User talk:Paki.tv

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi Paki.tv, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions to the coolest online encyclopedia I know of =). I sure hope you stick around; we're always in need of more people to create new articles and improve the ones we already have. You'll probably find it easiest to start with a tutorial of how the wikipedia works, and you can test stuff for yourself in the sandbox. When you're contributing, you'll probably find the manual of style to be helpful, and you'll also want to remember a couple important guidelines. First, write from a neutral point of view, second, be bold in editing pages, and third, use wikiquette. Those are probably the most important ones, and you can take a look at some others at the policies and guidelines page. You might also be interested in how to write a great article and possibly adding some images to your articles.

Be sure to get involved in the community – you can contact me at my talk page if you have any questions, and you can check out the village pump, where lots of wikipedians hang out and discuss things. If you're looking for something to do, check out the community portal. And whenever you ask a question or post something on a talk page, be sure to sign your name by typing ~~~~.

Again, welcome! It's great to have you. Happy editing! --Spangineer (háblame) June 29, 2005 14:58 (UTC)

Contents 1 Hezbi Islami and Wikipedia:Redirects 2 Sabbatai Zevi's influence on Bektashism 3 RE Caravans Act 4 East London 5 Bakunin reverts 6 Londonistan 7 Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot 8 Ricky Bishop 9 Mediation Cabal case 10 'Smash Wikipedia, down with NPOV, down with consensus' - a note by 158-152-12-77 11 link to British 12 Jonathan Fifi'i 13 London Action Resource Centre 14 Request for Comment: London Action Resource Centre 15 LARC 16 If I were an Asian! 16.1 Fazlallah Astarabadi

[edit] Hezbi Islami and Wikipedia:Redirects

Hi there! I was the one who redirected Hezbi Islami to Hezb-e Islami, but I don't know a lot about the transliteration, only did it based on the amount of incoming links, since nobody gave me any input at the time. So if there's a standard, I'm glad that you're upholding it. One thing I'd like to mention, though, is that you left in place some double redirects. That is, you left Hezb-i-Islami and other alternate spellings redirecting to Hezb-e Islami, which was itself a redirect. And so if a person followed the link in U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, it wouldn't actually take them all the way to the article. This is no big deal, and I'm fixing it myself, but I wanted to let you know so you wouldn't make the same mistake in the future. See you around, and much appreciation for your efforts! NickelShoe 05:47, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh, if you didn't know, the way to tell if there's any double redirects is to click on "what links here" over in the toolbox on the left side of the page. Just check to make sure all the pages that say "redirect page" in parentheses redirect directly to the main article and not to each other. Later! NickelShoe 05:51, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry about checking the links for Hezbi Islami, because I went ahead and did that myself. I just wanted to make sure that you knew how to do it next time. NickelShoe 13:45, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sabbatai Zevi's influence on Bektashism

I have never before heard of Sabbatai Zevi's influence on Bektashism. This is quite interesting. Could you provide any links? Thanks! KI 16:59, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

When editing, please only add comments on talk pages. Also, when you leave comments, post them to the bottom of the thread. Thanks. KI 01:44, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE Caravans Act

you're welcome. Kurando | ^_^ 11:33, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] East London

I removed your edit as it contained errors and repeated what was already in the article. Have you looked at the West Essex article you have linked to. It is about a place in the USA. Kind regards. Mrsteviec 16:15, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bakunin reverts

As indicated, I have requested arbitration. Here is my statement:

To maintain the NPOV status of the Bakunin entry, his anti-semitic comments should not be given the undue prominence that certain people keep insisting on giving them. It is sufficient to note that Bakunin made anti-semitic comments, and then to provide a link to an acceptable original or NPOV secondary source. The current quotations are taken from anti-semitic websites and are of dubious provenance. The first quote (allegedly calling Jews an "exploiting sect," a "people of leeches," etc.) is taken from an "essay" posted on an anti-semitic website: http://library.flawlesslogic.com/jtr_01.htm. This is not an acceptable NPOV secondary source. The second quote is just a lengthier version of the first quote, and is supposedly from an essay attributed to Bakunin entitled "Polemique contre les Juifs." There is no link or other information given that would enable anyone to verify the authenticity of this alleged quotation or the essay it is supposed to be taken from. If you search for it on the internet, it shows up only on anti-semitic websites. I have yet to find a reference to this alleged essay in any library catalog or in any collection of Bakunin's writings. When I posted a "citation needed" note to this second quotation, the Iron Duke simply deleted that, claiming the current citation was adequate. Thus, I object to the inclusion of these particular quotations because they have not been properly authenticated. I also object to more than passing reference to Bakunin's anti-semitism because these lengthy quotations, even if authentic, exaggerate the importance of Bakunin's anti-semitic writings, which formed only a miniscule part of his voluminous literary output (the Archives Bakounine project published 7 large volumes of his writings, and that was not a complete collection; the International Institute for Social History in Amsterdam has since published his complete works on CD ROM. It contains thousands of pages of material). Robgraham 20:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Londonistan

I don't have to "explain" anything -- you're the one who is substituting a ranting personal tirade for factual information, so you're the one who has to explain things. In future, please put comments at the bottom of user talk pages (as is standard Wikipedia protocol). AnonMoos 16:36, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Displaying a certain degree of childish petulance if you don't get your ownway isn't necessarily the best way to improve Wikipedia articles... AnonMoos 00:51, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Anti-systemic library Muhammad Asif Muhsini Tony Conrad La Vieille Taupe Pavel Sergeevich Alexandrov Recuperation Steve Booth Al-Ahbash National Islamic Movement of Afghanistan Society of the Spectacle Islamic Movement of Afghanistan Giuseppe Fanelli Harakat-i-Islami Islamic party Golam Azam Tawalla Libyan Islamic Fighting Group Kastriot Islami Mustaali

Cleanup Arman Class War International movement for an imaginist Bauhaus Merge Islamic fundamentalism Assembly language Javed Ahmed Ghamdi Add Sources Major conflicts within anarchist thought Kalbe Abid Nubuwwah Wikify Syed Chand Patel Syed Mir Qasim Cresent International Expand Anarchism and Marxism Islamic art Indian Muslim Nationalism

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 10:59, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ricky Bishop

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Ricky Bishop, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://uffc-annex.moonfruit.com/rickybishop, and therefore a copyright violation. Ricky Bishop has been nominated for deletion.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:Ricky Bishop. Then you should do one of the following:

• Make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL at the site of the original publication.
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions at wikimedia dot org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation.

If the article has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at Ricky Bishop, after describing the release on the talk page. However, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia.For more information, take a look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Happy editing! Whpq 11:54, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mediation Cabal case

Hi Paki.tv, there is now a mediation in progress concerning the disputes at Peoples' Global Action. Please consider sharing your perspective on the case page so that we can reach a consensus on how best to resolve everyone's concerns. Thanks! - N1h1l 01:12, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 'Smash Wikipedia, down with NPOV, down with consensus' - a note by 158-152-12-77

Hi Paki.tv, I just wrote this, and thought you might be interested. Best regards from 158-152-12-77

Prediction

My prediction: Wikipedia will sell to Microsoft or Google, or otherwise partner with them in a big way, or conduct its own IPO, within five years. Linux is already big money. Open source is big money. This is the real world, i.e. the business world. It saddens me, how few people realise the above. The bureaucratically-mediated 'closing down to what is acceptable' is visible from one end of Wikipedia to the other. On a central level this is indicated by the references to verifiability through academia. Who pays for academia? Who does academia serve? You certainly won't get a proper answer by applying 'NPOV'.

NPOV? What a load of crap!

'NPOV' is boss-talk, pure and simple. It is an ideology, a chimera, a lie. There is no such thing as NPOV, nor should there be. NPOV is a cover for the POV of the boss class, and of all who want petty positions under the boss class, telling the plebs what's what. Under the latter heading I'd include all long-time politicos.

The alternative? Well, it's when proletarians get together without role-playing, when neither the bosses, nor any representatives or 'activists', are around. In places such as the UK, usually this only happens in twos and threes nowadays. The fascist and totalitarian character of current conditions can't be got rid of by imagining it doesn't exist.

A cautionary tale

If you want an analogy, look at 'health'. Some 'health' controllers were annoyed for a time, fearing hordes of the great unwashed coming into medics' surgeries with information they had found on the internet. They really hated the idea that it would be easy for people to find stuff out and share their experiences. Soon they realised it wasn't so scary, and all they had to do was to set up some 'public-access' sites, ostensibly for patients but in practice upholding respect for the medical system as is. Or just let it roll, and let the 'opinion-formers', themselves taking their opinions from other opinion-formers, and so on, all the way up to WORLD CORPORATE PR CENTRAL, take the floor. In short, the internet is as sh*t as anything else.

Many 'participatory' patients' websites are openly sponsored by pharmaceutical companies. Public opinion of medicine is organised from the top, the same as public opinion of anything else. With other sites the relationship is less immediately obvious, i.e. the corporate logos aren't used.

The system is supple. It can recuperate. This is what Wikipedia is about. It's a big focus group where anyone can wander in. "Press the red button on your remote control now". "Contribute to a Wikipedia article now".

Same old lie, just a modern wrapping

Wikipedia is, in fact, an extremely important item in current worldwide internet bullsh*t and the perception thereof. Most journalists, being lazy swine, use it. But never mind them. Many decent people with good pro-social intentions will be fooled. They will either sell out for a bit of local fame, or get burned out, I'm afraid. 'Don't get sucked in' is the best advice. These waters are run by sharks. Capitalism really is a slaughterhouse, it's not just something to say from a stage.

In a nutshell

It's the 'participation' lie. The old cartoon had it right, showing someone with a rope around their neck, and the slogan 'I'll hold, you braid'.

The revolutionary 'line' must be: smash Wikipedia, smash the internet.

The hell with consensus!158-152-12-77 12:52, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Well a few comments. On one level, NPOV is like doing an exam paper, presenting all sides of the case etc. On another level you are right, it creates the same old illusions of democracy, dressed up as modern technology. Will it get sold off for a vaste amount of money: yes I reckon so. Also Open Source Software in general, including Linux, are very important for the capitalist future. Like the railways, at first developed by private capital, and then taken over by national capital. I agree with you that changes are on the cards as regards intellectual property rights (IPR). I think I would go further and suggest that one reason why the Soviet Union was done away with was because it failed to operate copyright laws (which led to all the restraints imposed about exporting IT there set up by the USA). I agree with you that it is disappointing how little discussion there is about the limitations of Open Source. I have seen rooms full of people talking about liberalising the IPR as the next revolution. Most of these peopel are themselves are young programmers who have more to gain by using other peoples work. Whether they will feel the same when they have a substantial back-catalogue of material is another matter. Aside from political naivety, the most significant current is individualist libertarianism . . .

Returning to NPOV, it creates a very constrained writing style, which can be easily internalised - you can just get used to writing with these constraints and forget you are doing so. The point of reference is broader than academia, but still creates problems. I think the issue is that all information is distributed in a fashion helping to perpetuate capitalism, this affects the information which is available on the internet, just as much as acaedmia etc. So any interventions take place in the situation of asymmetrical warfare. It is only in times of open contestation that we have any other situation.

So why use Wikipedia? I think on my part, laziness is part of the answer. It provides a big note pad where I can work on stuff (like Emile Acollas and Joseh Heco), and perhaps get help for others. A bit of an open research tool. Yes of course anything we do becomes alienated and can be used against us. And perhaps wikipedia provides a way in which that can be speeded up. I don't think wikipedia desrves a privileged place when it comes to seizing the means of production, nor a privileged place in terms of oppressive institutions which need to be smashed. Just as the Bolsheviks used their control of the electrical power stations to help seize control in the Soviet Union, or the anarchists fought with the stalinists over control of the telephone exchange, certain industries by their nature have strategic importance in how industry as a whole operates. And of course it can be turned off at teh flick of a switch, as we saw on 7-7, when the mobile phone network was disabled. What concerns me in all this is much more the internalisation of the values embedded in these institutions, eg that NPOV is in some way "good" or "fair", or that Open Source is somehow anti-thetical to capitalism, or that teh interneyt is liberating. These illusions need to be smashed, but to what extent this involves smashing the institutions which create them and the technologies upon which they are based I think remains to be seen. I do not know how to envisage a society without any institutions - by which I mean organisations which draw together specific activities, the skills, technologies and resources through which those activities can occur - i.e. a division of labour. I do not know how the existing organisation of resources, skills and technologies would be re-organised in a communist society. However, the anti-systemic library is a very limited attempt to look at some of those questions. Yes, workers have been sharing information for generations, even under conditions when possession of certain material could be met with death. I shall leave the question of "Escape" to another day. Even Gaughin going to sun himself on a South Pacific island could not escape the contradictions of contemporary capitalism. What hope is there today? I prefer resistance to escape - which of course can be done from teh South Pacific jus as much as anywhere else.Harrypotter 09:30, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Harry! Nice to hear from you. We agree on the essentials. This will have to be short and aphoristic; I'm about to go to my Pacific island! :-)

What importance to give to the concept of institution? I don't think such an institution as a library will exist in communism. All books etc. will be in the same 'library', in which case the concept could only help to cause separation. If we kept the word, it would just mean books etc. But asking Is there a book on this in the library? would be an odd way of asking Is there a book on this?

I think some institutions will exist in communism, though. E.g. the institutionalisation of the first consumption of food after waking up, aka breakfast. Just without the hassle, the harmful additives, and any prospect of going to work. Calling for the abolition of breakfast would seem unserious and arty.

As for the internet institution, I think its abolition should be accepted as an aim by those who want a better world. I can't imagine how the internet could continue to exist in communism. It's much better to relate to people face-to-face. Getting to see them won't be a drag even if they are on the other side of the world.

I agree that open source is very important for the capitalist future, although how things will happen in China, as compared with in the US empire, is not wholly clear.

Roomsful of people thinking the liberalisation of intellectual property rights is the next revolution? I'd hazard the guess that most of them were computer programmers for whom the focus of a) their career aspirations and b) their politics was...the fascist US empire which has long carried 'FREEDOM' on its banner...

I tend to stick my fingers in my ears and go 'laaaaa' when computer programmers come out with social theories based on the economics of computer programming.

Some gibberish I found recently from a certain disreputable individual of our mutual acquaintance in the distant past is here. Presumably having a double first in classics, even one obtained via time travel, is an advantage in the US software industry.

You make an interesting point about the railways. Much of early railway investment (Russia, South America, Africa) was controlled by a handful of merchant banking families, e.g. Rothschilds and Hambros, who didn't step on each other's toes much. In those rare places where the State was involved in the construction effort, the money was raised from specific loans (largely from those same banking interests) rather than through general taxation.

Interesting that one of the spokespeople for the ones-and-zeros guys who wants to tell us all what's what, is Douglas Rushkoff who raps admiringly about how Judaism has been so successful because it's open source. Yeah, right.

"I prefer resistance to escape". Gauguin made his money on the French stock exchange before going in for the French myth of Tahiti etc., which the mass-murder advocate and marquess, de Sade, had also been into. In Tahiti he went to church every day!

Doubtless we'd agree that to build up a choice between resistance and escape as a big idea would be subjectivist, as perhaps indicated in the raising of 'preference' onto a pedestal that it would entail. I think much of the reason that resistance occurs is that it is forced. Resistance isn't a great deal of fun, just less undignified, degrading, and psychically unhealthy than being ground down into the sh*t without a fight. (Unmistakable evidence that the so-called 'anti-capitalist' movement is anything but, lies in their ignoring this point in their advertising. Quoting 'I won't make a revolution if I can't dance', or whatever that idiot American tourist Emma Goldman said, is pretty much typical). The overall aim of resistance is...to escape.

I was just making a more mundane point that too many people fail to escape what they could escape. Recently I encountered someone in her 50s, who I believe has been in debt for decades, who plans to buy a house and live in it with her elderly dad who is selling his own house and will put up some of the money. In order to get a large house, she will be getting a loan similar to the one that she has currently got, which is linked to the mortgage on 'her' present house. The result - she will probably have to continue to go to work up until she is maybe 65, to pay off the bank. And yet she has got a fine opportunity, right now, to get out of debt forever. This sort of mentality is widespread in the UK. People have much more sense in most of the rest of the world - Russia, India, wherever.

Wikipedia/NPOV. I participate on Wikipedia too... One crawls in through the interstices only. Conflict on given pages is bound to be lost, because it's the cops and our enemies generally who are most at home with NPOV, which we stand opposed to (as with moderation) but without being able to say so during a conflict. That cops find they are in the element here is indisputable. The page on archaeogeodesy was closed down by the cops, although admittedly they had unwitting help from a small businessman. Elsewhere, the encyclopaedic position is that the cold war ended in 1989 and that East European countries were mainly soviets. Not to mention the medical-industry lie that medics are doctors. Profiteering, cops, lies, all go well together. Recently I had cop trouble, people finding my choice of username objectionable, and interpreting misread rules to back themselves up. Perhaps a cop had a filter running to trap the phrase 'Smash Wikipedia'. Perhaps a GPAer called the cops. I dunno.

Talking of financially loaded greenery, I wonder whether Zack Goldsmith will be in the next front-of-house 'government'?

Catch you later; hope you're well; take care!158-152-12-77 11:13, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] link to British

Hello, when you want to link to the article about something British, please do not link to British, as that is a disambiguation page (which nothing should be linked to). Instead link to the one of the options found on that page such as United Kingdom, Great Britain or British English by writing out [[United Kingdom|British]] or [[Great Britain|British]]. Regards, Jeff3000 00:05, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Many thanxxxxxxxxxxxxxx... how about Former British Empire ? Paki.tv 23:43, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

"Former British Empire" redirects to Commonwealth of Nations, which has officially not been British since 1949. One could make a link like "former British Empire" (no colon in an article link) or former British Empire (with a direct link disambiguation). It is always best to check links by using the "Show preview" button before pressing "Save page". That way you can edit the redirects and make them into direct links. Hu 11:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jonathan Fifi'i

A tag has been placed on Jonathan Fifi'i, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Turlo Lomon 04:43, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, saw your response on my boards but it appears the admins already nuked the article despite your hang on tag. My apologies - after reading your changes, it was already becoming more clear that this was a person of historical significance. Turlo Lomon 04:55, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] London Action Resource Centre

Perhaps we can have a discussion on the talk page about how to progress further with this page? Cheers Mujinga 11:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Comment: London Action Resource Centre

hello, i have set up an rfc here to see if we can resolve this dispute. As one of the persons involved in the dispute, i would like to ask you to make a comment in the section entitled "Statements by editors previously involved in dispute". Cheers! Mujinga 03:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] LARC

Paki.tv, I have asked for some responses and participation on LARC's talk page. Since you have been a principal member in the disagreement, I would appreciate your insight. Please respond as soon as possible. —bbatsell ¿? 17:46, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

I see you have been able to revert to your preferred version of the page (despite consensus that I can see), but have not been able to participate in discussion. Do you plan on continuing this particular course of action? Thanks, —bbatsell ¿? 17:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] If I were an Asian!

HmmmHarrypotter 17:39, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fazlallah Astarabadi

I've been adding material from the Bashir book which is very interesting.Harrypotter 20:58, 1 February 2007 (UTC)