User talk:IsraelXKV8R

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

OTRS icon The content of this article has been derived in whole or part from http://www.bobcargill.com/about.htm. Permission has been received from the copyright holder to license this material under the GNU Free Documentation License. Evidence of this has been confirmed and stored by OTRS volunteers, under ticket number 2007071510004371.

This template is used by approved volunteers dealing with the Wikimedia Open Ticket Request System (OTRS) after receipt of a clear statement of permission at permissions-en at wikimedia dot org. Do not use this template to claim permission.


Contents

[edit] Ha ha ha

"No more Advanced Deletionist Theory or Nihilist Blanking", that's the best thing I've heard all day! Of course, it's still early. I wasn't the guy who tagged your article for deletion or the guy who blanked it with a copyright violation tag, but it's still funny. Useight 16:44, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My Award

OK, I put it back, with wikilinks. See you around! -- But|seriously|folks  04:50, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DSS

I took a run at the article. You're absolutely right about the organization. Somebody will probably revert me, but at least it makes more sense at the moment. I also left a note for the IP that has been editing the article from the SDNHM to please stop inserting promotional material. I'm watching the page, but feel free to let me know if there are further problems. And don't forget to contribute your knowledge, particularly if it can be sourced! (WP is not for WP:OR.)

I don't have time to get into another project right now, so the SDNHM article will have to be somebody else's responsibility.

As for your article, are you gunning for the Barnstar of Irony? The answer is yes, I can delete it as an author request and undelete it when you want it back. When it's undeleted, the copyright permission confirmation template will be restored as well. Just confirm that's what you want and I'll go ahead with it.

TV archaeology, eh? I'll have to start calling you Zahi. Tell Nicole I said hi. -- But|seriously|folks  02:48, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, I suppose we can live without the COI tag, since you asked nicely. The article seems fairly neutral, although who knows what scandals you are failing to disclose! I added the bio project and blp tags to the talk page, which is where they belong.
Did I say I only knew a little about archaeology? I have always found it fascinating. One of my very favorite websites is kv5.com, and I was closely following the kv63 developments last year. And I'm patiently waiting for somebody to track down the bones from the "James" and "related" ossuaries for a DNA study. But that's about it.
As for Zahi, I suspect you misread what I wrote. I didn't say I had to call Zahi, I said I'd have to call you Zahi. I don't know him personally, but he really is everywhere. Maybe I am more aware of him than the average person, but he's hard to miss from where I'm sitting.
You can remove your notes from my talk page, just be careful not to remove anything else. See you later. -- But|seriously|folks  04:02, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Your "Paris Hilton" comments

Hi Robert, I'd like to reply to your "Paris Hilton" comments - your lament that people from reality TV get on Wikipedia, but top scholars get nominated for deletion.

Wikipedia's both strong and weak point is that it is democratic (or to be more precise it works on consensus). Anyone can edit. It also makes no inherent judgements on what is good or bad, or what is notable or unnotable, but instead relies on community consensus to work that out. It is a sort of great social experiment to see if an army of volunteers can produce a better encyclopedia than the paid team of experts at Britannica.

Being democratic, people put in what interests them. Not what the people at Britannica deem to be interesting. But what the users, democratically, deem to be interesting. So reality TV gets in. Because millions of people watch reality TV, and only thousands read any particular scholarly journal.

I guess Wikipedia could put in any person who has ever achieved anything of substance, but the Wikipedia community decided that would open the floodgates to putting in an article on just about every person on earth. So instead they decided on Wikipedia:Notability guidelines. It might not seem fair, but at least it's fairly consistent.

It might not seem fair to put in people who have "achieved" nothing, and leave out some successful scholars. But Wikipedia can't just put people in because they are successful. Why not? Because tens of millions of people are successful - very good at their job and have achieved a lot. But that doesn't make them notable to the wider community (which is what Wikipedia is trying to reflect).

So in short, don't get discouraged, but work within the Wikipedia guidelines. Personally, I'm more interested in getting good articles on topics rather than on people. The articles on Bible and Theology are, for the most part, truly woeful. I'm trying to do my part to fix some up, but it's an uphill battle. Peter Ballard 03:24, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I enjoyed looking at your page. It is only a matter of time before cultured people figure out a way to do a better job of getting the masses' attention than is done by those people with dubious intentions. If wikipedia's present shortcomings are similar to Mao's, then maybe we just need some Cultured Mao. LOL. DavoudMSA (talk) 11:13, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your Conduct

[****] Refactored. comment by Critical Reader 07:45, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Please see WP:TALK and WP:NOT. Wikipedia talk pages are not provided engage in these type of discussions. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:06, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Use of the UCLA logo in infoboxes

The fair-use rationale at Image:University_of_California,_Los_Angeles_logo.png allows the use of the UCLA logo in a single article, specifically the article University of California, Los Angeles. Please remove it from your info-boxes. Sancho 06:48, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

This is correct. -- But|seriously|folks  08:46, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Done. I went ahead and swapped them all out. Thanx for keeping an eye on this page. IsraelXKV8R 14:32, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! If you're interested in the details of Wikipedia's use of non-free content and why we only do so in certain settings, check out Wikipedia:Non-free content. See you around. Sancho 19:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] E-Mail

My e-mail on wiki was being difficult; it is now fixed. i said 23:56, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Hm. It should be fixed. I don't know why it's a problem. i said 03:41, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] writing one's email address on wikipedia

Hi. I was responding to a message from User:I and I saw you had posted your email address. A common email harvesting technique of spammers is to crawl various websites with bots and harvest any emails on the site. A lot of people on Wikipedia comment out email addresses if they have to post them, which is basically writing out the non alphanumeric characters. So instead of fakeemail@someisp.com the email is written as fakeemail at someisp dot com. You may wish to do this as well. Natalie 02:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You're joking!

Jesus is not no 8 ponds and 6 ounces--Angel David 23:21, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

(Note: the user above is saying is comment out of laughter not of anger).

Hmmm . . . An angel ought to know . . . -- But|seriously|folks  00:22, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User Boxes

Thanks for your kind words. Please feel free to "steal" my user boxes (they're GNU license like everything at Wiki). If ever you have time for it Discoveries in the Judean Desert and Tanakh at Qumran could do with contextual information, that I simply don't have. I've just documented some of the hard data. If you know anything about the publication processes of DJD, human interest information and sources that describe it, I for one would be interested. qol tuv Alastair Haines (talk) 01:32, 31 May 2008 (UTC)