User talk:Quadell/archive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Talk archives
  1 (4/8/2004 – 9/14/2004) 1 - 50
  2 (9/16/2004 – 10/15/2004) 51 - 100
  3 (10/16/2004 – 11/18/2004) 101 - 150
  4 (11/18/2004 – 12/8/2004) 151 - 200
  5 (12/8/2004 – 12/30/2004) 201 - 250
  6 (12/31/2004 – 2/11/2005) 251 - 300
  7 (2/11/2005 – 3/5/2005) 301 - 350
  8 (3/5/2005 – 3/29/2005) 351 - 400
  9 (3/30/2005 – 5/21/2005) 401 - 450
  10 (5/22/2005 – 8/06/2005) 451 - 500
  11 (8/06/2005 – 10/14/2005) 501 - 550
  12 (10/16/2005 – 11/22/2005) 551 - 600
  13 (11/23/2005 – 1/12/2006) 601 - 650
  14 (1/12/2006 – 2/2/2006) 651 - 700
  15 (2/2/2006 – 2/21/2006) 701 - 750
  16 (2/22/2006 – 3/24/2006) 751 - 800
  17 (3/25/2006 – 8/28/2006) 801 - 850
  18 (8/29/2006 – 10/13/2006) 851 - 900
  19 (10/13/2006 – 11/4/2006) 901 - 950
  20 (11/4/2006 – 11/29/2006) 951 - 1000
  21 (11/29/2006 – Christmas) 1001 - 1050
  22 (12/27/2006 – 5/10/2007) 1051 - 1100
  23 (5/10/2007 – 6/17/2007) 1101 - 1150
  24 (6/17/2007 – 6/25/2007) 1151 - 1200
  25 (6/25/2007 – 7/4/2007) 1201 - 1250
  26 (7/4/2007 – 7/9/2007) 1251 - 1300
  27 (7/9/2007 – 7/12/2007) 1301 - 1350
  28 (7/13/2007 – 7/16/2007) 1351 - 1400
  29 (7/16/2007 – 7/21/2007) 1401 - 1450
  30 (7/21/2007 – 7/27/2007) 1451 - 1500
  31 (7/27/2007 – 8/2/2007) 1501 - 1550
  32 (8/3/2007 – 8/14/2007) 1551 - 1600
  33 (8/14/2007 – 8/25/2007) 1601 - 1650
  34 (8/25/2007 – 9/13/2007) 1651 - 1700
  35 (9/14/2007 – 10/5/2007) 1701 - 1750
  36 (10/5/2007 – 12/10/2007) 1751 - 1800
  37 (12/10/2007 – 12/21/2007) 1801 - 1850
  38 (12/21/2007 – ) 1851 -
Current talk

This archive contains messages posted between April 8, 2004 to September 14, 2004.

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Again, welcome! - UtherSRG 15:41, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Chris said. . .

Great job Quadell. I am myself to be non biased and provide accurate info for people on the presidency. I applaud your actions and urge you to keep up the good work. ChrisDJackson 23:07, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] dic def solutions

Answer on my talk. - UtherSRG 13:47, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! Good advice.

[edit] Belgian Shepherd Dogs

Thanks for taking a look at the list of dog breeds, but we deliberately didn't combine the belgian shepherd dogs because they're separate breeds in some registries. I wouldn't object to there being a generic Belgian Shepherd Dog page that basically makes observations about the group and how they're sometimes considered to be variants of the same breed & sometimes different, with links to the individual breeds. We've done the same for others, such as Corgi and Fox Terrier. BTW, I saw that you uploaded an image of belgian shepherd dogs. Could you fill in the copyright info on the image page so we know it's valid to use it on a public-domain site? You'll need to specify the image's source and its copyright status; see Wikipedia:Image_use_policy and Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags for more info. If you have questions, feel free to contact me (although I'm gone this weekend) or User:Sannse, who is also familiar with the dogs page. Elf | Talk 02:00, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

From a personal page--I wish it were that easy to just assume it's OK! But noooo-- You could certainly ask that person & explain what it's going to be used for; if it's really their picture (as opposed to something that *they* took from somewhere else), they'll need to agree to release it under the Gnu Free Distribution License, text at Wikipedia:Text_of_the_GNU_Free_Documentation_License. Wikipedia is getting very careful about images that it uses and making sure that they're legally usable.

BTW, you can sign your name using ~~~ or use four (~~~~ ) to include the date, which is what most of us do. Thanks for verifying, and welcome to Wikipedia! See you next week. Elf | Talk 03:22, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. It seems like uploading images is generally too much trouble for a non-dedicated newbie to bother with, unless they're pictures you take yourself. *sigh*.
I think some of the other pictures I uploaded are unkosher. I'll have to back and pull them. *sigh again*.

Hi Quadell. We have some GFDL images available for three of the Belgian Shepherd breeds (taken by me). Those would be better to use than images that are not free use, those may cause future copyright problems (even if the site you got them from did not mention copyright). The photos are:

Sadly my picture of a Malinois didn't come out. I hope to get one in the future though. Hope this helps -- sannse (talk) 09:05, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Wow! These are great! Thanks.

Nice job on the Belgian Shepherd pages! Thanks. Nice to have another person interested in the dogs. Elf | Talk 01:37, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Tears

Good work on Tears !! Jay 05:44, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! *grin*

[edit] Pickle

Great pickle pic! jaknouse 17:55, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Images

Thanks about the editing at Garden of Eden. (I just did a little editing at Cheryl Bentov you'll approve of too.) I do respond to symbols and myth, it's true. So... if I'm so smart, how come I don't grasp the process for downloading public-domain images, uploading them at Wikipedia and formating them? There's so much that is crying out for illustration, where entries hardly make sense without images... Wetman 14:36, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Operation Mockingbird

I have proposed Operation Mockingbird for deletion. Nothing personal. Do you have some sort of cite?

Excuse me, I have to get to work, I will check back this afternoon. [[PaulinSaudi 02:58, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)]]

  • Exceptional claims demand exceptional proof. I would like to see a cite that Harry Truman was involved in a plan to influence American newspapers.

Please feel free to join the deletion debate. [[PaulinSaudi 11:54, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)]]

[edit] My Lai

Good job on fixing up My Lai Massacre. That article's bugged me but was a mess I didn't even want to try to start on. -- VV 19:30, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! Quadell 19:35, May 3, 2004 (UTC)

hi Quadell- i noticed your post regarding "Yoga Sutra". can you give me a hint about the material you have in mind that needs to be combined. thanks --robert_wh 15:25, 2004 May 4 (UTC)

thanx for the input on the Yoga Sutra page. i agree with your comments. next time you're in Livingston KY stop in at LEAP. they make same great sorghum-ky whiskey bon bons among other goodies. ;-) robert --robert_wh 05:52, 2004 May 5 (UTC)

[edit] John Michell

Hello Quadell. For what it's worth, I have reverted the edit you made [1] to John Michell on April 22, as it appears to be text copied verbatim from [2]. I didn't see a notice on that page which suggests that it's OK to copy it, and I didn't see something in the article history or edit history which suggests you obtained permission to do so. If you know it's OK to copy that text, then feel free to restore it, but you might consider putting the permission notice on the talk page or something so other editors know it's OK. Thanks for your help & happy editing, Wile E. Heresiarch 06:39, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

No problem. I had moved the info from another Wikipedia page (here) without knowing it was a copyvio. User Jheise had made this addition. Thanks for keeping up with this! Quadell 12:40, May 14, 2004 (UTC)
OK, thanks for the update. Regards, Wile E. Heresiarch 13:56, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] "Scandal"

I just want to be really, really, really perfectly clear... that, whatever you may think of my changing "Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal" to "Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse reports," my intention in doing this was that I am offended by the trivialization implied by the word "scandal." The issue is war crimes, not Rumsfeld's embarrassment or Lynndie England's disgrace.

You may feel that my change had the effect of whitewashing or minimizing the matter, but that was absolutely not what I meant to do.

I see that you've worked on the My Lai article. Well, suppose the article had been entitled "My Lai scandal"... what would you have done? Dpbsmith 16:27, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

You wrote:

To me, a scandal is when a bunch of people are upset about an embarrassing controversy. In my view, the My Lai atrocity came first, then the cover-up, and then, when the story broke, there was a scandal. In the Lewinsky affair, there was a scandal but no atrocity. The Russian rape of Berlin was something akin to an atrocity without a scandal.
Very nicely put. Dpbsmith 19:28, 19 May 2004 (UTC)


[edit] Dog genetics

Thanks for adding the dog DNA stuff from today's news. I didn't have time to pursue it all; I have been wanting to add a detailed article on "dog breeds" and what that means but also haven't had the energy. I was amused by the version of the story that reported something like "despite the AKC believing that the Belgian Shepherd (Groenendale) and Belgian Tervuren were different breeds, this info shows that they are identical." I laugh because, if you see the article on Belgian Shepherd Dog, they *are* the same everywhere except in the US, where the AKC is stubbornly trying to *make* them different breeds. This has caused problems for people importing , say, a brown Belgian from Canada who had one black parent--AKC won't recognize it. Elf | Talk 03:32, 22 May 2004 (UTC)


[edit] Photo resizing

Hi. I saw that you have reduced the size of tne photo of Jonathon Prandi. Thanks! I didn't know how to do it, therefore it was posted in that big size./Builder


[edit] General

Hello. Found you from what links to Leopold Poetsch page. From your biography you sound quite interesting. Are you a vegetarian or a Vegan? Do you believe the Japanese generals in World War 2 were true Buddhists as they allowed and directed suffering?

Thank you! I eat vegan most of the time, but occasionally I eat things that have egg or milk products. So I guess I'm in between. About the generals, I honestly didn't know that any of the Japanese generals called themselves Buddhists. I guess I would say that they were very bad Buddhists, since "right profession" would seem to rule out directing a war, and "right effort" would proscribe attacking civilian targets. But then again, people have long used teachings of the "Prince of Peace", Jesus, to justify all kinds of attrocities. Quadell (talk) 15:39, May 26, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Cowboy

The Wikipedia article Cowboy hasn't been updated since April 16, and you have been the last one to update it. Please see Talk:Cowboy for a good update to this article. Any comments?? 66.245.6.21 23:33, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Dashes

  • Don't use fancy dash characters in the wiki-text; their display may be problematic. (and by this, I mean the ? character.)
  • Please don't call reversion of the replacement of such dashes (as on Agriculture) vandalism. - Fennec (さばくのきつね) 18:46, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • Excuse me. You were referring to the spam at the bottom of the page. Please don't call spam vandalism. :) - Fennec (さばくのきつね) 18:51, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Mexican politicians

I noticed you alphabetized names with Á as if they had simply a. Was this intentional?

Yes, absolutely. And thanks be given for the possibility to do that by means of the |piping command in the Category box. It wouldn't make much sense to have Ávila Camacho listed at the end, on his own, after Zedillo, under "Á", rather than alongside Miguel Alemán – particularly when it's only the odd pedant like myself that insists on putting the accents on capitals. They should tweak the sorting algorithm so that accented letters are sorted as if they were the unaccented variants (and I think that holds for all languages) but meantime, the piping hack (|Avila Camacho) is a good way round it. –Hajor 15:13, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] "Pali Canon texts"

Are you sure the Dhammapada is a canonical text? I thought it was extracanonical. -- कुक्कुरोवाच|Talk‽ 20:38, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Never mind, I'm clearly smoking crack. -- कुक्कुरोवाच|Talk‽ 20:41, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] "Old Testament" is NOT a Jewish name for Jewish texts, it's Christian

Hi. See my comments at Talk:1 Maccabees. IZAK 08:01, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Coke C2

For future reference, please do not move pages by cutting and pasting. There's a page move function explicitly for doing this. Cut and paste moves leave behind the page's history, which we need to fulfill certain legal requirements. I have repaired the minor damage this caused. -- Cyrius|✎ 05:32, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Khalid bin Mahfouz

Hi pleased to meet you. Lawyers acting apparently acting for Khalid bin Mahfouz have contacted the site owner Jimbo Wales about possible inaccuracies in the Khalid bin Mahfouz. See User_talk:Jimbo Wales and Talk:Khalid bin Mahfouz. Some major newspapers appear to have published retractions about similar material. As you wrote much of the original article, I thought you ought to know, and encourage you to respond to Jimbo's point at that talk page. We need to get the page in a state we are happy with in the light of the lawyers comments as soon as possible. Thanks. Pcb21| Pete 18:07, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] What's your e-mail address?

Hi. If you give me your address I will explain what I meant when I opposed your application for admin. Contact me at moriori@hotmail.com. Moriori 03:32, Jul 10, 2004 (UTC)

I have e-mailed you, and look forward to your reply. Quadell (talk) 20:14, Jul 12, 2004 (UTC)
I wish you would have explained your opposition. Perhaps it could have been resolved. Quadell (talk) 13:15, Jul 13, 2004 (UTC)
I thought e-mail discussions remained in e-mail. Am I wrong? Moriori 09:19, Jul 19, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] post-Libertarian

What is a post-Libertarian? I have made a transition from an orthodox Libertarian to a pragmatic libertarian myself, but have never heard of a post-Libertarian. --H. CHENEY 04:38, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I made the term up myself as I was writing my brief bio. I was orthodox Libertarian in the past, and even ran for office as a Libertarian for a local election. I have since then found many situations in which the pragmatic option that seems more Libertarian was actually no more Libertarian than the pragmatic option that seems more socialist. (For example, should we keep parts of Alaska a federally-owned nature preserve and forbid drilling, or should we create a tax-payer-funded pipeline and enforce a local monopoly on the oil extraction in the region? Neither option is truly open-market, and protecting the wilderness trumps drilling for oil, in my view.) I'm not an ex-Libertarian -- I still see issues through a Libertarian perspective -- but my conclusions are almost as likely to disagree with the Libertarian Party's suggestions as they are to agree. Quadell (talk) 15:06, Jul 12, 2004 (UTC)
I think the perfect comment was made by Michael Moriarty, the actor, who characterized himself as a libertarian, "but too much of a libertarian to join the party." :) -- Cecropia | Talk 02:53, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Sysop nomination

Hi Quadell, I had to remove your nomination since the time was past and consensus was not reached. I hope you remain interested both in Wikipedia and adminship because I feel your work more than merits it and I also feel you will be shown to have acted appropriately on the disputed article. Cheers! Cecropia | Talk 05:03, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

"Consensus" for RfA has been pretty much hashed out to no less than 75% to 80% support. You were a bit under 2/3. The "neutrals" are not counted at all right now, but are informational for other voters and could be advisory in a tight race. With your permission, I will post a new nomination for you in a month's time, and I am comfortable that will succeed. You have dealt with this matter with level-headedness and dignity, which I'm sure will be noted next time around. Keep up the good work! -- Cecropia | Talk 15:31, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Quadell, I have heard from Jimbo on this matter. He is mostly supportive and I want to restore your nomination for the amount of time since the original critical posting (about 3 days). Is this all right with you? Or, if you prefer, I could post it as a new nomination (7 days, votes wiped). -- Cecropia | Talk 15:57, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Wow. I'm honored. I don't feel bold enough to venture an opinion on the best way to proceed, but I'll happily accept whatevery action you wish to take. Quadell (talk) 16:30, Jul 13, 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for the support of my nomination. What a broad range of heroes and interests you have. Keep up the good work! Robin Patterson 00:51, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] You're welcome

Thank you for your kind note on my talk page yesterday, Quadell. Changing my vote and apologizing after the matter had been clarified was the least I could do. I'm glad we've resolved that matter, and I hope you win. As things stand now, I expect that you will:-) David Cannon 13:53, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] I've switched.

I've changed my vote to support you. Thanks. Neutrality 03:54, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Administrator

Congratulations! You are now an sysop. I suggest you read Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list and Wikipedia:Administrators' how-to guide. Warofdreams 16:53, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Now that you're an administrator

Can you do me a favor and delete Sino-Japanese so that I can move Sino-Japanese language there? As far as I know, this should be totally uncontroversial, because Sino-Japanese has pretty much no history. - Nat Krause 06:39, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

It's done. Quadell (talk) 14:05, Jul 19, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks. - Nat Krause 17:40, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Islamophobia article

Please help if you can. The user RK keeps vandalising the article by putting his POV in. He has now accused me of being racist and is, I feel, attempting to bully his point of view into being accepted and me off Wikipedia. I have attempted to discuss the issue with him but he keeps reverting and being abusive. I have accepted his idea of Islamophobia being a neologism and included this in the article. Thanks.

Hello Quadell. I have put a lot of workand research into this article and have tried to accommodate RKs opinions. He has now restarted a revert war and I regard this as vandalistic. Regretfully I want to request that you protect my current version. RK has also accused me of anti-semitism, a charge which baffles me and has resorted to abuse rather than discussion. John Ball 28/07/04. 10:15.

John Ball

My response is on your talk page. Quadell (talk) 14:07, Jul 28, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Hopefully RK will have time to cool off. I am fairly new around here, what can be done with someone who is perpetually disruptive?

[edit] Daniel Pipes

Hi, just got your note. If you want to unprotect Daniel Pipes, go ahead, but it may need to be protected again. The problem is an extremely tenacious anon editor who persists in trying to turn the page into a hagiography. -- Viajero 22:14, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Holocaust

Rewriting Holocaust has been on my to-do list for some time, but I keep getting distracted by the need to earn a living etc. I am currently travelling in Thailand and away from my references, but I will get back to it sometime in the next few weeks. Adam 06:28, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Protection

As you were informed a few times, the article Anti-Semitism is currently being looked at by mediators. Cimon avaro agreed to take the case and it would benefit all of us if you discussed your concerns with him before going ahead with your suggestions. -- Simonides 23:43, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Are you interested in moderating anti-Semitism with Uncle Ed?

Hi. While I refuse to repeat the fights that I had in the past over anti-Semitism, I'd be happy to help you out with any academic sources you might need. I have access professionally to most anything you might need. Lemme know if I can help. Danny 19:11, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. I understand. No point in giving yourself ulcers over others' rudeness. I'll probably be asking you things from time to time. (My strength in the article is my even-handedness. I don't actually know that much about anti-Semitism. I had never heard of the Pale of Settlement or host desecration before reading the article, for instance.) Thanks again! Quadell (talk) 00:33, Jul 25, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Abu Musab al-Zarqawi

Hey - I note you added a bit about Zarqawi going to Afghanistan in time to catch the tail end of the jihad and that he edited an Islamist newsletter - any idea what the name of the newsletter was? Graft 21:49, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Peak Oil changes complains

There are some things that I do not understand. I know that the article Peak Oil was meant to be merged with Hubbert Peak, and I never opposed that change. But I keep asking myself how happened that this merge was done in such an unprofessional way:

1 - The history of Peak Oil is gone 2 - It has been moved into Hubbert Peak 3 - Which means the history of Hubbert Peak is gone

The way to do it is as follows:

1 - Redirect Peak Oil to Hubbert Peak. Do *not* delete Peak Oil, just add an edit with a redirect in it. 2 - Do the merge into Hubbert Peak, by adding an edit to it. Do *not* delete the history of Hubbert Peak.

And that's it: now you have the two articles merged, but you still are able to look at the history of both articles independently. History is important, you know? It lets you spot changes, mistakes, and divergence in opinion.

(It took me a while to discover what had happened; another prove that it was lousely done)

Besides, the way you merged the information in Peak Oil into Hubbert Peak was, to say the least, a very _interesting_ one. Most of the text and notes are gone. If you had no time to do it, you needn't to.

[edit] RFC Wigdor

Hi Quadell

I have reviewed the RFC listing and don't wish to certify.

Wigdor's behavior leaves much to be desired, true. He is not especially polite or subtle.

However, I think he is making a genuine effort to make the articles better, albeit in a clumsy and unhelpful way. The surrealism-related articles have up until now been primarily the work of a single editor who is himself prone to edit wars and who has given the articles a POV that is at odds with mainstream sources. Most if not all of the articles listed on the RFC page are presently of very poor quality. Some should just be deleted, IMO.

Many of Wigdor's edits are valid based on factual grounds. Much of the material he is removing does not belong in the articles, or at best needs to be better sourced and kept in perspective.

I myself have sufficient knowledge of surrealism to see that there are problems but not enough knowledge to fix them, let alone to fix them and defend the fixes.

If the RFC were limited to behavior rather than content disputes, I would support.

UninvitedCompany 18:10, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Two points: whatever might be said about many of the edits the individual(s?) some people are thinking may well be Wigdor, if such persons do indeed share such identity, the inclusion of Keith Wigdor in the main surrealism article, as if he is of some level of significance to the movement in general, while failing to note that he is an extremely controversial figure in (to whatever extent he may be said to be in it, Eric Bragg amongst others having called him a "false surrealist") surrealism, not only is questionable in terms of the article, but may lead one to question UninvitedCompany's characterisation of his motives.
In talking about "at odds with mainstream sources," I have cited a number of such sources including the Grove Dictionary of Art. Encyclopedia Britannica also had Franklin Rosemont create online content for it containing many of the same assertions that are in these "poor quality" articles. Furthermore, I have not been able to get an answer on why we should ignore all actually surrealist sources (from Breton's Manifesto of Surrealism up till 2004) in favour of secondary sources that have themselves been proven to be very poorly sourced and to contain numerous inaccuracies, or tertiary sources largely based thereon (Mary Ann Caws, for example). --Daniel C. Boyer 20:45, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I really don't have any dealings with this user other than a couple of reverts. I'd rather sit out the RFC. RickK 18:41, Jul 29, 2004 (UTC)

Replied on my talk. —No-One Jones 23:15, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Certified. I don't have much time, but I recall his edits on the surrealist poets page to be arbitrary and in the face of google's returns on searches for poets he deleted. Good luck. --Tagishsimon 20:22, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Picture of Khaled al-Harbi

What is the source on this photo? It isn't the Osama video as your new caption claims. Isn't it an Arab network video after his surrender? Why else the news microphones. I don't read Arabic so I can't tell what the microphone says. Rmhermen 22:02, Jul 29, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Re Echeverría orthography

Thanks for the message. I made the changes in the orthography ..... probably mistakenly, it sounds like. Is there a convention I don't know about (i.e. one that prefers the markup-style "&;" orthography to the "ready-made" kind)? I never know which to use, so I'm trying to learn to be consistent. I'll switch them back if "&;" is preferred. ffirehorse 23:30, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Ziad Jarrah

I find this the most puzzling of the hijackers. The article doesn't look too bad. I took out one line which said he returned to the US in 2000 because there was no mention of why or how long and I think no mention of him being in the US previously. Also I beleive we have to put the source on the image description page when using fair use pictures (and it is encouraged for other types). Rmhermen 15:08, Aug 4, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] 26 Most Wanted Saudis

Saudi Arabia claims to have captured another person off its top 26 most wanted terrorists list. I have never been able to find this list. Have you ever seen one? Rmhermen 17:22, Aug 6, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Internet democracy

(Thank you)^2 for protecting Internet democracy. The group of us who monitor this article are really growing tired of this anonymous prick (pardon my language, but he deserves it) named Gale who refuses to abide by any rules or answer any reasonable questions thrown at him. By the way, Greetings from a fellow Louisvillian!  :)

[edit] Guaifenesin protocol fixup

Can you take a look at your article Guaifenesin protocol, please? There was an initial typo that got fixed incorrectly, but it looks as if it doesn't really make a lot of sense anyway. I was hoping you could fix it up.

[edit] Tughra

Image:OttomanSultanAbduHamid.gif is not "the signature of Ottoman Sultan Abdu Hamid". It reads: "Muhammad Sabri, the scribe (Calligrapher)". The smaller writing on the right reads: "al-hilali". It's most probably post-Ottoman so I wouldn't be to shure about the copyright either. --Baba66 14:05, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! My response is on your talk page. Quadell (talk) 15:07, Aug 22, 2004 (UTC)
Please seek further information on the source of this image from the site I've mentioned on the image descrption page or from whatever the actual source was. It appears quite possible that it is a copyright infringement but also quite likely that if asked politely the source may be willing to license this and other helpful images. Jamesday 00:33, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Padua

Your thank-you set me to work, because I didn't deserve it. Wetman 18:40, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] "Encyclopedia" links on talk pages

I'm not sure Google would approve of what you are doing on various talk pages. We disapprove of this kind of behavior when others promote their products, we should do the same for attempted promotion of Wikipedia. Your efforts are likely to get us penalized as a link-farming site: many copies of near-similar text (i.e. Wikipedia mirror sites) all linking to the same page. Please let natural processes promote Wikipedia instead. -- Karada 23:23, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I replied on your talk page. Quadell (talk) 13:37, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] 9/11

I don't see the problem here; There is this link, and all I do is tell the viewer what that link is about. Now, you can say there are people who think things have not been covered up, but it's been proven that they are, in fact, FYI, this is exactly what 911truth emphasizes: We carefully review the articles, books, videos, sites and other resources published and linked at 911Truth.org. Of the many works about 9/11 now in circulation, we strive to promote the best. We urge everyone to fact-check, engage in due diligence, and research the issues from all angles. It is important to expose mistakes, and we are happy to correct our own when these occur. Some works about 9/11 forward ungrounded claims based on misinterpretations, distortions or even fabricated evidence. Others reveal racist or extremist biases. We avoid both types of distraction by focusing on the most promising lines of inquiry and bodies of evidence; those that have stood up to the scrutiny of peer review, have been subjected to expert analysis, and as a result are winning in the court of public opinion. Beyond issues of factual content, we prefer to disengage from individuals who employ vitriol or highly-charged rhetoric. We value positive and sober approaches over heavy-handed ones that might alienate potential allies.

Julius 23:12, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Binladens

You're 100% correct - they do have a lot of influence, but the purpose of that sentence seemed only to advance the Michael Moore theory and didn't do much else for the article. Graft 13:45, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Arnold

See this

[edit] Pics copyright tags

Hi, thanks for adding images to Illegal prime and DeCSS; good work in thinking up a suitable illustration! I don't suppose you'd be willing to indicate precisely what the copyright status of those images is, e.g. {{GFDL}}, {{PD}}... etc? It'd be most helpful, cheers! — Matt 12:32, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! — Matt 21:40, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] User 66.93.166.174

As you've noted, this user has been making highly POV edits to Arab-Israeli conflict and Israeli-Palestinian conflict (some of which you've reverted). This editor has been extremely persistent, so I've protected the articles for now; what should be done next? Any advice or guidance would be helpful, I'm quite new at this. Jayjg 18:45, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] great job!

Thanks for the vfd rescue of cocaine anonymous. I am quite impressed and it is this kind of impression that makes me want to continue learning as a new wikipedian.--Jpittman 00:18, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)