User talk:Urthogie/archive/

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 R&I 2 Brilliant 3 Inadvertent deletion?? 4 User account blocking 75.25.204.215 5 Who was blocked ? 6 Help on Editing 7 Black supremacy 8 Thanks 4 the word 9 Questions on Zionism, etc 10 egypt 11 AfD nomination of Canonist 12 WP:CfD 13 Activism 14 Advice requested 15 Indie hip hop 16 Thanks! 17 Do you know anything about this? 18 unhelpful 19 take a look 20 Great save on Campusj deletion discussion 21 "race and Egypt" 22 Got up, on the floor... 23 Thanks Urthogie. 24 Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot 25 What have you done?

[edit] R&I

Mahalo (thank you) for your contributions to the Race and Intelligence article. Your focused discussion and pertinent edits are greatly appreciated! --JereKrischel 02:26, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Brilliant

I see that you are now redefining articles to allow the easier insertion of your POV. Thanks for making it even more impossible to get these articles, which some of us have worked on extensively, into coherent shape. Libertatia 19:02, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Last comment here, but I believe it was you who "brought the bullshit" to my talk page in the first place. Libertatia 23:31, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inadvertent deletion??

I just noticed that in your edit to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_anarchist_communities&diff=97230194&oldid=96808396], you not only restored your two boxes at the top of the page, but also deleted several dozen edits I made to the page to improve it's handling of citations.

Was your deletion of my several dozen edits intentional or careless?

If intentional, why? Lentower 22:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User account blocking 75.25.204.215

What are you talking about as to your comment about the above with your comment: "How is one to assume good faith for a user who goes so far as to talk to his own accounts to push his ridiculous POV?--Urthogie " ?

trueblood 02:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Who was blocked ?

I am confused was the user above blocked or user sidique because I looked at the above user and I dont think he was blocked ?

trueblood 03:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Help on Editing

Can you look at the article Aga Khani and Islamic Cults and see what you think , please post your opinion on the discussion page,I would like as many people as possible to put in their views to make these articles proper

Thanks

trueblood 03:30, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Black supremacy

We need to talk about the text you replaced. Please see the talk page. futurebird 20:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

ANCIENT EGYPTIANS

"I thought that those busts were made during the 26th (or was it 25th?) dynasty... too long after menes for them to know what menes looked like. Correct me if I'm wrong. I may be on this point. Provide sources and dates, please."

Who said they were made in the 25 or 26 dynasty? who questions the time frame they are supposed to be found in? i think its your turn to get sources for this claim. as far as i know they are authentic from the first 3 dynastys.

"Because most people are ignorant, and don't know that the Egyptians looked unique and were a mixed-race society"

so professional egyptologist are ignorant and dont know the difference between a mixed race person and a semetic looking one? its got nothing to do with them being biased right?

"Several things. Domestication is a big one. There wouldn't have been a sizable population if domestication wasn't introduced first from the Fertile Crescent (cirac 6000 BC). There's more stuff, but you should read up on your history if you want to know."

domestication wasnt introduced from elsewhere, The Nilo-Saharans had granaries By 7200 or 7300 BCE, and sedentary sediments. didnt you know that

"I honestly don't know much about them. From the little I have read I would say they were of mixed-race, most of their ancestors were likely from the Western Desert. How does that relate to this exactly?"

it relates to things because everything advanced in africa seems to be according to you and a lot of other people interested in ancient history mixed race, never black african. the badarians are from the south the same culture and colur of the nubians. check out ian shaw- the oxford history of egypt.194.176.105.35 02:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC)viola

"What do you mean, "my turn"? That implies that you've sourced anything thus far. You haven't. You initiated this conversation-- you even chose the points we'd discuss-- its your liability to present evidence for your points, and me for mine. This is your point. Defend it."

er you are the one who said they may of been made in the 25 or 26 dynasty so it is up to you to prove it, is there any egyptologist who questions the age of the busts if not we have to assume they were made when the pharoah who they were made after were alive. the only people who i know said they were made in the 26 dynasty is the people who moderate stormfront.

"You asked me about "most people", not "most Egyptologists". Please don't switch around your questions. Most Egyptologists are accurate if they're published in peer reviewed respected scientific journals"

i ask a simple question about bias. if the mainstream beleive in a mixed society then the programme should reflct this and not just put semetic people as the egyptians.

"First off, you can have granaries without domestication, and you can have sedentary settlements without domestication. Second off, the only Nilo-Saharans who there is any evidence of them having developed domestication independently were the Ethiopians and some parts of Sahel (most of Sahel was not Nilo-Saharan, only a small portion of it was). Third off, even if these two places independently developed domestication (the proof is shaky-- their crops may have been domesticated in Southwest Asia first), but I know of no proof whatsoever of either of these two places transfering domesticates to Egypt"

ok mainstream like keita say it was a cultural transfer of crops from asia to egypt. the other things that made the culture of egypt was totally african from the south.

"A study in 1972 of their remains found them to be mixed-race. They are not the same culture as the nubians. Every culture of people is different-- respect human diversity. The reason science says Egyptians were mixed race is because that's what the evidence shows. Egyptologists today sometimes even go out of their way to avoid bias-- Tut's image for National Geographic was created by researchers who were not told who it was or where he was from"

cranial studies like the one stroahl did are hard because the masai may be thought of as mixed race or white is seeing a skull.the king tut looks nothing like the guy from his staues busts and funeral masks. i do respect human diversity. but the badarian and naqada are located in the south. there is no proof what so ever except wishful thinking that they would of been anything but black african. http://www.ancient-egypt.co.uk/metropolitan/index_1.htm194.176.105.35 03:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC)viola76

yeah no problem take as long you want Viola76 06:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)viola76

[edit] Thanks 4 the word

I am happy to hear your honesty, It would be worrying if the whole world agreed, so its all good. Racism has to be wrong period, and that applies to Arab supremacy and Afro-supremacy, its all bad. I honestly believe in balance, and equality. the entire map of the Ha Shoah into popular culture deserves respect (wish Africans would do the same). The debate above looks very tempting but i will stay out of Egypt for now. God has a test for us & it is clear killing each other isnt making him happy.Chow my friend--HalaTruth(ሐላቃህ) 04:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Questions on Zionism, etc

Thanks for your questions. I'll try to answer them. First I'm not Chomsky or Finkelstein but their POV is similar to mine on many issues. I do not know that they would agree with me. But to explain my POV--and I hope I'm logical--I'm against all States. I'm not an anarchist, either; I see States as a necessary evil given the current state of human civilization. Some are better than others. None should ever be glorified, nor treated as an end, but rather as a means to an end, that end being peace, security for ALL, democracy, people before profits, equality ect (essentially progressive values). Note I'm an anti-nationalist. Nationalism, I hold as a reactionary ideology that doesnt service the best interests of mankind and leads to treating some people better than others. There should be no "me first" thinking on the individual or group level. They are all ethically repugnant and a prime ingredient to racism.

Of course States should never be supported when they rest on the oppresssion of others. I oppose all conquest and imperialism, past and present. As far as states created by conquest, what is important is current oppression, i.e. ending it,(esp. state-sponsored) that are in the bussiness of building based on conquest of others. This must be opposed equally in all cases, which a special responsiblity for those you can have the greatest effect in changing, stoping, i.e. if I live in the US, I have a special responsiblity to speak out against things this countries does (directly or indirectly as in the case of support for Israeli occupation).

As for the meaning of a national homeland, it could mean the country of origin and native land of a people who have a strong cultural connection and history within such a territory , a cultural geography. There are many ethnic groups who holds a long history and a deep cultural association different country or geographical regions, in particular where the national identity began. And, diffferent groups can live in peace side to side, with different language, cultures, co-existing with the same country, united under the common accepted cultural norms of democratic values. This does not negate a national homeland, only having it based on the oppression of others. Hence, I'm able to be for a national homeland for the Jewish people in the land of Israel while at the same time I'm anti-Zionist and advocate for a Binational solutionGiovanni33 07:06, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I have difficulties with the notion of an ethnic state but I recognise that people have the desire that they should exist. (However, I have a real problem with comparing the state I'm a citizen of -- the United Kingdom -- with Israel, because an "English state" doesn't really make any sense to me, and is a difficult concept these days, not one subscribed to with much vigour by people of goodwill.) In any case, the Jewish people want a state of their own and I think that although it is a difficult concept (solely because of the difficulty of ethnic states in a world that has become somewhat multicultural), the case for its existence is strong. I am not sure whether another solution for where the Jewish state should be should not have been considered, but in any case, it is where it is, and I think that that should be the basis for any discussion of the future. Anyone who is unprepared to accept the continued existence of the Jewish state on some portion of the land it currently occupies would need to explain why Israel should be considered any differently than other states that were created by dispossession but whose basic legitimacy is not generally questioned. The country I now live in springs to mind. Australia was created in terrible circumstances, but it now exists. I don't think anyone wants a solution that involves its destruction, and if they did, I do not see how a constructive dialogue could be had with them.

I understand too that Israel has legitimate security concerns. In part, these stem from hostility towards its existence, although these concerns have surely lessened as it has normalised its relations with some of its neighbours. In part, they stem from hostility towards its continued harsh treatment of the Palestinians. I need not go into other reasons Israelis have for security concerns: that Jews should fear other nations who insist on a fixed ethnic identity is an understandable outcome of history.

However, it seems to us, looking from the outside, that those concerns are hijacked by aggressive nationalists, who wish a larger Israel for various reasons. We call them Zionists because they are strongly nationalist and the original Zionists were nationalists in the broader sense, not because they want a state of Israel. I don't have the time to write any more at the moment, but perhaps I will when I have more. I don't entirely share the Chomskyan view of Israel (he's not sufficiently realist in my view: in the ideal world we'd all live in communes and love each other, but it's not and we don't) but I am on "that side" if you know what I mean. Grace Note 08:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] egypt

EVIDENCE CONCERNING BLACK EGYPT

with quotation marks type in

"KHARTOUM MESOLITHIC" "KHARTOUM NEOLITHIC" "NABTA PLAYA"

additional

http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/nabtaplaya.html

lots more peer reviewed sources:

http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/keita.html

some will be usual to are discussion. Viola76 04:39, 9 February 2007 (UTC)viola76

I dont know what your view is. but my view is that ancient egypt from predynastic was "black" african. the culture came from the south. my view is egypt became more mixed as time went on. but the original egyptians were "black"Viola76 04:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC)viola76

I can recommend some forums where the participants in them are students of egyptology,genetics,anthropology and archaeology and will answer any questions you have on the ancient egyptians.

1.http://www.forumcityusa.com/index.php?mforum=africa

2.http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi ubb=forum&f=8&DaysPrune=45&submit=Go

Viola76 05:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)VIOLA76

what are you talking about my evidence of black egypt is in those links your just trying to stall. those studies are peer reviewed so please deconstruct them please and tell me why they are wrong. i can use as much evidence as i want to prove my point, what do you mean stick to one piece of evidence. now show me your peer reviewed sources that support your view of the ancient egyptians.Viola76 21:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)viola76

It seems somebody deleted the continue discussion page we were on . if you didnt get the last reply i put there tell me and ill reply again.Viola76 02:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)viola76

Heres what i wrote:

lol, urthogie, we both know there is no such thing as race, we both used race in our discussion, we know it isnt scientific to use race but we say it socially, i know it ,you know it and keita knows there isnt such a thing as race. But to stop you from stalling and distractions like this: example

PERSON: the ancient egyptians were a black race"

URTHOGIE: "define black race, the ancient egyptians were not a black race because races does not exist"

So here is what people mean when they say the original ancient egyptians were black.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=bN1KYkeBYTk&mode=related&search=

1.Now deconstruct the sources that are relevant to our discussion that i have left above and tell me why they are wrong.

2.Show me your up to date peer reviwed sources that prove your view point on the ancient egyptians

Viola76 02:25, 10 February 2007 (UTC)viola76

"First off, I love the soundtrack. Erykah Badu is one of my favorites. But youtube is not a scholarly source".

"I've provided sources for what I've said..and"

"I'll deconstruct what you supply if its scholarly"

1.Are you saying the ancient egyptians didnt look like that? lol again you are using the busts as if it is my only evidence .the you tube thing is about the fact of what the original a.e looked like and the argument of stopping you using distractions like this:

PERSON: the ancient egyptians were a black race"

URTHOGIE: "define black race, the ancient egyptians were not a black race because races does not exist"

2.no you have not where are they. show me peer reviewed sources that supports your view of A.E. stop stalling and show me. your the one who keeps on going on about sources with everyone.

3.lol Are you saying people like keita,skittles,ehret,wendorf and schild,zkarzewski,A.j boyce,kobusiewicz and others are not scholarly? face it you have no answers to the information i have provided and you are just stalling.

P:S Are you sure it wasnt you who made someone get rid of the discussion page we were having. Viola76 06:37, 10 February 2007 (UTC)viola76

"You are the one making claims right now. I don't need to source someone elses claims. That is not how an argument works. You do the work for youself, and I do the work for myself. Since I am not making a claim right now, it is your job (as the person that is making the claim) to provide sources. So far your sources have failed, so you think by asking me to provide sources you can win the argument."

I did do work for myself, i deconstructed up to date peer reviwed data and came to the conclusion that the original Ancient egyptians and their culture came from the south i.e sudan and west i.e sahara . if we dont use peer reviwed sources then we are just giving our opinion without backing it up with evidence. lol of course you have to provide sources to use as evidence in discussions i.e sources. lo my sources havent failed, again, deconstruct the sources and tell me why they are wrong. correct me if im wrong but is your claim the A.E were a mix of arab looking people and black african and meditereanean people. at what time frame did they mix. Are you saying people like keita,skittles,ehret,wendorf and schild,zkarzewski,A.j boyce,kobusiewicz and others are not scholarly? simple question.Viola76 21:55, 10 February 2007 (UTC)viola76

[edit] AfD nomination of Canonist

I've nominated Canonist, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Canonist satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canonist and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Canonist during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Sandstein 19:24, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Response left to our discussion on my talk page. Thanks.Giovanni33 01:14, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:CfD

I wanted to explain my comment on the Hip-Hop CfD in more detail. CfD is for discussion, not exclusively for deletion like the other 'fD' areas. Once a category is brought to CfD (for whatever reason), almost any of the outcomes could happen to it. Surprisingly often renames get deleted instead, deletions get merged or listified, things get kept. The problem with discussing this category on its talk page is that very few users ever go to Category talk pages. The problem specifically with the category you created is that it is one that is likely to cause WP:BEANS, and other users who have less experience with categories may go off and be WP:BOLD and try to subdivide the parent category 100 different ways without consensus. If the category is deleted, I would recommend going to the talk page for WP:ALBUMS and try to build consensus within the folks who deal with albums. I hope that this explanation is helpful to you. ~ BigrTex 23:42, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Activism

Tupac Shakur did speeches at the Malcolm X Grassroots in 1992 and 1993, late in his life he was doing speaches to encourage people to vote. He also guaranteed a political party in time for the 2000 election. License2Kill 00:05, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Advice requested

I've been attempting to overview and tidy up the geography cats which involve the places where people live. From the top level down to local neighbourhoods. There has been some overlapping and various mis-routings. It's been interesting looking at it all. However, there appear to be two useful ways of doing it - by region, and by size. And these can operate side by side quite usefully. The by region isn't a problem. But the by size has become difficult because User:Hmains wishes to use the term settlements to cover all sizes of communities, and has altered dictionary definitions [1] to fit his own understanding of the term - [2]. Community appears to be the term used most often to describe the places where people live, regardless of size. This is the definition of community - [3]. I did some sorting, placing the cat Human communities under Human geography. Human communities splitting into Urban geography and Rural geography. And those splitting into appropriate sized communities - cities, districts, neighbourhoods, villages, settlements, etc. Hmains has reverted much of my work, and insists on settlements being the term we should use - basing it on this decision, which was a declined proposal to rename Settlements by region to Populated places by region. What do you think? Is settlement an acceptable term for covering human communities ranging from well established cities down to refuge camps. Is Human community a viable alternative? Are there other choices (apart from populated places of course!)? I have started a discussion here and here, with the above wording, but no response as yet. I have left this message on the talk pages of active Geography Project members. And then on this page. I am a bit lost as the best place to discuss this issue. I don't want to delete or rename any category. And I don't want to get into a revert war. I'd like an open debate to reach sensible consensus. I'm now leaving this message on the pages of WikiProject Category members. Can you advice? SilkTork 19:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Discussion taking place at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements)#Settlements SilkTork 11:27, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Indie hip hop

As you think the article is entirely original research, how about you propose it for deletion? --Oscarthecat 21:13, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree. You have compelling arguments for the complete artificiality of the Alternative Hip Hop page, and I think you should use them to propose it for deletion. You're right, Alternative Hip Hop IS a made up genre, and that's why there are no sources either denying OR supporting it. --IRua 18:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

I love making graphs. Could you help reword this new intro? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence/Intro

I think it's important to make the point right from the start that some kinds of research have fallen out of favor, and I think we can easily source that. However, we don't want to give the impression that nobody reputable uses IQ tests or race in any kind of research. It's more the tendency to use both and then go running and leaping to the conclusion in the face of other evidence that there must be genetic differences causing the test score gaps that has fallen out of favor.

People like Steele and others accept psychometrics. futurebird 03:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Do you know anything about this?

[4] ? futurebird 05:45, 27 February 2007

[edit] unhelpful

LOL. Rbaish, you must be unaware how sane and rational you make DCV look.

I thought this was unhelpful. futurebird 19:24, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll remove it then.--Urthogie 19:30, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. futurebird 19:32, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I was just making fun of him because he seems to be this white supremacist sympathizer who actually does his foolish cause harm, like an anti-semite who talks so much about "made-up" jewish history books that people go out and read about the travesties commited against the Jews. Just found him incredibly ironic.--Urthogie 19:34, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

OK. It's not a big deal. futurebird 07:13, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I hope my recent comments at "cool" are not too harsh. futurebird 07:13, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I'll drop you a message with my reply, soon. Thanks.Giovanni33 23:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] take a look

Could you take a look at the new article I've created Race and health ? futurebird 17:27, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Great save on Campusj deletion discussion

Hi Urthogie,

That was a perfect argument on the deletion discussion page. Please incorporate some of that in the article and you shouldn't have deletion noms in the future. There are only a few votes now (and you should add yours in the style the other people did, with a bullet and Keep in boldface, although I assume any administrator who looks over the discussion will count you as a "Keep", but if the admin is busy or distracted he just might miss it). I think after your comments the article will definitely stay, but we'll see. The delete supporters will need to have a consensus, which almost always means something well over a majority. Best, Noroton 01:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "race and Egypt"

I must say the present version looks much cleaner and saner to me than most of what's been there for the past year or so. Maybe best work from it than reverting to the disastrous state the article used to be in. regards, dab (𒁳) 16:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

alright, I see I picked an inopportune moment :) I'll peek in again some later time. dab (𒁳) 16:54, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Got up, on the floor...

...cuz your link brought it all back from way back when and made us get down boogie oogie oogie. Thanks for cheering me up. :-) ---Sluzzelin talk 00:18, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks Urthogie.

My first question naturally is whether you are Jewish and if so how would you define yourself in terms of various characteristics? For instance do you believe in God? Are you Jewish by birth and ancestry or by decision to become a Jew? Virtually all of my questions relate now to the characteristics which define Jews that some may claim make them Jewish and others not or even reject. From this I intend to develop a hierarchy of characteristics which hopefully will not have to remain dynamic but which at least some parts may prove themselves to be stable.

Thanks again for your offer to help. Being able to define and classify Jews according to such things as their attitude toward money and God and non-Jews will help me be able to argue that not all Jews can be lumped into one single category and then condemmed. Not only that but its just interesting to me all of the variety which might be found thropugh the pursuit of such a project. A similar study of Christains revealed the Hutterites to me which since I believe in the divinity of Christ and communal life is possibly the perfect religion for me. By doing such a study Jews may likewise find a particular group which better reflects their true feelings, beliefs and practices than the one with which they are currently envolved.

Thanks again... 71.100.166.228 00:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

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

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

Stubs Hip hop soul Urban culture Urban Pasifika Mafioso rap Waiapu River Country-rap Ne-Yo Scott La Rock Hip house Hardcore hip hop MC Eiht Low-rise jeans Instrumental hip hop Hip-hugger Westende Coast to coast Nasiruddin Wahid Caribbean Basin West Coast Rap-The First Dynasty

Cleanup Nas R.A. The Rugged Man The Source (magazine) Merge Sambo (ethnic slur) List of oceanic trenches Data remanence Add Sources Busta Rhymes Dirty South Daniel Dumile Wikify European exploration of Africa Garage rock Get Rich or Die Tryin' (2005 film) Expand All Eyez on Me Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Me Against the World

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 07:50, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What have you done?

Why would you delete that whole alternative hip hop entry? It was wonderful! I used it all the time!

It should be brought back! This is ridiculous! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Canucksfan06 (talk • contribs) 04:53, 17 March 2007 (UTC).