E1 (i.14350143_2_3) : 10 Foot Ganja Plant, Titre du fil : Notability

Ok - I'm stepping away from this article for a bit. Aside from the Billboard info, the only sources I could find on this band were largely unreliable. There are a few pseudo-blog musical sites on which they appear, such as:

The pier dot org - self-described on the site as having originated as a blog. Not sure what they are now - it's like 5 or six white duThe war concludeddes in ball caps. Doesn't look super professional or reliable.

Topshelfreggae dot com - no indication of who owns this site

The island sound dot com - again no indication of who owns or operates the site. Seems like a blog.

Curdigirl

16:26, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

E2 (i.169273_2_1) : 1995 in film, Titre du fil : Other Movies

"You Do know you are moissing a lot of movies of this time, your probly missing more movies in the othe days also so i think im going to quit using wikipedia unless i have no other choose!! Your website is unreliable Just to let you know!!!! —Preceding 03:10, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Great point! I agree the same --- where is my ""favorite"" movie Pride and Prejudice? That was very popular and famous! You are missing a lot of movies! —nbsp;Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.194.169.89 12:56, 31 May 2016 (UTC)"

E3 (i.18567812_5_17) : 1860 Mount Lebanon civil war, Titre du fil : Name change

"Ok, I'll leave this discussion open for a few more days in case of new input. If not, ""1860 Mount Lebanon civil war"" will be the new title. Thanks for taking the time to discuss fellas, cheers --Al Ameer son Al Ameer 20:53, 31 August 2015 (UTC)"

E4 (i.21964476_5_36) : 1996 Padilla car crash, Titre du fil : License Plates and Insurance.

This is directed to Esemono. For the record I am done with this conversation. I was correct in my edits, I just about it the wrong way. However if you still choose to be stubborn and ignorant, thats on you. The US State Department website site states all vehicle owners and drivers are subject to the compulsory insurance in Japan. I am no longer going to argue these points. I am in the service and was stationed in Japan for 3.5 years. We were REQUIRED to have both Japanese Compulsory Insurance, and supplemental coverage on our personel vehicles, and yes we were required to have license plates. Even though we are covered by the SOFA agreement, we are still accountable to Japanese law. Just look at the 1995 Okinawan Rape Incident. US Service members serving time in JAPANESE prison, sounds like they were tried by the Japanese legal system. But how can that be? SOFA personel are not bound by Japanese law. I know more on this subject than you Esemono, so before you respond please realize I have lived in Japan as a US Service Member covered by the SOFA agreement. I owned 2 personal vehicles that were registered in Japan. I paid the annual Japanese Road Tax, and was required to obtain and maintain Japanese Compulsory Insurance and additional coverage.

E5 (i.22057772_21_33) : 1948 Arab–Israeli War/Archive 12, Titre du fil : Arab Higher Committee of Amin al-Husayni - Amin al-Husayni wasn't the Grand Mufti of anywhere at the time of the war

You should consider that maybe it's you who is misunderstanding the guidelines rather than others misconstruing them. I have wasted enough time making a good faith effort to try and explain these things to you. I will not be commenting further on this issue. Do not take that as agreement for your suggested change. No More Mr Nice Guy14:03, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

E6 (i.25073618_1_5) : 101 People Who Are Really Screwing America/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Copyright protection?

The latter. I left a note inviting him to participate in this discussion. -Will Beback · · 09:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

E7 (i.28029304_19_56) : 1928 Okeechobee hurricane/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Requested move

"'Invalid arguments in this discussion:'

To provide a worldwide view of the topic if that view is contrary to source material

State or territorial pride

Egalitarianism, or a way to be seen as equal (i.e. the title ""hinders access to information for people interested in and knowledgeable about Puerto Rican history"" per User:Lawrlafo)

Issues with spelling or typing

This is the way it's been for a long time

What other Wikipedians might think of us, either that we may curry favor with individuals or be viewed as more open and tolerant (i.e. Mercy11's ""you will gain the respect of those of us who feel very strongly about titling this hurricane"", the fact that Mercy11 contacted editors sympathetic to Puerto Rican issues to inform them of this discussion http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Quazgaadiff=prevoldid=366718429, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lawrlafodiff=prevoldid=366717986, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pr4everdiff=prevoldid=366717608, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Caribbean_H.Q.diff=prevoldid=366717484, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Thief12diff=prevoldid=366717218, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:AntonioMartindiff=prevoldid=366717016, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cerejotadiff=prevoldid=366716916, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:AntonioMartindiff=prevoldid=366716428. I left a message at FLORIDA http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Floridadiff=prevoldid=366907413. No one has yet left a message at Tropical cyclones.) --Moni312:40, 9 June 2010 (UTC)"

E8 (i.2865410_2_2) : 1925 Atlantic hurricane season, Titre du fil : Reanalysis

I don't know where these come from, but I was moving things around while you were editing. I am done with this page, so it's safe to change them. Potapych15:46, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

E9 (i.31578895_1_45) : 1948 Arab–Israeli War/Archive 13, Titre du fil : Nakba

"NB: Not sure what happened there. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3A1948_Arab%E2%80%93Israeli_Waraction=historysubmitdiff=423517625oldid=423517414 If I deleted stuff inadvertently, apologies. Re-inserting reason for the change made.

Noting no further comments since 02:25, 30 March 2011 and no attempt to reconcile the fact that the Arab neighbours most effected, being Israel's Palestinian Arab neighbours, are not named in the lead to the article. Noting NMMNG's continual moving of the goal posts each time his objections were met. Complying with NMMNG's demand for sources for the word 'occupation'/'occupied', leaving him with only the ridiculous notion that, although territories were under occupation or control, the people were not. Making the change to include Israel's neighbouring Palestinian Arabs. Thus;

The war concluded with the 1949 Armistice Agreements, leaving the neighbouring Palestinian Arabs under the occupation of Israel, Jordan and Egypt. Talknic talknic 15:11, 11 April 2011 (UTC)"

E10 (i.31578895_3_39) : 1948 Arab–Israeli War/Archive 13, Titre du fil : Re: 1947–1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine

Your personal interpretation of policy and your wikilawyering notwithstanding, you do not have consensus to make the change you want. If you make it, you will be reverted. If you make it repeatedly, you will be reported. I will not be commenting further on this issue. Do not take that as agreement for your suggested change. No More Mr Nice Guy09:56, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

E11 (i.31984504_16_13) : 1948 Arab–Israeli War/Archive 14, Titre du fil : Suggest the inclusion of the occupied Palestinian territories in the first section

Did you have consensus to make the change you wanted? No. Am I going to waste my time reading walls of text and going around in circles with you again? Fat chance.

If another editor supports your change we can discuss it. That's unlikely to happen because the change you're proposing is nonsensical and a-historical.

I'm done here. Do not take my not replying to you further as agreement for your proposed change. No More Mr Nice Guy22:38, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

E12 (i.3230661_8_7) : 1971 San Fernando earthquake, Titre du fil : Imveracious's errors

"My only ""error"" was simply in making a couple of well referenced changes for the sake of accuracy. You on the other hand want nothing in this article other than ""'your""' sources and writing. As you wrote, ""I use that"", ""articles I do"", ""I have put a monumental effort into this article"", ""I chose this source last year when I did the expansion"" etc. Count the number of times you have used ""' ""I"" !!""' In short we again return to ""'if Dawnseeker2000 did not add it, it is reverted-to his version.""' Undoubtedly any number of reputable and far more recent sources would not suffice. Perhaps you should inform (NISEE), National Information Service for Earthquake Engineering of the University of California, Berkeley that they are incorrect. Though the confirmation bias which you clearly show would most certainly preclude that. This is all yours Dawnseeker2000, the good the bad, the correct and incorrect. I'm done with this--- Imveracious16:08, 12 October 2014 (UTC)"

E13 (i.3260036_1_3) : 1962 Pacific typhoon season, Titre du fil : Todo

Yes,i am done with the storms.Mitchazenia HurricaneCraze32 aka Mitchazenia 14:01, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

E14 (i.3260036_3_16) : 1962 Pacific typhoon season, Titre du fil : JTWC info!

Your lucky, i'm not reporting that. To me that's an insult, i'm only 15 1/2, what do you expect? Otherwise i am done with everything. 16:13, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

E15 (i.34072428_1_18) : 1948 Arab–Israeli War/Archive 16, Titre du fil : [[WP:VERIFY]] violations in the Lede supported by consensus?

You are either unwilling or incapable of understanding what I'm telling you. I'm done here. I have warned you about making edits to something that's under discussion. I will report you without further notice if you do it again. No More Mr Nice Guy01:18, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

E16 (i.34072428_3_6) : 1948 Arab–Israeli War/Archive 16, Titre du fil : my recent edit

"Could you please report me for hounding you already? Reading your silly accusation in every post you make is not only quite boring, it makes the chore of reading your long rambling diatribes all the more unpleasant.

Former British Mandate - wording was supported by several other editors in another discussion. You're the only one who objected. It's called consensus.

Casus - still not sure what it means. You have not provided any explanation, not to mention a plausible one. How can we know if the text fits if nobody knows what it's supposed to be describing?

Protected - I don't think you understand how to use the encyclopedia's neutral voice properly.

Green Line - your edit summary and reply above leads me to believe you didn't read the article that was linked to before you reverted it. You saw the word ""Israel"" there and reverted because of that.

Did I cover everything? I think I did. Since I'm not going to repeat myself for your amusement, and another editor supported the changes I made, I will not be responding further unless an editor other than you raises concerns. No More Mr Nice Guy02:35, 16 December 2011 (UTC)"

E17 (i.34072428_5_6) : 1948 Arab–Israeli War/Archive 16, Titre du fil : WP:NPOV in respect to consequences of the war in the Lede

The only desperate thing here is your repeated attempts to convince people that your personal opinions are worthy of inclusion in this encyclopedia. I gave you some advice. Take it or leave it. I'm done here. No More Mr Nice Guy21:36, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

E18 (i.640531_13_14) : 1997, Titre du fil : Wikipedia articles '''about''' the person (off topic tag)

"Whatever you say Irn. I'm done with this conversation, it's not appropriately located, it's completely one-sided and it's not helping anyone progress or achieve anything, it's not benefitting our readers, Rubin still refuses to answer the points raised, his hostility towards new editors with his false or misleading edit summaries goes unmentioned (and he must know better by now, yet refuses to see that), and all the while you still refuse to see the long-term issues there too. All in all, a waste of everyone's time. P.S. I just ""archived"" a ""civility"" barnstar from my talkpage, so perhaps you need to think harder before carrying on picking me out as the bad guy. Goodbye. The Rambling Man21:17, 10 March 2018 (UTC)"

E19 (i.6501223_25_6) : 1994 San Marino Grand Prix, Titre du fil : Classifications table

Eh, forgot I logged out. Whatever, I'm done here anyways. I can't work with editors who are so opposed to wikipedia's core mission. Kuguar0300:41, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

E20 (i.8850312_2_3) : 1920 Palm Sunday tornado outbreak, Titre du fil : Inappropriate tone

"I'm leaving this discussion open to see if anyone agrees on doing some extensive copyediting and NPOV improvements.JForget ""'JForget""' 20:34, 14 April 2008 (UTC)"

E21 (i.902920_30_7) : 1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine, Titre du fil : Characterization of the Irgun policy of Black Sunday

"Right, so if the head of the Irgun orders a series of terrorist operations, described as terrorist in numerous sources, it is a POV-push to call it ""formally embarked on terroristic operations"". Please don't waste my time: I'm done here. I'm fine with the text as it is, because I don't think it's worth fighting over. 06:16, 3 September 2016 (UTC)"

E22 (i.10417030_1_1) : 2007 in Australia, Titre du fil : Assessment completed for [[{{BASEPAGENAME}}]]

"As per either a recent request at section for assessment requests or because this article was listed as fully or partly unassessed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/Assessment I have just now completed a rating of the article and posted my results to this page. Those results are detailed above in the template box. Unfortunately, due to the volume of articles that need to be assessed, I am unable to leave detailed comments other than to make the following brief observation:"" no further comments at this time "" However if you have specific questions, please write to me on my talk page and as time permits I will try to provide you with my reasoning. ""'Please put my talk page on your watchlist if you do ask such a question because in the case of these responses I will only post my answer underneath your question.""' ""'ALSO""' if you do not agree with the rating you can list it in the section for assessment requests below, and someone will take a look at it.--VirtualSteve VS talk 04:53, 11 April 2007 (UTC)"

E23 (i.10429665_2_11) : 2007 New England Patriots season, Titre du fil : Section heading

"I'm done with this. I gave my opinion, I was attacked for it, and I have nothing more to say. Sorry Pats1, I hope you understand that this is just not a big enough issue for me to endure this crap.►""'Chrisjnelson Chris Nelson""'"""" 22:33, 30 September 2007 (UTC)"

E24 (i.10429665_2_11) : 2007 New England Patriots season, Titre du fil : Section heading

"I'm done with this. I gave my opinion, I was attacked for it, and I have nothing more to say. Sorry Pats1, I hope you understand that this is just not a big enough issue for me to endure this crap.►""'Chrisjnelson Chris Nelson""'"""" 22:33, 30 September 2007 (UTC)"

E25 (i.11002977_26_1) : 2002 Gujarat riots/Archive 4, Titre du fil : Change of section name in article

"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Gujarat_violenceResponse_of_the_accused_parties

This section, instead of giving the opinions of admitted rioters (which is what the title seems to suggest) only gives the response of the Gujarat Govt. and Birbal Punj's rebuttal of Arundhati Roy.

Worse, the title is misleading and seems to suggest the culpability of the Gujarat govt. in these riots (which are not proven).

IMO, a change of title to ""Response of Gujarat Government"" would be more appropriate. I leave it to the regular contributers to this page to take a decision in this regard, which i feel would be better.

Skandaprasadn prasad88 21:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)"

E26 (i.11431073_4_3) : 2007 NBA playoffs/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Series Summary Tables

"I am currently working on a format, I'll post it here as soon as I am done with it. --""' • E""' 01:05, 22 April 2007 (UTC)"

E27 (i.12996099_13_5) : 2010 Victorian state election, Titre du fil : Image in election box?

This as a consensus issue still needs further discussion. If there are no further comments I will move the discussion to WikiProject Australian politics soon. Романов01:52, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

E28 (i.13308779_27_2) : 2007 Venezuelan constitutional referendum, Titre du fil : Templates disrupting flow of text and article

"Please see the note I left http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Venezuelan_constitutional_referendum_by_state%2C_2007 here quite a bit ago. Those templates are horribly formatted, and destroy the formatting of the main article. The results should be arranged side by side, or the template should allow for right alignment so text can be added on the left. I tried, and am unable to make those corrections; I don't ""speak HTML"", and that template code was removed from the main tally template that was created by someone else. Adding horribly designed templates that disrupt the flow of the text to the middle of an article that is on the main page is not a good idea, IMO. I've moved the templates to the bottom, but they still disrupt the entire article, causing the reader to have to scan a lot of info they won't care about in order to reach the sources, etc. at the bottom of the article. Please help address this if you feel so strongly about including that info in the article, because right now, those templates are truly ugly. SandyGeorgia17:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)"

E29 (i.14280191_17_4) : 2008–09 UEFA Cup, Titre du fil : Protection request for this article

Please see PNSD for information about voting to decide results. I think I will leave the page protected for the time being – the page can always be unprotected once you reach a consensus, and it will ensure there is no further edit warring. Stifle18:29, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

E30 (i.1507058_1_6) : 2004 U.S. Election controversies and irregularities/Archive 7, Titre du fil : Section on Media Lockdown

"Kevin, this will be my last post here, as I really don't appreciate the patronizing tone that you take. (and you call me patronizing!) Olbermann has stated that he was on vacation, that he was not being fired and he still talks about the recount. More importantly, NO-ONE has heard him say that he was afraid of being fired. If he was gutsy enough to keep on blogging about the controversy, you think he would be afraid to tell people that he expects to be fired? If you think I was being patronizing by posting the link to his blog, how about me asking you whether you have googled this issue?

Indy media has been passing this verbatim from one site to another, no fact checking, no cooberation (sp?). If there is, in effect, only one source of this story, then it is NOT backed up in any way. All you have to do to change my mind about that article is to tell me who ""I"", ""credible source"" and when ""today"" is in the first sentence. Proof would be nice, but frankly, I'm not overly concerned with it, I can take your word. If you want to protect people's jobs, that's fine, just tell me who knows. btw, don't bother citing Peter Coyote as his post was titled 11/13, I've found other places that definitely had it 11/11 and saw one labeled 11/8. I've also seen the ""credible source"" being cited as Mary Mapes, who was recently fired for the Rathergate fiasco, you could, of course, claim that she was fired for attacking Bush, but that, to me, would be a big stretch.. -Vina21:28, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)"

E31 (i.21068697_59_28) : 2008 Greek riots/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Gini coefficient

"This is my last post... so here are two things we all simply avoid to face:

Other countries are in much worse economic situation and yet we haven't seen say the London School of Economics get burned or Ecole Polytechnique in Paris to that matter. Sure there were riots but either there was an external form i.e. immigrants or the conflict was a much more ""'civilized""'. So even with a bad economic situation it is still no reason to become barbarians!

You may hide behind numbers saying that Greeks are becoming poorer due to Simitis or Karamalis policies... but the fact remains the same, just look at the clothes and the gears (i.e. mobile phones, computer, ipod) the teenagers have on them. All of them are brands and pretty expensive. This is unheard of compared in 80's or 90's. Also the Greek family becomes poorer because not only the parents spent so much money to dress and feed their children but also to educate them to the best universities, which means abroad. I repeat myself here but this is not an option for the youth in foreign counties. Hence we become poor because we spend more; we are not moderate capitalists.

So yes... the planet, the world, the economy are in bad shape... in very bad shape, yes we know that. We ""'all""' around the world know that. Thank you very much. But the question remains: why in Greece and not somewhere else? Why we do not see the Piccadilly Square or the center of Rome in flames? Why we have witness such events in Athens? Is Greece a third world country? If not then it has to be cultural trend or something unique to Greek society. Maybe Greeks do not have any respect to law... but just look the facts: police was ordered to keep a complete defensive attitude, why? Karamalis had the option to order the military to enter Athens and bring order and he didn't to it, why? Also, why we do not dare to change the constitution about banning police from schools and universities to something more ""'pragmatic""' say for example policemen may enter into the area only with a court order or with the approval of the head of the university? To every person Greek or non-Greek that I have talked to about this they think the unrestrained freedom is completely wrong and yet we do not fix it... why? Feel free to think about it... but at the end of the day blaming everything to economy or as the Greek youth say it is the system's fault, i do not think it is the reality... anyway... I think the following quote suits the situation

""To see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle."" --George Orwell A.Cython00:58, 17 December 2008 (UTC)"

E32 (i.21269339_2_8) : 2008 Atlantic hurricane season/Archive 4, Titre du fil : Nana Sandbox

Boring storm you say? Sounds like a plan to me :) once I'm done with the MH of hurricane bertha, I'll expand the article to something along the lines of Tropical Storm Karina (2008). Cyclonebiskit01:53, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

E33 (i.22105666_8_6) : 2009 shootings of Oakland police officers, Titre du fil : NPOV DISPUTE: This is the most biased Wikipedia article I've ever read.

"Oh, so its ok to call a newspaper a ""black"" newspaper and call activists ""black activist"" and continually refer to the ""black"" neighborhood in Oakland, but there is no such thing as a European American community? You are discredited for wanting to believe everything the SF Chronicle writes. All the alleged rapes you obviously WANT Mixon to have committed happened in February, yet ZERO Oakland citizens were made aware of these alleged rapes until Mixon killed Oakland police. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/26/MN3516N0KN.DTL But I'm done with this. This entire article and your comments are the ""blatantly racist drivel"" and I hope you and Wikipedia get pleasure out of biasing history. Operationnation14:39, 28 March 2009 (UTC)"

E34 (i.22229957_1_5) : 2009 North Dakota floods, Fil sans titre

"I have deleted the materials which are out of scope, reorganized some material, and added a background section. Additional text and cites should probably be added on the Missouri basin flooding; the Souris River flooding section needs text; and as mentioned above, the Red River flooding should be rewritten and also condensed (there is a lot of ""old news"" there; we already have a separate article on the Red River floods; and I understand for GFDL reasons we should not reuse text w/o its history). Good luck. (I'm done here.) Kablammo01:18, 1 April 2009 (UTC)"

E35 (i.24279946_11_45) : 2009/Archive 4, Titre du fil : [[Andrew Martin]], [[Mitsuharu Misawa]]

"Here is the kicker, I'm 18 and I have an interest in politics and religion. I plan to run for President of the United States in 2028 and after I'm done with my poticual career I plan to retire and become a Professor of Religion somewhere. My father also has an interest in politics and religion, while my mother use to be a substitute teacher. I'm home schooled and everyone I meet usually ends up asking ""Damn, how smart are you?"" or stating ""Damn, you are smart!"". Honestly, I've never heard of her and if I ever remember a moment where I saw her on tv or anything, I will mention it.--Wrestlinglover ""'Will""' 09:09, 10 August 2009 (UTC)"

E36 (i.24755241_3_26) : 2009 Honduran constitutional crisis/Archive 7, Titre du fil : Coup d'etat Section Discussion

Enough. I did not say it didn't come from the Library of Congress,just that it did not come from the Congressional Research Service. If you downloaded it and looked at it, you would see that it says Directorate of Legal Research LL File No. 2009-002965. If you looked at the Library of Congress organization chart, you would see that the Directorate of Legal Research is part of the Law Library of Congress. Also on the cover is the URL www.loc.gov/law/congress. This is my last post on this topic. Rsheptak01:47, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

E37 (i.24859352_2_2) : 2009 MLS Cup Playoffs, Titre du fil : 24 hour time

"On the team season pages we've always used 24 hour times, but I left this page alone because it's not a big deal to me either way. Some IP editor switched them up. Just switch them back if you want it the other way. Another thing that I tried to tweak in this article was to list the home teams first as is also done in the team season articles. It was reverted, and I just chose to leave it be. My preference would be for 24 hour times, and home team listed first, but I'm not going to argue strongly for either. --"" 03:54, 3 November 2009 (UTC)"

E38 (i.25029485_38_4) : 2009 Fort Hood shooting/Archive 4, Titre du fil : Nidal Malik Hasan

You beat me to it Patsw, but I was about to say basically the same thing. If it hasn't already been done, I'll AFD it after I'm done with my current project. In any event, the infobox should have stayed, as it was very informative. - 23:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

E39 (i.25329926_9_30) : 2010 FIA Formula One World Championship/Archive 1, Titre du fil : USF1

I'm done here. The team is called Team USF1, period. We do not have to wait for their entry to be approved before we address them by their actual name. USGPE is not the name. Putting that in the article is simply lying. I will revert any edit you make to that extent. AlexJ, thanks for brightening my day. Eightball22:17, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

E40 (i.27215949_85_5) : 2010 United Kingdom general election/Archive 3, Titre du fil : 2 May - Mona Sahlin article

You are acting against current consensus - why revert and then ask for comment? Just to warn that was your 3rd revert within 24 hours. I will leave this discussion for others to have fun with and bid you farewell, I believe my points stand for themselves. |→nbsp;Spaully17:38, 4 May 2010 (GMT)

E41 (i.27359279_14_6) : 2012 (film)/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Sony's IHC/EU HQ photo con

Anyway, I'm done here. I've done my best, and I've better things to do with my life... --PL08:53, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

E42 (i.28061154_13_2) : 2007–08 world food price crisis/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Crisis

Read the article Food vs fuel, the leading paragraph and the section http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_vs_fuelThe_.22food_vs._fuel.22_debate The fuel vs. fuel debate explains the reasons of all the recent hype. When I am finished with the full edit of this section, I will bring a summary to this article, precisely for the reasons you are asking the question. Mariordo23:06, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

E43 (i.28238369_3_22) : 2001 anthrax attacks/Archive 4, Titre du fil : Summarizing the article

"Okay, I think I'm done with all the major condensing. The article occupied 112,752 bytes yesterday, it's now 101,465 bytes. It was 143,899 bytes on June 26. There are probably other changes I could make to further summarize the article and reduce it's length a but more, but for the moment I'll just leave things the way they are. Example: The article still contains this in the ""Silicon too high?"" section:"

E44 (i.28651387_2_1) : 2011 Giro d'Italia, Titre du fil : Perhaps this goes without saying

But I am planning major revisions and expansions to this page, after I finish up with the second stages page. I'm not telling anyone not to edit, far from it, but I think my track record speaks for itself (I was the primary writer for the articles on each of the last four editions of the Giro, all of them at GA or FA status). Think of this as a (hopefully) friendly reminder that the page will look very different when I'm done with it. ) 06:35, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

E45 (i.30265311_30_24) : 2011/Archive 3, Titre du fil : Gabrielle Giffords assassination attempt/Tucson shootings

There are many examples in the last 5 years, and beyond -- events outside the US -- that are in the yearly pages, with less deaths and NO international signifigance. My favorite being April 26, 2007. How does that event outweigh the Giffords assassination attempt and subsequent mass shooting??? I am done with this debate. We could literally clean out every year to a couple of entries or less to meet the guidelines of international relevance. That's the truth. There are many students that use Wikipedia as a study guide (I'm not endorsing that method of studying... just stating a fact), therefore, it's a good thing to have more information than not on the yearly pages. It is pure crap that it won't be added to the 2011 page. Truthfully, much love and peace to everyone though, whether you agree with me or not! — Preceding 03:18, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

E46 (i.31234733_26_1) : 2011 Chinese pro-democracy protests/Archive 1, Titre du fil : I will be leaving this article

"I will stop participating or contributing to these pages (article, talk and AfD or any further move/rename requests,etc). I will unwatch these pages so please ""don't direct any questions or comments at me"" as I am unlikely to know. See my user page for more information since I don't want to spam the talk page with my personal issues. Zlqq214404:51, 4 March 2011 (UTC)"

E47 (i.31696195_21_2) : 2011 Mississippi River floods, Titre du fil : Historical Wrap-up?

- One year after last post here, 3 years after flood -- why didn't the author close this out? — Preceding 21:55, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

E48 (i.32156123_26_14) : 2011 Super Outbreak/Archive 2, Titre du fil : "also known as the 2011 Super Outbreak"

"The addition of the word ""April"" is trivial at best in my opinion. I am done with this debate for the night. I'll wait for some other opinions."

E49 (i.32302124_21_6) : 2010 G-20 Toronto summit/Archives/1, Titre du fil : 5 meter security rule didn't exist!

In the interest of disclosure, I'm the same guy (205.189.194.208) who posted what is now the 4th last post here: different IP now. 18:38, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

E50 (i.32655903_2_26) : 2011 Afghanistan Boeing Chinook shootdown, Titre du fil : New title

"'Comment' Why are not fond with shootdown? Are you sad that the Taliban downed the helicopter? Or whatever... I'm going to stop using wikipedia, it is so NATO and Israel-biased. — Preceding ) 15:25, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

E51 (i.32972276_10_8) : 2011/Archive 4, Titre du fil : Ok

This is a waste of time, so I will stop debating this with you until you read the discussion on this topic and provide a relevant argument for inclusion. — Yerpo19:13, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

E52 (i.33223037_9_8) : 2011 Virginia earthquake/Archive 3, Titre du fil : Magnitude of 1897 Giles County Quake

"I'll look some more later. I'm stepping away from the computer awhile now. :) One of my problems with editing the lede for the review is that (linguistic arguments aside) the earthquake is an event. The entire description of the event is in the lede. Thus, it's difficult to remove all references. OR.... re-describe the 'event' in the body of the article. I'm feeling that the cost estimate really ought to be down in the Impact section, etc. I'll hit it again this evening. ""'""Wikipelli """"' 19:20, 29 January 2012 (UTC)"

E53 (i.3424087_3_3) : 255, Titre du fil : page move

"I undid the move, it is against the rules. The article about a number x, has to be at ""x (number)"". I will leave the discussion here though. Oleg Alexandrov23:41, 15 December 2005 (UTC)"

E54 (i.34983054_41_4) : 2012 Republican Party presidential primaries/Archive 8, Titre du fil : Any way to fix the "Sort By" function?

Putting the unbound RNC delegates info in the result section and compiling the schedule to one table instead of three. When I am finished with this it the sorting troubles should be done away with. Jack Bornholm14:51, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

E55 (i.35746693_40_8) : 2012 Republican Party presidential primaries/Archive 9, Titre du fil : Delegate map(s)

"I think insulting people as anony ""mouse"" is pretty damn childish. I'm done with wikipedia since I don't wish to associate myself with immature and rude adults. ---- 15:14, 4 May 2012 (UTC)"

E56 (i.36739750_3_18) : 2010 IAF Sikorsky CH-53 crash, Titre du fil : Contested deletion

i'M stepping away till an administrator comes. An editor who has clearly shown they don't know at least 4 WP policies and has accused me falsely of lying and won't retract it or apologize is not worth any more time.WilliamJE ...William 23:39, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

E57 (i.37091979_1_3) : 2013 Boston Red Sox season, Titre du fil : April series against KC

"Yeah, I admit I'm lazy about formatting references properly. I understand I'm not a bad editor because of it, I just feel it's easier for other editors to view the source and verify if legit or not in case they need to be removed. No use going through the hassle of fixing them when it may not be acceptable. In this case, it's ESPN, so there isn't a concern. But sometimes a source/cite can be challenged, and it's just ""easier/better"" to insert them using sometimes. Thanks for your understanding, I just didn't want us being counter-productive since up to this point the situation regarding Sox vs Royals would quickly change and I was only temporarily editing the content about the weekend status in light of the 2013 bombings. At this point, I'm finished with today's game. I'll add anything signficant tomorrow after the double-header if warranted/necessary. Take care! :) 00:17, 21 April 2013 (UTC)"

E58 (i.40337689_1_1) : 2000–01 S.L. Benfica season, Titre du fil : July 2015 Copyedit

"Threeohsix – I believe I am done with a once-over copyedit. Since section 4 (""Players"") has only a single subsection with a single sub-subsection, what do you think about merging the related information from section 2 (""Squad"") into section 4? By moving section 2 down, I feel that the article might read better with the matches of the season coming first and extra details of exact squad coming later. Thoughts? ← Scribbleink ""'scribble""'""'ink""' 16:44, 29 July 2015 (UTC)"

E59 (i.40337689_1_3) : 2000–01 S.L. Benfica season, Titre du fil : July 2015 Copyedit

"Threeohsix You're welcome. I try to keep my Wikipedia experience improving by learning about the MOS of different WikiProjects. The one for football is new to me, but it wasn't terribly complicated. Glad you like the outcome. Regarding the table excessiveness, I'm really not an expert on determining what to remove and what to keep. Since you, or other editors, have more experience with a broader set of football-related articles, I urge you (or other editors) to please simplify it. I have tried to follow the manual of style example at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Club seasons. If you stick to it and just change the tables, we should be golden. For now, I believe I am done with the copyedit request. I will continue to watch the page and participate as and when necessary. ← Scribbleink ""'scribble""'""'ink""' 16:30, 30 July 2015 (UTC)"

E60 (i.44482553_1_5) : 2012 Aurora, Colorado shooting/Archive 6, Titre du fil : "Most victims" claim

"Note that I specifically used the word ""unimpeachable"" in my comment. I'm not referring to guidelines about whether a source can be used; I'm referring to a situation (hypothetical or not) where information from a source that we would generally consider reliable has been questioned, in which case I think it can be perfectly valid to consider what we know or can infer about how that source derived its information, rather than dismissing questions about the information because ""this news site said it, and that's good enough for us."" To be more candid, I have no problem whatsoever, in this age of shoddy journalism, imagining a news source throwing a statement like that in without proper consideration, or, in fact, by just checking what Wikipedia happens to say at the time (have you seen that comic where the falsehood gets posted to Wikipedia, and then the news operation gets it from Wikipedia and reports it as fact, and then that story gets added to Wikipedia as a citation for the falsehood?). I have nothing further to say on the issue at hand; I just didn't like the edit summary I saw dismissing RJ4's concerns. Theoldsparkle14:57, 10 December 2012 (UTC)"

E61 (i.6782636_5_25) : 2006 Atlantic hurricane season/Archive 7, Titre du fil : Chris merged

This is exactly the reason I left Wikipedia and no longer have a username here. 206.47.141.2117:18, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

E62 (i.7740991_10_9) : 2006–07 NBA season, Titre du fil : Conference Champions

Look like the continuation of this argument is not going to go anywhere. I am not going waste my breath from now on. I am not going to use the term 'clinched conference championship' again on the page since not everyone support it. However, you shouldn't change it to 'clinched conference 1st seed' either because it is redundant to express it again whereas the table is shown it clearly. What I am going to do now is keep the term 'clinched conference' in place because it is official. If you disagree with the NBA, then send a letter to them or something. I don't care. What I do care is keeping wikipedia from turning into a battleground. Go do something else, this is not a worthy debate. I am sorry if you feel offended, but that's just my opinion. See you around. This is my last post, Out Chrishomingtang Chris 02:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

E63 (i.10417498_1_1) : 3SH, Titre du fil : Assessment completed for [[{{BASEPAGENAME}}]]

"As per either a recent request at section for assessment requests or because this article was listed as fully or partly unassessed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/Assessment I have just now completed a rating of the article and posted my results to this page. Those results are detailed above in the template box. Unfortunately, due to the volume of articles that need to be assessed, I am unable to leave detailed comments other than to make the following brief observation:"" no further comments at this time "" However if you have specific questions, please write to me on my talk page and as time permits I will try to provide you with my reasoning. ""'Please put my talk page on your watchlist if you do ask such a question because in the case of these responses I will only post my answer underneath your question.""' ""'ALSO""' if you do not agree with the rating you can list it in the section for assessment requests below, and someone will take a look at it.--VirtualSteve VS talk 08:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)"

E64 (i.10554249_15_28) : 300 (film)/Archive 6, Titre du fil : Farrokh, summary

"I'll note that at present we've moved backward; a vague (""the notion of human rights and democracy,"" etc.), POV-worded (""criticizes the movie for its many distortions""), inaccurate (Farrokh is not an expert in Greek history) text has been inserted, that no one here has supported besides the editor who added it. This is not a satisfactory conclusion. I've removed the same text twice before, so I'm not going to do it again, but I would suggest that its repeated insertion by Agha Nader despite the patient and well-reasoned arguments of multiple other editors constitutes an act of bad faith. That said, I'll leave this discussion alone until after the http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheidebecher Absacker -- or, for all intents and purposes, until tomorrow morning. --Javits200017:08, 31 March 2007 (UTC)"

E65 (i.25194700_4_3) : 350.org/Archive 3, Titre du fil : Balanced proposal

As I made clear earlier, I will not be participating further in this discussion for at least some weeks. I am also not making edits to articles in general at the moment until the issue regarding my username is resolved. I trust that you can come up with a consistent, NPOV, and defensible standard for what is in this article. Good luck!--FredUnavailable20:40, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

E66 (i.3575417_17_1) : 3D Realms, Titre du fil : Development Hell

"I love how this is considered an encyclopedic term. Even if it is worthy of a wiki, it's hardly legitimate in use in an encyclopedia; it just sounds too much like insider-industry slang. —Preceding 04:44, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

All the forums are locked on the 3DR page, it looks like it's all over. Unless of course this is a big publicity stunt, although a company member called Joe Siegler said: ""It's not a marketing thing. It's true. I have nothing further to say at this time."" Stuffs in the BBC article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.216.124.170 22:59, 8 May 2009 (UTC)"

E67 (i.11456497_8_8) : 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days, Titre du fil : Cast

"Oh good grief Ribbet 32. I missed it completely - 1000 apologies. I have some trout (almondine) ready for face slapping as soon as I am done here. I guess I'm not used to those boxes for cast lists yet. I'm also sorry that I don't know how to fix those two refs that I marked as not working above. Hopefully you or another editor can get to them. You've put a lot of work into the article so I will just repeat what I said in my edit summary ""I wish you well in getting this to GA status!!"" MarnetteD124; 00:12, 15 September 2017 (UTC)"

E68 (i.24822492_50_44) : 4chan/Archive 14, Titre du fil : Pedobear, CP, etc

Twist your words? I quoted you verbatim! The appearance of a pedophilic bear in pedophilic image threads is noteworthy. I did not modify any picture. Pedobear is commonly found on 4chan drooling. It doesn't have to be exclusive to CP threads to be noteworthy. I am finished with you. 16:48, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

E69 (i.24822492_50_45) : 4chan/Archive 14, Titre du fil : Pedobear, CP, etc

"You're still failing to address what I'm saying. You cannot cite or prove the notability of a single meme, and claim it has a significant meaning. There are far more controversial memes that exist, but you fail to acknowledge their existence, because all you wish to focus on is this single one. Pedobear is an image, and is used in ways far beyond ""CP threads"", and you fail to see that. A ""know your meme"" website as a citation does not carry notability or reason, and will likely be removed. The intentions of putting it in the article, too, carry little to no notability, and absolutely no verifiability. You wish to spread false information, so be it, but you know the rules of Wikipedia. Your internet ""White Knight"" attitude of ""I'm finished with you"" says a lot about your character and your unwillingness to address the facts and see the other side. Gpia7r17:03, 11 August 2009 (UTC)"

E70 (i.248535_1_8) : 4th Annual Grammy Awards, Titre du fil : Comments

Friday June 20th 2003, 10:56 pm

Hi Sansse! Thanks for your reply and also thanks for entering the 1962 data.. I will leave the pages blank as instructed.

Someone wrote in one of the Grammy Articles (at the very top) that the Ceremony was televised coast to coast.. I think that is a great idea! If you could also mention that info it would be nice...

I understand there will also be a page with precise Grammy requests such as: Grammy Best song of the year.. So there will be a lot of copy and paste to do down the line...

Finally, the Wiki software serves its purpose very well ..But not as a forum...

Wikipedia needs a real forum.. Check out a great forum (also called Bulletin Board) at: http://phpbb.com/phpBB/

It is free but a bit difficult to install. Some programmer is willing to install it for a fee.. I am willing to pay him.. But at the end of the day, you will see how great having a real forum is... I can have it set up and if you guys don't like it I will have it removed.. This is not demanding in terms of space: PHPBB has a few hundred thousand messages on ... 60 megs!!!!!

Since I don't know precisely what your needs are, I would need someone to help me install the categories... Maybee you!!!! (I read you bio; very well written.. And you are pretty brave to mention your depression.. Heck! Science has lost you but lexicography has gained you!!!! Too bad for science! lol)

Let me know about the forum..

So long..

Robert A.

E71 (i.3051265_5_4) : 4th Panzer Division (Wehrmacht), Titre du fil : War Crimes 2

I'm done with part of the references. I suppose the ball is now on Molobo's court as he told me he has obtained Datner's book. Quoting numbers of relevant pages should do, I guess. Halibutt Halibu 21:33, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

E72 (i.38421296_39_6) : 4chan/Archive 16, Titre du fil : [[Alt-right]]

"One person is not ""members"". Stop refusing to get the point. Don't misrepresent the source. Move on. This is my last post on this topic. Sundayclose03:21, 6 March 2016 (UTC)"

E73 (i.1838645_5_4) : 507th Maintenance Company, Titre du fil : Alleged Rescue Casualties

"I may have to eat a little crow, or at least a side dish. The mission to press forward and take the bridges was in support of other planned Marine movements. But, as I'm reading the detailed hearing transcripts, the 507th survivors were a factor. Lt. Col. Grabowski (1/2 Battalion CO) testified ""so it knowledge of the 507th kind of picked up our momentum to push forward as quickly as possible. One, to seize the bridges, which was the intent of the commander, and it was my intent to rapidly seize the bridges. And two, to see if we could find any of the survivors that might be along the road.""

I leave it to the Wikipedia gurus to present this info, if relevant. The mission to take the bridges (and the 18 casualties incurred) was at least secondarily related to the 507th"

E74 (i.8683627_6_12) : 500 Years Later, Titre du fil : "Plot" section

"you ""changed"" it only once somebody else had input, you have been all over the article prior to this and never felt the need to change it. Why? You only suggested quotations after somebody else changed it, did you not care for the quality of the article or wiki policy prior to that? Obviously i am being funny with you but after all of your condescending comments toward me it is fun for me to poke fun at you. Whats funnier is you will more than likely comment again as you need to have the last word lol either way this is my last post on the matter of the ""plot"" section unless it is changed again, have fun...Stevowills117:52, 25 June 2014 (UTC)"

E75 (i.2892532_1_9) : 7 World Trade Center/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Neutrality

"***The burden of proof lies in the court of the person who claimed this ""The expression could simply refer to a decision to pull firefighting operations out of the building"" because if there were no firefighters in the building at the time Silverstein said, ""pull it"" his statement could not mean remove the fighterfighters. So the claimer needs to establish, who Silverstein talked to, when he talked to him, and when the firefighters were removed from WTC 7, otherwise it is an unsubtantiated claim. Who is the ""we"" that ""watched the building collapse"" and when did they watch? ""unsigned edit by user|Alfonslof""

****The government's stance is that pull ""it"" did not refer to demolition of the building. Based on your assertion, the government should therefore be burdened with proving that there were no missiles on the 767 tanker with no windows, that there was no nuclear bomb that blew up beneath WTC 12, that there were no explosive inside WTC 1, 2, and 7, that there was no inside job, etc...etc...etc... Otherwise, their statements to the contrary are nothing but unsubstantiated claims. I guess the moon landings didn't happen either since the government hasn't proven to the satisfaction of the conspiracy theorists that the Van Allen belts won't kill you on contact, or that there isn't a large chem trailing program over the entire country, much less the planet. We can do this ad nauseum. Personally, I'm not up for it. FEMA, NIST and others have teamed with literally hundreds of related field experts to determine the collapse sequences of the various WTC towers. In no case has any part of the investigation led to the possible conclusion that any of the buildings were intentionally demolished. If you want to insist on believing in unknown demolition teams working in total anonymity for weeks prior to 9/11 without anyone seeing them and a building that can be heavily damaged, suffer fires for 7 hours and then underwent intentional demolition, perferctly falling into its own footprint (well, according to conspiracy theorists...though this isn't true), and that Silverstein made the collosal error or stating as much in a publicly aired interview that was allowed to go on the air despite Silverstein's collusion in the purposeful demolition of the building which could blow the cover on the largest conspiracy in history...that's your business. Me, I'll go along with substantiated fact. Substantiated fact is that no evidence of intentional demolition of WTC 1, 2, and 7 have been found by FEMA, NIST, FBI, or any other federal agency working on 9/11 investigations. I'm done with this debate. As I've said here repeatedly, this is """"'NOT""""' the proper forum for it. We are writing an encyclopedia here. We work with substianted fact, and all the more so on controversial articles. If you don't like the article because it doesn't support your pet conspiracy theory, then by all means change it to do so. NObody is stopping you from doing so. But, be prepared for others to revert your edits because they will be unsubstianted speculation. Good day. --Durin16:01, 8 October 2005 (UTC)"

E76 (i.33929817_1_12) : 7 World Trade Center/Archive 8, Titre du fil : Proposed change

"You and Tom have further proven with your emotional comments that the collapse timing is indeed a relevant topic to discuss, and should therefore be addressed in the article. All right, I'm done with you. When it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, even the best Wikipedia editor cannot assume it isn't a duck. We're the emotional ones, check. You're the neutral one and we're the biased ones, check. You're being ganged up upon, check. Free fall acceleration, check. ""Allegedly,"" check. Interested in the collapse of 7WTC and apparently no other topic in the worldhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Smitty121981, check. Given this evidence, it is my opinion that Smitty121981 is editing 9/11-related articles with the specific intent to skew their POV toward fringe conspiracy theories, and is hiding behind the AGF guideline in order to accomplish these goals. Perhaps sanctions ought to be considered at this point. At any rate, from here on I will ignore this editor's comments. -Jordgette02:11, 3 August 2011 (UTC)"

E77 (i.5452988_7_40) : 7 World Trade Center/Archive 3, Titre du fil : whatreallyhappened.com

I'll probably take some kind of action once I'm done with finals. Wikipedia policy is crystal clear about representing each notable POV on a subject, and the only thing preventing that from happening are inappropriate threats from an admin. --Hyperbole20:27, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

E78 (i.19419778_25_2) : 90210 (TV series), Titre du fil : Cast Order in Infobox

I was told it's however the page started and if there's a problem with the order it should be discussed. All main characters should be listed in the infobox as they've all starred in 90210 the TV show, the page isn't 90210 season 3 (which some had left), get what I mean? The only issue is how it should be laid out, alphabetical or credit order followed by order in which they joined the show. To me, credit order makes more sense than alphabetical as alphabetical doesn't actually hold any purpose. I hope I've made it clear, I'm going to go ahead and revert the edit but I'll leave this discussion open to see if anyone would like it alphabetical. Jayy00818:19, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

E79 (i.24426852_21_1) : 9-12 Project, Titre du fil : It's Non-Neutral Again

Ok, I left this page alone largely for a few months and now it's become another propoganda piece. Editors, please read the arguments we've had on this talk page before doing substantial editing. We had reached a nice happy consensus on what all the sections should say in a balanced and SOURCED manner. For political articles in particular, Wikipedia's policies need to be followed closely because as you know political orientation can be very divisive. Everything in this article must be SOURCED. The sources should drive everything, not personal perceptions... unless you can source the points with neutral sources. We report what the verifiable and reliable sources say... no original research. 912Project.com is not one of those neutral sources. While you can say what that website says the 9/12 Project means, you can't use it as your primary source of info and expect this article to have credibility. So, either we go far back into the past and revive the old article and do our revision from there or we fix it like it is. --Triadian07:24, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

E80 (i.1043912_3_15) : Achaea, Titre du fil : Requested move

":::Well, I don't feel like arguing anymore, but what I said about dictionaries is true, unfortunately; and I left out Britannica because it did not fall under any of the categories I mentioned, seeing as it used the ""Akhaia"" spelling as its secondary form. And yes, the Achaean to Achaea thing was certainly pure speculation, although your claim that it's ""plain wrong"" is founded in nothing, whereas my suggestion was at least based on logic. All in all, I am sorry you took so much offense at my response; my summary of the dictionary sources was meant to clarify which sources actually did include ""Achaia"" and to remove ""Achaean"" from the discussion since it is spelled and subsequently transliterated differently in Greek. I leave this discussion to everyone else now. Nothing like a great debate to find the truth. — the Man in Question22:50, 8 July 2012 (UTC)"

E81 (i.10525627_1_2) : Avoid note, Titre du fil : Question

"I'm not familiar with it either, but that isn't my main objection. My main objection is that it sounds like Pidgin English or baby talk: ""Avoid"" is a verb, not an adjective. ""Tone to be avoided"" would be a much less objectionable phrase. I have a third objection as well: ""Tone to be avoided"" and the original phrase are markedly more proscriptive than conventional pedagogical theory is. I should like to see this stub deleted altogether, and if I discover no further comments here, I'll likely nominate it for deletion myself in a about a week or so. TheScotch05:56, 14 April 2007 (UTC)"

E82 (i.10656578_3_57) : Afshar experiment/Archive 27, Titre du fil : Disputed peice #6

I think I am out of here. The only one who wanted to keep the reference is Price, and now you are ignoring the voice of the majority. Additionally you are telling me to stop fighting when I have only presented reasonable arguments. My faith in the mediator is now lost and I am frankly tired of this mess. By all means keep the irrelevant reference, and additionally if presenting well reasoned arguments in a non disrespectful way by me is suddenly to be called fighting, than I shall stop fighting by ceasing my contributions altogether. I have had enough. Dndn101123:07, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

E83 (i.10684012_2_1) : Abdullah Tariki, Titre du fil : Untitled

Got two great books in Arabic about this great man. As soon as I'm done with them I will add some more info to this page. Alchemist arabia Alchemist 03:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

E84 (i.10746003_6_1) : Angus & Julia Stone, Titre du fil : Media appearances

"I've had a go at providing some refs for material here. More reliable refs are needed but I'm done with my edits for now.Shaidar cuebiyar ""shaidar cuebiyar"" 21:15, 22 December 2012 (UTC)"

E85 (i.10778192_1_7) : Amsterdam/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Drugs

See, the article lists Montreal as a sister city, but frankly it should be Vancouver. Am I right? Am I right? Okay, I'm done here. Zweifel14:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

E86 (i.1088379_25_8) : Audioslave, Titre du fil : Infobox lay out

Template talk:Infobox Musical artistStandardizing genre delimiters. I'm going to leave this discussion now. --PEJL09:31, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

E87 (i.10888851_1_32) : Antisemitism/Archive 25, Titre du fil : There is definite bias in the text

"Beit, I explained at least three times where I don't think the concept of anti-semitism applies. Kirby explained it. Aminz explained it many times as well. If you don't agree with my answer, fine, I can live with that. Wikipedia is not about making everybody agree with each other, and I have seen worse articles in the Wiki. This one here is reasonably fair. But at least I understand that one of the pillars of the wiki experience is to assume good faith. Assumptions on ""certain editors"" denying historical facts, or ""the goal is to blame Jews for their own persecutions"" simply goes against this basic AGF. But I am going to stop this discussion here. The talk page is not a forum and I don't intend to make it one.--Ninarosa08:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)"

E88 (i.10936418_26_15) : Azarbaijan (Iran)/Archive 2, Titre du fil : Re: North of Azerbaijan

"My dear student, you have the link above where it says ""greater Azerbaijan"" and a few other things. Maybe some of the others are teenagers and students and maybe some are employed by Armenia and maybe others are obsessed teebnagers and students fed with propaganda. Anyway, I am not putting up with these types of issues any more. If SOME Armenians and SOME Persian-Iranians are so much dedicated to distorting Azerbaijan and Azerbaijnai history, then believe me that Azerbaijanis are won't be damaged by these. OK, this is my last post! Bm79 09:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)"

E89 (i.1100505_24_29) : Apollo command and service module, Titre du fil : Requested move 26 November 2018

Kranz is the most important, as he was the head of the project. And if you didn't check out https://www.nasa.gov/feature/50-years-ago-the-apollo-lunar-module the NASA link I left above, please do so, both for this discussion and because you like the Apollo information - I'd suggest watching the NASA vintage Apollo 5 15-minute documentary linked to youtube on that page, I just saw it and learned a lot about the Lunar Module (they correctly call it a spacecraft). After reading the link and watching the video you may up your estimation of Kranz's upper-casing the terms, and maybe consider having another switcheroo. As for me complaining about anyone to some kind of formal tribunal, I've never done that or would do it unless under the most extreme of circumstances. Not my thing. Randy Kryn03:30, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

E90 (i.11016904_11_16) : Afshar experiment/Archive 29, Titre du fil : Specific critiques

I am not argueing in that way! I am testing what are the limits of your honesty in applying your own criteria! For me whether Drezet has PhD or not is NOT relevant. If I cared about notabilities, I would never have argued against Unruh. Yet, I am expecting that Unruh will withdraw his flawed letter, announced in PP, so that the whole issue is decided once and for all. Neverhteless I think there is more interesting events to come in PP, in the dialogue Georgiev vs. Unruh, instead of posting here offenses on journals, etc. p.s. I quit from this discussion, provided no personal attacks against my name appear in the talk. Danko Georgiev MD10:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

E91 (i.1119401_2_24) : Atheism/Archive 9, Titre du fil : Request for comment.

I've described it at least 3 or 4 times! I'll put it in a seperate section just to make sure you see it this time. As far as this back and forthing goes, I'm done with it. I've already said that I feel the mere fact that these authors you quote have to spend so much time defining atheism to be what they believe it to be shows that alternate definitions have widespread usage and acceptance. Therefore, quoting more of them at me is only (to my mind) proving my point. As a side note, no I didn't read your last link before posting, it showed up as an edit conflict when I tried to reply, so I didn't have much of a chance to when composing my reply. Having now glanced at it, I repeat what I've just said: it reinforces my point that the definition of atheism is (and probably always has been) under debate.

Anyway, I shall (re)post my definition and be done with it. If you want to respond to my other points (eg Britannica defining atheism), be my guest, but your entomology argument doesn't hold much water with me, unless you can explain away things like pedophilia being about attraction to children, not friendship with children. ShaneKing Shane King 05:10, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)

E92 (i.1119401_9_2) : Atheism/Archive 9, Titre du fil : Comment

"I have been doing my best to keep things cool here, but it is not an easy task. However, while User:20040302 is willing to comprise, Adraeus states above: ""I will not negotiate. The article is correct, accurate, and reflects common usage now."" This derails the dispute resolution process. Once dispute has ended, contributions must resume. Since x Andre (for whom I have a decent amount of respect, though some of his posts are slightly more hostile than I would like) and RRR_User:Adraeus_RRR Adraeus (who I assume to be acting in good faith, though not willing to compromise) have both walked away from the table, it does not appear there is much left. If Adraeus has unilaterally withdrawn from discussion while the other side of the dispute shows a willingness to work things out, I will consider the dispute ended. I will ask that the page be unprotected and if Adraeus continues to revert edits that do not conform to his views as he previously has, I will consider it to be hostile activity and support a move toward arbitration. It is up to Adraeus if he would like to continue informal dispute resolution on this page or not. All I am concerned about here is resolving the dispute. If one side vanishes, it is resolved and I am done here. Skyler1534 Skyler""'1534""' 01:17, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)"

E93 (i.1119401_9_4) : Atheism/Archive 9, Titre du fil : Comment

"I'm out of here too; there is little point in banging ones head against highly emotive POV positions such as has been put forth by Sam Spade who will not concede the simply crushing case made on the point in question. Namely that the definition of atheism should within its meaning cover both the positive and negative sense.

Sam has seen fit to come up with his own version of my Venn diagram set descriptions above which rather tells all. His agenda is clear, ""Those who know God,"" and ""those who don't take a stand, but do not reject God"" Please! The premise and POV virtually leaps off the page. I posit that Sam is a Theist with an agenda and that agenda is that he personally feels the term 'atheist' is an extreme pejorative (he's been rather open on this point) and this has skewed his judgment so that he seeks to limit the general definition to that of Positive atheism so as few as possible are sullied by the term."

E94 (i.11218949_9_4) : Anti-abortion movement/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Fairness in Final Two Paragraphs

"The last two paragraphs are not even close to fair or objective. It is simply a list of what Pro-choice critics have to say about the pro-life views, most of which is completely irrevelent to the subject matter. Death penalty, war, economics, sexual education, the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and political distraction all have nothing to do with pro-life and do not belong in this article. Having a Pro-life stance is completely independent from any of these topics, and yet these last two paragraphs would lead one to believe that most pro-lifers also support war and the death penalty, and reject sexual education in school and try to distract voters from concerns. Furthermore there is no such ""critic"" section in the pro-choice article, therefore I will be removing these paragraphs from the article. I will leave the discussion of Pro-life as a loaded term, because the Pro-choice article has the same discussion in it. There are plenty of books and websites out there that criticize Pro-life, this website should not be one of them, unless of course, a section of criticism is included in the Pro-choice article as well. For the record I am pro-life, but happen to be against war, against the death penalty, for sexual education in schools, and I am not a Roman Catholic. Hopefully this helps whoever inserted those criticisms in the article to understand why they do not belong there."

E95 (i.11317250_1_5) : Ach Gott, vom Himmel sieh darein, BWV 2, Titre du fil : Tag on External links section

They are two entirely different issues, and you know it. You should take it to EL noticeboard and leave an notice on the Reliable sources board to that effect. This whole issue about 4 simple and useful external links is a manufactured and pedantic dispute on your part. Ditto your re-addition of the tag and insistence that it must be settled on a board that is not designed to settle it. But I know from long experience that it is utterly useless to try to reason with you. I will make no further comments here. Voceditenore20:46, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

E96 (i.11317250_2_5) : Ach Gott, vom Himmel sieh darein, BWV 2, Titre du fil : Tag on Recordings section requiring additional sources

My comments were entirely appropriate to this talk page and concern removing the source to which you object and restructuring the recordings section. However, as I said above, I know from long experience that it is utterly useless to try to reason with you. I will make no further comments here. Voceditenore20:49, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

E97 (i.11319520_21_17) : Anna Politkovskaya/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Unsourced speculation

"I am going to stop this discussion. Did not you know that Rajiv Gandhi and many other Indian officials were bribed by KGB? See http://www.boloji.com/myword/mw042.htm and read Mitrokhin Archive. Mitrokhin described in great detail how suitcases with KGB money traveled to Indira Gandhi office in his book ""The World Was Going Our Way: The KGB and the Battle for the Third World"". I would strongly recommend everyone to read it. Biophys00:54, 10 November 2006 (UTC)"

E98 (i.1139949_1_5) : Aubrey–Maturin series, Fil sans titre

Where is your reliable source on the novels being told from the viewpoint of the two main characters with two exceptions that came to mind? There is none, as there can be none, because it is your original research that has no basis at all in reality. I am out of this discussion now, obviously it is very important to you to have an unsourced paragraph of misinformation in this article, people have gotten kicks from weirder things, it is just a shame that Wikipedia users have to have these great novels spoilt by an aside in a paragraph that's demonstrably wrong. 06:27, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

E99 (i.11421491_9_35) : Anthroposophy/Archive 4, Titre du fil : Question to other editors

"Do you think I have an on-going dialog with Peter Staudenmaier? Your request is unreasonable. I already posted a link to his answer on this issue. You want me to bother this man with YOUR questions? I don't know why I'M bothering to answer your questions here... You think I should write to him and say ""Sune doesn't understand, again, about something you have already explained very clearly. Please take time out of your day to try to explain the obvious to Sune, once again."" You've got nothing to base any claims of unreliability on - and that's that. I'm done with this conversation. ""'Pete K16:28, 20 December 2006 (UTC)""'"

E100 (i.11689627_7_4) : Abaza family, Titre du fil : Infobox

"Seif Al-Sharqawy Thank you for your reply! The Kennedys were a dynasty. A dynasty is defined on Wikipedia as """"a dynasty (UK /ˈdɪnəsti/, US /ˈdaɪnəsti/) is a sequence of rulers from the same family"""". The royal family of Egypt was a dynasty for example, the Abazas are just a family with a lot of distinguished members. If you insist on including the description of them as a political dynasty and noble house then the next step would be finding sources that explicitly refer to the family as a whole as a ""noble house"" and a ""political dynasty"", because having members who were given non-hereditary noble titles does not imply they are a noble house (moreover, Egypt simply doesn't have any nobility). I wont edit the areas of prominence if that's the sticking point for you but I will leave the discussion open for other editors to weigh in. Turnopoems11:13, 5 January 2017 (UTC)"

E101 (i.11750607_10_29) : Antisemitism in Islam/Archive 3, Titre du fil : Trends section

"Ah, you've said ""censor"" again. As explained, I won't be responding any more, since you continue to violate CIVIL. The break will be 48 hours this time. Jayjg (talk) 04:10, 10 June 2007 (UTC)"

E102 (i.11972408_1_1) : Assemblies of God in Vietnam, Titre du fil : Questionable source

"The Vietnam house church movement began in 1988, when some pastors were expelled from the official churches for reported charismatic gifts and healing. The most uncompromising from them was Tran Dinh Ai, whose movement in 1997 reached 16,000 members in 165 churches. The movement proclaimed itself the Assemblies of God in Vietnam, followed the AG rules and was recognized by the AG worldwide. http://www.fva.org/0297/pastors.htm FVA News Tran Dinh Ai later left Vietnam for the United States and was considered to be a modern day apostle"".""

""In August 1997, three Vietnamese Christians, belonging to the unregistered Assemblies of God house churches, were jailed for three years. Lo Van Hen, his cousin Lo Van Hoa, and Nguyen Van Vuong, who were pastors in unofficial ""house"" communes in Dien Bien Phu (Northwest Vietnam), had been accused by local authorities of being ""fake Christians"" and of ""illegally propagating their beliefs."" http://www.fva.org/0297/pastors.htm FVA News On May 7, 1999, police raided an Assemblies of God meeting in a hotel in Hanoi, holding 20 people for several days.""

I'm giving this article a major rewrite. Until I'm finished, I'm moving more questionable material here. After I'm done with the re-write, I'll decide on if/how to reincorporate this material back in. Ltwin21:11, 21 October 2010 (UTC)"

E103 (i.1198831_3_2) : Al-Qaeda/Archive 2, Titre du fil : Mossad Connection

Find a CNN source that says so. I cannot really mess with you right now until I am finished with my Spanish final that I am typing, so someone will have to address you on this.

Energybone, you may want to stop and think carefully about what you are doing. What may seem like universal fact to you may turn out not to be. WhisperToMe08:40, 26 May 2004 (UTC)

E104 (i.1200682_5_8) : Alex Ferguson, Titre du fil : BLP More citations needed

You asked my advice. I spent half an hour composing a detailed response. If you choose not to agree with it, that is your privilege. I have nothing more to say on the subject. -- MelanieN23:25, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

E105 (i.1202630_5_5) : Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, Titre du fil : Changes

"Can the CIA guarantee that all the information is correct? I don't think so. I think nobody can guarantee, because most are estimates.

Take a look at the following Links. It should be no problem to say instead of ""there are 4 million in Pakistan"", that you say, ""there are approximately 1-4 oR 2-4 million in Pakistan"".

""From the National Chairman of the AMJ Germany, Uwe, Abdullah Wagishauser, one learns at a press conference on Friday that the security measures are in an attempt to assassinate the head of the AMJ in the 1940s had become necessary. In addition, the community was being persecuted in Pakistan. So be it recently came to attacks on Ahmadiyya mosques in the Islamic country. According to the community living in Pakistan currently has ""'two million followers""'. These should be there but not publicly profess their faith.""

http://www.ka-news.de/region/karlsruhe/Konservativ-und-friedvoll-30-000-Muslime-treffen-sich-in-Karlsruhe;art6066,651668

Google Translator: http://translate.google.de/translate?sl=detl=enjs=nprev=_thl=enie=UTF-8layout=2eotf=1u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ka-news.de%2Fregion%2Fkarlsruhe%2FKonservativ-und-friedvoll-30-000-Muslime-treffen-sich-in-Karlsruhe%3Bart6066%2C651668

Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (2 million)

http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,IRBC,,PAK,,49913b5f2c,0.html

US State Department says:

""Section I. Religious Demography

The country has a total area of 310,527 square miles, and its population is approximately 132 million. According to the 1998 census, an estimated 96 percent of the population are Muslim; 1.69 percent are Christian; 2.02 percent are Hindu; and ""'0.35 percent are ""other"" (including Ahmadis)""'. The majority of Muslims in the country are Sunni. An estimated 10 to 15 percent of the Muslim population are Shi'a. It is estimated that there are between 550,000 and 600,000 Ismailis (a recognized Shi'a Muslim group). Most Ismailis in the country are followers of the Aga Khan; however, an estimated 50,000 Ismailis, known as Borahs, are not.

Religious minority groups believe that they are underrepresented in government census counts. Official and private estimates of their numbers can differ significantly. The most recent census estimates place the number of Christians at 2.09 million and the ""'Ahmadi population at 286,000""'. The communities themselves each claim membership of ""'approximately 4 million""'. ""

http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/2002/14026.htm

This is my last post. It's your decision. I think Wikipedia should be more objective. If some say 2 million and others say 4 million. You don't know who are right. Adnan93309:38, 23 June 2012 (UTC)"

E106 (i.1218097_10_11) : Anarchism/Archive 11, Titre du fil : [[NPOV dispute]]

As I said months ago, after you had already been demolishing these pages for a couple months, you are long since past the point of demonstrating your own bad faith and insincerity on this page. Frankly I'm finished with trying to deal with you, I will wait for others to try and resolve this and then respond appropriately to your behavior. Kevehs Kev 00:50, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

E107 (i.12202766_10_4) : Alizée/Archive Jul 2007, Titre du fil : WoW Night Elf

Fanatical Wikipedans such as yourself are why people edit one or two articles then run away with their tail between their legs after being spanked. You win. I'm done here 24.61.171.5300:42, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

E108 (i.12522734_5_10) : Angel: After the Fall, Titre du fil : plots of issues

"This will most likely be my last comment here(if not all of Wikipedia), as I have began to feel increasingly frustrated, mildly insulted and even a little angry at the treatment I have been subjected to upon this discussion page. Despite conducting myself politely, (I even re-checked my comments after reading the ""Wikipedia Civility"" to make sure my comments weren't in breach of policy (they weren't)), I have been out-right insulted and a victim of unsupported accusations.

I must thank user Paul730 for his conduct, as despite evidently disagreeing with me, he was polite enough to remain civil (something others have failed to do). From an objective perspective, I entered this discussion, expressed my views on the issue summary concern, provided helpful links to fellow contributors, asked harmless and polite questions...and recieved out-right abuse to it.

Also, as one who suffers from various social-interaction disorders, I find being labelled ""dumb"" highly insulting and distressing (though I do not intend to press for further action regarding these intolerant attitudes). Unfortunately, for these reasons I feel I will be unable to continue contributing here, and will restrict my vists to Wikipedia to article pages only.

-Ryan1711 —Preceding 17:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)"

E109 (i.12600977_9_74) : Allegations of state terrorism by the United States/Archive 14, Titre du fil : Introduction

A minute ago your whole point was that what I was describing violated SYN or OR, but now you have found a new point, so I assume you are conceding the particular argument we just had. Moving the goal posts as you are in the midst of losing a debate (we were only talking about one very specific thing--not the entire first sentence of the article, or the fact that another source was required) will not stand you in good stead with me. I'm done here for now. If you take away anything away from this excruciatingly painful tete a tete, I hope you recognize that you do not have consensus for whatever it is you thought you were arguing (at this point I don't know what that is since you just flipped the script). I'll leave it to others to deal with the new objections you've raised now that the old ones did not work out for you. The best thing to do though would be to work elsewhere since progress is not going to happen here right now. Fin.-- 10:47, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

E110 (i.1264565_1_1) : Annapolis, Maryland, Fil sans titre

Overreact much? The point was and is, the statue was there much longer than it wasn't. This isn't a GUIDEBOOK. You are obviously aware of the details as you have mentioned several sources. I'm not. How about you take all the sources you found and add the quite encyclopedic information about its removal and treat what we are doing as writing an encyclopedia? Or are you one of those revisionists that thinks American History can be changed by hiding it? I'm done with this discussion, do what you want. I don't have time to deal with angry jerks. Life's too short. John from Idegon07:24, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

E111 (i.12698139_20_31) : Asia/Archive 2, Titre du fil : Sometimes/always Asia map

I just have one last comment here. Search for US map in google images. You will get at least 7 (out of 20 images) in first page without alaska. Does that means Alaska is not a part of US?. If this can happen to a well defined country what do you think will happen to a fairly poorly defined continent?. Leotolstoy13:15, 6 February 2007 (UTC)\

E112 (i.12698139_27_11) : Asia/Archive 2, Titre du fil : Massive changes to article

"Like before, you simply claim, """"I'm done with you"""". When you cannot argue your case based on policy, you simply deride the opponent's argument as """"subjective"""" or call them a hypocrite. I wish it was that simple for me. If that were the case, I could simply call the other editor's argument foolish and discontinue talking with them. Unfortunately, I must make logical arguments. Throughout this conversation, you fail to address the argumentive points I make and the fact that I base my points on policy whereas yours are based on misunderstandings of policy and falacious arguments.----x DarkDark Tea Tea 07:55, 31 May 2007 (UTC)"

E113 (i.12698139_27_12) : Asia/Archive 2, Titre du fil : Massive changes to article

As numerous editors have implied, your arguments and edits (which aren't even predicated on consensus) are unconvincing and, IMO, replete with logical fallacy. I am not insistent that the article remain as is, I maintain that it should be enhanced and be as comprehensive as possible (as this is an encyclopedia); what you condone is, well, the opposite. You attempt veil your content editions as neutral, but they in fact fly in the face of the very 'Foundation issues' you invoke. Your verbiage notwithstanding, when I say 'I'm done with you', that acknowledges the fact that discussions with you are getting circular and are no longer productive, even counter-productive, and hereby extricate myself from further involvement. Basically: if you persist in continually pushing your viewpoint and stirring sh*t as you have been, don't be surprised if you are ignored by me or others and likened a troll. And that's it. Corticopia13:53, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

E114 (i.12698139_27_13) : Asia/Archive 2, Titre du fil : Massive changes to article

"Unlike Corticopia's claim that I use logical fallacies, my claim that he uses logical fallacies shows concrete examples. His claim is an empty accussation. When you say, """"I'm done with you """", you are noting the point where you have no desire to continue arguing, because you realize your arguments aren't based on policy or are fallacious.----x DarkDark Tea Tea 01:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)"

E115 (i.12759781_3_1) : American Family Association/Archive 3, Titre du fil : Problematic editing concerns

Okay all, the vandalism has officially returned. The vandal, CMM, even violates the 3RR rule to assert his POV. About a half a year (since March) this vandalism has been going on with a short hiatus for the vandal to make then break his agreement. And I was banned for pointing out the vandalism for what it was, leading to the eventual agreement, proving I was right. I tire of seeing the constant vandalism on this page. I will not likely edit here any more and I am removing the page from my watch list. The vandal has officially chased away an editor, me this time. There are more important things in life than going after a person who promotes his own vision of the world by equating the AFA with the Nazis, and that it what the homophobia cat essentially does, and in violation of wiki policy (small p) no less. People are totally powerless at wikipedia to stop the vandalism. Someone please let me know when the vandal has finished violating wiki policy in, say, another half year or more I guess given his persistence and wikipedia's total failure to control the vandalism, then I'll come back and edit. In the meantime, the AFA will be equated to the Nazis by a person with an agenda that no one has stopped for almost half a year and I'll bet no one can stop. Hence, I'm out of here. Anyone care to contact me further, use my Talk page. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling02:55, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

E116 (i.12827564_16_1) : Asperger syndrome/Archive 12, Titre du fil : Sources in the previous version

"If you wanna clip the DSM criteria, that's a simple job.

The previous version had the best possible sources : Baron Cohen's Cambridge study (showing superior mathematical ability), Volksmar of the Yale Child Study group saying, not that these kids showed no verbal deficit, but that they ""talked before they could walk"" - they all post-date the DSM. If you want to give the current state of knowledge, you are not going to find it in the DSM, you are going to find it coming from the verifiable, peer-reviewed publications of the authorities in this field.

Given the apparent reluctance to even read the sources yourselves, i suggest you cut-and-paste the DSM. When the DSM gets around to including the new state of knowledge, you can cut-and-paste that too. Peace out, i'm done here. CeilingCrash14:24, 16 August 2007 (UTC)"

E117 (i.12887965_4_7) : Assyrian people/Archive 8, Titre du fil : Assyrians (also known as Chaldeans and Syriacs)

"My words on this page have been few, but beacuse they do not speak as much nonesense as those who frequently rant in this page - I am addressing those fools who wish to destroy the Assyrians/Chaldeans/Syriacs/Arameans or whatever blasted name they choose to divide themselves by. You are Christians, you are all speaking Aramaic, you all have genetic similarities, you are all one people, and unless you accept unity and choose a name (I don't care if you call urselves Summerians, Philistines, Amelkites or Donkeyites) that you are all able to unify under, you will all perish as fools into history. And with this comment I leave this page, my duty to help my fellow country has been fulfilled, since if you are my country men than you deserve little extra help without the reform I suggest. Gabr-el """"'Gabr-""""' 01:28, 14 October 2008 (UTC)"

E118 (i.12966516_3_3) : American School/archive2, Titre du fil : Going from here

"I'm done here for now. Thank you both for an interesting experience ""and"" thank you both for helping to improve Wikipedia - a gift from all of us editors to all of mankind. See you two 'round the 'pedia! WAS 4.25016:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)"

E119 (i.12993622_4_36) : Amelia Earhart/Archive 3, Titre du fil : Pioneering achievements

"Gwen Gale, your reply with a total lack of factual on-topic argumentation really can't change anything. This link you provided is just a ""common statement"" from the BBC website, not even a quote at all. What is its real value and historic credibility in this form? Just zero. Meanwhile yesterday i did provide the exact citation from Snook, with exact reference to source, the page, and photocopy reproduced there. How about that?.. No more comments on this required, i strongly believe. Other Editor (Bzuk) and I ""'did provide to you - not once already - all the exact sources, pages and citations""' that are needed to disprove the Gillespie's statement as not matching any criterias of historic credibility. ""'It all IS provided above.""' Not once already. And if you just don't want to see it i really can't help. Also i would seriously suggest you to ""tone down"" a bit and ""'avoid""' the bossy remarks like ""For the last time..."" etc. It is not only utterly arrogant and impolite (""not the first time from your side)"" but can be legally interpreted as a public abuse against other Editors on the public website. You ""'don't""' have neither any ""monopoly on truth"" nor any ""exclusive ownership rights"" to this article, and ""'no""' any ""special royal right"" to interprete the Wikipedia Rules and ""code"" in any way convenient for you exclusively. And naturally you are not in position to demand from anybody to satisfy your ""requests"" that you just repeat again and again after receiving the actual answers already long ago - totally ignoring the actual and reasonable on-topic requests addressed to yourself. Please try to be a reasonable, polite and cooperative Colleague to other Colleagues; that's all i can suggest to you now, with my true best wishes. Regards - Alex V Mandel18:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)"

E120 (i.1300088_4_5) : Asbestos and the law, Titre du fil : NPOV and CLEANUP Tags

As there were were no further comments or edits other than my own, in the past week, I followed your suggestion, Ed, and deleted the NPOV and CLEANUP tags, ok? Wikityke17:55, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

E121 (i.13085103_14_2) : Asperger syndrome/Archive 14, Titre du fil : Causes

I'm finished with Causes x in my sandbox. Will others please go through it with extra care? It's mostly Greek to me, and I've only regurgitated what the sources say. SandyGeorgia22:29, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

E122 (i.13095555_47_2) : Alice Bailey/Archive 2, Titre du fil : Moving Onward

'Obviously only a tiny fraction of the Bailey work relates to the subject on which you are exclusively focused. That you could draw such a conclusion as the above is mind-boggling. This is my last comment to you. I wish you well. Moving on. Kind Regards. Jamesd1 James 16:04, 27 August 2007 (UTC)'

E123 (i.13179762_11_19) : Annie Hall, Titre du fil : Edit warring

"You do not have the MoS ""on your side"", nor do you own this article, which you seem to think is the case. You have reverted the information at least four times. Once more and I'll happily report you. I'm stepping away from this, because dealing with such an entrenched owner of an article is never a happy experience. Well done for ensuring the article will not,grow beyond your mediocre ability. - SchroCat00:30, 13 March 2014 (UTC)"

E124 (i.13179762_12_8) : Annie Hall, Titre du fil : Should lead summarise article?

If you weren't a gutless coward you'd have reported it by now. I'm out of this discussion while you're being so childish. I provided the link to report on Gareth's page: use it or shut the fuck up. - SchroCat17:40, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

E125 (i.13263301_29_5) : African Americans/Archive5, Titre du fil : All black people in america are not african americans

"So, IceHunter, you're one those morons that believe we're all the same? Well, we're not. Why do you think the U.S. is called a ""melting pot?"" It's because this country is diverse in many ways. I don't know if you're an American, and I don't care, but you have absolutely no right to tell people they shouldn't celebrate their cultures. In New York City (my hometown), we have a lot of ethnic parades: West Indian Day Parade, St. Patrick's Day Parade, Mexican-American Day Parade, Dominican Parade, German-American Day Parade, Columbus Day Parade, Pakistani Parade, Puerto Rican Day Parade, and others. Now, these people are not saying, ""We don't want to be Americans."" They're just celebrating their heritage and culture, and they have every right to do it, whether your closed-minded moronic ass likes it or not. They're proud to be Americans while at the same time proud of their heritage and culture. That is why all the people who say, ""We're all the same,"" are dead wrong. The human species, not human race, are different in every way. If we were the same, planet Earth would be dull and boring. People like you need to embrace the fact that we are different. And the real reason racists like you exist is because racists don't accept things that are foreign to them. They look at so-called ""minorities"" (a term whites invented) and think they are superior to them because of who they are and where they come from. Racists look at diversity as a threat. If America is going to solve the hatred problem, some Americans are going to have to accept that the U.S. is a diverse, multi-ethnic, multi-cultural nation. There is no such thing as a real American culture because most of it came from other nations. As for African American, it's obvious you're too stupid to know what it means, so I am done with you. Go celebrate your stupidity and ignorance.Fclass21:34, 8 February 2008 (UTC)"

E126 (i.13263301_30_6) : African Americans/Archive5, Titre du fil : Title

Thank you, Malik Shabazz, but I want to respond to this dumbass. I don't know you, but I know stupidity and ignorance when I see it. And from the way you think, I think it's safe to say I'm a lot smarter and articulate than you. DLWDWFreek, you need a lesson in geography. Africa is a continent, just like Europe and North America. The continent of Africa is made up of 50+ countries with their own nationalities. Ghana=Ghanaian, Ethiopia=Ethiopian. I could go on, but I want to make this short. If I, an American, move to Canada, I would still be an American, but I would be Canadian because I'm applying Canadian citizenship. Duh!!! And black Americans(or African Americans) aren't descendants of American slavery? Somebody needs to educate you on American history. Why don't you do us a favor, and leave this operation to people who know what their talking about. I'm done with you. Fclass21:29, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

E127 (i.13372151_19_1) : Alice Bailey/Archive 3, Titre du fil : Goodbye to Kwork

Kwork, I've tried for a long time to dialog with you and now see that it is useless and produces nothing good. I'm done with the defensive posture. This is my last message addressed to you. I wish you well. Jamesd1 James 20:12, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

E128 (i.13372151_19_1) : Alice Bailey/Archive 3, Titre du fil : Goodbye to Kwork

Kwork, I've tried for a long time to dialog with you and now see that it is useless and produces nothing good. I'm done with the defensive posture. This is my last message addressed to you. I wish you well. Jamesd1 James 20:12, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

E129 (i.13458936_2_3) : Academic views on Falun Gong/Archive 3, Titre du fil : Quotes

I don't know Olaf. But i think it is not right for Practitioners to get emotional when arguing. I don't like arguing. If someone attacks Falun Gong, i just make it clear to him that if he does that right now, it might result in people not making their own judgements of Falun Gong and therefore ignoring the persecution, which helps the persecution to go on. If he still doesn't care, i leave it at that. If people on wikipedia attack Falun Gong, i would just make my own website and point things out there.

--Hoerth01:42, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

E130 (i.1346262_6_1) : Autobiography (album)/Archive 4, Titre du fil : Tightening

"I must say I don't understand why some of my changes were reverted:

""a hit in many countries in ""'mid to late 2004""""' -- why is the time period necessary? The paragraph already says when the album was released, so we already know the approximate time-frame. If anybody is interested in more specificity, there are links to the appropriate articles with that info.

*The lead is relatively short and the time context ""mid to late 2004"" is useful, in my opinion. It also helps broaden the intro to a broader international contextmdash;it was a hit in most countries somewhat later than it was in the U.S.

""she has described the process as being similar to keeping a diary"" -- this is followed by a direct, sourced quote which imparts the same info to the reader; keeping both is redudant, and the diary comparison is neither direct nor sourced.

*I think the ""diary"" thing helps the reader to understand things better. She has said that before, at least on the Capital FM radio interview I cite elsewhere, but I'm unsure what the best way to go about citing radio interviews is.

""I write non-stop... It's a great way for me to express (my feelings)"" vs """"I write non-stop from my house or in the studio or wherever I can write. It's a great way for me to express it and get it all out"" What info is added by using the whole quote?

*I worried that the more concise version was taking too much liberty with what she said, and it looked kind of clumsy to me.

""When asked to describe the music on ""Autobiography"", Simpson said: ""I think my music is rock/pop. When recording, I didn't try for a certain sound. I just wanted the music to sound like me and to be an expression of myself."""" vs ""Just before the album's release, when asked to describe the music on ""Autobiography"", Simpson called it ""rock/pop"", but she said that she did not focus on making the music conform to a certain genre: ""I just wanted the music to sound like me and to be an expression of myself."""" Why note when this quote came from? Has her opinion changed? Why give an interpretation, even (especially) an obvious one -- she explains herself pretty concisely in the quote?

*I thought my version explained things better, more clearly, and I don't like doing things to quotes like putting in when recording if it can be avoided. I also think giving the time context is better, because it makes what I've written timeless.

""""I felt that the album was my baby and I wanted to be hands-on"" vs ""I was extremely involved in everything cos I felt that it was my baby and I wanted to be hands-on."" Given that the rest of the para already goes on about how she was involved, what purpose do those extra words serve?

*The rest of the paragraph goes on about the other people she worked with, not about her. It's important to note the degree of involvement she had, or at least that she says she had if she's the only source we have.

""half the album ... feels self indulgent and lacks substance""mdash;but that ""in between the formulaic, innocuous songs are a smattering of catchy pop-rock tracks."""" vs ""half the album ... feels self indulgent and lacks substance""mdash;but it conceded that ""in between the formulaic, innocuous songs are a smattering of catchy pop-rock tracks."""" NPOV -- that claim of the review doesn't really feel like a ""concession"" to me, and calling it such implies that catchy pop-rock tracks are de facto a good thing, to be contrasted with the self-indulgent and formulaic bits. I am sure I am not alone in feeling that Simpson's ability to make ""catchy pop-rock tracks"" is anything better (or indeed, different) than self-indulgent and substance-lacking tracks.

*The tone of the review suggests it is a concessionmdash;generally we don't like it, but there are these few tracks... But OK, it's just one word, I'll ""concede"" the point.

"" it is rock-flavored pop (or pop-flavored rock) sung by young women who incorporate rebellion and independence into their images."" vs "" it is similarly styled rock-flavored pop (or pop-flavored rock) sung by young women who incorporate rebellion or at least independence into their images."" What does ""similarly styled"" mean in this context? This seems to be concluding for the reader that there are stylistic similarities here. This is a reasonable conclusion, but one which the text already gives enough info to reach; let the reader make his own conclusion. Why add ""at least""? Does anyone dispute that both rebellion and independence are an important part of all three artists' image? I admit that I am only passingly familiar with Pink and have never heard any of the others' music, but from what little I do know of all three, this seems uncontroversial.

*I think it's useful to say it's similarly styled, and I went on to cite quotes supporting that. Rebellion isn't necessarily independence, or vice versa. An independent woman may not need to rebel, she may not have anything to rebel against. So it would have to be rebellion ""or"" independence, and adding ""at least"" shows that it is a matter of degree and that therefore they can possibly go together.

"" The New York Times review said that"" vs ""The New York Times, in its review of the album, said that "" Aside from the second version being longer, what is the difference?

*I just think it's more clear. I like to be as clear as possible.

"" self-titled 2004 release)"" This format is not allowed according to Wikipedia:WikiProject Music. That it is self-titled and a release is obvious, and the year is not relevant here. The name of the album is ""Hilary Duff"", and it should be called precisely that.

*What, I have to obey the music project's decrees? I thought it looked awkward. You're saying ""Hilary Duff"" twice in a row.

""Courtney Love's 2004 album ""America's Sweetheart"", which ""is tragic and blasted..."" vs "" Courtney Love's 2004 album ""America's Sweetheart"": Love's solo debut ""is tragic and blasted"" What is wrong with cutting off two extraneous words? Is it relevant that ""America's Sweetheart"" is her solo debut? Would the quote be less relevant if it was a Hole album, or her second solo album?

*No reason except that I thought it flowed better in the context of the quote.

""""Pieces of Me"", the first single ""'(which preceded the album's release)""', is"" Why put the parenthetical here? The single's release date is already given elsewhere, and has nothing to do with her relationship with Cabrera or the song's upbeatness.

*OK, I'll concede this point. There may be a need for a degree of reworking along these linesmdash;maybe the singles section should just ""describe"" the songs and accompanying videos, and the other info should go in ""promotion"" or somewhere else.

""The ""'song's""' lyrics"" Since it's already clear from the context which song is being referred to, what is the point of this word?

*OK, ""its lyrics"" or something like that.

""comfort and happiness she ""'finds""' with him"" I had changed this to the past tense, since they are apparently broken up and she presumably no longer finds comfort and happiness with him. Even if they have gotten back together, or she otherwise continues to find comfort and happiness with him, it still should not be in the present tense: ""The song's lyrics describe"" is quite appropriately in the present, since the lyrics continue to do so, but those lyrics do not describe comfort and happiness she felt some time after the song was released (i.e., in the present).

*Yeah, you're right there.

""Although the song has somewhat dark and melancholy lyrics"" vs ""Although the song is noted for having somewhat dark and melancholy lyrics"" Who notes this? Why? It's hardly the first song to have such lyrics, nor does it seem to be particularly notable in this regard.

*The reason is that the song got a lot of people talking about how dark it wasmdash;people asking her about her relationship with her sister, etc. I'm flexible on this point.

""has a positive message, as Simpson sings that ""everything's cool now"" and ""the past is in the past"""" vs ""it has a positive message, and towards the end of the song Simpson sings that ""everything's cool now"" and ""the past is in the past""."" Why does it matter when in the song these lyrics appear? The important part is that they do appear, and impart a positive message.

*OK, truth be told it's really more like the middle of the song anyway.

""In the video""', which includes considerable symbolism, ""'Simpson plays"" This is just bad English, especially since no symbolism is explained (some is implied, but encyclopedia articles shouldn't imply). In what way is the symbolism considerable?

*It says symbolism, and then it goes on to explain it: she plays different versions of herself living side by side, etc.

""arguably the album's most rock-oriented and energetic"" vs ""arguably the album's most rock-oriented song, which has been described as ""energetic"""" That it has been described energetic is already supported by the link, where it is thusly described. Why add those extraneous words?

*The link says it's energetic, but not that's it's the most rock-oriented.

""Simpson has described them as tongue-in-cheek: ""every silly thing that was sexual... I put into the song."""" vs ""Simpson has described them as tongue-in-cheek: ""It was one of those songs where every silly thing that was sexual that I could think of I put into the song."""" Aside from adding eleven words, what do the additional bits of the quote do for the reader? Are we concerned our readers will think she added silly things that she couldn't think of? Do our readers need to know that she apparently has a class of songs in which every silly little sexual thing was added? The important part of the quote is that she added every silly little thing that was sexual into the song. The rest is just verbosity.

*It's important to say ""that she could think of"". Not every silly sexual thing went into the song, only the ones she could think of.

""Simpson said light-heartedly that ""you can take (""La La"") how you wanna take it."" vs ""Simpson said light-heartedly about the song that ""you can take it how you wanna take it."""" Why make it longer? Again the important part is that you can take ""La La"" how you want to take it -- both versions impart this info, but one is shorter.

*I just don't like chopping up the quote like that. I think it's clumsy and bad writing.

""The music video for ""La La"", which debuted in late November, features Simpson and her friends hanging around a suburban town"" vs ""The music video for ""La La"", which debuted a few days after Simpson's November ""TRL"" appearance, takes place in a suburban setting; it features Simpson and her friends hanging around town"" Why does it matter that the video debuted a few days after she said the above quote? What useful information is lost by changing ""takes place in a suburban setting; it features Simpson and her friends hanging around town"" to ""features Simpson and her friends hanging around a suburban town""? The long version takes five extra words to impart the info that the town is suburban.

*I like ""suburban setting"". It seems to say something that ""suburban town"" doesn't.

""serves to introduce Simpson, who says she has ""got stains on my t-shirt, and I'm the biggest flirt""."" vs ""serves to introduce Simpson at the beginning of the album: ""Got stains on my t-shirt, and I'm the biggest flirt,"" she sings."" That it is the beginning of the album is already explained (because it's the first song). The rest is just more verbosity. It doesn't matter that she sings those lyrics (as opposed to rapping them, or speaking them), because the important part is the info they relate to the audience.

*Does it already say it's the first song? If it does, it's not such a big deal.

""she responds to people talking about her by singing"" vs ""she responds to people talking about hermdash;""you think you know me""mdash;by singing"" What purpose does ""You think you know me"" serve?

*More detail, more context.

""about emotional turmoil and conflict in a relationship, but Simpson concludes that ""I'm over the drama of you."" vs ""about conflict in a relationship and the emotional turmoil that comes with it, but it concludes with Simpson singing that ""I'm over the drama of you."""" Do we need to tell the reader that emotional turmoil comes with conflict in a relationship? It is neutral to claim that emotional turmoil aways comes from conflict? Is it worth the extra words? ""it concludes with Simpson singing"" -- this bit is unnecessary, since the important part is that Simpson concludes something. In addition ""it"" is ambiguous, and does not clearly refer to the song. ""It"" should only be used if the noun it refers to is the previous noun used, and the previous nouns are ""turmoil"", ""relationship"", ""conflict"" and then, finally, ""track"".

*Maybe we can find something in between our two versions, then. Suggestion?

""She explained the song's meaning ""'in an interview""': ""I was at the stage where I got really sick of my ex-boyfriend's dramas and this song says it all. ""'At the end, you know""' I've reached the point where I've had enough of these dramas; I'm finished with him."""" Does it matter that she said this in an interview? (keep in mind that the quote is referenced for anyone who cares when and where she said it) The important part is that she said it. The least important part is ""at the end, you know"", which is vague -- I honestly have no idea what she means -- at the end of the song, or the relationship, or the stage in her life? Ultimately, does it matter? The important part of the quote is that the song refers to her lack of patience with her boyfriend's dramas. We don't need Simpson's ambiguous asides.

*Sure we do. She means at the end of the song.

""she recorded the song just after their breakup, and ""'although it took her a little while to get over her ex-boyfriend,""' by the time she finished recording ""Undiscovered"", she was over him"" Once again, the important part is that she recorded the song to get over her ex. That this took ""a little while"" is already explained, and so vague as to be useless (""a little while"" could be a few days, a few weeks or even a few months).

*Well, she said it; I think it's useful.

""I think... it's very true to my emotion... people like to hear when somebody's being real, and you can (tell) if they're being real or not..."""" vs """"I think that it's an album that's, like, very true to my emotion; I think that, you know, people like to hear when somebody's being real, and you can, like, tell, if you listen to an album, if they're being real or not..."" Surely this is self-explanatory... We don't need to repeat that these are her thoughts (we don't even need to include it at all, since it's a quote, but more than once is totally unnecessary). Words like ""like"" and ""you know"" are just wasted space. Why not cut them out?

*Well, maybe. I just didn't like chopping up the quote.

""""""'I was in the car.""' I just finished a show, and my dad called me, and he ""'was like, ""Guess what, baby?"" I was like, ""What?"" He was like, ""Your album went number one!""""' So I was freaking out. It was awesome!"""" Who cares that she was in a car when her dad told her the album was 1? Who cares that he was vaguely coy about it before telling her? The whole quote could be removed, as far as I'm concerned, but we certainly don't need all this.

*Well, I think it's important. I'm not going to deprive the reader of this information.

""Simpson has said"" vs ""For her part, Simpson said"" Aside from the length, what is the difference?

*Clarity and eloquence, I guess.

""she did not want to meet with Jessica's record label (Columbia): ""I wanted to be signed because of my ""music"""". She eventually signed with Geffen instead. At the beginning of ""The Ashlee Simpson Show"", Simpson is shown signing the record deal."" vs ""he eventually signed with Geffen instead: ""You find the people who believe in youmdash;and it works."" At the beginning of ""The Ashlee Simpson Show"", Simpson is shown signing the record deal (which also occurred about three months before November 2003, according to the ""Late Late Show"" interview)."" What does the first quote mean? If she meant that the people at Geffen believe in her, say that; what is it that ""works""? If you must give a date for the signing of the record deal, why not ""about August 2003"" instead of ""about three months before November""? That's just silly... And since the date of the record deal is not so important, nor controversial, why cite it to a specific interview?

*I'm reluctant to go beyond her own words. If she said three months before, I prefer that to August, because it seems safer. It could've really been July, or September, who knows? This is our only source.

I really do think this article is ready to be featured, but it won't happen unless it is considerably shorter. It may be wrong of people to demand a shorter article, but... In any case, terser prose is always better (assuming neutrality, informativeness and clarity are not sacrificed), so the article should be shortened as much as possible. ""Arbitrarily and capriciously snip ever other adverb"" and all that... TUF-KAT Tuf-Kat 00:21, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)"

E131 (i.13611205_2_11) : A Scientific Theology, Titre du fil : Irrelevant review & response

"Er, right....So now your going to argue that every author who engages with the project should have their work mentioned in the lead, but the three major works that McGrath himself cites should be ommitted. I think I've been arguing that ""Genesis"" and the Torrance biography are two of the three ""'significant""' works. Tell you what, I don't have time to waste giving you an education in McGrath's thought. I've been studying it for the last five years, I know what I'm talking about, and I can spend my time better elsewhere. You write the article. I'm out of here. But at least I know why Wikipedia is a laughing stock when it comes to reliable content. Muzhogg17:33, 25 May 2009 (UTC)"

E132 (i.13623720_43_6) : Alcoholics Anonymous/Archive 5, Titre du fil : Article Direction

I'm done here I think, wasting my time trying to make improvements only to have someone come immediately behind and mess it up like a child smearing fingerpaints around. Too frustrating. Same with AA history. Y'all take care. -Bikinibomb22:05, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

E133 (i.13652102_1_51) : Ann Coulter/Archive 18, Titre du fil : John Edwards comments

Fine, whatever. I'm not going to watchlist this page, in little time, I'm sure all of the bad about Coulter will again be gone. yet again, Agenda of Encyclopedia. I'm done with this issue, someone else can fight it. ThuranX01:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

E134 (i.13877467_41_21) : American Family Association/Archive 4, Titre du fil : Discussion suggestion

"Hal, if you're being disruptive (which you are), then I am certainly entitled to say so, without it being a personal attack. You continue to ask that I ""address the issues"" but they ""'have been""', and consensus has already decided this matter. I have nothing more to say to you. --Cheeser107:23, 22 October 2007 (UTC)"

E135 (i.14073997_10_2) : Amazing Facts/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Page protection

While I appreciate your help Durova, I am finished with this. I live a very long way from any Catholic university. Maybe the original editor will decide to do something. This has left me very angry at wikipedia and at the Seventh Day Adventists. I believe Maniwar is a shill for this Amazing Facts group. This whole thing is disgusting. So I am done here.64.21.238.4915:34, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

E136 (i.14169047_22_1) : Atlantic slave trade/Archive 1, Titre du fil : IDIOTS

i'm going to stop adding info to this page if wiki doesn't get on the ball about vanadalism. this place is full of idiots who have nothing else to do but destroy valubale information about important topics. meanwhile the rest of us try our hardest to shed light on complicated issues. where the hell are the bots?4shizzal Scott Free 15:20, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

E137 (i.14180520_2_4) : Arlington, Devon, Titre du fil : Merger Proposal

'Merge' I will complete merge if no further comments in 1 week.--NHSavage20:03, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

E138 (i.14238110_6_13) : AEI Legal Center for the Public Interest, Titre du fil : A fresh start?

Nevermind, I'm done with it. David, add whatever you want, I no longer care. You are clearly more motivated to pursue Ted Frank than I am to stop it. ATren14:46, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

E139 (i.14290974_12_7) : Al Gore/Archive 12, Titre du fil : "Reactions" to Gore's Nobel Prize

I will comment here, though I would like to request that we all observe Wikipedia:No personal attacks, Wikipedia:Civility, and Wikipedia:Assume good faith. As someone who likes Gore and thought he deserved the prize, I thought that there were some very nice comments made by notable individuals in the following article: http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/10/12/ap4215589.html which I added a few days back and referenced by listing the names of those in the article. The notability of some of the individuals mentioned was questioned by other editors so I removed the names, added this article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7041573.stm and rewrote the sentence to comply with Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. When criticism was later added to the paragraph, I also added praise to the section for balance and to maintain Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. I do think it is a fair point to say that praise of Gore outweighed criticism and if the section is re-added, it should be written in such a way as to clarify this point. I also thought there were historically noteworthy comments from individuals such as UN Secretary - General Ban Ki Moon which I would have liked to see in the article. That being said, since there are no hard and fast rules on whether or not to include a paragraph on reactions, I will leave it to Wikipedia:Consensus to decide. -Classicfilms14:34, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

E140 (i.14327767_1_24) : Autism/Archive 8, Titre du fil : Regarding Austism in Girls

"Well, Sandy, if I haven't seen everything now!! No, I was used to seeing templates where everything is listed, one thing above the other - and these set to the right up near the top of article --- But I had no idea these ""open-close"" things were available. After I look at ""External links"", I stop reading any further down the page for in the past, there has never been a darned thing down there in English besides the categories listing at the bottom of the page. When did they start using these? And why can't it be placed higher on the page where people would find it? You must have thought me a dunderhead, but I truly had not seen such a thing in my life and would not have conceived of looking for such a thing.

You have to give most of us non-editor types step by step instructions. I only dropped in because I read the article and recognized myself and finally understood myself. And I wanted to share. A Kiwi Kiwi 02:09, 7 August 2007 (UTC)"

E141 (i.14489625_1_2) : Amish furniture, Titre du fil : Protected

I left a http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Colonel_Wardendiff=prevoldid=395564300 clear and polite message on Colonel Warden's talk page warning him that I would be reverting future removals of overtly valid tags as vandalism. I'm not sure what other action you would have had me take, Spartaz. Delicious carbuncle16:35, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

E142 (i.14670772_6_5) : Agnez Mo, Titre du fil : Copy-edit by the [[WP:GOCE|Guild of Copy Editors]]

"Sorry for my late reply. I haven't checked this article for ages :)

1. I can't find any source stating why she was chosen, but I think it was because she is one of the biggest stars in Indonesia.

2. ""Si Meong"" is ""The Cat"". I didn't add it because I think it isn't necessary. You are free to add, if you want :)

3. I can't find http://www.kapanlagi.com/showbiz/selebriti/agnes-monica-jadi-penulis-script.html this sourceeven in the old revision (before copy edit). Anyway, it shouldn't be used.

4. I would like to expand the ""Early Life"" section, however I don't have any more information to expand that. Any suggestion?

5. I agree with you that we shouldn't draw a conclusion from the number of views on YouTube :)

6. Do you mean: I can't use YouTube video to prove that she performs at Asian Idol?

7. Ok, I'll include about the piracy issue in the article. I'll let you know when I'm done with it.

8. Yes, it is KFC, the Kentucky Fried Chicken :D

9. I'll think how I can come up with the ""Presenter"" section.

10. She is known for not disclosing any information about her personal relationship. There are many gossips about her personal relationships but many of them are not true, and she never bothers to clarify them. It is a challenging topic to write, but I'll see what I can find.

Awriterwrites

14:00, 17 January 2012 (UTC)"

E143 (i.14703426_2_4) : America's Army/Archive 8, Titre du fil : Propaganda?

"Yes I was obviously talking about the ""current"" discussion. Furthermore its very misleading to say that page is the 'result' of discussion. Not only were many things added that were not discussed, but the majority of changes were left not because you reached a compromise, but because they got tired of arguing and undoing your reversions. For example, take your ""discussions"" with a user andre, it ended with ""I quit, people. I can't deal with this page anymore and Nightbeast/anonymous editor's nonsensical arguments. Sorry. Andre (talk) 20:21, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)"". Ele9699 00:56, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)"

E144 (i.14862269_23_61) : Aquatic ape hypothesis/Archive 2, Titre du fil : Should Jim Moore be cited here?

"I'm not talking about what's currently in the article, I'm talking about what we're ""discussing"" about ""putting"" in the article. You have been reading this discussion, haven't you?

Anyway, I'm done with this pointless ""discussion"". If you want to add an account of the savanna hypothesis that accurately reflects the views of those who propose it, i.e., explicitly mentioning the locomotor economy theory / panda's thumb approach, knock yourself out. Kwamikagami kwami 06:45, 14 December 2009 (UTC)"

E145 (i.14946462_1_4) : Albert Einstein/Archive 14, Titre du fil : The first line (again)

Which way? (and I fixed my last comment here-please read it a gain...:-)--Gilisa07:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)x Epson291 , forgot about my last comment (which is now striked) I think that we better live the status quo as it is .It get to my knowledge that this is the best way to obtein Einstein Jewishness along with his German history in a very balanced way , not ideal , but there is nothing better for now.--RRR_User:Gilisa_RRR Gilisa 07:48, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

E146 (i.1498993_4_13) : Autobiography (album)/Archive 6, Titre du fil : Here's an idea

"Are you trying to goad me into another fight? I'm not going to revert again; I'm done with it. My editing has consisted of ""adding"" content. Your editing has consisted of ""deleting"" content. Your editing has not only been atrocious, it has been characterized by persistent bullying and harassment designed to force me away from the subject, which has now been successful. Everyking12:17, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)"

E147 (i.1504776_1_8) : Al Gore/Archive 5, Titre du fil : Patriots for Al Gore

Chris, this isn't about you, so please, get a grip. I will no longer respond to your vitriol against me. You damn sure think you are the only Gore supporter worthy of notice and think everything everyone does is copying you. With all due respect, I truly think you need help. You don't get along with the people at Al Gore Democrats either. You don't get along with anyone you see as honing in on YOUR TURF. I am FINISHED with you about this. You have proven through your actions that you are an immature jealous person, and I will no longer entertain your attacks on me. I don't take my ball and go home, BTW. YOU BANNED ME for speaking my mind and sticking to my political convictions. Now gee, how aftaid of me are you? As I stated, I will open my own account here and put work into providing a section over time on what our PAC represents and does, which includes more than supporting Al Gore. I surely then hope as someone who doesn't hold a grudge, that you will then stay out of it.

To James: Thank you for your adult and civil response in explaining how this works. I thank you for keeping our link here, and understand your explanation. And as I have stated, I will start my own account when I can find more time. Thank you again.

Jan

* Lie after lie after lie. You are the one who doesn't get along with AGDEMS. You have left and been banned from there before. Again you are lying about me banning you. You left after we had a forum dedicated to Senator Kerry. You then came back as a guest questioning our loyalty to Al Gore and our cause, and that is when I banned you. Yet you still keep coming back and saying you will report our site for not letting your post, yet you don't understand no one cares and nothing can be done. I am the administrator and you have broken the rules. I don't know when you will stop. I just want you to stop messing with my work on here, our site, our forum, and our members. Just stop and I will not say another word to you. ChrisDJackson20:05, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

E148 (i.15074007_21_26) : Anti-Polonism/Archive 8, Titre du fil : Polish jokes on the international Web

"My dear friend Molobo! Your last comment here shows clearly, ""'that you never saw the Harald-Schmidt-Show!""' Otherwise you would have recognized, that he made the same jokes with the same correctness with Turkish, Belgian, Danish, Czech people and so on, too! Simply said, what YOU say is completely Bullshit! (Oops, I don't feel sorry for this ""Personal Attac"" :-) ) Micha."

E149 (i.15127775_7_18) : Anaheim Hills, Anaheim, California/archive 4, Titre du fil : Article cleanup

And it is not a well known group yet. I do not even affiliate myself with the area, all I was doing was adding some information that I knew about to the Anaheim Hills page. That is all, I am done with this page, for that is all I can contribute. Architect King05:34, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

E150 (i.15240041_6_13) : Arthur Firstenberg, Titre du fil : Two versions

A blind person could see the the santafe article is a much more detailed coverage of the story, that is clearly the strongest citation from the two. I can see that there is no real point in discussion so I will leave the discussion. Off2riorob16:50, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

E151 (i.15306098_2_1) : Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder/Archive 5, Titre du fil : last time

If you are looking for consensus scientific opinion, then here it is. ADHD is a mental disorder. That's why it is in the DSM. People can suggest that it is neurological and research should continue on these fronts but if it was a MAJORITY opinion that ADHD was neurological, it wouldn't be in the DSM.

All opinions are not equal and just because you can find a scientist who says something on the web, doesn't mean it is true.

I'm done with the broken-record stuff, but bottom line is that the people writing this page don't seem to understand what a mental disorder is, and that seems awfully important. —The preceding 16:22, 12 March 2007 (UTC).

E152 (i.1536076_10_2) : Armenian Genocide/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Continuing our Discussion

"Wow - again I just don't know what the point is of writing to someone who says they are not looking to believe everything bad about Armenians, then says he suspects the Nazis who arrested Ann Frank were Armenian because they were described as ""dark skinned"".

Please don't make me laugh with consipiracy theories. I am telling you, I know this subject VERY well. McCarthy has gotten grants from both the ""Turkish Studies Institute"", in Washington D.C., whose honorary chairman is the Turkish Ambassador to the U.S., and from American Research Institute in Turkey. Both funded by Rep of Turkey. Heath Lowry's (who recieved a couple of grants from the latter) embarrasing closeness to the Turkish government, including penning letters for the Turkish Ambassador is well documented online at: http://users.ids.net/~gregan/pac.html I suggest you read every page in there, including the parts where the Turkish Ambassador and Heath Lowry freely discuss the Armenian Genocide as just that. Not as ""alleged"".

For your other points:

1) I have nothing to add. ""The Armenian File"" is ""an absolutely atrocious hack job,"" and no scholar would ever put it in their footnotes. Whoever can appreciate that book wants to believe any evil rumor about Armenians possible. That seems to be your thing though. And if you want to know why Armenians were especially targetted, read up on Pan-Turkism, and think about what some Turkish generals were fighting for in Central Asia after WWI.

2) Oh, so there were still good, obedient Armenians. Yes, yes, too bad they were deported/murdered too, huh? And too bad none of them were allowed to reclaim their homes or move back by Ataturk. Oh well, huh?

3) Oh brother. No comment needed.

4) Alright, then the complete absense of Armenians in Anatolia and the stories of all of the survivors will just have to be my proof. Have you read Survivors by Miller? You ought to. If you claim that nobody's words are relevant because they were either biased or should have been dead, then you have no business reading ANY history. It's all peoples words.

5) Yes, it is unfortunate that the Ottomans were not as good a record keepers as the Nazis, and too bad the Republic of Turkey kept the Ottoman Archive closed for 60 years of ""sanitizing"" and still do not allow free access. Convenient too, eh? What was being hidden in there do you think?

6) Thank you for admitting it was a genocide by the ""definition"" of genocide. I like to stick to the definition, personally. If you read carefully it was the intent of the murders that are important, and the intent they say, was elimination of the Armenians of Anatolia.

Anyway, I don't see really where you want to go with this discussion, or the point. So I am finished with this conversation.

--RaffiKojian04:08, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)"

E153 (i.15371979_22_11) : Anti-Mormonism/Archive 3, Titre du fil : Self pomotion in article

Don't even go there. Much like your anti-Mormon claims, you are just citing whatever you can find that is negative without doing the objective work necessary to determine if it's correct. I'm confident enough to let my work (and the site that published it) speak for themselves, so I'm done with this conversation. Can you do the same? --Uriah923 uriah923 03:40, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

E154 (i.15446313_4_11) : Argument (complex analysis), Titre du fil : Rewrite (2009)

Just noticed this discussion now. I left a note on Wikipedia:Requests_for_feedbackarg_.28mathematics.29. Bamse bamse 11:25, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

E155 (i.1547104_34_4) : ALGOL 68, Titre du fil : syntaxhighlight tag changes by [[user:Boshomi]]

So i will stop my work at this page. I think a reformating would be nice, when we get a better highlighting form the wikimedia project.

i have found the algol68.php file, used by mediawiki for source and syntaxhighlight tag:

http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:SyntaxHighlight_GeSHi http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:SyntaxHighlight_GeSHi This file should be replaced by a better one. This file is not too complicat:

folder: /Syntaxhighlight_GeSHi/geshi/geshi/

filename: algol68 --Boshomi19:50, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

E156 (i.15708883_16_12) : Alger Hiss/Archive 4, Titre du fil : using a source to make an argument the source would not support

If there's a connection between these two issues, you have not been able to demonstrate it in a comprehensible manner. If you want to discuss the proportionality issue, start a new topic, and present evidence. I'm done with this topic. RedSpruce20:57, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

E157 (i.15759583_12_1) : Asian martial arts (origins)/Archive 1, Titre du fil : To Kennethtennyson

I would like to apologise for attacks on your intellectual integrity in my recent contribution. It was uncalled for and not in keeping with the spirit of a proper written exchange.

However, I do not agree with most of your points in your most recent discussion.

As I have some pressing matters to attend to, I will provide you with a rebuttal as soon as I am done with my present responsibilities. Thank You. 30 June 2325hrs (+0800GMT)

E158 (i.15759583_18_1) : Asian martial arts (origins)/Archive 1, Titre du fil : ATTN: JD or KennethTennyson- cont'd

With reference to Boddhidarma, do you not think that it is unusual that you have chosen to lock on to the few ambiguous references claiming he was Central Asian instead of the majority of your very own Chinese and Japanese references, citing him as being of Indian origin? His early sermons were not only rich in Indian linguistic flavour but were filled with Indian geographical references e.g. 'sands of the Ganges'..... To claim Boddhidarma was anything but Indian is to label one of your own grand masters, Hui Neng I believe, a complete fabricator. For wasn't it him that described Boddhidarma's lineage. Also to claim that Boddhidarma came from Central Asia does not discount the fact that he originally was from India. To label him semi legendary is to say that Krishna, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad, etc were semi legendary. The fact is you cannot conclusively prove that these people even existed even if you had their bone fragments. How can we prove someone existed unless we knew him personally, had a photo of him, or knew someone who knew him/her, or had scientific evidence? That is why we base our theory on literary texts and historical references. This is all we have and the volume of information suggests overwhelmingly that he is Indian rather than Central Asian as you feebly claim. Right now most people know that Buddha was from India. I believe in another 1000 years or so people not unlike yourself would be fervently claiming that he was from China and aggressively trying to prove that no text can be found suggesting he was from India. You would even base your claim on the fact that there are more Buddhists in East Asia than anywhere else in the world. It still however doesn't change the fact that he was from India. Even as I write this I have noticed a number of Chinese nationalist websites sprouting and fanatically trying to disassociate the Chinese branch of Mahayana Buddhism form all its existing counterparts, even going as far to claim that Buddhism existed in China long before the Buddha was even born. Notice anything familiar with that argument?

I do agree with you that there is nothing to tie Kalaripayattu to Boddhidarma. But it is only because the term kalariupayattu is a south Indian dialect called Malayalam that does not have much history before 1000AD. The Malayalam dialect group have been very successful in preserving a number of hindu sciences that has lost prominence in India in recent times. Among them are Ayurveda and Kalari. It is only fitting that the present label for Indian martial arts be a term in the Malayalam dialect as they have so painstakingly preserved it over the ages. This does not however mean that the art was born at the time the Malayalam dialect was born.

Boddhidarma was described by your Chan Buddhist figures as being from the Kshastriya caste. If you're not familiar with this caste it means that they were born and bred as occupational fighters. They are born into a line that had primarily only one thing to do and that is to learn how to fight. As with all fields in ancient Indian times it was a perfected art form. They are initiated from the day they are born. There is even a whole science behind how the initial castes were formed based on their metabolism, physical form and psychological predisposition, etc. They are even taught to eat foods (rakshasic foods) that would heighten aggression and nurture tolerance to physical pain. They did not just learn martial arts but various fields that came with it like yoga, meditation, medicine, field surgery, etc. In the final stages it is revealed unto the students, primary marma points that can heal or do harm. One of which is a nerve cluster that can cause instant death from a single open hand strike. These were not just kalari practices but skills imparted long before the term kalari even existed. All this has been done since the earliest of times as described in all our early religious and mythical texts. These are not practices that have evolved over a few hundred years but a science that has evolved through the ages and is shrouded in antiquity. So of course Zarilli would not be able to find any connection with Kalaripayattu and Boddhidarma because how or where would he find it?

It is no wonder that the similarity in practices between shaolin and kalari practitioners is an area that is subject to much speculation. Such coincidences do not come about randomly. This is why the existence of Boddhidarma requires such great attention as he provides the link that explains these patterns. This is the exact same reason you are bent on casting doubt as to his existence and origins. If Boddhidarma did not exist or if he was not of Indian origin you have yourself a theory that eliminates any connection between Indian and Shaolin martial arts. I hope you are not naïve enough to think that your trickery is not evident. The crucial point I am trying to make is that Shaolin martial arts is greatly influenced by Indian meditational and fighting techniques. It would be simple to label me a liar but the evidence suggests a logical pattern as to how Shaolin martial arts evolved.

Your mistake is in relying on texts written by individuals who had no intimate understanding of Asian culture and history. You have taken their sugesstions as the premise of your argument, that Kalari is no older than 1500AD to support your claim. If Indian martial arts did begin in 1500AD than I admit I would have a problem. But it is much older than that. If it were not, there would be no kshastriya caste which we know did exist as it is in the Vedas.

These are different times, everyone speaks english and more information is at hand from the east. You cannot hide behind some obscure text written by an author you personally favour because he supports your view and slag the ones that run against the grain of your stand. You imply that kalari did not exist before 1100AD but what evidence do you have? A travelogue from some portuguese traveller and an author that supports your view who probably did not even understand the science and history behind it? As an example, If aliens came to earth today they would see us using telephones. In their log it would be that 'the first documented observation of humans using communication devices would be 2005AD earth years' But every earthling would know that phones have been in use for more than 150 years.

The fact is you are in no position to discount the evidence that suggest a possible link between Boddhidarma and Shaolin martial arts purely because you do not have enough evidence to suggest otherwise. Your attempt at trying to cover up possible links would be nothing short of censorship. I am done with repeating myself and will not partake in this verbal exchange any longer. I will not tolerate gross censorship and the manipulation of literary material to serve personal ends; I will persevere in my efforts to promote the freedom to post material that will ultimately aid individuals on the path to making their own choices and forming their own opinions on the subject. User: Morfeen 06 Aug 2005 01026hrs (+0800hrs)

E159 (i.15759583_19_1) : Asian martial arts (origins)/Archive 1, Titre du fil : ATTN: Morfeen

"Bodhidharma's early sermons were not only rich in Indian linguistic flavour but were filled with Indian geographical references e.g. 'sands of the Ganges'.

I would love to read these sermons. Are they collected in a book or can I find them online somewhere?

""With reference to Boddhidarma, do you not think that it is unusual that you have chosen to lock on to the few ambiguous references claiming he was Central Asian instead of the majority of your very own Chinese and Japanese references, citing him as being of Indian origin?""

This reference comes from a source you consider credible enough to cite as proof of Bodhidharma's existence.

; Your words : ""On the internet, propagandists disclaiming his existence remark that historical record of Bodhidharma did not exist until centuries after his death. Yang Xuanzhi describes Bodhidharma in the earliest surviving mention of him in ""The Record of the Buddhist Monasteries of Lo-yang"", a 547 Chinese text. Yang tells of meeting Bodhidharma at the monastery of Yung-ning.""

; My words : ""In the earliest surviving mention of him in the ""The Record of the Buddhist Monasteries of Lo-yang"" (547), Yang Xuanzhi describes Bodhidharma specifically as a Persian from Central Asia (Wade-Giles: ""po-szu kuo hu-jen"") (Broughton, 1999).""

At that time there was a monk of the Western Region named Bodhidharma, a Persian Central Asian. He traveled from the wild borderlands to China.

And for anyone who cares to read the whole thing:

Yung-ning Monastery was erected by Empress Dowager Ling of the Hu family in Hsi-p'ing I 516 CE.... At that time there was a monk of the Western Region named Bodhidharma, a Persian Central Asian. He traveled from the wild borderlands to China. Seeing the golden disks on the pole on top of Yung-ning's stupa reflecting in the sun, the rays of light in the wind, the echoes reverberating beyond the heavens, he sang its praises. He exclaimed: ""Truly this is the work of spirits."" He said: ""I am 150 years old, and I have passed through numerous countries. There is virtually no country I have not visited. But even in India there is nothing comparable to the pure beauty of this monastery. Even the distant Buddha realms lack this."" He chanted homage and placed his palms together in salutation for days on end.... Hsiu-fan Monastery had a statue of a fierce thunderbolt bearer guarding the gate. Pigeons and doves would neither fly through the gate nor roost upon it. Bodhidharma said: ""That catches its true character!""

""To claim that Boddhidarma came from Central Asia does not discount the fact that he originally was from India.""

Here is what Stephen Broughton's endnotes for the above passage have to say:

The intriguing line, of course, is ""po-szu kuo hu-jen"" (""a Persian Central Asian""). According to Berthold Laufer, ""Sino-Iranica"" (1919; reprint, Taipei: Ch'eng Wen Publishing Company, 1978), 194-95, the term ""hu"" relates to Central Asia and particularly to peoples of Iranian extraction. What we seem to have is an Iranian speaker who hailed from somewhere in Central Asia.

""To claim Boddhidarma was anything but Indian is to label one of your own grand masters, Hui Neng I believe, a complete fabricator. For wasn't it him that described Boddhidarma's lineage.""

I do not claim that Bodhidharma was ""anything but Indian.""

I pointed out that Yang Xuanzhi says that he was Persian, which you omitted, even though you were otherwise happy to cite him.

Moreover, I also pointed out those authors who do say that he is Indian. And no, it was not Hui Neng who described Bodhidharma's lineage; it was Daoxuan.

; My words : ""Of the primary sources on Bodhidharma, the ""Xu Gaoseng Zhuan"" (645), written roughly a century after Bodhidharma's death, and those texts which copy it, the ""Zutangji"" (952) and the ""Jingde Chuandenglu"" (1004), identify him not only as South Indian, but Brahmin.""Bodhidharma, the Teacher of the Law, was the third son of a great Brahman king in South India, of the Western Lands. (Suzuki, 1949)""The ""Biography"" (pre-645) by Tanlin, the original which the ""Xu Gaoseng Zhuan"" copies, does not specify his caste.""

I presented what all of the primary sources had to say about Bodhidharma's originsmdash;without self-serving omissionsmdash;and let the reader make up his or her own mind.

""Boddhidarma was described by your Chan Buddhist figures as being from the Kshastriya caste.""

The Chan Buddhist figures Daoxuan and Daoyuan both describe Bodhidharma as being from the Brahmin caste.

If you're not familiar with this caste it means they were born and bred to be priests, teachers, and scholars. The most observant among them eat a sattvic pure vegetarian diet, avoiding even vegetables such as onion and garlic because their pungency supposedly arouse base urges for violence and lust. Such a diet is followed not only by observant Hindu Brahmins, but also observant Jains and, yes, observant Buddhists.

""How can we prove someone existed unless we knew him personally, had a photo of him, or knew someone who knew him/her, or had scientific evidence? That is why we base our theory on literary texts and historical references.""

Exactly, so if you would be kind enough to cite the specific literary texts and historical references that you are basing your theory on, your readers would appreciate it, such as naming those Chan Buddhist figures that describe Bodhidharma as Kshatriya and in which texts they do so.

""So of course Zarilli would not be able to find any connection with Kalaripayattu and Boddhidarma because how or where would he find it?""

So how and where are you finding it, Morfeen?

""Your mistake is in relying on texts written by individuals who had no intimate understanding of Asian culture and history.""

Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki has no intimate understanding of Asian culture and history?

""You cannot hide behind some obscure text written by an author you personally favour because he supports your view and slag the ones that run against the grain of your stand.""

Suzuki is hardly obscure. Moreover, I'm not the one presenting distortions and misrepresentations of Yang Xuanzhi and Terence Dukes to support my view.

""You imply that kalari did not exist before 1100AD but what evidence do you have?""

All I do is note that the Barbosa reference dates kalarippayattu to c. 1500, Zarrilli to the 12th century, and Pillai to the 11th.

If you want Wikipedia to reflect your assertion that kalari existed before 1100AD then please name the sources that support that assertion unless, of course, you have something to hide.

""The fact is you are in no position to discount the evidence that suggest a possible link between Boddhidarma and Shaolin martial arts purely because you do not have enough evidence to suggest otherwise. Your attempt at trying to cover up possible links would be nothing short of censorship.""

As is your attempt to silence those who point out the gaping holes in your hypothesis.

If you'll note, Morfeen, I did not delete your interpretation of Terence Dukes' theories, the conflicting claims about Bodhidharma's birthplace (Tamil Nadu or Kerala), and the supposed inscription on the Shaolin Temple Mural (""Tenjiku Naranokaku"").

I did little more than point out what the literary texts and historical references actually said.

The fact, Morfeen, is that it is ""you"" are in no position to discount, distort, or misrepresent literary texts and historical references purely because you do not have the evidencemdash;direct or circumstantialmdash;to make your case.

""I am done with repeating myself and will not partake in this verbal exchange any longer. I will not tolerate gross censorship and the manipulation of literary material to serve personal ends.""

If I were a ""Chinese nationalist"" manipulating literary material to serve personal ends, why would I have added all this:

""'Kalarippayattu""' (Malayalam: 3349;3379;3376;3391;3370;3375;3377;3377;3405;) is a martial art practiced in the Indian state of Kerala and the Kodagu district of neighboring Karnataka....

Tradition attributes kalarippayattu and indeed Kerala itself to Parasurama, sixth avatar of Vishnu....

Related to the point of indistinguishability to the Southern style are the Tamil martial arts practiced in the Travancore district of Kerala and the Kanyakumari district of neighboring Tamil Nadu that variously go by the names ""ati tata"" (hit/defend), ""ati murai"" (law of hitting), ""varma ati"" (hitting the vital spots), or ""chinna ati"" (Chinese hitting) (Zarrilli, 1992). These arts claim descent from the rishi Agastya and, compared to kalarippayattu, place more emphasis on empty-hand techniques and less on weapons.

I, at least, have been doing heavy lifting to ""clean up this page to conform to a higher standard of quality"" while you abuse Wikipedia by doing nothing for this article except reverting to your POV rant.

Moreover, I made a point of citing sources precisely because this is clearly a matter of such contention while you either refer vaguely to ""historical texts"" or misrepresent those authors you actually bother to name.

""I will persevere in my efforts to promote the freedom to post material that will ultimately aid individuals on the path to making their own choices and forming their own opinions on the subject.""

As shall I.

At least we have that in common.

Good day.

JFD

21:19, 5 August 2005 (UTC)"

E160 (i.16176767_32_1) : Alice Bailey/Archive 5, Titre du fil : Goodbye, and Thanks

"The situation in the AAB article is analogous to that of a case where two atheists descide to write a Wiki article on Christianity. Parsifal and Kwork tend to be anti-Bailey editors and their personal bias conditions their edits. They make nice little format fixes, but where anything significant is concerned, their bias is likely to control. I have fought their selective-misquotations and distortions and lack of perspective for a long time, and struggled in the face of it to create a biography that is accurate and that contains a just amount of reasonable criticism. It is no use, unless others with knowledge, interest, and authority show up to change the situation.

I am done with editing this article. Without administrative intervention or other knowledgeable editors with a scholarily interest in the subject, it is like writing in Beach sand and there is insufficient support to warrant continued painstaking efforts. There have been a few people who have given mostly moral support and discussion contributions, and for that thanks. But there is no real community of active editors willing to join me in shaping the article.

My friends in this karma, those identified with the Jewish issues, will now control a subject they are averse to and which they have limited knowledge of. The pro-Jewish editors, those I've called anti-anti-Jewish folks, have won and I predict the result will be apparent in the near future. What progress I have contributed will be dismantled. The order and relative sanity I've sought to foster will be undermined. Sections will be cut away until the article bears little resemblance to AAB's life and thought or the contrasting thoughts of a community of reasonable critics. How could it be otherwise when people work on a subject they do not know and are averse to identifying with, even on a temporary scholarily basis.

Yes, the situation in the AAB article is analogous to that of a case where two atheists descide to write a Wiki article on Christianity. It is absurd, and no amount of Wiki rule quoting will avail. For any complex and controversial subject, and in the absence of knowledgeable and clear-headed editors, the Wikipedia process breaks down.

I will not be coming back to the article unless word reaches me by email that the situation has changed. It will likely be some time before I sign on to Wiki again and I will not be checking for response to this, my last post--there is a direct non-Wikipedia email link on my personal page. If anyone should need to contact me, use that, because after I click ""Save"" on this message, I'm out of here and will not look back. Jamesd1 James 02:21, 6 October 2007 (UTC)"

E161 (i.16176767_32_1) : Alice Bailey/Archive 5, Titre du fil : Goodbye, and Thanks

"The situation in the AAB article is analogous to that of a case where two atheists descide to write a Wiki article on Christianity. Parsifal and Kwork tend to be anti-Bailey editors and their personal bias conditions their edits. They make nice little format fixes, but where anything significant is concerned, their bias is likely to control. I have fought their selective-misquotations and distortions and lack of perspective for a long time, and struggled in the face of it to create a biography that is accurate and that contains a just amount of reasonable criticism. It is no use, unless others with knowledge, interest, and authority show up to change the situation.

I am done with editing this article. Without administrative intervention or other knowledgeable editors with a scholarily interest in the subject, it is like writing in Beach sand and there is insufficient support to warrant continued painstaking efforts. There have been a few people who have given mostly moral support and discussion contributions, and for that thanks. But there is no real community of active editors willing to join me in shaping the article.

My friends in this karma, those identified with the Jewish issues, will now control a subject they are averse to and which they have limited knowledge of. The pro-Jewish editors, those I've called anti-anti-Jewish folks, have won and I predict the result will be apparent in the near future. What progress I have contributed will be dismantled. The order and relative sanity I've sought to foster will be undermined. Sections will be cut away until the article bears little resemblance to AAB's life and thought or the contrasting thoughts of a community of reasonable critics. How could it be otherwise when people work on a subject they do not know and are averse to identifying with, even on a temporary scholarily basis.

Yes, the situation in the AAB article is analogous to that of a case where two atheists descide to write a Wiki article on Christianity. It is absurd, and no amount of Wiki rule quoting will avail. For any complex and controversial subject, and in the absence of knowledgeable and clear-headed editors, the Wikipedia process breaks down.

I will not be coming back to the article unless word reaches me by email that the situation has changed. It will likely be some time before I sign on to Wiki again and I will not be checking for response to this, my last post--there is a direct non-Wikipedia email link on my personal page. If anyone should need to contact me, use that, because after I click ""Save"" on this message, I'm out of here and will not look back. Jamesd1 James 02:21, 6 October 2007 (UTC)"

E162 (i.16214607_101_4) : Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder controversies/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Multiple and large scale editing

"There were ""a lot"" of bad edits in there. Bulking reverting was easier. I will stop this practice if you post in talk before editing and I can do likewise. The edit to the lead sentence came from someone else. Lets do talk about the image. Ritalin has been shown to be the safest and most effective drug for any sort of mental disorder. No scientific body or medical body will state that the biggest controversy with ADHD is Ritalin. I'd be more happy with no image or how about a protest image?--Scuro scuro 02:33, 30 September 2008 (UTC)"

E163 (i.1624642_5_13) : Atheism/Archive 18, Titre du fil : Reply

At the risk of sounding like an AOL poster on usenet, me too. I quit the talk page a while back because it was stressing me out, but I was watching the article and I thought it was good before the most recent disputed edits. Andrevan Andre (talk) 01:27, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)

E164 (i.16312240_20_3) : Ashley Alexandra Dupré, Titre du fil : [[TMZ.com]] as a source

"Thanks, Travis. I left http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/NoticeboardTMZ.com a note at BLPN asking for further opinion on its reliability. I did some digging and agree with you on ""The Post Chronicle"". Nesodak01:30, 22 March 2008 (UTC)"

E165 (i.16420955_3_16) : Andrew D. Chumbley/Archive 5, Titre du fil : Notability

Then by all means, delete. I'm finished here. Lulubyrd00:38, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

E166 (i.16702287_80_10) : Alcoholics Anonymous/Archive 7, Titre du fil : American treatment industry

Actually, there is such a policy. The material may be verifiable and encyclopedic, but it's not germane, and as it stands it's just confusing and distracting. Anyway, I'm done here: I won't change it. PhGustaf19:16, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

E167 (i.17089061_37_13) : Anti-Americanism/Archive 26, Titre du fil : Degeneracy Thesis: Rationale for Deletion

I tweaked the sentence to make clear Grantham is quoting Roger. Beyond that you have identified no problems with the sourcing. We are free to use book reviews. We are free to use JSTOR papers. Meunier's is a seminar paper and she's well-published elsewhere. Goldstein and Danzer provide ample background on the thesis. The sources do support what is in text. So keep on talking but I'm done here. Marskell12:47, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

E168 (i.17336877_4_48) : Alexander the Great/Archive 13, Titre du fil : Request for Comment: Alexander the Great - Ancient Greek, or not?

"(Defend is speaking about slavs?!?)

Since nobody here is respecting the rule of wikipedia (showed everywhere when you're in editing mode), since nobody have direct sources calling alexander as ""ancient greek king"" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research ""to demonstrate that you are not presenting original research,you must cite reliable sources that provide information DIRECTLY related to the topic of the article, and that directly support the information as it is presented."")

(""However, even with well-sourced material, if you use it out of context or to advance a position not directly and explicitly supported by the source, you are also engaged in original research"")

give me just 1 reliable source calling alexander the great ""ancient greek king of macedon"" and i will leave the discussion, no problem for me. 1 reliable source. and please, if you don't have don't change subject starting again accusations. PelasgicMoon22:00, 17 April 2008 (UTC)"

E169 (i.17336877_4_50) : Alexander the Great/Archive 13, Titre du fil : Request for Comment: Alexander the Great - Ancient Greek, or not?

"maybe i will be banned for my insistance. But aniway, i want to remember still i never saw 1 ""'direct""' reliable source contraddicting, but just direct accusations from, User:Tsourkpk, User:A.Cython, User:Xenovatis, User:Megistias, User:3rdAlcove, User:NikoSilver, User:Sthenel, User:DefendEurope (accidentally all greek editors seeing from theyr talk-page), because no-other accused me, and editors like PhoenixWiki agreed with me.

i was very clear even if usualy i am against judging editors for where are they from. But this time i have to admit... really good greek pushing team guys.

Banned or not, this is my last message. PelasgicMoon22:23, 17 April 2008 (UTC)"

E170 (i.17420345_32_16) : Azerbaijan/Archive 3, Titre du fil : Golbez edit

"Actually there are 216 (if you go the last page), but the majority of them are about the south of republic of Azerbaijan and many of them discuss the political nature of the term. Where as Persian Azerbaijan and Iranian Azerbaijan bring more than 1000 unambigous links. Note also ""eastern Armenia"" gets a lot of hit (600+) . So does ""western Kurdistan"" (150+). East Kurdistan gets (310) hits where west Azerbaijan gets (350), but the latter is the neutral name. So just getting number of hits is not important. What is important in my opinion is to use internationally recognized names so no misunderstanding arises. I guess we can close that discussion, but I tried to give the other perspective.. As per ""Median vs Iranian"", Medes are considered Iranian both ethnically, linguistically and geographically, besides being called Arian (Iranian) by Armenians and Greeks and also Armenian documents identifying Kurds with Medes continuously in the last 1000 years. Nothing to discuss there, given we have enough words from Median (specially personal names) and basic animal names (Dog, Horse)... I think I am done with this current thread and I left the background for its own article. Thanks.--Ali doostzadeh alidoostzadeh 02:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC)"

E171 (i.1757933_9_13) : Artificial general intelligence, Titre du fil : Infinity Paradox on Artificial Intelligence (... Suppressed ...)

"AlvoMaia The only one wasting our time is you with your refusal to provide a reference. The material you added isn't going to stay in the article unless you provide a proper reference. Unless you have something else to say other than, ""I don't have to provide a reference"", I'm done here. --NeilN23:47, 22 June 2014 (UTC)"

E172 (i.17618929_4_2) : Abraham Lincoln/Archive 8, Titre du fil : GA Review

"McPherson in ""Abraham Lincoln and the Second American Revolution"" makes the point that Lincoln was instrumental in shifting the focus of American Liberty from negative liberty (i.e. freedom from government intrusion) as embodied in the Bill of Rights to positive liberty -- the utilization of the government to expand, in McPherson's words, ""notions of equity, justice, social welfare, equality of opportunity."" (page 64). In Lincoln's words (from his July 4, 1861 speech to Congress), the war was ""a struggle for maintaining in the world, that form, and substance of government, whose leading object is, to elevate the condition of men -- to lift artificial weights from all shoulders -- to clear the paths of laudable pursuit for all.""

Harry Jaffa in ""A New Birth of Freedom"" looks at the same speech from Lincoln and concludes that it is consistent with Lincoln's consistent position, in Jaffa's words, was that ""the Declaration of Independence had formed the 'sheet anchor' of American republicanism."" (page 399) Jaffa concludes that this is a specific rejection of the Southern conception of republicanism in general and Calhoun's philosophy in particular.

While I did not write the phrase in question, it seems like the above provides specific support for the claim that a significant change in the concept of the role of republican government had changed. I will add the footnotes as soon as I'm finished here. North Shoreman Tom (North Shoreman) 20:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)"

E173 (i.17619032_4_26) : Abraham Lincoln/Archive 12, Titre du fil : "Edit Warring"

"I've explained pettifoggery to you, and why your contributions to this talk page are accurately described as that. I'm finished with that. As to adding block quotes, cherry-picked and ripped from context to the article to support your interpretation that Lincoln ""advocated"" the continuation of slavery, well, it's not happening. There's no consensus for it, and that's how WP works. Kscottbailey K. Scott Bailey 08:14, 11 November 2007 (UTC)"

E174 (i.17625132_4_35) : Ahmadiyya, Titre du fil : This article requires a cleanup

Sure self source is allowed, but not creating connections between sources. I think I am done here now, trying to make you understand what OR is , has given me a headache lol. Last try, OR(Original Research) is when you create connections between stuff yourself which no RS has created. The Official Ahmadiyyah view is that they do not consider other muslims to be non muslim, any change to that goes against their official view and cannot be put into the article, simple as that. If they change their official view you can change the information here. FreeatlastChitchat15:31, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

E175 (i.17625132_4_47) : Ahmadiyya, Titre du fil : This article requires a cleanup

"The official statement is that they do not think of anyone as a non muslim or Kafir, simple as that. Anything against that is Original Research. It will be tantamount to putting a new subsection in Christianity named ""Divorce"" and then inserting material that says divorce is not allowed according to Bible. What you can put in the article is the official line and that is ""they do not consider anyone to be a non muslim. Period"". I'm done with your competency issues here. FreeatlastChitchat03:07, 22 September 2015 (UTC)"

E176 (i.17668873_11_1) : Amsoil/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Done with this article

"♠Okay I'm done with this article, you write whatever you like. Here are some revisions you can look at if you like.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amsoildiff=nextoldid=195567415

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amsoildiff=nextoldid=195567635

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amsoildiff=nextoldid=195569131

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amsoildiff=nextoldid=195739630

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amsoildiff=nextoldid=195237687

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amsoildiff=nextoldid=195454402

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amsoildiff=nextoldid=195454797

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amsoildiff=nextoldid=195455458

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amsoildiff=nextoldid=195455692

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amsoildiff=prevoldid=195466093

As can be seen, I was trying to make the article better and provide references of some sort, which is better than none. I also didn't capitalize Amsoil as was alleged. Mr 244 if you have anymore problems with this article, talk to the people below, if you can find them. They have usernames just like yours. --The Founders Intent """"'THE FOUNDERS INTENT """"' 13:58, 17 March 2008 (UTC)"

E177 (i.17820418_1_3) : Air India Limited, Titre du fil : Fleet

No further comments so deleted refer SILENCE. MilborneOne20:23, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

E178 (i.17940502_11_23) : Aphex Twin/Archive 4, Titre du fil : edit war (reprise)

i'm done with this debate. there are other things on wiki i can contribute to more productively. but if there exists an idm cat, i maintain it's pretty apparent rich belongs in there. anyway, this is a ridiculous argument and i'm out. --01:30, 17 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding )

E179 (i.181058_5_16) : Adultery, Titre du fil : Dharmasastra sources and summary

"Ms Sarah Welch That's strange. Is that all you want to say in response to my comment? The note 6 refers to 361-62 or 362-63? How exactly does it affect my objections? They are all intact and unchallenged. Did you even read what I said after ""The note 6 refers to ...."" statement. Please do not argue with me on such trivial issues that could happen because of typos. That's not even my argument. Do you even realize ""Manu says that sex..."" is not what you are stating or indicating in your conclusion reflected on Wikipedia?

Is there any specific reason why you are not considering your other cited material (Manu's code of law by Patrick Olivelle)? Why do you even think that Patrick agrees with Wendy's passing mention or your own conclusion? It is better if you reread your conclusion (cited in my previous comment). Then compare it with the cited material (p.186cite book|author=Patrick Olivelle|title=Manu's Code of Law|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=PnHo02RtONMC |year=2005|publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-517146-4|page=186 and the passing mention on p.171cite book|author=Ariel Glucklich|title=The Sense of Adharma|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=d6bsOfvySvMC |year=1994|publisher=Oxford University Press|isbn=978-0-19-802448-4|pages=171 with footnote 6, Quote: ""Manu says that sex with the wife of an actor is not a sin"". Your conclusion is the improper synthesis of these sources. You have basically adopted the idea that ""the verse 361 is about sex"" from p.171 of Glucklich's source and heavily imposed it on the content (p.186) of Patrick's source. Is that hard to notice or understand? Better attribute that ""Manu says that..."" passing mention to Wendy Doniger with a proper synthesis with her own Manusmriti. There are no issues, then. But I still think it is not good to use such passing mentions. Readers, refer p.171 (unfortunately not available on Gbooks)

Okay, I am done with you. Don't want to argue with you anymore. It is exhausting to me, tbh. There's no any fruitful results either. So I urge all other neutral editors to look into this.

""'To the readers""': The page no. 186 of the cited material is available on Goggle books. Read it here. https://books.google.co.in/books?id=PnHo02RtONMClpg=PP1dq=manu's%20code%20of%20law%20patrickpg=PA186v=onepageq=manu's%20code%20of%20law%20patrickf=false. Everything's as evident as the sun in the sky. Also refer the note (8.362) on the top.https://books.google.co.in/books?id=PnHo02RtONMClpg=PP1dq=manu's%20code%20of%20law%20patrickpg=PA322v=onepageq=the%20fact%20that%20the%20compound%20f=false. Important to note here that the author Patrick agrees that ""wives who earn a living on their own"" should refer to ""Prostitutes"". What's the correlation between this source and Wendy's? Absolutely nothing, in fact it is contradictory. Regards! Onkuchia19:01, 9 October 2018 (UTC)"

E180 (i.18202189_18_30) : Al-Aqsa Mosque/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Compromise, peace

"Until a compromise can be reached between all users who were involved in the edit warring of this article, I will leave this page as ""'fully-protected""' which means only administrators can edit. ""'Nishkid64 Nishkid""' 21:39, 6 November 2006 (UTC)"

E181 (i.18338540_6_2) : Arthur Uther Pendragon, Titre du fil : This page could be replaced by a link to the Warband website

James, I don't think this is deliberately as a page to promote a campaigner; from this discussion page I think it's just written and worked on by people who are beyond passionate about the subject. It's also been clarified that the subject of the article has in fact been involved with writing it. The relevant Wikipedia Guidelines Autobiography http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Autobiography and Conflict of Interest http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest. But the most important one is Neutral point of view http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view. (Could you look at that specific one, please?)

That the article is still here is, in large part, my fault. My last comment here is the last time I looked at it, and I entirely missed the discussion about deletion. I'm only looking at it now because your comment above showed up on my watch list. I'm rather wishing it hadn't.Kovar19:21, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

E182 (i.18437216_16_4) : A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism/Archive 3, Titre du fil : For the record

"'Comment' - I really really hate fighting. I've tried to help this page. I like my earlier edit better than the minimal last one. But I'm done here. I think it is a real shame when some people believe the Discovery Institute ""'lie""' that people signing this petition signed a statement against evolution. They did not. They signed a statement that suggests there is more to the ""complexity of life"" than ""random mutation and natural selection"" and there ""is"" as the modern theory of evolution clearly shows. Also, they signed a statement that suggests the ""careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged."" What scientist could be against ""careful examination of the evidence""? There is nothing in the actual statement that could not be agreed to by every scientist on the planet; except that anyone with an ounce of savoir faire can see that it is designed as a propaganda tool to mislead and so should not be signed on ""that"" basis. Why some non-creationists think it is helpful to promote the Discovery Institute's lie that the signers signed a statement against evolution is beyond me. The word evolution is not even in the statement. And ""Darwinianism"" is certainly not the same thing as evolution to anyone who understands evolution. WAS 4.25010:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)"

E183 (i.18484415_4_9) : Abortion–breast cancer hypothesis/Archive 3, Titre du fil : Disputed status

"I suppose so, look at ya taking the high road and stuff. That pleases me, one tweak I just did... move Brind out of the quote and into the preceding intro; merely for flow. Needless to say I was displeased with how you situated Carroll being ""rebuked"" by Mooney; though thanks for inspiring me to use the word for Gold's article. Absolutely agree on the last sentence, I shoved it in there for our benefit as a ""think out loud"" exercise; to give you a taste of what I've seen others do to this article. You want ""rational""? Sure thing. I can do rational better than most, but it means a lot of reading for you; and plenty of typing for me:

That is an excellent question about Mooney. Generically speaking, no, he seems to be a perceptive and bright individual. But his assessment of ABC is curiously non-existent, and appears to me, to be based on the NCI workshops authority rather than the ""peer reviewed"" science he mentions as a linchpin of his criticism of Carroll and praise of Gold. That does bother me, in much the same way the Planned Parenthood website will criticize positive ABC studies for being ""extremely small"", but then hold neutral/negative ABC studies with similar or even smaller datasets as reliable and gospel... and then good faith people let it slide as if all is well. Hey, Gold's article on intelligent design may have been a rosey colored poor article; that certainly does not change the fact his ABC article was very poor for different reasons, and he was thankfully taken to the woodshed by someone who cares about journalistic integrity.

Its aggravating after you see it dozens of times. Mooney is somehow being especially insightful as he paints truisms with a broad brush? Not this time! Mooney associates ""intelligent design"", cloning hoax with the ABC hypothesis as equally ""fringe"" science. On what planet is that not ""'Flagrantly Irresponsible Journalism""'? Last time I checked, the cloning hoax had several news releases over a matter of months; ""intelligent design"" had precisely zero bonafide scientific studies published over its run of 20 years; whereas the ABC hypothesis has dozens of studies spanning decades, various continents, with a spectrum of results, criticisms, politics and even sub-articles (response bias, editorials, meta-analysis), Congressional interference, state laws, shifting scientific ""Fact Sheets"", and judges determining the issue is in a ""state of flux"".

You tell me how Mooney should be in anyone's good books after that? Mooney took the low road, it's guilt (or in this case) ""fringe by association"". It is piss poor rationale (we have our caps on still?) and I've seen better rhetoric in Star Trek vs. Star Wars forums. LOL... seriously, Mooney argument is inexcusable despite his good faith truism on journalism; and I don't think I'm done with Mooney's mention here. It feels ""'distinctly wrong""' to give Mooney the last word over a Head Editor who generates Pulitzer's where he works. Mooney is at best a middle-weight compared to Carroll on journalism, and a light-weight compared to Brind on the ABC issue.

Mooney's article is flawed and contains assumptions on ABC, Carroll's criticism is beyond reproach and damning. That's why Gold changed his tune for ""intelligent design"", was it an appropriate change, I don't know, I'd have to read the article... since I'm not willing to take Mooney's assessment at face value. How Carroll would need to ""defend"" himself in any way seems to be a matter of the political momentum created by the NCI conclusion; not on the substance/science of the matter, which Carroll reiterates is what is ultimately important. “You have an obligation to find a scientist, and if the scientist has something to say, then you can subject the scientist's views to rigorous examination.” That looks like a good candidate to follow up Mooney.

See how long that was!?! It's much easier to say ""political hack job"" and leave it there. - x Roy RoyBoy/The 800 Club 800 07:46, 22 March 2008 (UTC)"

E184 (i.18527375_21_11) : Alan Shearer/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Photo From Newcastle Section

It's a nice find because Getty Images must have a million pics of Shearer. It is not yet established to be in violation, follow the links on the page for the procedure, it can/will be deleted when that process completes. It doesn't matter if a hundred people make the same edit if it has no grounds in policy, or common sense. Anyway, I'm not going to repeat the previous points, that's my last word, I'm done here. MickMacNee17:20, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

E185 (i.18578798_4_9) : Aesthetic Realism/Archive 9, Titre du fil : Sources

"Samivel, you're a one-note record. The fact that you repeatedly call me a liar is precisely why you don't deserve any further explanations about my edits. You made your own bed on this one. You know, here in Texas, there's a saying, ""When you find that you've dug yourself into a hole, STOP DIGGING."" It's crazy that you insist on continuing down the same failed, offensive, combative path. In any event, like I said, I'm done with it. I'll continue to edit the article to keep it fair, but your charges and accusations don't deserve two further words in response. Michaelbluejay Michael Bluejay 01:17, 11 December 2005 (UTC)"

E186 (i.18578798_4_10) : Aesthetic Realism/Archive 9, Titre du fil : Sources

"You're absolutely right, Michael, arguing with samivel is just a waste of time. I ask him not to call me a liar and he writes an entire paragraph calling me a liar, while saying that he hasn't called me a liar for some time. He accuses me of ""promot(ing) the malicious false information that men and women who changed are not telling the truth,"" when I have repeatedly stated that there's no way to know whether they're telling the truth or not. What gets me is that anybody can read the discussion on these pages and see that what I'm saying is true. They can also see how he has avoided direct replies, preferring instead to hurl accusations and insults. However, I believe I know why he's doing this. As a former member of AR, you have to know that the ""Countering the Lies"" website was either mandated or approved by Ellen Reiss. It is obvious that AR (meaning Reiss) has decided to attack us by calling us liars. Therefore, as a good cult member, Perey is unable to go against this. Everything he says about us has to follow from the fact that we are all vicious liars, because that's what Reiss has ordered. That's why, when presented with logical arguments that disprove what he's saying, he cannot reply directly. He must never, ever admit that AR, Siegel, and Reiss are anything but perfect. He cannot deviate from his marching orders. He's not interested in debate; he's a robot, like the rest of them, doing what he has been programmed to do. I'm done with debating robots. I will remain, however, to make sure that the robots don't get their way with this article. Marinero07:53, 12 December 2005 (UTC)"

E187 (i.18832524_11_16) : Arabic Wikipedia/Archive, Titre du fil : Protection

if the article about mohammad does not contain any images of him, it does not mean there is a restriction, maybe all users in ar wikipedia do not want to add these pics. Anyway, this is my last reply here because it seems that u just want to put ur own ideas without listning --Osm agha11:20, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

E188 (i.18834659_22_4) : Alien (franchise)/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Cast chart

"Whatever, man. Take the table and shove it up your ass for all I care. I'm done here. Hypocrites, the lot of you. Rusted AutoParts ""'RAP""' 18:28 16 September 2012 (UTC)"

E189 (i.18869176_10_1) : Anti-Hindu sentiment/Archive 2, Titre du fil : Overuse of fact temmplates?

"Obviously cn template has been used to the point of redundancy.

Eg.

""Neo-Buddhist Personalities such as Kancha Ilaiah and Udit Raj are often accused of anti-Hindu sentiments due to their derogatory remarks against Hinduism and incitements to violence against Hindus.citation needed

Anti-Hindu sentiments also come from far-left groups who support Islamic Terrorism and Islamic Fundamentalism against Hindus. Islamist groups who have anti-Hindu views include Students Islamic Movement of India, terrorist groups like Lashkar-e-Toiba.citation needed

""

LeT's own pamphlets as stated by major news organisations are brazenly anti-Hindu in their language... Frankly defacing everyother sentence with ""'cn""' templates isnt helping this article. When people start asking for cites like:

""The public school curriculum in Pakistan was Islamized during the 1980s.citation needed"" Every person with elementary knowledge of South Asia would know about Zia-ul-Haq's Islamisation during 1980's...

I'll try to get as many cites as possible when i'm done with my exams. But frankly the negative enegry expended in defacing every other sentence is irritating. AMbroodEY Amey Aryan DaBrood169; 08:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)"

E190 (i.19074282_6_8) : Accession of Macedonia to the European Union/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Further comments

*Thank you for being an example of what I stated above. I stop the discussion here, and hope everyone sees what you just posted. Then they can go read the Arnaiz-Villena controversy, Alexander the Great etc. NikoSilver Niko 20:53, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

E191 (i.19176160_23_7) : Abortion/Archive 31, Titre du fil : Nazi Germany and abortion

"KC, it should be obvious that I am not seeking to insert anything into this article against consensus. Why pretend otherwise? You are accusing me of attempting to insert things into this article a full eight days after my last comment here. Why are you doing that? Please try to assume good faith. If you have personal accusations to make against me, please do so at my talk page.

And please be more specific, KC. Are you saying that the following proposed sentence by Andrew c is bizarre? ""In 1935 Nazi Germany, a laws was passed making abortions compulsory for those deemed 'hereditarily ill', while Aryan women were specifically prohibited from having abortions."" Are you saying that the following sentence that existed in this article for months was bizarre? ""In the 20th century the Soviet Union (1919), Nazi Germany (1935) and Sweden (1938) were among the first countries to legalize certain or all forms of abortion."" Are you saying that Nazi Germany did not legalize abortion for Jewish women?

Thanks in advance for clarifying what it is you think is bizarre, and for clarifying why you think I am attempting to insert anything into this article against consensus.Ferrylodge16:27, 13 April 2008 (UTC)"

E192 (i.1921426_6_14) : Amir Khusrow, Titre du fil : Warning to Anoshirawan

"Dear 82.83.152.225/82.82.133.241/82.83.139.81/82.83.153.142, it has obviously escaped your notice that the article is ""not"" about the difference between ""Turkic peoples and Turkish people"". If it doesn't hugely discommode you, I'll continue to make edits on those aspects of the article that I do know something about.

I should have known that you're the kind of coward who will make allegations about someone else, and then refuse to either substantiate or withdraw them.

I've come to the end of my patience with your nonsense, so I won't be responding any more. --Sarabseth14:58, 11 September 2007 (UTC)"

E193 (i.19267243_38_4) : Anchor/Archive 2, Titre du fil : Suggest unprotect

After reading x Chuck Hawley's post (Adding more information from the West Marine test), I left a http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Chuckhawleydiff=prevoldid=130738951 note on his talk page about the issues here in the hope that he might have time to drop in and contribute additional expertise. He doesn't often edit Wikipedia, though. — Athaenara15:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

E194 (i.19406078_55_14) : Ali/Archive 5, Titre du fil : Where is the picture from?

"You are essentially claiming that Wikipedia can't use any image that was uploaded by the artist who created it. You are further asserting that Wikipedia can't use any image of an Islamic subject created by a ""Westerner"". Neither of these positions is supported by any policy; your reasoning is invalid and simply doesn't apply. I'm done with this discussion and won't waste time replying any further on this topic. Doc Tropics Doc 16:10, 28 May 2011 (UTC)"

E195 (i.19535275_17_32) : Arjun (tank)/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Correct Information

"Kindly show where I said, ""another nail in the coffin"". All the reasoning that you have yet to address (and apparently even read) is right above you. I'm done with trying to explain anything further with you. However, I will continue to montior this page to ensure that consensus is reached before any major edits take place... especially by you. 02:13, 8 September 2008 (UTC)"

E196 (i.19803525_73_7) : Adnan Oktar/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Gentlemen/women Please

The text was jointly written. You made no further comments for 24 hours. If you wish to bring it up again, as you have done, then it is fine. Nothing is final in wikipedia, but it must be orderly. Concerning deleting an academic review from the lead, I would strong object and insist on a RFC. --Geoffry Thomas11:08, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

E197 (i.19997884_21_4) : Acid dissociation constant/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Final polish

Personally I prefer the Wikitable because its easier to read. I do prefer your presentation of the table though. I'm going to convert it to a Wikitable at User:EagleFalconn/ThermoSandbox and let you know when I'm done with it. EagleFalconn21:26, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

E198 (i.20233650_2_13) : Anti-Islamism, Titre du fil : Redirect

It was just a quote and the first source was a magazine. Anyway I will leave this discussion because it's not leading anywhere. Blueroom219:46, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

E199 (i.20366985_23_68) : Avicenna/Archive 2, Titre du fil : Avicenna's notability: "Persian and/or Arabic scholar" or "Scientist and Islamic philosopher"?

This discussion is getting annoying! Why can't we just DELETE the title of the infobox and mention his ethnic origins in the article?! What is all of this about?! Everyone who is educated and has some basic knowledge of the topic knows that Avicenna was Persian, the same way everyone knows that Einstein was German. There is no need to stress this out in every sentence! Think about it! I am out of this discussion, because I do not see any improvement in it. Tajik Tājik 02:03, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

E200 (i.20562831_10_17) : Algorithm/Archive 3, Titre du fil : Is Persia different from Iran?

"From the same article: ""In 1959 Mohammad Reza Shah announced that both ""Persia"" and ""Iran"" could officially be used interchangeably. Now both terms are common; ""Persia"" mostly for historical and cultural texts, ""Iran"" mostly for political texts."" As I said, ""Persian Iranian"" is a tautology. I am done here. Gandalf6112:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)"

E201 (i.20603553_13_24) : Autonomous Republic of Northern Epirus, Titre du fil : Patois

"http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Autonomous_Republic_of_Northern_Epirusdiff=388202799oldid=388202474""If you really feel that Stickney is relevant, please feel free to put it back along Frasheri"". Sulmues: I'm sorry but you are showing the worst behavior here. You just restored Frasheri. I have nothing more to say. Especially lying and pretenting a situation is the definition of bad faith.http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Autonomous_Republic_of_Northern_Epiruscurid=20603540diff=388203269oldid=388202366Alexikoua01:55, 2 October 2010 (UTC)"

E202 (i.2073793_3_2) : Age of majority, Titre du fil : UK does not include, Isle of Man, Jersey, and Guernsey

doneFixed. Grouping clarified and ages reduced to 18. I wasn't sure what flag to use for the Crown dependencies, so I left that out. see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Age_of_majoritydiff=538174321oldid=538077800 this edit. 06:01, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

E203 (i.21163886_47_5) : Albany, New York/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Article size

"article size says about the size of ""readable prose"" that- ""Readers may tire of reading a page much longer than about 30 to 50 KB, which roughly corresponds to 6,000 to 10,000 words of readable prose. If an article is significantly longer than that, it may benefit the reader to move some sections to other articles and replace them with summaries"". I have done the steps that the footnote at the bottom of the page tell you to do to find the readable prose (take the printable version, copy/paste it to an edit window and delete ToC, lists, footnotes, etc etc, and show preview to see the size. It comes out to 46 kb, which is within the 30-50 range and ""'is not""' ""significantly longer than that"" which is when it ""'recommends""' splitting would benefit the reader. Policy is clear it is a judgement call, and Afriedman and I are well within our rights under policy to say the template is without merit given policy and the numerous articles of similar size. This article is nowhere near being finished, more and more and more information should be stuck in and as we, who actually work on this article, feel a section is generally done and as being done it is too big we'll spin off sections; when I am done with the History of Albany, New York article then we can par down this history section on this article, their are several sections that arent in good prose form, as those get put into paragraph sections and actual prose instead of list-like one-line sentences then the size of the article will improve, as citation needed and cleanup templates are rectified and removed the size will decrease as well. Adding templates is a self-fullfilling prophesy making the article longer, which is why the wp:article size page tells you it is about readable prose size, not size of the article as put on the edit screen (which it makes clear ""'is""' a hold over from when browsers were slow), the size given on the edit screen is one that includes templates, photos, infoboxes, etc that ""'are not to be counted""' as readable prose and true article size. I have laid out, using policy, why this size template is not to be put on this article.Camelbinky21:59, 25 October 2009 (UTC)"

E204 (i.21208074_1_4) : Aaranya Kaandam, Titre du fil : Requested move

*Uninvolved admin here; I left a message regarding this discussion at Johannes003's talk page http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Johannes003diff=411476041oldid=409836509. Dabomb8723:59, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

E205 (i.21234837_29_21) : American English, Titre du fil : General American section

MrBadger42 You are consciously refusing to reply to the entirety of my post. Until you do that, I'm done with you. I'm reverting your change, nothing you said so far is convincing enough. Mr KEBAB14:04, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

E206 (i.21280678_3_1) : Aeria Games, Titre du fil : Aeria-developed games

Is there any reference to substantiate the claim that “Aeria Games does not develop any games directly”? I can't find a reference to prove that it does either, but I do know people (in person — I live in Berlin) who work there as game developers. There are job openings for game developers in their careers page, and http://dawn-of-gods.com/ the website for Dawn of Gods for example seems to indicate it's developed by Aeria.

For now I will leave the page with just don't claiming either way; if anyone can find a reliable reference, feel free to add the corresponding text. LaloMartins Lalo Martins 12:28, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

E207 (i.212999_1_10) : Abortion/Archive 2, Fil sans titre

"http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=religionist

OK, I'm done with my edits now. I have integrated objections to all arguments, as is ""perfectly reasonable"" to do (it's extremely useful information, for one thing). I have also done something that no one thought to do so far, namely, to distinguish the different positions it's possible to have about abortion. Frankly, I think there are only two reasons why someone cannot continue on in this fashion I've tried to demonstrate: (1) the person is so irremediably biased that he or she is incapable of it--in that case, please go work on some other article; (2) the person just doesn't know the subject very well--ditto. I'm rather disgusted with the way you all have handled this controversy. In the future, please try to be more adult about it. --LMS"

E208 (i.21429399_21_1) : Ancient Egyptian race controversy/Archive 16, Titre du fil : What material to include?

"Ok, the easy part first, before we come to the question of the lead and scope of the article. What we had discussed here is that we should include material on Tutankhamun, Cleopatra VII, the Great Sphinx of Giza and Kemet. I was under the impression that it was especially Wdford's concern to have a specialised article to include the material on the Great Sphinx of Giza, in accordance with wp:NPOV, since that material would give undue weight to the question of race in the article Great Sphinx of Giza. Anything else wasn't discussed, and most importantly, x Woland ONLY agreed to this. In case anyone hasn't noticed this yet: There is a notice on top of this discussion page that says: """"'Please discuss substantial changes here before making them.""'"" Adding completely new material is, of course, a substantial edit, so it was necessary to revert in full. (Changing the lead or scope of the article is a substantial edit, too, and therefore it was necessary to revert it accordingly.) If we want to have any improvement of this article, we have to stick to the rules. It would not even be necessary that I specify my objections here, but I'll do it anyway while I look through the material (and I don't think that I would need to remove the inuse notice before I am done with that.) Zara170902:22, 3 February 2009 (UTC)"

E209 (i.21514000_7_2) : Ancient Egyptian race controversy/Archive 17, Titre du fil : Concern

I don't know if that is a reference to me but I'm done with this article. It looks like there is progress being made but I just can't deal with certain people so I'm stepping out of this one. Ciao. --Woland37 Woland 17:35, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

E210 (i.21767362_15_21) : Anarchism/Archive 58, Titre du fil : [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias]]

"Then you're simply lying when you said you checked Caplan and couldn't find what I referred to. http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/bcaplan/anarfaq.htmpart1 and http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/bcaplan/def.htm . Now since it took me a whole 5 seconds to find that, and you ""couldn't"", it's quite clear that you're just trolling and writing in bad faith. I'm done with you. - Knight of BAAWA13:57, 25 May 2009 (UTC)"

E211 (i.21782940_2_4) : Anarcho-capitalism/Archive 18, Titre du fil : Consequentialist?

Thanks, I liked that article a lot. I will stop the inappropriate chatting on the talk page now.Sjeng04:44, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

E212 (i.21967390_48_6) : Ancient Macedonian language, Titre du fil : A revert solely due to no consensus

And now you are going through my contribs and reverting my edits in every dispute I have been involved in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_populationdiff=prevoldid=692647751 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_populationdiff=prevoldid=692647847 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Greek_genocidediff=prevoldid=692648067, in clear retaliation. This is clear BATTLEGROUND and HOUND. What are you hoping to achieve by this? Do you really think this is going to work? Do you really think you will get what you want by behaving this way? I am done here, there is absolutely no point in discussing with someone like you. Athenean08:12, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

E213 (i.22044094_24_33) : Atheism/Archive 41, Titre du fil : Two sentences still better

Against my better judgment, I'm stepping back in here. (God, you'd think this were a religion, the way people argue about it! (smile)) I agree with what Powers said. I'll also suggest what I had suggested earlier, which is to restore the link to theism, and to go back to the references that were there before the edit, and to put the references within the sentence, rather than at the end. I say this fully realizing that this would not really address all of JimWae's concerns, but at least it's a step in that direction. I also say this fully realizing that this would disappoint some who are very happy with the newest edit, but I'd say be flexible. --Tryptofish20:51, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

E214 (i.22513542_32_8) : Adam Lambert/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Want and On With the Show

"Okay, well, I left a message on her http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Christina_Aguilera_discographyJust_Be_Free talk but it seems underused so I don't know if anyone is going to reply. However, in her talk, her demo was definitely discussed circa 2006. At some point, it was removed but it was never clarified why in the actual talk.

And of course there is such a thing as ""precedent"". If there weren't, every wiki page would be formatted differently and all over the place and it wouldn't be standardized. Perhaps precedent isn't' the right word - consistent then. I'm not trying to exclude the information - it's ON his page already. I'm saying that it doesn't belong in discography. Kyuu06:52, 25 June 2009 (UTC)"

E215 (i.2275899_5_3) : Armagh, Titre du fil : Use of CE in this article

I agree. That's what I've been trying to do.

No further responses after four days, so I assume there are no more concerns. I'll remove the CE notation. LevenBoy09:18, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

E216 (i.231124_41_14) : Academic degree, Titre du fil : exclusion of J.D. from article

This is my last message on this topic. Zoticogrillo04:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

E217 (i.23162992_5_32) : Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder/Archive 11, Titre du fil : Dispute2

Several of the editors on this thread have MAJOR page ownership issues. I've been debating on the controversies talk page for what seems like forever about a single citation. They don't address that citation but throw up a pile of new citations or call me names. I'm not allowed to edit that page without it being reverted. I'm not even allowed to put a POV tag up without it being removed. One contributor has been through two mediation processes, the last one was specifically about page ownership and supported by an administrator. In both cases he withdrew from mediation. A link to his RFC is on the other talk page. Also look at the archived history of this talk page.

Sportsmand, let me first say that what you are stating makes perfect sense to me. To the others who know better and choose to be silent, well your strategy really hasn't worked. I left Wikipedia for over two months and the same issues are here when I left. For administrators watching this page, it's about time something was done. Why must a lawlessnes environment be endured for months on end when a contributor has shown virtually no personal growth? Doesn't such a policy drive away many excellent people from wikipedia?--Scuro scuro 16:07, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

E218 (i.23167619_13_57) : Atlanta Braves/Archive 2, Titre du fil : Source added, please comment

Based on this discussion, reliable sources are not what is required by Wikipedia. Only the majority's opinion is what matters. A hard lesson learned, but an important one. For the time being, I am done here.MAL0115920:06, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

E219 (i.23233913_1_10) : Air data module, Titre du fil : Moved from [[Talk:Air France Flight 447/Archive 4/Archives/ 3#Recurrent Material in Airspeed inconsistency]]

"For the sake of the ADM page the diagram has been changed as per the suggestions of ASC, the nose label and colorations were removed and the ARINC 429 was replaced by ""communication"". I still think the image can be improved since we as above we know there is also a maintenance bus. Since this image is now clearly in the realm of what an ADM is, I think the depiction of the maintenance bus is a good idea. I am going to leave this discussion here for now, but It will be moved to the ADM page soon as per the changes of Socrates and that no news has mentioned ADM it really does not belong here to begin with.Pdeitiker PB666nbsp;yap 16:17, 14 June 2009 (UTC)"

E220 (i.2349642_5_1) : Alprazolam, Titre du fil : Half-Life Elimination Time

"Hi All,

The infobox drug currently lists the plasma elimination half life of Alprazolam as 4-6 hours for standard release tables. The reference supplied, a page from rxlist.com, appears to be verbatim a FDA publication, which is fine. However, the webpage sourced makes no distinction between the extended release half-life nor the instant release half-life elimination times, despite that it is used as the source for both IR and XR half-life times.. It appears that this website has created two pages for Alprazolam, one of instant release and one of extended release. The extended release page may be found here: https://www.rxlist.com/xanax-xr-drug.htmclinpharm . The half life elimination time of this second webpage discussing the XR formulation agrees with the information on the wiki, being 10.7 - 15.8 in healthy adults.

The IR half-life time of 4-6 hours currently listed in the wiki is incorrect. The original webpage, which is still accurate in regards to the instant release formulation, states ""the mean plasma elimination half-life of Alprazolam has been found to be about 11.2 hours (range: 6.3–26.9 hours) in healthy adults.""

I am new to Wikipedia but I feel like misinformation is being spread by this particular element of the Wiki page. After independent research, I am unable to find a single source stating that the mean half-life elimination time of Alprazolam IR between 4-6 hours.

I will leave this discussion up for about a week, and if there are no objections, I will take the initiative and change the half-life of IR to something more accurate, and update the source for the XR formulation half-life as well.

Cheers —nbsp;Preceding 04:40, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

With half lives we only have a ball park. So many different factors in metabolism. Half-life period is the time required for the dose to become twice less in the system. But even after being made twice less, the dose is still detectable by tests until it is reduced almost to nothing, half by half. Urine testing can reveal traces of Xanax for up to 14 days in the system PantaniPINK 12:35, 30 June 2019 (UTC)"

E221 (i.23575923_33_1) : Articles of Confederation/Archive 2, Titre du fil : Shay's vs. Shays's

"Gmanfive: I will leave this page alone and hope that a relevant discussion will emerge on the appropriate page. Many, many external sources use ""Shays's"" and NOT ""Shay's."" It is a style choice. It is incorrect to say, ""It's 'Shays' Rebellion' not 'Shays's.'"" Reversions should be discussed per Wikipedia policy unless they are obvious vandalism or errors. Cheers! HolyT Holy 19:59, 7 December 2015 (UTC)"

E222 (i.2368325_5_6) : Andy McNab, Titre du fil : McNab's use of a pseudonym for 'security reasons'

= = = If McNab did NOT want privacy concerning his name, he would use it openly. You will not find his name anywhere but in places were smart asses feel they do not have to respect his wish to only use his pseudonym in public. There is no logic in your statement that the fact that he does the public things you mention above, rules out the fact that he wants to be known as “Andy McNab”. In all of his productions, he shares with the public what he wants to share (and only what is ‘allowed' by the MOD). Being a public figure (whether movie/tv stars, sportsmen, politicians etc) does not exclude a desire to keep parts of ones personal life private. They do not always (often not) get it (described so nicely in your article as “right to freedom of expression, enjoyed by the press and media”) - but that doesn't mean it is fair! Just because you CAN release private information, doesn't mean you have to, and it shows, imho, a lack of integrity.

The fact that you did not write/publish/sell ‘The Real B20' is not really relevant: Verifiability is all well.. .can you give me one source that states that M.Ashers book, however called ‘the Real..' gives 100% (verifiably true) facts? (If you HAD written the book, I'd still want that source – call me skeptic). Because it was published and sold (thanks to the popularity of McNabs and Ryans accounts!) – it does not mean it is (all) true!! I can give you endless lists of book titles that were published and sold (well) but are disputable!

I have no idea why you feel such a strong need to go beyond McNabs wishes – but I resent it. And I've spent enough energy on this - so you be one of those smart asses mentioned above if you can't help yourself. I'm done with it. 13:42, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Of all the celebrities in the world, it is famous autobiographers who most give up their right to privacy. Peer review and scrutiny is standard practice for all academic work, and when an autobiographer makes themself the subject of such a work, privacy is the price they knowingly pay. Wikipedia is not about your wishes, my wishes or even Mr Mitchell's wishes, it's about verifiable information. The fact that Andy McNab's real first name is 'Steven' is not only verifiable in published literature, but also known by yourself to be true - as demonstrated by your misguided efforts to delete it. Please read Wikipedia:Verifiability.Mr Pillows 14:41, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

E223 (i.2378326_12_3) : Adonis, Titre du fil : Just because all information in the lede should reappear in the body—

Just so you guys know, it may be several weeks or even more than a month before I am completely done with my current revisions. –Katolophyromai17:07, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

E224 (i.23950693_2_9) : Adam Lambert/Archive 2, Titre du fil : Unexplained removal of columns

"Last post here, until we hear some other opinions. The status quo is that the columns exist. ""You"" have to explain why it should be ""removed"". Your reasoning (basically consisting of, ""It was removed on David Archuleta"", and ""I really don't think there's any point in it being there"", in my view) is unconvincing to me. Let's see what others think, before removing it again, or commenting further. 18:36, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

*Sorry, but we don't use revision and suppression to build consensus. You are suggesting I should not comment here after insisting that I do in the first place, interesting. Since you have now http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Unitanodecurid=22091535diff=298979543oldid=298979019 deleted my response on your talkpage allow me to keep the comments transparent here. You asserted that the David Archuleta article didn't have discussion or consensus but you now have links that show otherwise. And those discussions, now that you see they do exist are about this exact subject - the inclusion of columns about performance order number and ""results"". And *shock* who is the exact editor who I had to have this exact conversation with on those talkpages about this exact issue? Why it's Aspects, the same editor who first reverted me. But now you are the editor adding these columns so please explain why this content should be kept. My reasons have been the same but I will spell them out. ""'""Order"" column""' - this tells our reader what order Lambert sang in out of all the contestants that week. This seems trivial at best and possibly original research that we are suggesting the order number has anything to do with anything; absent any relaible sources that the order number is truly notable this column should go. ""'""Results"" column""' - completely redundant. This information is in the lede so adding a ""yes, he also moved to the next round"" is just unneeded. -- Banjeboi 18:49, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

**One comment: you are makely inaccurate assertions about what I've written. I never asserted that you didn't have consensus at the Archuleta page. My quote was, ""I couldn't find anything where you gathered consensus there, though I well could have missed it."" Even still, discussion at a different article doesn't have any bearing here, especially when there's multiple precedents for the status quo. You're being very uncollegial here, what with your incorrect claims about what I've asserted, so I'll take my leave now, and let others deal with this. 18:58, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

***I apologize if I mischaracterized what you wrote. See how easy it is to apologize? I fully realize that most of the other ""Idol"" articles have the same useless and - I've avoided using the word - ""Cruft""-like content. That doesn't mean that the Archuleta or ""this"" article should also be degraded. Wikipedia:Other stuff exists is a bad reason to include something as a general rule. You seem unwilling to have a more reasoned discussion with me on this and I don't want to violate 3rr so let's hope others who you may be willing to listen to will offer some insight. -- Banjeboi 19:16, 27 June 2009 (UTC)"

E225 (i.2404999_22_4) : Atheism/Archive 22, Titre du fil : Let's talk

"I'm told it has to go because it is so obviously true it is not needed. I'm told it is so obviously false it must be deleted. Normally this would indicate false reasons are being given; but I don't believe that is the case here due to my respect for the people involved. I give up. I'm not going to fight for it anymore. But I am an atheist and due to my good works (""by their fruit you shall know them"") and the fact that I accepted Christ into my heart in my Christian youth, some people I know believe me to still be a Christian, no matter what I say I believe (""God will know you as one of His own when you die."") As I say, I'm done with the subject matter deleted. I truly hate these fights. 4.250.138.8311:43, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)"

E226 (i.24102257_3_3) : Ancient Egyptian race controversy/Archive 22, Titre du fil : Step 2: Scope and Lead of the article

"Probably I have not made myself clear enough: We can't address ""anything"" here, if we don't know what reliable sources have to say on the topic. If editors simply add whatever they ""personally"" think is relevant for the article, then we are not getting an encyclopaedic article, but an expression of whatever viewpoints the editors have. As soon as I'm done with checking 4 history books on this, I can tell you, why we need to mention Afrocentrism (and also Black Athena) in the lead. Zara170916:50, 29 July 2009 (UTC)"

E227 (i.241229_1_7) : African diaspora, Fil sans titre

"O well i am done here. Will let other respond from now on ..Quote =""All reliable sources about the African Diaspora agrees with the terminology"" Like the 14 refs on this page are not not there? Good luck in the future on your endeavour to rid the world of the word black --http://books.google.ca/books?id=mb6SDKfWftYClpg=PA667ots=gXewQPMvm_dq=Unesco%20encyclopedia%20%22African%20diaspora%22pg=PP1v=onepageqf=true Encyclopedia of the African diaspora. Moxy10:13, 24 February 2011 (UTC)"

E228 (i.24160103_7_3) : Asmahan/Archive 4, Titre du fil : some issues

I think I'm done with the early life section. Can you answer at my suggestions? --Supreme Deliciousness18:06, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

E229 (i.24201334_40_9) : Allies of World War II/Archive 5, Titre du fil : ANI report

Dear x Jacurek, I don't propose you to change your mind. However, if I, for instance, have no arguments to support my opinion, I stop discussion and cease to express my opinion on that concrete subject. That does not necesserily mean that I changed my mind. That means that since I have nothing reasonable to say, I have no right to subtract others wrom their work.--Paul Siebert00:50, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

E230 (i.2422225_4_3) : Amarillo, Texas, Titre du fil : Headline-making news

I'm done with this article's arts sections. Feel free to expand or experiment with the headline news section. I just checked the Tulia article. Wow, it needs to expand the history section because I feel so sorry for that article. All it was mentioned was the sad event... --J. Nguyen04:56, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

E231 (i.24278798_3_1) : American Cribbage Congress, Titre du fil : major re-write

I think I'm done with the major re-write of this article.

Any feedback is appreciated. FarScapePhx00:40, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

E232 (i.2448071_11_32) : Afrocentrism/Archive 4, Titre du fil : Semitic = Son of Ham?

"Further, Haitians are the kittens, if you get my meaning. The difference between them and Berbers is they know they're not white. :p Here's another quote from the Internet: ""The Tuareg of the Sahara are referred to in the Bible as the original 'Canaanites.' The Tuareg are descendants from an ancient race of people known as Berbers.""13 (http://www.authenticafrica.com/tuarturnec.html) The Tuareg are not some fringe element of Berbers, some exception to the rule; they are the original Berbers. The first record of Tamazight appears among the Tuaregs. Why? Because the language originated there among them, an African (black) people. They are the autochonous people of the Sahara.

But I'm done with this discussion. The edit conflicts are annoying, and I've got work to do. Besides, far be it from me to tell you what to call yourself. (White folks try to do that all the time to African Americans, and it's annoying as hell.) I'm certainly not trying to do that. But like I said, the facts are the facts. deeceevoice 03:22, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)"

E233 (i.2448071_17_1) : Afrocentrism/Archive 4, Titre du fil : About Berber origins

"I've deleted the following passage, pending clarification here in discussion:

Afrocentrists also commonly claim that ancient coastal Northwest Africans (Libyans, Berbers, Moors, etc.) were racially black, explaining the light skin of modern Northwest Africans as the result of influxes of Vandals, Romans and Arabs. (A number of recent genetic studies have found that Northwest Africans have a predominant Neolithic ancestry 38 (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJHG/journal/issues/v75n2/41184/41184.text.html?erFrom=4317471345896084348Guest) and that recent historical invasions have had little impact; see Berber origins.)

This seems to explicitly contradict the information provided in the link referenced. My understanding of the origin of the North African populations is black African mixed with Asiatics (Arabs) in an east-west migration, with some black infusion from the south (West Africa) and European lineages from Southern Europe. There is seemingly no indication that the so-called ""Caucasoid Berbers"" of North Africa are indigenous to the area at all. If I am mistaken, then please provide references. I repeat my earlier assertion that the original Berbers are black and East African. Again, if I am incorrect, please cite appropriate sources. deeceevoice 17:07, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

In brief, the original Berbers, like Semites and Egyptians, are white and east African. In less brief, Bosch et al. 2001 (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJHG/journal/issues/v68n4/002582/002582.html)find that:

""the historical origins of the NW African Y-chromosome pool may be summarized as follows: 75% NW African Upper Paleolithic (H35, H36, and H38), 13% Neolithic (H58 and H71), 4% historic European gene flow (group IX, H50, H52), and 8% recent sub-Saharan African (H22 and H28)""

making the Caucasian Berbers of North Africa extremely indigenous, and supporting ""the interpretation of the Arabization and Islamization of NW Africa, starting during the 7th century A.D., as cultural phenomena without extensive genetic replacement."" The relative blackness of the Tuareg is explained by Rando et al. 1998 (as cited by 1 (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJHG/journal/issues/v68n4/002582/002582.html)) who ""detected female-mediated gene flow from sub-Saharan Africa to NW Africa"" amounting to as much as 21.5% of the mtDNA sequences in a sample of NW African populations; the amount varied from 82% (Touaregs) to 4% (Rifains). For more details, see BerberOrigin. - Mustafaa 17:44, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Mustafaa, for your response. Will read up when I have an opportunity. Of course, I reject any notion that ancient Egyptians were not originally and predominantly black African. The Arabization of Egypt has taken place over centuries since around the 7th century A.D. Still today, the farther away one gets from the major cities, as well as the farther south one goes, the darker and the more nappy-haired the population becomes. deeceevoice 18:04, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I don't know what the geneticists say about Egypt, but the Ptolemaic mummy portraits - and, indeed, the older sculptures, like Rahotep or the Sheikh al-Balad - show people who look exactly like modern Egyptians, so I very much doubt Arabization had much to do with it. - Mustafaa 01:32, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ah - this link list (http://www.geocities.com/enbp/genetics.html) looks like a good start... Unfortunately, it doesn't provide links, so a trip to the library would be necessary. - Mustafaa 01:46, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Mustafaa, there is absolutely no way you will convince me that the earliest dynastic Egyptians were not black Africans, so don't waste your time. IMO, it's a ridiculous debate. I've already done very extensive reading on the subject, and for me the matter is not even open to debate. I've asked you about the North African Berbers. Let's leave it at that. deeceevoice 03:05, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Fine; if your mind's made up, I won't waste our time with the facts... I find it impossible to imagine how anyone could think the Egyptians were black after looking at their own self-portraits, but whatever. I've answered your question about the Berbers above; I look forward to your reaction. - Mustafaa 22:19, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Poor dear. I could say the same of you, Mustafaa. I've presented extensive, indisputable facts. I notice no one has challenged the information provided about the structure of Tut's skull and others of Egyptian royal lineage -- and the clear implications w/regard to their and his racial identity. Gee, wonder why. Because they simply CAN'T. :p deeceevoice 22:26, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You already answered yourself, my dear... If Tiye was black - as the sculpture shows - and he was probably either her son or her grandson, then it's scarcely surprising that he should be half-black. - Mustafaa 22:43, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ya damned straight, darlin'. And was Tutankhamun's (obvious) black African lineage an exception to the rule? Judging from the considerable archaeological and forensic evidence to the contrary -- including the Great Sphinx at Giza -- heck no! :p deeceevoice 00:17, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Judging from the considerable archaeological and forensic evidence to the contrary, he certainly was an exception to the rule, and an easily explained one, since Tiye was a foreigner. For someone who thinks ""the matter is not even open to debate"", you seem awfully eager to debate it... - Mustafaa 00:28, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Just making what I had hoped was a final response to your post. And, no. If you read the information on the cranial examinations of the royal mummies, you will find substantial Africanoid phenotypes over the course of other dynasties, as well. Beyond that, there is ample other evidence, as well -- but you obviously are not open to it. I'm done here on this subject; I believe the article and the volumes cited therein speak eloquently and conclusively for themselves. Deeceevoice deeceevoice 03:40, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)"

E234 (i.24590461_8_23) : American Pit Bull Terrier/Archive 2, Titre du fil : Third opinion

Look, it would be nice to have the history page worked on and have it set up better, but its not worth all this time and energy. You two can revert/edit the page anyway you want to. I am done with it. Working terriers07:30, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

E235 (i.2475958_4_4) : Amon Amarth, Titre du fil : Consensus on Viking Metal or not

"Despite not using my account for two years, I received an email about a message on my page inviting me to contribute to this conversation. It's good to see you around Blackmetalbaz. Don't know if you remember me but we used to work together now and then years ago, mostly on black metal pages. In any case, I disagree with your position on this (sorry). Yes, there are sources referring to Amon Amarth as Viking metal. Part of the reason I left wikipedia was because users could often find idiotic sources to support their positions, whether they were right or not. While sources can be found to support the Viking metal label, many more can be found that simply refer to the band as playing death metal or melodeath as this article now states. Whatever the decision here, I don't even care about the band or anything, I still think it's absolutely wrong to call this band Viking metal, a style of music which emerged out of the black metal and folk metal scenes. Stylistically, Amon Amarth has nothing in common with these bands, besides their metal ""roots."" Many sources refer to them as Viking metal purely based on their lyrical content, which does not make a genre of music. Fans and critics are always doing stupid shit like that, though. You can find fans and critics saying Moonsorrow plays vampire metal, Finntroll plays troll metal, a number of bands play pirate metal (Alestorm being the most well known despite the fact that they play a mix of power, thrash, and folk metal). Over the years I've heard it all. There's plenty of examples of this kind of crap. It's not even rare, it's pretty common. That doesn't make it any more correct or any less idiotic. This is exactly the argument that is going on here. While certain lyrical content may be associated with music subcultures, what a band chooses to talk about in their lyrics has nothing to do with the genre they play. Stylistically Amon Amarth plays melodic death metal. Their music has nothing in common with the Viking metal subgenre. It's just that simple. Navnløs14:33, 24 June 2013 (UTC)"

E236 (i.2484523_25_6) : Anti-Polish sentiment, Titre du fil : The Mika photo is not [[WP:SYNTH]], it's [[WP:DUCK]]

"Chumchum7: If you mean that would you object to this photograph on the right having a caption which says that women and children were killed by Germans ""because they were Jewish"" on a rationale that there is nothing about this particular picture that shows that the women and children were killed by Germans ""because they were Jewish""? As if, maybe it was for some other reason? is a straightforward question, we obviously have very different definitions of ""straightforward"". But if you say did not mean that as an insinuation, I will take your word for it. I am finished here. --TU-nor T*U 21:18, 2 November 2018 (UTC)"

E237 (i.25114563_1_6) : Authonomy, Titre du fil : Slow down

Good luck finding citations from organisations not to some extent owned or controlled by Newscorp. I'm done here and I'm done with Wikipedia. This is frankly an abusive community. Sjc20:02, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

E238 (i.25203320_12_22) : Amanda Lindhout, Titre du fil : Recent edits

Same old pattern. No regard for facts or sources, just repeat jargon and make accusations. I'm done here. I doubt this page gets much traffic anyway. But it's still a shame. I never thought it would be this difficult to improve an article on Wikipedia. Adios. InTheInterestOfObjectiveReporting00:19, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

E239 (i.2555_6_1) : Ab urbe condita, Titre du fil : I suggest a move

"polltop ""'I left this page as the dominant meaning""'. The other page is now at Ab Urbe Condita (book). Anthony Appleyard04:57, 22 August 2009 (UTC)"

E240 (i.25671598_44_3) : Anwar al-Awlaki/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Must have balance in the article’s lead

"I haven't the foggiest idea what you are driving at now. Have you somehow confused me with ""“the man”"" responsible for all that is mean and nasty in the article about al-Awlaki? Do you think my ""'grand total of 19 edits are""', in some way, largely responsible for the contents of this God-forsaken article???Above, you were incessantly harping about the inclusion of the key, notable passage from the tape Awlaki sent to CNN. My role was to consolidate two poorly transcribed pieces—one of which had been quoted ""way"" out of context—into a single quotation that is accurately quoted. It's exceedingly notable, it's al-Awlaki's voice and he said it. “Government sources” and accusations—or lack thereof—that he is a member of al-Qaeda matter not one twit with respect to the CNN tape.This morning, I rearranged the lead in an attempt to make it harmonized so it didn't have that Wikipedia “she said / he said” look of dueling editors. When I left it last, it http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anwar_al-Awlakioldid=356811201 looked like this, which prominently disclosed that al-Awlaki denied involvement with al-Qaeda and just as prominently disclosed that he declared jihad on America. Just the facts, ma'am. And, now that I think about it, I added into the lead one important detail: Since we are saying he's an American citizen and that the president authorized that he be targeted for bombing, we should certainly mention that he now resides in Yemen (which I duly cited). When I finished, it seemed fair and balanced given what I had to start with. If you think I came here this morning to POV-push, you're barking up the wrong tree.If you felt all “duty bound” to ensure the facts were properly there, then it would have been nice if you had the proper material waiting for me there when I rearranged it this morning. If you want to widen the argument onto other matters, go find someone else to complain to. Either that, or fix the shortcomings yourself. Just stop with saying that quoting the “doozy passage” from the CNN tape must be deleted from this article for yada-yada reason, or because it—as you say—ignores the “thousands of hours” of his other teachings where he ""doesn't"" mention jihad. Such reasoning is utter nonsense and is completely at odds with just about every guideline and policy we have. The guy made world headlines with that tape and the world press picked right up on the part that is quoted here. You don't like that reality. Trouble is, it's reality. As I said before: in the military that's called “so sad — too bad.” Greg L23:55, 18 April 2010 (UTC)"

E241 (i.25734997_45_12) : Ancient Macedonians/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Recent edits

OK.. I will come to this when I am done with the edits I am currently making. (Don't worry, nothing to do with Macedonia or any of its derivatives...). Dear Politis, the people of RoM, who desperately wish to connect their history with that of the ancients have no clue regarding what Borza stands for... He has viciously dismissed any of their claims and has boldly stated that the inhabitants of RoM have absolutely no connection with the ancient Macedonians... If they knew what the man has written, they would never quote him...GK197316:51, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

E242 (i.25786818_43_79) : Anarchism in the United States/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Rothbard, et al. redux redux

"It means ""without rulers/chiefs"". Now then: I'm done with you. POV-push all you want, but it will be reverted. It's as simple as that. Enjoy your rage against whatever it is you're raging against. Knight of BAAWA21:25, 26 September 2007 (UTC)"

E243 (i.25817142_10_32) : Aikido/Archive 7, Titre du fil : Worldwide dissemination

"As it stands, *I* don't have to do *jack*. Nada. Nothing. But then, *I'm* not the one looking to insert completely subjective ""facts"" into an article without citing them *at all*. It doesn't matter how academic that looks, or sounds, or anything else. It's not like I'm going to block any revisions you make, but the simple fact is this: ""without citations, ambiguous additions to a Featured Article WILL be reverted"". Bring some kind of verification to the table, and I can almost guarantee that the information regarding Mr. Seagal will be added and/or remain intact. As it stands now, the article is well-referenced; even beginning to assert that ""*every* statement needs a dozen references"" is patently ludicrous. Tell you what: if you're so intent on having everything cited multiple times, why not be bold and research it yourself? As I hold a regular day job, I really have neither the time nor the inclination to do others' research on every topic I happen to find of fleeting interest.

Just so we understand one another: I've been here since 2005. I've watched articles live and die with far better citations. I *WILL NOT* do your work for you, but I *WILL* tell you what the likely outcome will be if you also refuse to provide citations. It's your own fault if you choose to ignore me on this matter, and it is my firm belief that I have nothing further to say to you. Orethrius00:01, 13 August 2009 (UTC)"

E244 (i.26027219_1_48) : Akmal Shaikh/Archive 4, Titre du fil : Bi-polar disorder as a defense

I haven't noticed any source mentioning what his plea was. My reading is that he pleaded 'not guilty', and not 'guilty but with diminished responsibility'. This may be what denied him the psych evaluation, but I'm only speculating here. The Deng Yujiao incident, and the subsequent trial, were highly politicised; this one is too as it involves a foreign national and the death penalty. I believe the problem may be that the Chinese legal system is completely intertwined with the political apparatus, thus unlike anything known in the west. Judgements, and how they are arrived at are frequently opaque, and it appears that few conclusions can be drawn from precedent - remember that China is not based on case law. I will comment once again once I have spent more time looking at that part of the article's sources and re-reading the discussion above. BTW, I'm done with the radical changes for now. Ohconfucius09:16, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

E245 (i.26057362_16_13) : American Israel Public Affairs Committee/Archive 1, Titre du fil : Deletion of sourced material

FYI I already replied on my Talk page before your last post here. --AladdinSE14:40, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

E246 (i.26201958_52_17) : Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse/Archive 2, Titre du fil : Application of the {npov} tag

"This is my last comment on the subject for the time being. I'm busy with other issues at the moment. Look at these quotes from the Congressional Research Service report ""Lawfulness of Interrogation Techniques under the Geneva Conventions"", Page 12 http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RL32567.pdf (PDF file):

""Torture. Torture is proscribed by all four of the Geneva Conventions and additional Protocols,24 as well as customary international law.25 Torture, which either mental or physical, is not explicitly defined in the Conventions. Modern tribunals may look to the United Nations Convention Against Torture (“CAT”) definition of torture:""

For the purposes of this Convention, the term “torture” means any act by which"

E247 (i.26220992_22_11) : Assassination of Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh, Titre du fil : Mossad or Israel Perpetrators?

I'm not bickering and I have nothing further to say. I made note of your personal attack and other than that it is up to you to decide how you will act in the future. Breein100719:01, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

E248 (i.26240402_9_4) : Anti-Polish sentiment/Archive 9, Titre du fil : Polish ultranationalist propaganda

"Crazy Poles eh our ""Volkerfreund"" ? No further comments needed I think.

--Molobo19:13, 31 January 2006 (UTC)"

E249 (i.26302047_84_6) : Area 51/Archive 5, Titre du fil : Illegal photos

"Somebody else breaking the law is not an excuse for us to do it. There are thousands of murderers, but that does not make it okay for me to go out and kill someone. And it certainly does not say ""beyond this point"", just that photography is prohibited, period. But whatever, I am done with this illegal website. --""'Jakec Jakob ""' aka Jakec 18:15, 5 September 2016 (UTC)"

E250 (i.26540130_21_40) : Arabs/Archive 5, Titre du fil : World Factbook on Ethnicities

Nableezy, I said a source from 1996 is old by your logic, since you want to remove sources that contradict your point of view, not because you believe they are old, but because you disagree with their content. If you want to use this logic, then I am removing sources that are older than 2002 and only my sources will remain. I am only using your logic here. This is a 2 way road. Either provide everything or only provide the most recent sources. Tiamut, your argument is completely POV. We are not talking here about whose opinion is pan-Arabist and whose opinion is Egyptian nationalistic. Not to mention that ALL the sources I am providing here are written by non-Egyptians, so to claim that they wrote what they wrote because they were Egyptian nationalists is unbelievable and inaccurate. If you want just want to mention a few sources that put forward numbers, as you claimed in your previous paragraph, then remove that sentence saying that in general Egyptians Muslims are considered Arabs, because they are NOT and you have no way to prove that most of them do. Like I told you before, many many Muslim Egyptians do NOT believe they are Arabs, and I already gave you many names. So just provide numbers and remove that statement. That being said, I will stop editing this page since Mr. Nableezy is warning me of 3RR!!! Funny considered both of you are sticking up against me. Of course it would be very easy for me to use your tactic and ask for some of my friends' help, in which case you will find tens of users reverting your edits, and you will feel overwhelmed, as I do right now. But before I do this, I am offering to settle this dispute in a civilized manner on the talk page. It's your call. --Lanternix ⲖⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝUser_talk:Lanternix|talk 18:52, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

E251 (i.266352_23_13) : Assyrian people/Archive 3, Titre du fil : About the Assyrian people and their languages

"Oh ok, so all of you guys who reply my first message win. Because now I m wrong about the Assyrian people and its language. This is because Akkkadian language are actually an Old Aramaic dialect in which that I've just go to it and read it about an article called ""Assyrian Neo-Aramaic"". So this is my last message here. Goodbye. mdash; Emrrans12:00, 30 July 2006 (UTC)"

E252 (i.266352_23_13) : Assyrian people/Archive 3, Titre du fil : About the Assyrian people and their languages

"Oh ok, so all of you guys who reply my first message win. Because now I m wrong about the Assyrian people and its language. This is because Akkkadian language are actually an Old Aramaic dialect in which that I've just go to it and read it about an article called ""Assyrian Neo-Aramaic"". So this is my last message here. Goodbye. mdash; Emrrans12:00, 30 July 2006 (UTC)"