Shi'a editors that have visited wikipedia have succumed to the heavy opposion they have meet, im the only one not giving up. Doesnt that make you wonder why?

Thing is, i perceive many editors just as biased and heavy pov pushers as they see me. Many times when people accuse me of being a pov pusher, you can bet that the feeling is mutual.

When judging my contribution to wikipedia, dont only look at what i do wrong, also look at what i do right, even though i admit it is easier to see what i do wrong. --Striver 01:22, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Penny...

It was merged. Then it was re-created. If you look at AFD, there are more then "keep" & "delete" as choices. I think the person who closed made an error however. This is a clear case of no-censenus to me. I still think they should be merged... maybe I'll do a mass merge-vote at some latter date. ---J.Smith 20:48, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

re. Kids Eat Free

I am fully aware of proposed deletion and use it often while new pages patrolling. The above mentioned article was not suitable for this process, despite its triviality, because it had previously been through the prod process and was 'deprodded' by User:Kappa. Once this has taken place, the article will not be deleted:

If the template was removed and replaced, the article will not be deleted. (from What this process is NOT for, WP:PROD proposed policy page).

As it didn't fit into any of the speedy categories, the only route left open to get rid of this "trivial" article was AfD. Thank you. Hynca-Hooley 23:20, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

• I deleted and reverted the comment because I was momentarily confused by the difference between the name signed to your comment on my userpage (Esquizombie) and the username displayed here. Apologies.

Qadianism

I created this page to discuss Qadianism from Muslim perspective. This page caused me to get 3RR and banned due to constant modifications by Qadianis/Ahmadis. Since then it has been extensively modified by Qadianis/Ahmadis group to became a copy of the Ahmadi page. Please do not merge with Ahmadi page since they do not like to add criticism in that page and this page was created to serve this purpose. I will contribute to change the content of that page in the future.

Siddiqui 03:05, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Yes, you are correct. I thought of the two as fairly similar which is why I put it down but WP:V is more accurate.--Jersey Devil 05:12, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Recommended Percaution

It is more of like something that falls within two of those terms. Mubah means something is permissible and Makruh means something that is disliked. Recommended percaution means it is permissible to do so, yet it would be better not to do. On a scale, it would probably read as, Halal, Mustahab, Mubah, Recommended percaution, Makruh, Haram. Yes, the scholars do use these terms, though I'm hesitant to say so about the "recommended percaution" without knowing the arabic term. Pepsidrinka 21:41, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

There is also "obligatory precautuin", and i dont think it have the meaning Pepsidrinka suggested. I dont know the areabic. Ill try to remeber your advice. You, on the other hand, should try to read this and this. --Striver 23:34, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Bro, i alway try to add a stub template when i create them, i am familiar with that. Or am i deluding myself, do you have a example of a article did not bring a stub template, a link and a short explenation?--Striver 00:05, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

"Suras" Al-Wilaya and Nurain

You are right. There is no need to have the tag. I removed it. Actually, I added the tag when I first saw the article I think. Thanks for the link btw. Regards, --Aminz 09:47, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

My Rfc

Please comment on my Rfc. Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Jersey Devil--Jersey Devil 02:00, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

reply from Smith03

Hi the gentleman ran for president under a differenet political party we do not have "fusion" in Minnesota. For that reason I removed him you can not run for office for one party and be a member of another Smith03 18:36, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

"Also in 2004, Thomas Harens, a member of the party, formed his own Christian Freedom Party and ran in the 2004 presidential election in Minnesota."

Also it really has little to do with the party and more of do with the indivual

Smith03 18:39, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Anon

This particular IP resolves to a school. That means the person who was warned on March 17th may not be the person who's vandalizing today. That's why it's imperative that the person be warned while they're vandalizing. The person vandalizing today may not have seen that warning, particularly with an IP that's dynamic. That's why the instructions at WP:ANV say to ensure that the person was warned on the same day in which the vandalism occurred. · Katefan0/poll 20:48, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

This person has made precisely one edit today. The proper response is to warn them, today. If they vandalize again, warn them again. If they vandalize again, report it to AIV and they'll be blocked. But don't report someone after they've only made one vandalizing edit; it's just not enough to block a dynamic IP over because either a) they didn't see the warning, or b) they saw the warning and stopped. Either way no reason to block. · Katefan0/poll 20:52, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: Casandra Stark

I added some references to the article, I don't know if it's enough to change your vote. I have the book Deathtripping but haven't located it yet... lots of books, not so well organized. Esquizombi 13:59, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello! I have added my revised opinion to the article's AfD talk page, as requested. Regards,  (aeropagitica)  14:09, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I suck at spelling

It was supposed to be "astoundingly" -_- Maybe punjabifire will get to those other 2 eventually. Though I agree those are probably the more notable and would have been a better starting place. I wish I could clean up the articles more but I don't really know a whole lot about this subject and don't know too much where to find more info on it. Lyo 12:42, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

• Havn't read the novel. But I'm going to work on getting a copy of it to read. I'd been meaning to do that anyway Lyo 13:33, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

AFD

Im tired of geting my stuff deleted, so i dont even bother anymore, just create them with the AFD sign on it and get it over with. --Striver 02:23, 26 March 2006 (UTC)