User talk:Malik Shabazz/Archive 7

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
← Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 →

Contents

Wow

Malik, I want you to know that I feel a bit humbled and irate after reading your "fan mail." Humbled because I thought the blows I have taken because of my editing were tough - but they pale to compare to the extent which you have endured; irate because there is no Wikipropriate way to become involved in combating the bile and bigotry that have been dealt towards you. If there is ever any way that I can ally with you, meaning co-author an article about a "sensitive" topic, defend your edits, fight an AfD, etc, please do not hesitate to let me know. I admire your editing and because of what I read today will strive to further explore the boundaries of this project in terms of its tolerance and limitations towards accepting divergent histories and presents/presences. Thanks for what you do. • Freechild'sup? 23:42, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Elisha ben Abuyah

Sorry about that. I was actually stubing a few articles and somehow got Elisha by mistake. Thank you for the fix.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 04:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

IAJV

Hi there. I just wanted to ask you why you did a few things to the IAJV page. A number of your edits are simply factually inaccurate. For instance, IAJV did not "published an advertisement". Rather, a few people who signed the original IAJV petition chose to sign this petition also.

Secondly, there was no "coalition of organizations to oppose a Parliamentary motion congratulating Israel on its 60th anniversary". Rather, there was merely a petition that was created by one Palestinian group which was circulated to the signatories to the original IAJV petition.

Thirdly, it is very odd to call IAJV a " Australian Jewish advocacy organization that opposes some of the current Israeli government's policies". If you read their statement, they are mainly concerned with widening the range of opinions that are heard in Australia about Israel's foreign policy.

Cheers, PoliticalSuperHighway --PoliticalSuperHighway (talk) 04:11, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Mediation Update

Just to let you all know, the case has been started. I have created a little navbox for you to navigate between pages and will be expanded as the case goes on so that its easier for you to navigate. The first page you need to visit in this case is here so you can give youre opening statement. There i have left a few questions for you all to answer. For those that have been busy and unable to confirm their participation in the mediation, they are welcome to join the mediation at any stage.

I can be contacted in several ways in the event you need to. I am normally present on the wikipedia-en, wikipedia-medcab and wiki-hurricanes IRC channels at some point between 15:00 UTC and as late 02:00 UTC depending on college and real life commitments. To find these channels and instructions on how to access IRC go to WP:IRC. Throughout the day, even when i am in college, feel free to email me using the email tool or by emailing the email address on my user page or both to make sure. You can also leave a message on my talk page which again ill do my upmost to reply to as soon as i can. Seddon69 (talk) 20:23, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

"survived" changed to "freed after the"

I have started a discussion on the African American talk page. I would like you to please provide your input. --Cooljuno411 (talk) 22:23, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

White Privilege

In the White Privilege article, Perhaps I'm missing the difference between a writer (Matt Rosenberg) and a theorist (Noel Ignatiev, Peggy McIntosh) here? We can talk on the article page.--Knulclunk (talk) 05:08, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah. I see just before my Rosenberg edit, a very chatty IP added all sorts of new stuff. I will reflect upon this... --Knulclunk (talk) 13:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

happybirthdaythankyoucheers

joyeux anniversaire
joyeux anniversaire

Happy birthday, Malik! It's been a pleasure to work with you on Wikipedia; your dedication to thorough detail and NPOV accuracy is greatly appreciated. Enjoy some time off this weekend, and thanks for posting the Emma Goldman newsreels. I'll see you on the anti-vandalism patrol. – Scartol • Tok 23:29, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Zygielbojm

I merely wikified the name that was already there. Now that I looked into it it seems he was born in the village of Borowica, not Borowice. Both names refer to more than one village (and share the same etymology, BTW), but Zygielbojm's Borowica seems to be the one I linked in the article: located 13 km north of Krasnystaw (which explains why he moved between the village and the town back and forth). Regards. //Halibutt 21:07, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

AAMoF I checked in a short bio published in a collection of WWII documents by the PWN, so it's a pretty much reliable piece of information. Łet me know should you need more help, I'm always here :) //Halibutt 00:53, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

answer

You could have just answered no if you did not like my question. I was just asking, not accusing anyone or making claims. 150.108.232.26 (talk) 01:39, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I have also reverted your edit. Let's wait until more people answered and if it indeed deemed inappropriate, then I will remove it or it will be reverted. Please, let us solve this like reasonable men.150.108.232.26 (talk) 01:41, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

History of Polish Jews

- give me some time Malik..I can't do it now. I will find a good source for you and others who have doubts that this escalated anti-Semitism. I promise you will not be dissapointed with it.--Jacurek (talk) 23:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

This sentence was there for months and did not bother anybody until now. Look Malik .. Jewish domination of post war Polish Communist Government is well known and it was also very well known to the Poles at the time. Do you think that made Poles to love Jews and they became less anti-Semitic than before the war ? NO. They became more anti-Jewish. Trust me, I have been talking to dozens of old people about these times, both Jews and Poles. Meantime I will find you a good historical source which will convince you. I'm trying to be as neutral as possible while working on History of Polish Jews because it is a very sensitive subject and I would appreciate if you did the same.--Jacurek (talk) 23:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

== You are barking up the wrong tree: == whatever Malik...:) P.S. This a DISCUSSION page. Since when words TRUST, I THINK are not welcomed here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacurek (talk • contribs) 23:43, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Andrea Dworkin.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Andrea Dworkin.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Phil Sandifer (talk) 05:06, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

please read sources carefully

Affirmative action source for first sentence is accurately quoted. Please read more carefully next time to make good faith edits. If you would like, feel free to re-word if you can do better, but it is important to highlight the historical context and change in word usage. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.110.172.111 (talk) 23:17, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

reverts

I would like to add that I am not starting a revert war. 1) I put up material. 2) You reverted. 3) I added source. 4) You reverted saying it was not in source. 5) I reverted and demonstrated where source was. 6) You reverted once again without reading the source.

I'm wondering if you will be civil about this, block yourself, or contribute in a constructive manner? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.110.172.111 (talk) 23:21, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

2 different excuses to delete the same thing. Congrats, I now know you're editing based on POV rather than facts. I don't think we'll get anything positive accomplished now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.110.172.111 (talk) 23:44, April 25, 2008

This is nothing new, Malik Shabazz has a history of excessive reverts and he often ignores sources while pushing his POV. He is also known for requesting account blockage if somebody brakes 3 reverts rule while braking the same rule himself. His behavior is being watched, documented and will be reported if necessary.--Cvc42 (talk) 17:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

John S. Curtiss

Hello Malik, how have you been? This is a notable Columbia University historian who is also one of the scholarly debunkers of the Protocols of Zion. Don't you think that your Speedy Deletion tag was put up rather hastily? Please reconsider. Thanks. Ludvikus (talk) 16:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Malik, nice to learn that you are reasonable and flexible. I'll get back to you soon, after more development, with a request for removal on the notability Tag. Have a nice day. Ludvikus (talk) 17:26, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
If you really cared about disruption, and Jews, and Judaism, and examined carefully all the work I put into the Protocols of Zion you would award me the Star of David WP:Barnstar. --Ludvikus (talk) 12:25, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Sinchronized changes

Hi Malik, Thanks for your input and tidying up by sinchronizing the related templates. Keep up the good work. Sincerely, Rusty Dr. B. R. Lang (talk) 21:24, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, Malik. Re: Sara Roy My point was "was" at AfD in that sentence. Looking at the article, there clearly was an intent to do a hatchet job on her, and highlight controversies and errors to put her in a bad light. So I added a bit and neutralized some. But I think AfDing should be the last step, especially if a tendentious editor is no longer there to cause trouble and revert BLP content deletions.. As I said she is the world's leading expert on her subject (Norman Finkelstein calls her the world's leading authority on the Gaza Strip, period.[1]) and so is clearly notable and prominent. I don't know about the sockpuppeteer who wrote the article, but not all contributions of even serious rule breakers are all negative. Cheers,John Z (talk) 02:34, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I can see better now why the article needed / needs drastic changes. Particularly silly to emphasize politics / Hamas insinuating she's some kind of Hamas auxiliary when her expertise is in economics, and the part about the position she hasn't taken is a good laugh. Glad we're close to agreement. John Z (talk) 04:14, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

POVdue to overstatement of pro-Nadia case and puffery such as "delightful mind" -- not at all suitable or neutral

May 2008

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did to Nadia Abu El Haj, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 16:32, May 2, 2008 (talk) 68.197.233.75

Palestinian territories‎

Greetings, Malik. A clash has developed at the cited page that I believe could benefit from your experienced help. Could you have a look at the recent history? Perhaps you will know a better way to handle this situation and break the present deadlock. Thanks in advance, and very best wishes, Hertz1888 (talk) 21:57, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Obama Image on African American page

forestgomp (talk) 01:05, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

re: my removal of image of Barack Obama from African American page (history: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=African_American&action=history)

It DOES make sense to discuss Obama on the page as a trailblazing African American in the context of the election. But the image by itself lacks relevance. I suggest it either be removed per my edit or augmented with appropriate text to provide context.

"On The Jewish Question"

Greetings, Malik shabazz, hope you are well. But with these quotes? Are you responsinle for that? I have no idea what that means? To me it's just sloppy. Otherwise, Cheers. --Ludvikus (talk) 01:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Maybe you misunderstood me. I'm asking about what you've been doing here: [3] : --Ludvikus (talk) 03:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
    • As you can see it's the Disambiguation page. I'm trying to figure what who wants what there. That's where these quotes come in. And I thought you would check the articles being disabiguated. So please let me know what your view is so I don't end up spinning my wheels endlessly. Cheers. --Ludvikus (talk) 03:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
    • Shabazz! I do not understnd what you are say here:
(cur) (last) 03:25, 3 May 2008 Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) m (801 bytes)
(Reverted good faith edits by Ludvikus;
(a) references to "The Jewish Question" precede all others,
(b) the description of the Final Solution comes from that article. (TW)) (undo)
    • Explain what your concern is, please. --Ludvikus (talk) 03:38, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Szmul Zygielbojm.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Szmul Zygielbojm.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:10, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Revisionism

Let's Discuss it. I will abide by the consesus. And look at my reference. --Ludvikus (talk) 16:29, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

  • I've answered you on this on my page. --Ludvikus (talk) 16:45, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
If you calm down and study what I've accomplished on Wikipedia, took a break from provoking me, and assumed good faith on my part, it is possible that you might award me a Star of David WP:Barnstar. Don't make me out to be, or characterize me as disruptive because you don't understand, or don't agree with what I'm doing. --Ludvikus (talk) 12:20, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Cemetery

Many thanks for filling up the Waldheim Cemetery ... I'm more used to people wishing to cfd them. -- roundhouse0 (talk) 19:22, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Marx/Engels Collected Works

I don't think we need the LOC entry at all, and the contents should probably be summarized in some fashion rather than listed in full; but I think there are in principle interesting things we could say about the books - for instance, if, as I believe, they contained the first and/or only translations of certain works by Marx and Engels, that would be worth mentioning. Also, a discussion of their reception in the academic world would be helpful - the Marx Internet Archive link in the article says that MECW contains the most authoritative translations of Marx; this is probably something that has been debated by Marx scholars. The publishing history seems potentially interesting, too, as the collection appears to have been a collaboration between the (Stalinist) Progress Publishers and the (Trotskyist) International Publishers. Perhaps, in the end, there isn't enough to say about this work to justify an article, but I don't think it's something that's deserving of immediate deletion. VoluntarySlave (talk) 21:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Anti-Iraq War activist criteria

"Not everyone who is against the Iraq War is a pacifist, an advocate of nonviolence, a conscientious objector, or against warfare in all circumstances: i.e. a anti-war activist."

--Thoughtman (talk) 05:51, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

What is the problem?

Instead of generalizing, can you be specific about you concerns, please. There is no way to resolve an issue by the use of generalities as you do. According, from my standpoint, if you wish something resolved, I advise you to be specific in the extreme. It appears to me that you visit all the cites I edit and seem to disagree with everything I write or edit. Is that not so? What do Wikipedians call that, can you tell me please? --Ludvikus (talk) 16:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

{{collapse top}}

The above tab is a great move on your part. But please leave my discussion with you since May 2008 open. --Ludvikus (talk) 17:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Please read this time

Please stop vandalizing article. --Thoughtman (talk) 18:53, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Your Vandalism

They fail to meet the "ridiculous" criteria.

Hence they can not be on the list.

You need to stop Vandalizing my work now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thoughtman (talk • contribs) 18:59, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

WTF?

You need to read the criteria again. --Thoughtman (talk) 19:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Al Sharpton

I apologize...I am just a little frustrated with Al Sharpton. Two out of the three police officers involved in that case were African-American, yet this is a racial issue? I want nothing more than for race to not be a factor of ANYTHING in America, but as long as people like him are out making statements and riling up angry mobs, we will never truly have racial peace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.242.74.4 (talk) 23:33, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Fiscal year ends June

Don't forget to send your donations to the Columbia College Fund for this fiscal year. The fiscal year ends in June, and a high alumni donation rate not only improves the College's rankings, but allows for the university to qualify for certain grants. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiSkeptic (talk • contribs) 17:24, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Malcom X

Don't you think we should be able to work together - instead of against each other? I'm willing to extend a hand for Peace and Comradeship to you. Are you willing to do the same? --Ludvikus (talk) 17:31, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia meetup

As someone who may live or work near Washington D.C., you may be interested - if you've not heard already - about the meetup scheduled for Saturday, May 17th, at Union Station. For details, please see Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 4.

You are receiving this automated message because your userpage appears in Category:Wikipedians in the District of Columbia. Addbot (talk) 21:49, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Recent edits in American Jews

Unfortunately, your last unwarrated edit does not comport to the Wikipedia articles on ethnic or religious groups where the term "irreligious" is often found in the top box of the ethnic group. For instance, see Han Chinese where irreligious is pointedly specified as a religion. I await your response otherwise I will reinsert the sourced and credible material that I added.Scythian1 (talk) 23:27, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

It's okay, as earlier noted, I will add the content back on the top-box. Scythian1 (talk) 23:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
You've grossly misframed my premise; I do not base the proposition that a sizeable number of Americans Jews are irreligious due to merely not attending synagogue. Rather, I base my premise for concluding that a sizeable portion of American Jews are irreligous from the sourced Harris Poll article that declares that many Jews are not sure whether there is a God or not, 33% to be precise. Carefully read the irreligion article which includes skepticism and agnosticism as modes of irreligious thinking that posit a view that there may not be a God. Scythian1 (talk) 23:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

DYK

Updated DYK query On 10 May 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Matilda Sissieretta Joyner Jones, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 01:54, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

anti-Zionism vs anti-semitism

You changed an edit of mine, regarding an anti-zionist which was mis-labeled under the heading of anti-semitism... are you suggesting they are the same thing??? your bias on the topic is plain from your bio...it would be a shame if you were trying to re-invent reality like what is happening all over this thing on all topics Jewish... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.28.202.39 (talk) 10:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikistalking

Shortcut:
WP:STALK

Wikistalking refers to the act of following an editor to another article to continue disruption.

The term "wiki-stalking" has been coined to describe following a contributor around the wiki, editing the same articles as the target, with the intent of causing annoyance or distress to another contributor.

Reading another user's contribution log is not in itself harassment; those logs are public for good reason. In particular, proper use of an editor's history includes (but is not limited to) fixing errors or violations of Wikipedia policy, or correcting related problems on multiple articles (in fact, such practices are recommended both for Recent changes patrol and WikiProject Spam). The important part is the disruption — disruption is considered harmful. If "following another user around" is accompanied by tendentiousness, personal attacks, or other disruptive behavior, it may become a very serious matter.

  • Please stop your Wikistalking (as described above) regarding my work. --Ludvikus (talk) 19:10, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

New AS mediation

The mediation im getting rolling as its been a long time waiting so i think its best to get moving. Most of the mediation will be on the talk (discussion) page. so make sure its in your watchlist. Seddon69 (talk)

Ghetto benches

I am extremely surprised that you appear to have shown no interest in the above article. Having read your User page, I would be very much interested in knowing your views on that subject, especially since we are both admirers of Malcolm X and the Article concerns the segregation practices of Poland against Jews before and during World War II. I would be pleased if we discovered some common gound on some articles. --Ludvikus (talk) 09:54, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Jewish question

I do appreciate your latest logical voice with me. However, for reasons that I need not go into, the current circumstances make it very difficult for me to assume good faith. I would appreciate it if you met me half way. --Ludvikus (talk) 02:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

New Antisemitism Mediation

I think thats its time we got moving. A couple of the points have been raised before and felt they were the foundations to the dispute:

  • Firstly whether the picture can be confirmed to have been taken in the rally in San Fransisco.
  • Secondly to come to an agreement on what new antisemitism is and then to decide what the image is depicting and whether it purely illustrates New Antisemitism or whether it also addresses other issues which could be confused with new antisemitism by new readers.
  • If we cant confirm the those then we need to find a viable alternative.

A point i would like to raise is that at some point a lead image might need to be found if this article got to FA. The image in question is not free and couldn't be put on the main page with this article as todays FA. Although not an immediate point a long term solution might wish to be found so that this article could feature on the main page with a viable alternative.

Does anyone have access to Lexis Nexis? It might help as a search on the network could uncover something not readily available on the internet. Reliable sources that use the image would be helpful. Do you reckon that there would anyway of finding third party images that might possibly contain the poster/placard? Also i would be grateful if images of other placards at that rally could be found to find whether this was a small minority at this rally or perhaps a larger group.

Whilst that is being done i wanted to find out on what the consensus view is on what New Antisemitism is? I have read the article and the previous discussion and attempted to get a proper understanding but i wanted to ensure that this was current.

PS any sources you find can you please post in the section at the top of the mediation talk page. Seddon69 (talk) 16:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Following discussion at the mediation talk page, i would like to bring up a suggestion that until the end of the mediation to remove both images from the article. There is currently no real consensus on the images so in the interests of fairness it seems best to simply have no images. If you have any suggestions or comments then please come to the mediation talk page to be discussed. The discussion will be open for around 5 days if there are no problems. But the discussion will go on if there is ongoing discussion. ŠξÞÞøΛ talk 00:53, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Aaron Lopez

Updated DYK query On 18 May 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Aaron Lopez, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 10:41, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Definition of "actuary"

Malik, what is an actuary?

Answer: An accountant without the charisma.

AustinTexasRRTX (talk) 15:43, 21 May 2008 (UTC) Robert, Austin, Texas

Crown Heights Riot

Sorry to disagree with you twice here, but it's in good faith and with admiration for your contributions! Cheers, DBaba (talk) 02:16, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Malcolm X (film)

Thanks for the feedback. I'm a bit weird in that I know about the short-hand, but I tend to always use the full cite in case a later edit moves or deletes the first one --sort of extra protection in case. I've gotten used to using copy/paste and leaning to use preview to see how a the paragraphs flow together. Again, I really appreciate the comments. All the best --Bobak (talk) 16:34, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Undo on Miscegenation

Malik, I thought it was relevant as a cultural reference~(interracial films category)~ at least as a mention along the "In the United States" portion of the article. I did not find a Wiki article on the subject by itself so I thought I'd add it in as an encyclopedic mention since that is a category of film related to the article and kinda uniquely American I think. Being a history-buff myself, I like the articles on American culture (pop and otherwise!) and so I see if I can improve them a little. It is not a subject discussed or written about much anywhere anyway. I found only ONE book that was about this subject on Amazon.com and it's called:"THE MIDNIGHT OIL" by Ken Knight.

MaxButterchuck (talk) 11:41, 27 May 2008 (UTC)MaxButterchuck

Afro-Caucasians

Hello,

no, this category is meant to include biracial people, i.e. people having a white parent and a black parent, or a white grandparent, or a black grandparent, etc., much like the "eurasian people" category. Hence, people having recent African and European ancestry. Notable examples are Barack Obama, Alicia Keys, Alexandre Dumas or Halle Berry. The "Afro-Caucasians" category already existed, but did not include people, so I created this sub-category. I guess the term Afro-Caucasian was coined as a politically correct equivalent to mulatto. However, due to the fact that this category I had innocently created (I meant it to be an equivalent to the "eurasians" one, which already existed apparently without causing controversy) led to a protracted and mind-numbing edit war with a pair of unsavory individuals, I'd rather not deal with it for the moment (nor do I feel like contributing to Wikipedia for the moment). I value my nervous health and would rather not waste a second of my time with kindergarten inquisitors. Feel free to add some introduction if you like. Best regards, Wedineinheck (talk) 13:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your message,
the creation and administration of this category has led me to be confronted to a mind-boggling level of bad faith from two particular editors, who considered that classifying people by ethnic origins amounts to condoning Apartheid. That could be disputed, but I did not make up such categories and tend to think that they should be voted/discussed for deletion first, before starting a war with good faith editors such as me, who are just trying to add some logic to classifications. The orwellian conflict I had with these two fellows has left me with feelings of hatred towards wikipedia, and I have to wait for some time to see if I can get over it. Anyway, I do not currently feel that I can contribute in a relaxed way. If you want to discuss with other users the validity of ethnic categories, please go ahead. I think it might be useful in order to avoid situations such as the one I went through. Best regards, Wedineinheck (talk) 08:56, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi! I'm one of the "unsavory individuals" or "kindergarten inquisitors", as it were :), and John is the other one. I'm not sure I completely agree with Wedineinheck's categorization of events. Reviewing his contribution history may be instructive. To your question on the criteria for inclusion in this ethnic category, as with any, there needs to be a cited reliable source for the characterization (observation or conjecture based on surname, place of residence, etc., is not enough) and a pressing need to include it in the biography, some source that references the ethnicity as having had a noticable influence on the person's career or achievements. Some folk that are concerned with BLP matters periodically review these categories and remove those biographies that don't meet those criteria. Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 19:54, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I understand the WP:RS and WP:BLP concerns. I've raised them with an editor who was putting people into Category:Americans of Native American descent. My question simply concerned the basic criteria for inclusion in this category. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 20:03, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Moment Magazine changes

Hi, I would appreciate it if you didn't change the Moment content...I am from the office and would appreciate it if you didn't criticize... thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Circusmark88 (talk • contribs) 18:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The name is Moment so I will keep your change for that... As for the rest... Previously there was some very basic info, and the new info is just to embellish on the magazine's history and mission...A lot of readers have asked about having wikipedia be more extensive...so that is the reasoning —Preceding unsigned comment added by Circusmark88 (talk • contribs) 19:00, 28 May 2008 (UTC)