User talk:Klonimus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Troll warning This discussion page may contain trolling. Before you post any reply, consider how you might minimize the effects of trollish comments. Simply ignoring certain comments may be the best option. If you must respond, a temperate response is always best, whether trolling is suspected or not.
  • Aggregation awareness directs the query optimizer to use the highest level of aggregation available.
  • He has a lot of enthusiasm for the Wikipedia project, and he generally avoids edit wars and other destructive behavior.
  • Are you all just a bunch of idiots? Listen now while you still may be unscathed and placid- the time of reckoning has come.
  • For within troubled times come troubled admonitions.
  • Now between your mindless clattering it's come to pass that incineration is the best means of reproof.
  • We must do battle on this territory which heretofore has been assumed to be irrevocably held in the clutches of the enemy.

Contents

[edit] Judge not lest...

Just a quick comment... on your user page, you ask that other WPians don't "quickly judge" you as a Christian simply because you're citing the bible. That's a good point. BUT, you yourself are in the habit of "quickly judging" people disagreeing with, for instance, you or GRider, as 'deletionists'. That is equally wrong. The issue is far less black-n-white than you suggest, and encouraging factionalism is not going to help anyone. Radiant_* 10:03, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)

There are those of us who appreciate your informed comments in defense of the position that article retention can and should continue to be the default position of Wikipedia, unless there is unambiguous evidence to support the application of established deletion policies and conventions. In my opinion, deletionist zealotry based on the "notability" furphy is by far and away Wikipedia's biggest challenges, and the sooner it is consigned to history the better. Please feel free to keep me informed on any matters relating to this subject that you become aware of. --Gene_poole 05:12, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] More about Practices of Deletionist and Recommendations to Fix this Problem with Wikipedia

Thanks for your activism on this issue Klonimus. I think you might find the Final Statement on my usertalk page interesting. As you will read, I have moved my pages to Wikinfo to avoid Wikipedia's politics and for other non-emotional reasons. Still, though, thanks for your kind words. They prompted me to write my Final Statement, and I appreciate your encouragement. Good luck to you always!AboutWestTulsa 21:37, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry for the reception you've received

Hi. I thought I should try to apologise on behalf of everyone who's been a bit aggressive towards you. Wikipedia does have a policy guideline that one should be nice to newcomers.

Slac gave some of the reasons for people (mistakenly) thinking you were a sockpuppet (and made the most toned down comments towards you so far).

It's good that you are interested in the deletion process, as it is a point of contention on the Wikipedia at the moment. Could I suggest that you take part in the discussions at Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Policy_consensus? The page is a place for people to arrive at Consensus on deletion policy for particular classes of pages, in a manner consistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. I would also recommend that you read through as many of the policies and guidelines as you can. There are a lot of them, and it can be a bit of a drag when you'd rather be editing articles/getting on with your life, but if you understand the policies which have been accepted by the community, you will have a framework within which to place your arguments. Remember to stay cool, and substantiate your arguments: The goal is to convince users of your point based upon its merit, not to try to manipulate them into factionalism and extreme actions (as GRider did).

Anyway, keep up the contributions, and feel free to engage in policy discussions. I hope you enjoy being part of the community. --Kieran 09:49, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Libraries

In Jordan Middle School, you added:

The school library maintains special collections on Native Americans, Medieval Europe, Ancient Civilizations, Palo Alto History, Young Adult Fiction, and Biography. The library offers a "Homework Center", every Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday from 3:15 to 4:30pm. The libraries collections are sorted using the Dewey Decimal System.

I removed this because it's not specific to this particular school library, and not information worthy of note in an encyclopaedia. Most schools offer the use of their libraries after hours, so this would belong on a general article which covers school facilities. Also, using the Dewey system is not in any way unusual. Most school libraries use Dewey since it is what you'd expect to find in a public library. A few might use the LoC system, used more by colleges and universities. If it used a system entirely other than these two, then it might be worth recording on the page. You might also be stretching the definition of "special collection" somewhat. As you may have noticed from the VfD, the primary argument employed is that the article does not mention anything about the school which might be any different from any other school, that might set it apart. Wikipedia is not a feature list or a schools guide. We don't have articles on every single bus route in existence, but the general features of a bus route probably get a mention on a transport page somewhere. Similarly, we can't have article on every school in existence (there are millions of them), however, that's no reason why we can't have a page somewhere which describes schools in their cultural context, e.g. schools in the United States will have some things in common, but they might be different from schools in the United Kingdom. I would suggest that people put effort into general articles, and only have individual articles for a school when you have something to say about it that isn't trivia (staff, location, address), and isn't the same as a large number of other schools. Chris talk back 16:27, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

    • I think Deep down we have a fundamental disagreement about wikipedia is. IMHO, the goals of the project are those of the 18th century encyclopedists in france. To create an encyclopedia that is the sum total of human knowledge. IMHO Public insitutions are inherently notable. There is nothing trivial about them.
      • First, I think you are misinterpreting "sum total of human knowledge" as literally "everything known by every person", when this is clearly not the meaning intended. Second, it is not so much that I disagree with you, but that your statement that there is "nothing trivial about them" is inherently false. There are plenty of things that are trivial about schools. Perhaps one day you should attend one and see. Think back to your own time in school (assuming you've left), and think of all the trivial details. Do you have any sound basis on which to counter my argument, or will you simply come out with more pointless conjecture? Where does this analogy fail? We don't have articles on every single bus route in existence, but the general features of a bus route probably get a mention on a transport page somewhere. Similarly, we can't have article on every school in existence (there are millions of them), however, that's no reason why we can't have a page somewhere which describes schools in their cultural context, The answer? It doesn't, otherwise you'd have come up with a better answer than using the fallacious "inherently notable". Chris talk back 03:39, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
        • I just think that alot of things which you think are unimportant, may well be important. I am very consistant in my inclusionism. I do beleive bus routes, and streets in west tulsa are encyclopedic. Essentially I think wikipedia should contain everything that is encyclopedic in scope. m:AIW for more on inclusionismKlonimus 04:30, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The libraries special collection's are also notable. They refelect the pedagogical judgements of the school's librarians. If the school library maintained special collections on Coal Gasification, Meat Processing, Pre-WWII Gay and Lesbian Erotic Fiction, Starch Chemistry, Noncaloric Sweeteners, and Retail Accounting it would be just as notable as having special collections on Native Americans, Medieval Europe, Ancient Civilizations, Palo Alto History, Young Adult Fiction, and Biography. Because the library is itself notable.
    • Factual error: a school library is not in and of itself notable. Fact. You're easily stretching the definition of "special collection" here. Having a bookshelf dedicated to it, or having a large quantity of a particular type of book do not make a "special collection", otherwise every school library has a "special collection" of something. In particular, the sheer number of them implies to me that they are not really "special collections". --Chris talk back
      • Like I said, we have a fundamental disagreement. The elementary school I went to had many notable things. It was located on a floodplain, the school site had been flooded several times in the 1950s and 1960s prior to the construction of a flood control canal which was necessary so that the school could be built. The school library, was in a doublewide trailer, did not have any scheduled programs, and had an Apple IIe computer. The school possesed a greenhouse, and a running track. It's all a matter of scope. Wikipedia is Not paper, so issues of scope should less concern us. Klonimus 04:30, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not paper, and we should not let the thinking on concerns of a paper encyclopedia limit us in our mission of documenting and preserving human knowledge.

Klonimus 23:34, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • Wikipedia might not be paper, however, as is clearly stated in policy, Wikipedia is not Everything2. Chris talk back 03:39, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • Show me where articles on school's are in the list of what wikipedia is not. Klonimus 04:30, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
      • That would be WP:VAIN. Radiant_* 11:53, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
        • Be fair, WP:VAIN does not at all say that articles on schools should not be in Wikipedia. First of all WP:VAIN is only semi-policy and hence a guideline and second, all that it implies is that if someone creates a poor article about their own school then there is a case for deletion. It goes on to say "if you must write on these topics to write a good article in an encyclopedic style that establishes as much notability as possible" where topics include one's own "high school, start up business or band".-- Lochaber 14:24, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
        • WP:VAIN in no way directly adresses schools.Again show me where articles on school's are in the list of what wikipedia is not. (Hint: You can't do it.)Klonimus 19:00, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
        • You could also try WP:WIN a general knowledge base. Note that I never stated that no schools are in Wikipedia - I state that, like for instance people and bands, there is be some level of notability for a school to be encyclopedic. Klonimus, you should really stop polarizing and factionalizing - it isn't helpful in forming a consensus. Radiant_* 08:48, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Schoolwatch

If you must contribute to this project, please contribute to one which can be used by everyone - Wikipedia:Watch/schoolwatch. GRider's action in putting it in his userspace was entirely indefensible. I suggest you move to the new project to avoid being associated with it, and as a result being labelled as disruptive. Chris talk back 03:39, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • Chris, the project started in his userspace. Then people with a deletionist agenda who wanted control of it, then forcefully moved it out of his userspace. Then after that failed, a vote was held, and it was decided his own userpage would stay in his own userspace.
I am not ashamed to associated with GRider because I agree with 90% of what he does (I disagree with anything disruptive he may have done; I do not consider heating up VfD discussions to be disruptive. To reach a true consensus you need to hear every side in all it's awesome glory). I don't think that trying to publicise VfD's of interest to inclusionists is disruptive. Klonimus 05:13, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • You are mistaken. People with a neutral agenda wanted the project moved some place neutral. And that has now happened, by general consensus. Also, please read (self-proclaimed inclusionist) David Gerard's closing remarks to the ArbCom case. Radiant_* 11:53, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
      • Allegedly neutral, many of the people who wanted the project moved, were involved on prosecution side of the ArbCom case. Klonimus 18:16, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
        • You should assume good faith that these people who are allegedly neutral are in fact truly neutral. The ArbCom case dealt with plain facts as is obvious from the evidence page - you are the only one who tried to put in emotional arguments. Radiant_* 08:48, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Intellectual dishonesty

Is intellectual dishonesty always conscious deception? Or can it also stem from self-deception? I thought the latter but I may be mistaken. Andries 08:26, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)


klominus, why are your so brutal to undo so much hard work? how can newbies learn if you revert their hard work? there must have been a better way to let someone know there is a problem. klominus, you must not mean it when you say happy editing! 15:35, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] GRider and the Jordan Middle School VfD

Hi Klonimus,

I've brought this here since I thought the VfD discussion was definitely straying well away from its point. As you say, "a great encyclopedia is not built by obscurantism and deletionism." I don't believe that most contributors to Wikipedia—even the ones who vote to delete articles on VfD—are supporters of obscurantism and deletionism. Many might be insulted by the insinuation that they're trying to conceal or erase knowledge. Moreover, labelling someone as a deletionist (or worse) isn't likely to change their mind or help to reach a consensus.

Pardon my drifting into the metaphorical, but I look at Wikipedia like a garden. I believe it should be encouraged to grow. I also believe that a garden requires occasional pruning and weeding. The former I see as analogous to copyediting; the latter to deletion. Sometimes it makes sense to gather similar plants together through article merger; a sickly plant that would get mowed out in the middle of the lawn might do well when allowed to cross-pollinate with its fellows in a sheltered greenhouse. Different editors have differing perspectives on what constitutes a 'weed'. I don't think that constitutes bad faith, merely a difference of opinion.

Back to GRider, now, and the literal world. How do you know that GRider was seeking to "demonstrate the unjust nature of the decision" of the ArbCom? Why do you presume that he is the victim of "an angry and organized bunch of deletionists"? Speaking for myself, I participated in both informal efforts to communicate with GRider as well as the RfCs and RfAr not because I am an angry deletionist but because he was taking actions that contravened established Wikipedia policy and (much more important) disrupted Wikipedia's normal functioning. GRider refused to participate in any of these processes.

His steadfast refusal to communicate with other Wikipedians about his behaviour is what ultimately brought about his ban. Perhaps you might be surprised by the ArbCom's openmindedness if he were to open a dialogue rather than ignore their rulings. It's possible that a change to the ArbCom ruling might be arranged to allow him to vote on VfD, but nobody—not even GRider himself—has asked. (I dare say, however, that any right he might have to participate in VfD is on very thin ice, given that before the ArbCom decision he was doing everything in his power to disrupt the deletion process.) --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 19:39, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Good call

Lovely call on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of names for the human penis ("Penises are always notable, unless they are merely stubs")! Nothing quite like Wikihumour. --bainer 06:21, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Great thanks

Please accept my heartfelt gratitude for all that you've accomplished during my time of oppressed silence. With the ongoing contributions made by you and others like you, Wikipedia still has a gleam of hope. One day we just may be the sum of all human knowledge. Don't lose sight, don't lose hope. --GRider\talk 19:00, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Islamofascism

I really agreed with what you said about Islamofascism. UDoN't!wAn* 23:23, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

    • Thanks I also agree with it. Klonimus 05:02, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Thanks, I have also started Islamic fascism which might fit in with that article quite well. Am just doing some early research at this stage. There is a lot on Google about it. Maybe there's a series of different fascist strains that it can be linked in with too. Walkingeagles 05:22, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • Please do, wiki needs people like you who are commited to the growth of useful articles. You'll just find that any attempt to add information to the main article quickly gets reverted, or watered down out of existence.
My understanding, is that the grand mufti injected Nazism into Islamism and Pan Arabism, which in turn influenced Sayed Qutb and friends. There is alot of corss pollination in fundamentalist islam. But the Mufti can be credited with adding Nazi elements to the witch's brew. Klonimus 05:27, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re: User:Walkingeagles

I do not think that it is a good idea to deliberately invite newbies into the middle of edit wars. Firebug 05:38, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • He will get baptized soon enough. As soon as I saw somone made an improvment to the article, I knew that Yuber and Co. would quickly work on destroying it. I might as well warn him now since this sort of thing could turn somone off of wikipedia.
Frankly what is going in Islamofascism is depressing. People who voted to destroy the article on VfD are now doing so by reverting and editing the article itself out of existance. This is much more depressing that even the firiest school deletion debates. Klonimus 05:43, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Oh gosh you're talking about me. Is that why the material on Aryan Nation disappeared? Someone just deleted it because they didn't like it? Walkingeagles 06:00, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • Basicly, At the moment some people are trying to hold an article in progess to extremely high standards and use as an excsue to delete everything they personally find objectionable. Now people delete stuff for alot of different reasons, so dont draw any hasty conclusions, However its very important to make sure anything you do add to an article is high quality. So may I suggest working on a spare copy on your computer, and then copy pasting any changes in. This lessen's the chance of people deleting stuff that is inprogress. Klonimus 06:08, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi Klonimus, I added my material to your article, I'm not sure if it fits if it does that's great. Will take your advice about that although it's easier working off the browser. There are certainly some unfriendlies out there. It's inevitable al Qaeda etc will always get people upset one way or the other. Walkingeagles 07:55, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • Great, Looks good. One of the very important principals at wikipedia is maintaining a neutral point of view. WP:NPOV Basicly this means that an article should take a disinterested tone towards its subject matter, and not promote particular perspectives. I suggest if you get a chance to read the WP manual of style to get a feel for encyclopedia writing. Klonimus 08:07, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Links between Iraq and Al-Qaeda

Could you please vote on the proposed move Links between Iraq and Al-Qaeda → Alleged links between pre-invasion Iraq and Al-Qaeda? The vote is here. Thanks. ObsidianOrder 17:16, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Another deletion thing

In looking around for Islamic fascism, I was reading about Nick Berg of blessed memory and noticed Conspiracy theories about Nick Berg. Would be interested in your opinion, should it be improved or deleted or whatever? Walkingeagles 07:02, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Schoolwatch

I must state that you're polarizing the issue. My aim is not to get schools deleted - indeed I find schools not important enough to warrant the daily fuss on VfD. My aim, rather, is to get people working together towards concensus in a civilized and NPOV way. Please answer me this... I believe SWG to be POV, and you seem to concur. I also believe NPOV to be absolute and non-negotionable (since that is one of Jimbo's founding principles, on WP:NPOV). I finally believe that a NPOV schoolwatch exists in mainspace. So my question is, how can you, in good faith, oppose merging the two? Radiant_* 08:50, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)

  • Because SWG is in userspace, and it serves a good purpose and leads to good results. Klonimus 17:30, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • So are you claiming that the neutral version does not serve a good purpose or not lead to good results? Why exactly do you oppose an NPOV page? Radiant_* 07:16, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
      • Because I oppose your hounding of GRider. Leave his userspace in peace. Klonimus 07:17, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
      • Second this. Enough is enough Radiant, move along. —RaD Man (talk) 07:22, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Islamofascism article

Thanks for your note. From a pratical standpoint I don't think there's any point in doing a lot of work on it until the VfD is over and its fate decided; it appears that most people are not voting based on content or whether or not it is an encyclopedic topic, but based on whether or not they personally like the idea of such an article in the first place. Jayjg (talk) 02:09, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Marjorie Pay Hinckley

Greetings Klominus. I hope I am not disturbing you, but I thought the "result" of this debate on VfD in which we both participated was quite interesting. There was a 2-1 majority to delete, which I think created consensus to delete. Some admins, and perhaps yourself as well, would argue that a larger majority is needed to delete and that no consensus was reached and the article should have been kept as you wanted. Instead, the admin who closed out the discussion declared that the result of the debate was merge and redirect, which was counter to the wishes of everyone who voted on the article. I consulted with the admin in question, Mindspillage, and she suggested starting a topic on the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard since I was unhappy with her call. I and Ejrrjs posted our grievances there and were dismayed to discover that fellow admins were supporting her decision to merge and redirect as a wise one. I know we disagree on VfD nearly all of the time, and I hope you can see past that for a moment. While I feel that the article should have been deleted with 66% approval, I think the far more important issue is an admin coming in and disregarding all the votes that were cast, keep and delete alike. If this does not bother you, I am sorry to have wasted your time with this message. If you feel that this was a subversion of the VfD vote (in your case because there was no consensus and the article should have been kept rather than merged), then it might be helpful to have someone who voted keep weigh in as well to illustrate the larger problem evident here. Thank you for your time. Indrian 00:26, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Jizyah

Done. Jayjg (talk) 23:53, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Don't tell other editors that I am an Islamist. That is a lie. You have personally attacked me twice now; third time's the RFC. Don't attribute to me actions I have not engaged in either. I made one single edit to that article, ever. [1] That is all. El_C 08:34, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Dude, relax and dont make wikilawyer threats. Klonimus 09:14, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
Don't tell me to relax, and don't call me dude. Reread what was said, and try to conduct yourself professionally and with dignity. El_C 09:31, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Saudi Arabia and anti-Semitism

Your article, List of Saudi Arabian Jews, was speedy-deleted for no content. Since the purpose of this article creation was to call attention to anti-Semitism in Saudi Arabia, I created an article specifically on this subject. You are, of course, free to edit it if you so choose. But please keep NPOV in mind, and try to source as many statements as possible. I was able to find several sources so that it was not necessary to include unsubstantiated allegations. Firebug 00:34, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

I think the other articles are more appropriate, and a link could be provide in the Saudi Arabia article. State sanctioned support for anti-Semitism in Saudi Arabia, while quite real, isn't one of the kingdom's most important facets or interesting features. Jayjg (talk) 15:57, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
Yes it is. Such shameless State sanctioned anti-semetism is very notable with only a few governments world wide engaging in such practices. Klonimus 14:45, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
Can you name those governments besides SA? Megan1967 06:49, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Maha Jana High School

Hi, Klonimus

Maha Jana has been restored and moved to the proper name, Mahajana High School. Now that you have gotten your wish, will you or some of your friends work to improve the article? Indeed I must say that to you and a number of other users have done a good job in making several of these high school articles good. Also, I suggest you make up with Mel Etitis, he is a good administrator even though he made a mistake in deleting the article. For the record, he was also the one who finally undeleted the article. Sjakkalle 09:05, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] WP:POINT

Please stop disrupting WP:VFD to make a WP:POINT. Note the ArbCom ruling, "VFD is Wikipedia's immune system ... and needs to be treated seriously by all involved." Radiant_* 08:58, May 13, 2005 (UTC)

  • Pray tell when have I done so? Klonimus 05:54, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] VDH and Islamofascism

If you go to victorhanson.com and search for "Islamofascism", it returns eight results. Here is a sample:

June 14, 2004 Feeding the Minotaur Our strange relationship with the terrorists continues. by Victor Davis Hanson National Review Online

...In the European mind, and that of its aping American elite, the terrorists lived, slept, and walked in the upper aether — never the streets of Kabul, the mosques of Damascus, the palaces of Baghdad, the madrassas of Saudi Arabia, or the camps of Iran. To assume that the latter were true would mean a real war, real sacrifice, and a real choice between the liberal bourgeois West and a Dark-Age Islamofascist utopia... [emphasis added]

Thinking back on all the instances where I remember him using the term, Hanson would seem use Islamofascism to describe both nominally Muslim, secular nationalist-socialist dictators like Saddam Hussein, as well as primarily religiously-motivated terrorists like Osama bin Laden. --Jpbrenna 19:43, 14 May 2005 (UTC) P.S. The old page is way better than the new!


[edit] Zzyzx11 has returned

Because of some of the comments I received by you and others on my talk page, and some other events, I have decided to return today -- but with a few self-imposed restrictions on myself. See my user page if you are interested. Thanks for your patience and understanding. Happy editing and see you around ;-) Zzyzx11 (Talk) 22:09, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Schoolwatch Archives

Klonimus,

Thanks for the information. I simply had never taken the time to look at the archive page -- it's so much better than what I was doing, and it will be very useful to analyse the data there when we argue about deletion policy and schools. I'll add some info on Schoolwatch to help others know to put deleted or kept schools in the archive, when I get time -- or you could do it. --Zantastik 06:04, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] People change

Hi there! While I respect your opinion of me, I'd like to say that I've changed since we've first met. I admit to having been somewhat trigger-happy in the past, but I've become convinced that organizing (or adding to) existing content is far more beneficial to the 'pedia than getting rid of sub-par articles that most people wouldn't notice in the first place. Thus I'd consider myself a strong mergist, and please realize that I contributed heavily to WP:FICT (which basically calls for including any and all articles on fiction) and I even wrote a rule of thumb "Do not nominate schools for deletion". Of course that may or may not matter to you, but since we haven't spoken much recently I thought I'd mention it.

As a side point, I don't accuse you of being a sockpuppet. I did once asked the question whether you were one, but that's far from the same (my exact words, "This may well be a coincidence, but could someone please check the IP address to see what's going on here?"). And in that case, it was quickly cleared up that you weren't, and I haven't brought up the matter since. We all make mistakes sometimes, don't we? Yours, Radiant_* 08:54, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

  • I see you're willing to strengthen your argumentation against my RFA, but then why are you unwilling to respond to me? Also, are you aware of the fact that User:GRider in fact is a proven sockpuppet, and that User:G Rider (whose only contributions are nominating schools for deletion) is in fact the same person? Radiant_* 09:51, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)
    • This taking things personally is one of the reasons I don't think you'd be a good admin. I think you are good person, and a good editor, but I think that you lack certain personal qualities needed insomeone who is capable of pulling the trigger. I.e you are too ideological, and tend to take things personally.
      • Well, I'll respect that; your first response at RFA looked like you held a grudge against me because you thought I accued you of sockpuppetry quite a long time ago. I'm glad that's not the case. Radiant_* 10:11, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)
    • User:GRider isn't a sockpuppet of anyone, he's done some foolish things, and suffered a harsh ArbCom injunction. I would really appreiate it if people could clue me to anything GRider has done post ArbCom that is bad, because from my personal communications with him, he's a good person. Klonimus 10:00, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • Check Special:ipblocklist, and you will find that GRider is permanently blocked as a disruptive sockpuppet. This was also mentioned on VFD/talk. The main thing he's done wrong after the ArbCom decision is ignoring it. Radiant_* 10:11, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)
        • Do you have a link? I've had some emails with GRider, and he seemed a nice a person. Although to an extent I think he was too ideological, and not willing to work within the system. However, I still think he wasn't that disruptive and some other arrangemnt could have been done. To me he exposed the problem of VfD, which is alot of it depends on who closes the VfD discussion. The Islamofascism VfD showed me just how unrelaiable and subject o manipulation VfD can be so I guess I'm a bit sensitive to concerns of that. Klonimus 10:22, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
          • Yes, [2]. I'm afraid that being unwilling to work within the system is a serious problem. It is quite possible to change the system (been there, done that :) ) but simply going against it serves little purpose other than to antagonize people (e.g. see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Policy consensus/Regarding tally boxes). I agree that VFD is far from perfect (in fact, there's an ongoing discussion on revising it), but it is necessary to have a system to get rid of our daily bunch of junk. While GRider has shown the problem to some extent (by which I mean that some people were already aware, and others still don't get it) he has never shown a solution. I'm afraid that Socrates is dead. Radiant_* 11:10, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mosque not MOSQUITOE

Your comment here is offensive and Counter productive! - it should be removed --NEWUSER|CARPEDIEM (talk) 17:30, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

  • It’s either people are very supportive of insulting Muslim's in the west that some try to come up with new definition to words to justify the racism behind it, or they are just uneducated – as far as the English language is concerned and this is the language used in the topic discussed here, not Spanish or Indian, English, the word used to identify a Mosque is very degrading and insulting to Muslims. MOSQUITO: two-winged insect whose female has a long proboscis to pierce the skin and suck the blood of humans and animals. - Mosquitos: are the members of the family Culicidae; these insects have a pair of scaled wings, a pair of halteres, a slender body, and long legs. The females of most mosquito species suck blood from other animals. Size varies but is rarely greater than 15 mm (0.6 inches). - There’s no justification for supporting racism as some people got out of there way to justify such indecent remark against a place of worship to Muslims. I must have completely failed to see that an INSECT is the WEST is the way to identify with Islamic places or worship – its even more saddening to see others justify such remarks. - I want no association with Wikipedia from this day forward since RACISM and OFFENSIVE remarks are justified and accepted by so called educated-people, rather then being corrected - Good luck to the non racist people. --NEWUSER|CARPEDIEM (talk) 12:27, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)
    • Klonimus is not a racist and calling islam-criticism racism is the same nonsense as calling criticism on Christianity racism. Klonimus, thx, I will keep it into mind. --Germen (Talk | Contribs ) 07:47, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] VFD

Just letting you know about Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/HYP (universities) 2. If you have an opinion, please vote. I am notifying people who have been active on either side of the debate. —Lowellian (talk) 23:54, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] My RFA: Thanks

Thank you for your support on my RFA. Now that I have been promoted, I promise to be as hardworking and fair with the admin tools as I have been with the other areas here on Wikipedia. See you around and happy editing. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:50, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RfA

I thought that you might want to consider this RfA: Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship#BrandonYusufToropov -- Stereotek 19:02, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Israel and the UN

  • H.RES.282 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding manifestations of anti-Semitism by United Nations member states and urging action against anti-Semitism by United Nations officials, United Nations member states, and the Government of the United States. (Passed on 6/7/2005 409-2)

Broken link. Shows error message: "Please resubmit your search Search results are only retained for a limited amount of time.Your search results have either been deleted, or the file has been updated with new information."

Hi - why do you keep changing God to Allah on the bombing page? Secretlondon 8 July 2005 20:31 (UTC)

[edit] Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda → Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda conspiracy theory - name change vote

Hello, there is a vote to rename Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda to Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda conspiracy theory. The voting is here: Talk:Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda#poll on changing the name of this_page. I would appreciate it if you could vote. Thanks. ObsidianOrder 05:21, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Usergroup

Consider my name added to the list.

Regards,

Guy Montag 16:45, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] SIIEG invite

I thought that this might interest you: Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam:SIIEG -- Karl Meier 12:45, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Altalena

Very interesting article. I was thinking the same thoughts when I read it a week ago. I think I'll add some information from it. You should too.

Guy Montag 01:57, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Existentializer

Just for your information: [3] Existentializer banned for "suspicion" based on someone's vandalizing his user page. This is way out of line. Ni-ju-Ichi 05:15, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] BaronLarf's RFA

Thanks for your support on my recent RFA. Please let me know if I can help with any particular administrative responsibilities, or if you have any problems with the way I use the admin tools. Cheers. --BaronLarf 15:27, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Al Andalus

If you have a chance, would you mind reviewing the current dispute there, and giving your thoughts? Thx. Jayjg (talk) 18:54, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dhimmi and Ger Toshav

Please see User:Heraclius latest edits pointing the articles to each other. Jayjg (talk) 00:32, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Request for third opinion

Heraclius is refusing to compromise and I have requested help with a third opinion. I will appreciate if you will take a look at Talk:Din (Islamic term) and give your opinion. Thank you. Nickbee 19:38, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] History of Palestine

Just wondering which of the factual errors you had in mind when you put the tag on. --John Z 21:31, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] John Birch Society

Thanks for that deletion. They sure didn't belong on the page. Just plain weird.  :-) --Cberlet 22:47, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Din (Islamic term)

Heraclius is rv warring, and he has announced that he has alerted other editors. Nickbee does not seem to be around. Please see if some sense can be talked to the rv warrior. Thank you. Exmuslim 19:58, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RuBisCO

RuBisCO
The current science collaboration of the week is RuBisCO.
Please help improving this article to featured article standard.
Last week's collaboration was Krypton fluoride laser - See how it was improved

--Deryck C. 14:22, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dilpazier Aslam and Prophet-removal

Thanks for the kind words! Didn't notice them until just now, for some reason. Babajobu 15:04, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] re: VfD Campaign against books critical to Islam

Hi, thanks for letting me know. I actually placed a vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Islam and the Jews: The Unfinished Battle right before seeing your comment on my talk page. I've voted on the third one now as well. I'm a Muslim myself, but that doesn't mean I'd want to hide all indications of there being any criticism at all of my faith. - ulayiti (talk) (my RfA) 23:51, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Nazism and Islamism

I saw the VfD on the Nazi Conncetion of Islamic Terrorism article. It's pretty ridiculous that BYT is trying to delete it.

On a related note, I have been thinking for a while to start an article on the connections between Nazism and Islamism. The affair of the Mufti of Jerusalem during WWII is the most notable example. But there are also reports in the media of neo-Nazi organizations collaborating with radical Islamist organizations in anti-Semetic efforts. Furthermore, in places such as Palestine, Syria, and Egypt, anti-Semetic propoganda from the Nazi era are widely disseminated through the print media and over public broadcasting. Anti-Semetic propoganda originating from the Nazi era is rife in Muslim countries. Take for example the statements of the former Prime Minister of Malaysia, Mahathir bin Mohamad, that "Jews rule the world by proxy." --Zeno of Elea 06:52, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Professional victims

Hi, Klonimus. Don't forget to sign your vote on the AfD. Cheers, Joyous (talk) 18:23, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Book Stuff

Isn't it annoying when people take a subject that you care about and wrap it up into a conspiracy theory that makes your legitimate complaints seem bizarre? Anyway, happens all the time. Excellent page. I added some more books and generally tweaked language and added details, but your basic page had already done all the hard work. :-)

Hi. We probably disagree on the other books. They seem too marginal for an entry, but I do not have either expertise or strong opinions about them. --Cberlet 23:29, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] ulayiti's RfA

Hi Klonimus, and thanks for your support of my RfA. I'm an administrator now, and I hope that I'll live up to the community's expectations as one. Your vote of confidence is much appreciated. - ulayiti (talk) 16:09, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Yuber arbitarion and Zionist terrorism

They are trying to get me banned? I cooperate, I discuss, and I rarely, if ever personally attack good standing editors. They have no basis for such a ban. As for the Zionist terrorism, as always there will have to be a compromise, but I don't understand what qualifies these people to be in Zionist terrorism catagory instead of lone wolf terrorism catagory, which is more appropriate to their motivations and actions. They were not sponsored by any group, trained by any group, or received logistics from any group. On what basis can they keep them in that article? Personally, I am tired of self described kings of NPOV like Zero, who are little less than Arabists, to push their pov as though it was the truth. No one wants to bring their beliefs on the table and discuss them. I don't hide my political affiliation and yet I get more slack for being honest than those who hide behind veneers of neutrality. Guy Montag 08:27, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alleged causes of Hurricane Katrina

I realize that there were strong feelings on both sides with respect to the outcome of the AfD for this article, now located at Alternative theories regarding Hurricane Katrina. I would like to assure those who expressed concerns about the content, tone, and potential for degradation of this article that I intend for it to continue to exist only as long as is necessary to draw the contributions of fringe theorists away from the more substantial Hurricane Katrina articles. Once interest in this topic dies down, I'll quietly trim and merge this information into the appropriate general-topic articles. In the interim, I will carefully watch this page to prevent it from being abused, and I will continue to work towards making this article NPOV, properly sourced, and useful to those seeking an accurate record of the hysterics that so often follows catastrophe. Cheers. -- BD2412 talk 00:53, 14 September 2005 (UTC)



[edit] Middle school renomination

hello can you please look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nautilus Middle School it is being voted on again because Dismas wants to erase two dozen schools today Yuckfoo 20:40, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

  • Might want to take a look at Cromer high too. Kappa 23:10, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image:AlHusayniHitler.jpg

Hey. This image should be by all rights deleted by now since Template:No source has been on it for a long time. I was wondering if you had a source and one that would show/prove its copyright status. You changed it to fairuse but you must have reasoning for that move. What makes it fair use? I know you wrote about that book which I think used this image on the cover. Maybe that will help to explain why this is fair use or what exactly its status is. Without explanation your fair use is conjecture and... it (besides it bad quality) is actually a pretty good picture. gren グレン 06:58, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

That seems fairly convincing. Since it says it was an official Nazi photo you should link that image to show it has been used. Also, Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags#German_government_copyright might be relevant to you. I just recommend changing the copyright and removing unverified before in case it gets deleted as it really should have been by now. Also, you must interpret whether it is derrivative work since it seems to have been cropped and definitely had compression change. Cheers. gren グレン 07:30, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Arbitration case involving Yuber

The Arbitration case centred on Yuber, to which you gave comment, has closed. As a result of this:

  • Both Yuber and Guy Montag are each placed on Wikipedia:Probation for one year from the date of closing this case (9th of October, 2005). Should any sysop feel that it is necessary that either of them be banned from an article where they is engaged in edit warring, removal of sourced material, POV reorganizations of the article, or any other activity which the user considers disruptive they shall place a template {{Yuber banned}} or {{Guy Montag banned}} as appropriate at the top of the talk page of the article, and notify them on their talk page. The template shall include the ending date of the ban (one year from this decision) and a link to Wikipedia:Probation. The template may be removed by any editor, including them, at the end of the ban. If they edit an article they are banned from, you will be briefly blocked from editing Wikipedia, for up to a week for repeat offenses.
  • Yuber is instructed to use only this account, and no anonymous IPs. What editing constitutes Yuber's is up to any sysop to decide. If Yuber violates this, any sysop is authorised to ban them for up to a week.
  • Guy Montag is banned from editing any article related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from the date of closing this case (9th of October, 2005).

Yours,

James F. (talk) 11:44, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Religion in Israel

Hi Klonimus. I thought you might be interested in improving the Religion in Israel article. Cheers. Jayjg (talk) 22:12, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] VfD

I thought that you might be interested in this VfD: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Everlasting_Hatred:_The_Roots_of_Jihad -- Karl Meier 18:35, 13 October 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Industrial processes

Thanks for adding Industrial rendering to the category. If you happen to know anything more about the process - like what types of boilers(?), or filtering is used, that'd be most excellent...
~ender 2005-10-13 18:59:MST

[edit] Michael Lerner (rabbi)

You said that the recent edit looked like it was copy/pasted from somewhere... If you mean this [4] version, then yes, that would be why I reverted it to this [5] one. Your edit leaves the two stubs, is unwikified, and still looks like a copy/paste. raylu 17:08, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RfA

Question for you, Klonimus, at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship/Anonymous_editor#Arab-Israeli_reference. Cheers, SlimVirgin (talk) 16:51, 25 October 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Reply to "Why nothing seems to work"

Look Klonimus, I had nothing against you personally, but since this rfa began, you have started to gather people to vote against me in bad faith. Much of what you do I interpret as POV too, especially these personal attacks against BYT or other Muslim editors. I barely have ever contacted you or even met you, so it seems highly odd that you would go to such lengths to try this and exaggerate this bias towards me. However, I am assuming good faith over the part of your last message that was not personal attack and I would like to hope that we can get along whenever we meet later in the future. Thanks. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 04:11, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

I am not angry at anyone. I just don't understand your actions. I understand why others may have concerns but you have done nothing but escalate that and call people to have a bias against me to begin with. Like I said before, I would like to hope that we can get along whenever we meet later in the future. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 04:36, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ariel

Thanks for the note - seems quiet now. Jayjg (talk) 01:49, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

There's a similar debate going on at Israeli settlement, or perhaps it's now Israeli settlements in the West Bank, it appears to be moving. Jayjg (talk) 20:19, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Your test has been reverted

Ok, ok. I don't think I've ever been called "sourpuss" before! ^_^
Ancient history, all right? - brenneman(t)(c) 11:18, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

Thank you Klonimus, those were some very nice things you said about me, and I appreciate it and value your opinion. Regards, Babajobu 21:37, 31 October 2005 (UTC)


I didn't know we shared a mutual acquaintance! Kade 08:27, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Compromise proposal on Template:Suicide

I have a possible solution to the dispute on Template talk:Suicide#Compromise proposal. When you have time, take a look at it and note your possible assent or not in the appropriate section. Thanks! — Phil Welch 22:39, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RFA

Hi Klonimus. I wonder if you might review your vote at Ramallite's RFA, and perhaps re-consider. I think if you look at his recent edits and comments you would find little objectionable in them, and, in fact, much to admire. I think his being an admin would be a real asset to Wikipedia. Regards, Jayjg (talk) 18:07, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Troll warning This discussion page may contain trolling. Before you post any reply, consider how you might minimize the effects of trollish comments. Simply ignoring certain comments may be the best option. If you must respond, a temperate response is always best, whether trolling is suspected or not.

[edit] Yuber's reverting

It certainly looks like a violation of his Arbitration ruling to me, but perhaps you should get it clarified with the Arbitrators who ruled on it. Jayjg (talk) 23:35, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Have you contacted the members of the Committee who imposed this sanction? Please recall that any administrator can enforce Arbitration Committee rulings. There are currently close to 700 administrators, so perhaps you just need to get opinions from a couple more of them. Jayjg (talk) 17:01, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

I have stated some opinions on Talk:Nikah about the scope of the Pipes debate, if you wouldn't mind commenting that'd be great. gren グレン 00:29, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Howdy back

Yes I certainly know what you mean. I do walk a fine line at times and so on but I try not to cross over it. --CltFn 06:14, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Howdy - Kade

I thank you for the invitation, but I'm not interested in becoming a member of any organization that accepts people like me as a member. I'm not yet convinced that France is a victim of islamic extremism, unfortunately, my opinion is that the socialist ideal of a "right" to employment is their reason for rioting. When people believe that their rights, real or perceived, have been violated, they will become violent. Kade 07:42, 8 November 2005 (UTC)


I disagree, even if you don;t have a job, that's no excuse to riot and commit arson. That's not what civilised people do. At the end of the day, every mob action is an aggregation of the actions of individual people. I refuse to accept explanations for events which absolve people of thier personal responsibility to behave in a moral fashion

Socialism is all about the removal of personal responsibility from the equation. Marx's class struggle and conflict theory all absolve a person of any rational decision making, asserting that any decision made by the proletariat, of purchase or where they work, is simply an illusion of contentment perpetuated by the bourgeiouse. Notice I never said I approved of their rioting, nor that there is a right to employment, only that France, as a Democratically Socialist nation tries to propagate that myth. Kade 09:30, 8 November 2005 (UTC)


Apparently you didn't find my joke funny. Kade

[edit] Voting

I have started looking at who voted

take this forexample:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Ramallite&diff=prev&oldid=27185058

Never voted for any RfA. Active for a week . How did he got to vote ? what does he know about interaction with the candidate and more important : who told him to support ?

Zeq 13:22, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] See? Socialism.

http://www.slate.com/id/2129921?nav=nw

Read it, read it. Kade 18:58, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Le Chenadec

no problem, I was a bit uppity myself (I should know better than to quibble like this) -- I'm just a mergist I quess, but the article does no harm :) best, dab (ᛏ) 09:12, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Crazy changes by Gilgamesh

Unfortunately, User:Gilgamesh is now imposing his own views by changing the transliterated Hebrew names of articles with redirects to unreadable Hebrew names and fonts, as if his criteria are the only ones to reckon with, when there are in fact several. My computer, as I am sure many others' as well, does not pick up his type of fonts, and thus he is messing up articles such as Safed, Hadera, Holon, Afula, Arad, Israel and many others defacing them and making them unreadable on the web. He is going to DESTROY the normal usage of Wikipedia's Hebrew transliterations to satisfy his own needs without there being any consensus. Common usages are being thrown out in favor of obscure and pedantic academic usages familiar to only a handful of unkown academics. He should be called upon to stop BEFORE he rushes to do further damage without any consensus being reached. All his changes should therefore be reverted. See all his recent contributions via: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Gilgamesh I thank you for your interest, and urge all readers here to act. IZAK 04:11, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hebrew naming conventions

At the present time there is a serious discussion taking place, aiming at some consensus that will result in "official" Wikipedia guidelines about how Hebrew should be used and written in Wikipedia articles. Because of your past or ongoing interest in these type of articles with Hebrew words in them, your attention is called to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Hebrew) [6] TO MAKE YOUR VIEWS KNOWN AND TO ADD TO THE DISCUSSION BEFORE THE "DOORS ARE SHUT" PLEASE SEE THE RELATED DISCUSSION PAGE AT Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Hebrew) [7] Thank you! IZAK 04:11, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Please help to watch this

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2005_civil_unrest_in_France&diff=28183360&oldid=28181683

Thanks.

BTW, Ramallite start showing his "true colors":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Zeq#Your_.22no_hate.22_article Zeq 06:08, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of victims of the American Civil War

Could you please revisit the discussion, read my comments there and consider changing your vote?

I think two reasons used to delete this are faulty:

  1. This list includes information which would be lost if categorized. Categories cannot list the date and manner of death in a organized manner as lists do. Categorizing would lose the info.
  2. Wikipedia is not a memorial doesn't apply as that rule is for people who do not deserve an article. These people played major roles in the American Civil War and therefore do not fall under the memorial clause of WP:NOT. They already have articles, and lists listing closely related people should not be deleted because they happen to be dead.

Thanks for your attention. - Mgm|(talk) 10:09, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Karmafist

You're featured on User:Karmafist/users to watch; recently described by another editor as a "hate page". Andy Mabbett 11:08, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Now recreated at User:Karmafist/kittens and sunshine, with the same content, but no redirect from the former. Andy Mabbett 08:58, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
Now recreated at User:Karmafist/Notepad, with the same content, but no redirect from either of the above. Andy Mabbett 10:37, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mufti & the Nazis on Religion in Israel

Hi Klonimus. You've now inserted the same content on the Grand Mufti and his relationship with the Nazis four times into Religion in Israel, without attempting to discuss what is clearly not a straight issue. Please do not continue to ignore the contentiousness of the issue, and join in the discussion rather than pretending there was none and continuing to reinsert the same lines. jnothman talk 17:40, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] yuber

i have been looking into this yuber fellow and I see you have had problems with him too. all he does is revert me everywhere especially Syria and History of Syria. he is a syrian apologist. can anything be done about him? John McW 15:33, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

thank you for your note. I am so frustrated with yuber, and you are right the admins here are sympathetic to him. he's not the first one i've seen here like that either. 6 months is a long time to wait i've already given up here a few times. you said "Just make sure you have good cited sources, and he can't touch you", but that is the problem I do bring good cited sources and he deletes them anyway. sometimes he deletes them and says "deleting uncited" even while he deletes the links I put in! then he puts in all sorts of syrian apologetic stuff with no cited sources at all! just watch, he will be reverting me on Syria or History of Syria again in a few minutes, or he will get his pet marsden to do it for him. John McW 15:55, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Your major edit...

... began at 19:53. May I ask how long you anticipate it taking? BrandonYusufToropov 20:07, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] List of dictators

Hey there, I would be grateful for your assistance in countering the systematic vandalism of a admin on the List of Dictators page. An administrator is blanking the page every few hours, without any AfD or anything. Yours,

jucifer 23:12, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RfA thanks

I'd like to thank you for your feedback at my RfA. Given that your objection was due to my lack of experience, I'd like to invite you to feel free to be quick to raise any concerns that you may have in the future at my Talk page. Good luck with your editing. Jkelly 09:03, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] please view

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fred_Bauder#complete_failure_of_wikipedia_NPOV_policy

[edit] Arbcom

Thanks for the words of support. Unfortunately I am coming to believe that the Arbcom, or significant parts of it, are stacked against me in this case. The current dispute involves User:Cberlet who is Chip Berlet, a liberal political activist in real life. Cberlet basically filed this case agaist me and 4 other editors for doing nothing more than adding sourced criticisms of his real life person on the Chip Berlet page. There aren't even any real policy violations involved except by Cberlet himself, who has made many venomous personal attacks on me and the other editors (e.g. this). The Arbcom nevertheless jumped to accept his case within about 48 hours, including with a vote to accept by Jayjg who had been a vocal participant in favor of Cberlet during lesser dispute resolutions over the last year. Earlier today Jayjg adamantly refused my request that he recuse himself as the arbitration policy requires, even though he cast votes in favor of Cberlet on a related earlier RfC and made multiple comments espousing Cberlet's positions on articles involving him.

The case seems to be stacked and I fear it's beginning to show on the "proposed decision" page. Currently there are all sorts of proposed findings that allege wrongdoings by every single editor Cberlet accused, including me. Right now they're voting on a proposal that I supposedly "harassed" Cberlet, yet they haven't even posted a link to one single diff showing what I specifically did that was so wrong! The proposed penalty is even more outrageous - they're trying to put me on probation for a year and admonish me to treat Cberlet better (even though I've never insulted him, though he regularly and frequently makes verbally abusive posts about me). Meanwhile there are dozens upon dozens of documented personal attacks and other misbehavior by Cberlet on the evidence page, but as of right now the only proposed sanction against him is a tiny slap on the wrist to avoid excessive involvement in edits to his own page. The entire process is highly disheartening and does not speak well for fairness in hearings on wikipedia. I consider wikipedia to be a great project and the majority of its regular editors are good, decent contributers. The pool of higher ups, on the other hand, leaves much to be desired. Quite frankly, whenever I find a dispute around here recently it's always been with a bunch of admins who are trying to prop up their buddies and rule the place with an iron fist! Rangerdude 10:08, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] nazislam

Found the image here (in french) and here translated in english

You might check this other site too [8] --CltFn 04:46, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] *Wikipedia:Requested moves/Islamofascism (term) – Islamofascism (term) → Islamofascism (move)

[edit] If there were only more of you

Thanks for your vote on the "Metric Downsizing" page...thats 2. Chooserr

[edit] New vote for deletion

[edit] Vote and discussion on moving Islamofascism (term) to Islamofascism moved to Talk:Islamofascism (term)

Vote and discussion on moving Islamofascism (term) to Islamofascism moved to Talk:Islamofascism (term) - Just so you know. --Chaosfeary 12:55, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Foreign relations of Syria

I have warned User:Yuber on his Talk: page. Jayjg (talk) 20:58, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Cities with significant Arab Israeli populations

Hi Klonimus: Please see the Vote for Deletion (vfd) for Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 December 4#Category:Cities with significant Arab Israeli populations. Thank you. IZAK 13:06, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] User Bill of Rights

You may be interested in Wikipedia:User Bill of Rights. (SEWilco 05:12, 9 December 2005 (UTC))

[edit] Emerging consensus on VfD

On Talk:Islamofascism (term) you justify your support vote with the words "This is the emerging concensus on VfD." I have no idea what you are talking about, and asked you to justify the claim in the Comments subsection, which I think you didn't see. Since I think the idea that there is some such consensus is behind several support votes (explicitly by Zeq), can you please respoond to my comment there? Thanks. --- Charles Stewart 21:21, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image galleries

You have in the past commented on Image Galleries nominated for deletion. Most galleries are nominated because the nominators feels that galleries violate WP:NOT. The William-Adolphe Bouguereau gallery has been nominated for deletion (here). A proposal to modify WP:NOT is here. Please join either or both conversations and comment as you see fit. Dsmdgold 16:20, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Radhanite

I put this article up for featured status. Your input would be most welcome. --Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 22:35, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Islamist Terrorism

Just an FYI, the article needs work, and was the target of a meatpuppetry revert war effort coordinated by user:Anonymous editor earlier today.

I've responded in talk to LeeHunter's ludicrous claims trying to equate the writer of one of the sources with a drunk in the alley wearing a tinfoil hat. Your thoughts might be of help.

Thanks.

[edit] Yad Vashem

You added a link to the Yad Vashem article. Unfortuantely it's now broken. Could you please provide the correct link and a more full reference if possible. Otherwise the link should be removed from that article.

For future, it's worth giving more full citations. If you include the article title and author along with the date and publication then others will normally be able to repair the link without your help or find the material in the newspaper's archives. All the best; Mozzerati 12:56, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hebrew Alphabet

Saw this message, what do you think of it? IZAK 06:30, 25 December 2005 (UTC):

"I have rewritten the articles on all the Hebrew letters here and before I replace the pages, your input would be appreciated. Thanks! Sputnikcccp 16:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC)"

[edit] For your information

To avoid a smear campaign by Anonymous editor (talk • contribs) and Irishpunktom (talk • contribs), I have to point out that I'm writing you because you where in the past involved with this user, and AE has in his last RFA many many times campaigned at other users (also to those users who voted oppose), and that he gathered opposition at Babajobu's fist RFA), and that a large part of his wiki-communications are per Email, and there are no policies against this (except the "policy" that it is right if AE does it, but wrong if others do it). I believe in democratic values, so everybody who had any interactions with an user should have the right to be informed and to express his opinion. But I advise you NOT to vote in order to boycott the kind of wiki-politics and wiki-clique behaviour I have seen on the RFA Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Anonymous editor 2.

[edit] RFA/William M. Connolley 2

You participated in the first RFA so you may be interested in Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/William M. Connolley 2. (SEWilco 07:43, 11 January 2006 (UTC))

[edit] User talk:Saduj al-Dahij

What do you mean "for what its worth, I support your message"? Thats Jews are terrorists...? freestylefrappe 02:35, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Islamofascism redirect again

Hey... I don’t know if you have any interest in this subject anymore, but there is yet another attempt to bury the Islamofascism page elsewhere. If you’re interested, the debate is here: [[9]] IronDuke 19:06, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please look at Amin_al-Husayni

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Islamophilia (second nomination)

I thought that maybe you'd be interested in this vote for deletion. -- Karl Meier 11:43, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Situation of administrator abuse

Hi, I'm in a potentially awkward position with an Administrator. I have read the Wiki pages on dispute resolution but I'm still not sure how to proceed.

The Admin ContiE has a personal grudge against me for reasons I do not fully understand. He has been this way since I began frequenting wikipedia.

I have done work improving the furvert article. He has basically gone on a crusade against any edit I make. He controls every furry category article and several others ruthlessly. He is an iron fist and bans anyone he edit wars with. I had uploaded pictures and he deleted them with no talking. He seems to believe I am every person he has had an edit war against. He is always using personal attacks, calling me troll without reason. I uploaded them again and he voted them for deleted, but to his surprise the person who runs the images, thank you Nv8200p, found they were acceptable once I tagged them properly. Just recently he removed both the images without himself discussing it in the talk page (unless he was the same person who discussed only one) with the edit here [10] Then ContiE assumed bad faith, added his constant insult of troll in the talk page. It appears on a completed different wiki, a comedy one in all things, somebody else stole my username and I believe this was Conti himself and uploaded them. ContiE showed it as his reason. While vandalism like his, I would revert and mention it, he would ban me permanently if I undid his edit. That is why I am asking admins for help. He holds a couple of accounts on wikipedia and I think they are administrators so I have to be careful who I tell about this. Arights 06:21, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:People killed by or on behalf of Muhammad

thought you would be interested. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 15:28, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Long talk page

Greetings! Your talk page is getting a bit long in the tooth - please consider archiving your talk page (or ask me and I'll archive it for you). Cheers! BD2412 T 00:06, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Page's trend test

Hi Klonimus... I see you tagged Page's trend test as needing expert attention. It's long ago, but do you remember why? While I'm not a statistician, I'm reasonably familiar with the technical literature in this area and I can't see anything seriously deficient in the article. Was there a particular area of improvement you felt it needed? An anon is doing some editing on it at the moment, but not everything s/he is doing is accurate so I will have to go back to it soonish. seglea 23:42, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your contact info

Hi Klonimus: You have not enabled your Wikipedia Email feature in your "my preferences" at the top of your user page. Sometimes editors overlook that when it's a useful way of staying in touch with other editors. Best wishes. IZAK 17:52, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Case for Israel

Hi! I recently added a few brief edits to this article. I noticed you had added one of the first sentences: The Case for Israel attempts to refute common criticisms of Israel, and defend Israel as an example of a sucessful Western-style democracy coping with the challanges of Islamic terrorism. I was wondering where you came up with it. I am currently reading the book, and so far I see it as more analytical of the true intent, historical and current, of the two groups. Is that a review or a comment from another source, or is it your interpretation (which is okay)? Please comment. Thanks. --Shamir1 00:23, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../k/l/o/User_talk%7EKlonimus_1b78.html"