This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rossami (talk | contribs) at 13:05, 16 December 2005 (re: Misplaced Pages talk:What Misplaced Pages is not). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 13:05, 16 December 2005 by Rossami (talk | contribs) (re: Misplaced Pages talk:What Misplaced Pages is not)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Welcome, but be warned: Enter at your own risk.

Welcome to the Misplaced Pages

I noticed you were new, and wanted to share some links I thought useful:

Questions and comments

German Chancellors

Thank you for your thoughtful answer, and for getting the point. As a German born after WWII and for a long time continuously preoccupied with our not so glorious past, I certainly don't want to see Adolf Hitler in the lineage of Gerhard Schröder or Angela Merkel. Best wishes, --wpopp 11:47, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, no, I hadn't guessed that you're German. I agree that we can't break the line for semantic reasons. But I think the line has been broken for the reasons you state. And, as I say in the discussion, nobody counts British (and, BTW, Austrian or other) heads of government/state The US is the exception, maybe because the have a greater need to establish themselves in history. Therefore I think that the effort to establish exceptionally a line up to Angela Merkel is biased, and I don't like that. Best, --wpopp 15:23, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

On the Catholic Church of Misplaced Pages

As you have described yourself as a Catholic, I thought I would alert you as a co-religionist to your opportunity to delete the particularly offensive article, Misplaced Pages:Catholic Church of Misplaced Pages.--Thomas Aquinas 21:58, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Elser

Dear Str1977, a friend of mine who uses Misplaced Pages and actually introduced me to it recently, asked me to review some changes he made to the Elser article this evening. By the time I got to it, you reverted most of these changes. Further looking into the article's history showed me that you have an unusual interest in George Elser, and have changed lots of information that others have added. I jokingly told my friend you're probably Manfred Elser. I hope I can get him to write to you and speak for himself. Two things that I agree on with him, are that an Encyclopedia's articles should not be a forum for propaganda of any stripe, and that terrorism is wrong, even when applied to Nazis, Communists, Bush's Foreign Policy, or any other thing that some support and others don't. So, let me ask you for example, why you removed "Eight innocent people died", and re-added,"Seven of the people killed were members of the NSDAP who had taken part in the meeting." Is this to say that of the eight that died, seven were Nazis and good for them? Why this emphasis re-added by you? If you care to answer me on this point, I have a couple of similar types of questions about your edit. Being new to Misplaced Pages, I'm not sure how you would contact me. Perhaps you can help me from the discussion page. Lastly, I saw on your homepage, that English is not your native language, however I must compliment you on your ability to write in English. With that in mind, my friend's corrections of your grammatical typos regarding "...AT the end of the 1960s" and "...neither his son OR the son's mother were molested," are right. It's improper to use two negatives in a sentence in English - "neither and nor", - and to say "in the 1960s" is correct, while to say "in the end of the 1960s," is not correct. Dr. Dan 00:09, 27 November 2005

Dear Doctor, thanks for your message and your compliments about my language. And thanks for your considerate words despite my revert of your friend 63's edits.

Let me first explain how to communicate on Misplaced Pages. You can leave messages at an article's or an editor's talk page. All posts should be signed by typing for tildes (~) at the end of your post - this will automatically add your user signature, the date and the time of your post. Through your wiki-linked user name another editor can easily switch to your user/talk page and reply to your posts. Exchanges about articles should be done at the talk page, so that others can read your posts and profit from the content.

Anyway, concerning 63's edits and your comments:

I agree with his statement "murder, terror,and assassination are either justifiable or not justifiable" (and I think they are not) and don't advocate a double morality that your can do bad to the bad. So, Elser's act was an act of murder, aimed at Hitler but also implicating and actually killing others. I don't advocate distinguishing the victims. My reinclusion of the passage "Seven of the people killed were members of the NSDAP who had taken part in the meeting." was only due to the revert of your friend's edit. Sometimes that some good gets reverted along with the bad. And I think the info is not bad in itself, as it gives only facts, but I see your problem and will remove this sentence (but also the "innocent") it again. In fact, after this passage I removed this sentence: "This made his actions justifyable and less terroristic, since mainly nazis were killed and injured." There is nothin I loathe more in this world than Naziism, but even Nazis are human beings and hence have the same right to life as anyone else. If you look at this edit you will see other "hagiographic" statements I removed - despite my own admiration for the man.
However, I don't think "terrorist" is an accurate description of Elser or his acts. He meant to kill Hitler in order to prevent/stop the war. This is murder, but it's not terrorism. The terrorist's objective is not so much to kill someone but to strike terror into other people - anarchists tried that in the 19th century, the original IRA around 1920 and now the terrorists in Iraq are doing the same (they are not trying to kill all US troops and "collaborators" but to kill as many so that the Americans will leave and the Iraqis will be too afraid to oppose them). Also, Elser didn't make a habit of killing people except for this special case.
When I say that I admire Georg Elser that doesn't mean that I am blind to the fact that he's a murderer. And even murdering a tyrant is murder, though there a longlasting debate (since the Middle Ages) about the moral quality of tyrannicide in Christian morality.
You're right - WP should not be not be a forum for propaganda of any stripe - in fact I'm involved in a major confrontation with another editor who is doing just that.
Your friend removed "Through this job he came into knowledge of the Nazis' rearmament program", but this is a perfectly neutral statement that is important and has its place in this article, unless your friend claims that it's factually incorrect.
Your friend included "an out of wedlock son" - it's true that he was born out of wedlock and I'm not aiming at denying that, though the article already says "girlfriend", but I don't think it's essential to explicitely mention that. (And no, I am not Manfred Niedermann. My user name gives you my birth year. You can work out the difference.)
Your friend replaced "Though he was not a Communist" with "Although he was not a member of the Communist Party" - I guess he was misunderstanding the meaning of the passage: the fact is that Elser was not only not a party memeber but he also was no Communist in his political thinking, hence "that was where his political sympathies lied" is too general a statement. But he thought that the Communists were "the best defenders of workers' interests" - that should not be read as saying that his opinion was true - it certainly wasn't true, but that's what he thought (BTW: I wasn't the first to post this opinion of Elser and I haven't been able to check whether it's accurate, but it doesn't sound impossible. If it were proved to be factually wrong, it should be removed).
Your friend replaced "by his longing for personal freedom" with "by his Marxist political associations" - the two are hardly identical, are they? His working class views is one thing, his longing for personal freedom another. To state this is not POV, though I see that the wording is a bit dramatic.
There is absolutely no reason for your friend to delete "As a devout Protestant Christian he also deplored the growing restrictions on religious freedom" - It is a well known and essential fact about Elser. This fact is not liked by some leftists editor (hence the German Misplaced Pages didn't have it), but to exclude this is to misrepresent Elser.
Your friend removed the reference to the Kristallnacht, but again, this is essential as it was the event which made Elser decide to do something.
Your friend removed "During these preparations, World War II started on 1 September, 1939, which proved his estimations correct" - again, this is a fact. If you consider my anti-hagiographic edit (see the link above) you can see what others can make of this if they don't care about NPOV - but to simply state that his prediction became true is not POV.
I deleted the comparison to Timothy McVeigh because it does not contribute anything to an understanding of either McVeigh or Elser.
Some smaller bits I will correct, unless they have been already corrected. (Though neither-nor is correct IMHO - and it has also passed Ann's edit).

If you (or 63...) have anymore questions, please feel free to post them here on my talk page. Cheers, Str1977 01:25, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi, Str1977, you may have seen that I sent a note to Dr Dan on his talk page. While I realize that the "in the end of the 1960s" phrase probably didn't actually come from you in the first place, Dr Dan is quite correct in saying that "at the end of the 1960's" is correct. However, I disagree about "neither . . . nor". It's perfectly correct to say that, as stated in Hart's Rules and Fowler's Modern English Usage. I did change the article to make the verb singular, as I explained to Dr. Dan. But again, I realize that the plural didn't originate with you.

I have no special interest in the Elser article. At the risk of shocking you, I'll confess I had never heard of him. (Was he very famous?) But I am very interested in language issues, so when I saw the above post on your talk page, I couldn't resist snooping!

It's bedtime where I am. Good night! AnnH 01:29, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind greetings. Since I know very little about Elser, I will get back to you on your detailed remarks after doing a little research on the topic. I had a big argument with my friend for using my computer to express points of view that do not coincide with my own. Originally he was only to check emails, etc., until he replaced his broken computer. I explicitly told him not to buy anything from my computer, nor to visit "chat rooms" or the like. As a consequence, he will have to make contact with you from another source, as he is "persona non grata", for failing to do so, and is "banned" from using my computer. This is ironic, since he introduced me to Misplaced Pages in the first place. And yes, we are still friends all the same.

A quick glance at the Elser article however, gives me pause, because it is in fact not scholarly and quite "propagandistic", in my opinion. I will expound on why I think so, after I do some more research on the subject. My friend is the one who wrote some "hyperdulia" on Elser, in order to smoke out the source of what he called "lesser hyperdulia and sympathetic propaganga about Elser". I think he is correct to some extent, that you have interjected many superfluous facts, many that should be documented or removed. This goofy "smoking out of the source", is precisely the kind of mind game that I deplore, when sharing different viewpoints with others. Not only did I tell my friend this, as I'm telling you also, but told him if he looked in the History of the article, he would see the evolution of the article as it has changed. In truth, the article took a very different turn when you added a lot of information on September 12, 2005, which can be challenged, as to where this information came from. An example is when you added that Elser was not a Communist. This is in contradiction to your earlier comment to me on the talk page, that he was in fact a Communist. Which is it? Have to go now. More later.Dr. Dan 16:12, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Dear Dan,

that explains the over-the-top nature of the hyperdulia edit.

I think my edits on September 12 are quite justified. I removed terms like "anti-fascist" as they are tainted by Communist propaganda and IMHO not appropriate in regard to an opponent to Nazism (which is not Fascism). The rest was merely rewording.

The "though not a Communist" passage I translated from the German wikipedia, even though the previous editors there had tried to paint him all red as well. However, to portray Elser as a Comumunist is untrue.

Elser was not a Communist in the sense that he adhered to Communist ideology or that he wanted to turn Germany into a Soviet-state. Neither was he a member of the KPD, only of the Rotfrontkämpferbund. He voted Communist and he had his reasons for doing so

I object to the allegation that I included "superfluous facts" - they are facts and have some bearing on his personality.

Str1977 16:30, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm almost ready with my research on Elser, and look forward to getting on the Elser talk page with some of my thoughts. Just wanted to let you know. By the way, I see you like Biblical and religious quotations. Can you tell me what you think of, briefly, what the quote, (paraphrase?), "If thy right hand offends thee, cut it off", means. Thank you.Dr. Dan 02:08, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

A Message to Pro-Life Wikipedians

The section "Foetal Pain" (Fetal Pain) has been deleted from the Abortion article. Could you help restore it? If you would like to see what was deleted, go to my talk page, scroll to "Fetal Pain," and click the provided link.--Thomas Aquinas 22:29, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

BC Prob

There is a problem with wikipedians changing the Euripides pages dating system to BCE/CE... especially SlimVirgin. I want to explain the situation incase you can help...I originally tried to change a wikipedia page from BCE/CE to BC/AD User:Shanes told me it's wiki policy to use the dates out lined by the creator of the page. I searched and found that the Euripides page originally used the BC/AD dating system and changed it with a summary. Now others are putting it back to BCE/CE. Can you help? Chooserr

Lateran

Hiya. You might not have noticed but the St. John Lateran is located at the Italian version of its name, thanks to a four person vote in April, even though English speakers worldwide (except in the US) don't use the Italian version of the name. I've proposed a vote to move the page back to its original location. It is at Talk:Basilica di San Giovanni in Laterano. Please drop in and vote. FearÉIREANN\ 05:24, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Hanging

Thought you might find of interest primary source The Opinions of Julius Paulus Book 5, Title 17 Concerning Acquittals (3). Ancient Roman jurist describing capitol punishments. There's a Big Deal about crucifixion being listed first. Never convinced about the use of hanging as a replacement for crucifixion due to PIETY. I think that's stretching it. Whatever — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.208.251.23 (talk • contribs) 15:43, December 02, 2005 (UTC)

Got me curious. What is your source for ancient hangings in the Ancient Roman Empire (before 476 AD) on the mainland taking place at all, outside of the those hangings by Romans in Britian and those by Germanic tribes?I am not doubting you. I'd like to know just to increase my knowledge of the ancient Roman Empire. I find it fascinating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.208.251.23 (talk • contribs) 03 DEC 05

Terri Schiavo

The article appears to continue to need scrutiny. Terri Schiavo was a human being with a mother, father, brother, and sister, and a life before her collapse. Can you imagine any other Misplaced Pages article that is "improved" by deleting the "Early life" section of the subject? patsw 04:29, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Pope Pius XII

Can you help me out with Pope Pius XII? Somebody has started reverting the article back to the October version, because they don't like the (now month-old) edits to the Holocaust section. As someone who has obviously worked hard on the article, you know me as a reasonable not-FK style editor who has tried hard to build consensus around my changes. Can you help me defend the nature of the balancing edits I made (removal of the unbalanced quotes from Jews section, the one-sided version of Israel Zolli's conversion, etc.) as well as the sources I added (the International Catholic-Jewish Historical Commission, the Journal of Religion) so that we don't start a messy edit war? I think the article is currently quite favorable to Pius, in any case. --Goodoldpolonius2 03:46, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Jobs still to be done (or are they?)

Herrera Puga (whoever he was)

Hello again, Str. If your study of history gives you any expertise in the Spanish Inquisition, you might like to compare the words under a particular image in Homosexuality and Christianity (near the top, very first picture) with the words under the same image in Spanish Inquisition (scroll down to Operation of the Inquisition). The words I'm wondering about are in the Homosexuality and Christianity article — According to Herrera Puga the authorities: "placed no limits on the means; in this way they used the rack, the lash, fire, etc. In some cases... they applied padlocked irons to the flesh which even led to the amputation of a hand..."

I haven't fully read either article, but I see that the image and caption were discussed on the talk page of Spanish Inquisition in March this year (first section, heading "Image of homosexual man" etc.). There seems to have been slight edit war about it (, , , , and ) The two editors who were debating it have now left Misplaced Pages.

I don't know enough about the Spanish Inquisition to know how appropriate the Herrera Puga reference is, so I don't want to jump straight in to the Homosexuality and Christianity article. Maybe you know something about it?

(And I hope to be properly back tonight or tomorrow, though I'm still at the computer a lot, so I look in from time to time!)

AnnH 12:49, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Philip the Handsome

I believe Philip the Handsome would be correct. At any rate, Philip the Fair probably redirects to Philip IV of France (who is certainly a much better known Philip the Fair). But I'm not sure what's wrong with Philip I of Castile. He was Philip I of Castile, and this title was clearly higher than his various Burgundian titles, even if only briefly held. As to Flamekeeper/Famekeeper/EffK, I think his behavior has been so egregious that there's probably not much need to do anything. But I'll try to take a look. john k 23:56, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

'Gay Pope' articles

Hello. I don't think we've met yet, but I've noticed from some of your edits that you are knowledgable about the lives of the Popes. I ran across the article Gay popes. I looked up the sources and Google does report that they are not made up, so the article, at least, has that going for it. I'm a little disturbed at with the lack of balance, though. Actually, I'm disturbed by the existense of the article altogether, but that's not going to change. I think I will start doing some homework to see what I can do. In the meantime, could you take a look at it and give me your sense? Thanks in advance. --Elliskev 03:26, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Black Legend

You say you don't like the Black Legend - the Misplaced Pages article, as well as the notion itself? The Black Legend has become a nonsense - the contributors (sadly few) seem to prefer baiting each other (how snotty are the Spanish-speakers!) to making an effort to perfect the article. Any suggestions?--shtove 01:35, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Favour

Str1977, I have just added a new section to Judaism and Christianity on "love." It is just a stup of a section, hopefully others will add more about the Jewish notion. But I know that my characterization of the Christian notion is at best wildly incomplete. When you have time, would you go over it and add whatever additional material, detail, nuance, explanation you think necessary? I am very concerned about not misrepresenting, or doing justice to, the Christian point of view. I also added a long quote from Maimonides to the section on Heaven and Hell; in fact, I did a rewrite a week or two ago. I know the Jewish position is well-represented but again I am concerned that in the process the Christian view may appear misrepresented or at least underrepresented. So, I'd be grateful if you checked and made sure the Christian view(s) are accurately and sufficiently represented. Thanks, Slrubenstein | Talk 00:41, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

New user

Thanks for the heads up...I've seen several of those. It seems we have a new editor who seems very POV to me. Something to keep our eyes on. KHM03 23:09, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Are we talking about User:Clinkophonist? I was baffled by some of his actions, too. But now, by assuming good faith and reading his proposal at Talk:Criticism of Christianity#Rendering this article neutral, I am inclined to believe that this is a valid attempt to a better overall structure of the area. Perhaps the intermediate steps in this process may look rather strange, because some material inserted by biblical inerrancy fundamentalists (e.g. from Biblical scientific foresight) become more visible. --Pjacobi 23:27, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Pj. Let's see how it all unfolds. Though certainly some things of concern are already visible. I only say "grass eating lions (and some carnivores too)" and house that's a leper. Str1977 23:33, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Please review my edits at Criticism of Christianity. Thanks...KHM03 01:47, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Please review my edits at Historicity of Jesus, when you have an opportunity. Thanks...KHM03 18:23, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Please place questions or comments here

Year of the Eucharist

Hello. I started a stub article Year of the Eucharist. I don't pretend to know enough to do it on my own. Would you mind helping? --Elliskev 21:43, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Felix Dies Nativitatis

FearÉIREANN\ 00:00, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Milton and Southwell

Hello, Str. Thanks for your clarification about Milton. I admit I was being deliberately provocative with that edit summary: I felt sure you'd see it! I loved Paradise Lost Book One, which I studied for my Leaving Certificate.

I'm glad you liked the Southwell poem. When I first came across it, I had no idea that he was a canonized saint. By the way, don't ever make the ghastly, humiliating mistake that I did and pronounce his name as a combination of the two words "south" and "well". The south part is pronounced as at the beginning of "southern", and the "well" part is very unstressed and has a silent "w". I found out when I went into a very posh, snobby antiquarian bookshop near Bond Street and asked for a particular book on Southwell using the wrong pronunciation! (In fact, I even used to pray to that saint with the wrong pronunciation!) If I'm allowed to make POV statements on talk pages, I'll say that I think he (along with Edmund Campion and Nicholas Owen) was one of the greatest heroes that England ever produced. (I intend to start an article on Saint Nicholas Owen when I get a little more leisure. He wasn't a priest; he was a carpenter who built secret hiding places for priests at a time of persecution, and he died on the rack.)

Anyway, I love that poem, especially the last line, which I find so suddenly sweet as to have a very startling effect. I feel the same way when I listen to a composer like Bartok or John Rutter or Hugo Distler, and hear a simple major chord coming unexpectedly after a few dissonant ones.

I hesitated a little bit over how to spell the past tense verbs ending with "ed". Some editions of poerty for that period use "èd" when it's pronounced as an extra syllable, and "ed" when (as nowadays) it isn't. Other editions use "ed" for the extra syllable, and apostrophe d for the modern pronunciation. So, the third last line of Romeo and Juliet could be:

Some shall be pardoned and some punishèd.

Some shall be pardon'd and some punished.

I think in the original spelling, there was no apostrophe and no è, just verbs ending with "d" or "ed".

I also hesitated a bit about the word "shrank". Many editions give "shrunk", though some give "shrank". "Shrank", of course, is correct in modern English; "shrunk" would be the past participle. I looked it up in a very archaic edition (which you'd love) and I think it was actually "shroncke". (It also had "shiueringe" for "shivering", "sodayne" for "sudden", "vp" for "up", etc.) I couldn't bring myself to put "shrunk", because it's simply wrong in modern English, but since "shroncke" doesn't exist in modern English, I could have opted for that. It would have looked very quaint, but might have made the poem a bit unreadable.

I see you've been adding to this; it's on my watchlist, even though I'm not involved. I sympathize, especially since I'm involved with this and am not enjoying it. It's time consuming, and unpleasant.

Going to bed in a moment, after writing a Christmas card to somebody very special. And, by the way, I do like the recent changes to your user page!

Bonne nuit, and Aurelie! AnnH 01:07, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

P.S. With regard to the pronunciation of "good" and "blood", I'm pretty sure they did rhyme in Southwell's day. After all, they're both descended from Anglo Saxon, and you have "gut" and "Blut" rhyming in German, and also "goed" and "bloed" in Dutch. That can become a problem when reading poetry that was written a few hundred years ago. See, for example, note on pronunciation at the end of the Molly Malone article, regarding the pronunciation of "She died of a fever, And no one could save her":

Before the Great Vowel Shift, /i:/ was pronounced as /eɪ/ This pronunciation lingered in Ireland after it had virtually disappeared from England. The word "fever" would have been pronounced as "favour", rhyming with "save her" in the next line. That pronunciation is still sometimes used in this song, particularly in Ireland.

I always wince when I hear a Sasanach singing that song with the modern pronunciation! AnnH 09:44, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Catholic teachings

Just found this article. Worth keeping? Thought you'd like to review it. KHM03 01:13, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Christianity, tolerance, and equality

This is an article that was started (not by me!) in relation to Criticism of Christianity. When you have an opportunity, please take a look at it and give your take on the article talk page or make edits. I had redirected it to the "Criticism" page, but the original author didn't seem to care for that option. Any help would be great...thanks...KHM03 13:16, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Pro-life celebrities category up for deletion

Hi, I see that you are listed as a Roman Catholic Wikipedian, well the Pro-life celebrities category is up for deletion. Category:Pro-life celebrities I think this is an interesting and worth while category. Afterall not all celebrities are pro-abortion. Dwain 23:57, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

EffK is forced to Abandon a Corrupted Misplaced Pages

I refer you to my response of a few moments ago at 15 December ],http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/EffK/Evidence#3_December_2005 EffK 01:31, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

re: Misplaced Pages talk:What Misplaced Pages is not

You just deleted the comments of three different people on the Talk page with the comment rv spamming. I'm not sure what you were thinking because none of those edits strike me as spam in any sense of the word. I may disagree with their comments but Talk pages are the place where we work out our differences. I've restored all those comments. Rossami (talk) 13:05, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages

User talk:Str1977