Datasets:

jaredjoss

/

jigsaw-long-2000

like 0

I have about 50 jury trials under my belt. i have no problem breaking things down in bite size pieces and repeating myself. What we have here is a proxy Arab-Israeli war. It can be perceived that a group with a NeoCon Likudnik POV have hijacked an article by a forceful critic of Israeli repression of Palestinians under Israel occupation, the heavyhanded American occupation of Iraq, and a moderating influence of the mad stampede to war against Iran. They have tagged him as an anti-Semite which Walt and Mearsheimer say is a common tactic used by the Israeli Lobby to stifle dissent. Moreover, this group has succeeded in locking this article against

balancing edits. The editors have refused to put up a netural stub while a neutral POV article can be worked out. This is newsworthy because WP is a free access encyclopedia. The longer this foolishness goes on, the more likely it is that it will get in the news like the Cuba article, or the self serving U.S. Congress staffers writing their bosses biographis. This is why action is urgent. The credibility of WP is at stake. That's what I'd do. I would put up a protected Stub. And say ok folds take your time. build up the article piece by piece. And let's not have anymore drive-by editying. Take Care!Will314159

:Editors may continue to edit articles involved in mediation while the mediation is ongoing; if it were otherwise, the article would be protected. It would not be out of the question for a condition of the mediation to be that both editors stop editing it, but it is not required. Mediation is a cooperative effort, and does not involve complex procedure; it is, for the most part, what the editors agree to in consultation with the mediator. Either editor may withdraw at any point, and may continue to edit the article while the mediation is ongoing; of course, continuing the actions that led to the mediation may make mediation less successful, but is not

a violation of any policy. :It is not the responsibility of any party to a mediation to quote mediation policy to the others; there is no place for wikilawyering in mediation. If there are issues, it should be brought to the attention of the mediator, who will take the necessary action. If a mediator has not yet be assigned, it should be brought to my attention, and I will handle it. :Since you didn't mention the specific case, I don't know whether a mediator has been assigned or not; if one has, please bring this to the attention of the mediator, if not, let me know, and I will look into the matter. •

" ::::::From the above it appears a consensus is emerging, however I would be interested to have other users' input after they also have read WP:UKVILLAGES. If kept I would want there to be inserted ""and is a small locality"", since if you live in the former park to the southeast in Reigate as some do then it is true to say that they live in Gatton, Reigate. However the only quibble with this is that ""settlements with people living in them are automatically assumed to be notable"" is false, for instance any suburb of a town does not merit its own article, its history, politics and geography are born out of and identical to its town; they go under a paragraph in the main article

itself. I mean take Stoke, Guildford for example, it would be absurd to put that as a separate article, per the policy above. This means that Reigate could easily have the same treatment under Reigate and a clear link to Gatton Park and to the historic MP's borough within such a subsection. I am sure the residents of Wray Lane would have no qualms to this, just as no article on Wray Common itself should ever be created per the policy. Otherwise we would have one on every town 'pocket' which would do no favours to wider understanding of matters such as history, politics and industry and compartmentalise everywhere to the nth degree. That would be estate agents' seventh heaven and heaven knows who else's. "

" :::::Lee, thanks for your compromise on ""claim"". I am between you and Armon about the Karsh quote. I don't think it is a ""fact"" it is Karsh's opinion, HOWEVER, Karsh's CV demonstrates that he has the credentials to provide a very credible opinion on this particular topic. In addition, his politics are moderate and this adds more credibility (because he's not Cole's usual target). Also, reviewing Cole's CV and publications certainly confirms Karsh's point (and that of others who made the same point previously). Sure, Cole is a full professor of History, but his area of expertise, although in the big area of ""Middle East"", is not very relevant to the issues he writes about in

the popular press and the blogsphere. Successful PhD level academics have very very narrow fields of expertise; most folks not familiar with academia would not know this, so it is important to an encyclopedia article to let this point stand. To use the word ""claim"" to refer to Karsh's opinion subtly discredits it and this is out of line by Wikipedia standards. Thanks for coming around. ::::::LLGre MEMRII have to chuckle when you call it ""my"" article and read Armon's response; Lee, Armon, and I recently spent two of the best weeks of our lives battling that one out =). BUT, I think that the Cole article could integrate the criticism better than it does now. "

" == Ebony article? == Does anyone have a citation to the 1990 Ebony article mentioned on this page? A search of issues since 1989 (in an online database) turns up nothing that matches this description, and no 1990 articles that come at all close. The reference was added by user Antares33712 at 20:19, 29 December 2005. It's possible that my search results were incomplete, but it's also possible that the author misremembered the publication or the article details. Because the current page accuses Ebony of printing misinformation (regarding Mariah Carey's race) and also suggests that the magazine article made other questionable

claims, any mistake (either an inaccurate paraphrasing of an actual Ebony article, or a misattribution of someone else's article to Ebony) could be considered harmful to the magazine, and conceivably libellous. I'm insufficiently familiar with Wikipedia's standards to take the step of removing it myself (I just added a ""fact"" tag), but I wanted to call particular attention to the question in case others deem this the sort of thing that requires expedited action. And of course, if someone does have a citation to add, or can correct any mistakes without deleting the entire reference, that would certainly be preferable! "

" Thank you. - :Thanks for sorting it out. () == Genius!!!! == Thanks for finding that sock. The created article will have be nuked as well (Germanic peoples (modern)) as created by banned. :Np. I'm about to close the AfD as a speedy delete. () ::Well, yeah, that works too. Again thanks, what a frickin' headache... == Socks == Thank you for the recent blocks and protections, could you please do the same with these: , , , , ; Sodomy law, Discrimination, Hate speech, Witherspoon Institute. Thank you. :I have some doubts about them. For example the IPs don't geolocate to the same area. Or were you perhaps saying that they're related to other sockpuppets? () == edit filter #541+#542 == Hi! I

just saw your new edit filter rules Special:AbuseFilter/541 and Special:AbuseFilter/542. It seems that you are not very used to the syntax, so I wanted to ask if I could help you in any way. What do you want to block. :Thanks for the offer. But at this time, I think everything looks fine for now. Though it's good to know that there's someone willing to help. Filter 541 is supposed to track IPs inserting ""|"" while blanking the page. Filter 542 is supposed to track edits like . () ::Ok, then your syntax was wrong. I fixed #541 already. lcase(added_lines) rlike ""|"" is the same as added_lines contains """", because ""|"" means ""OR"" in a regexp pattern. That's why e.g. this edit was matched. "

" == Military Administration in Serbia / Militärverwaltung in Serbien == Well, i have one proposition. We have where one name, but as far as i can see, there are not enough users who agree to this. I also dont like it. And i have one proposition. As no official state was established during Nazi rule in Serbia, we dont have official name of the state that we can use. But, only official entity that did existed during the war was Militärverwaltung in Serbien or Military Administration in Serbia. In article Military Administration (Nazi Germany) you may see the

names of the other countries that shared the same fate. {| class=""wikitable"" |- ! Name !! Article |- | Militärverwaltung in Serbien || Nedić's Serbia |- | Militärverwaltung in Belgien und Nordfrankreich || Military Administration in Belgium and Northern France |- | Militärverwaltung in Frankreich || German military administration in occupied France during World War II |- | Militärverwaltung in Polen || German military administration in occupied Poland |- | Militärverwaltung in Rumänien || Military Administration in Romania (No link, i created it.) |- | Militärverwaltung in Griechenland || Axis occupation of Greece during World War II |}"

FUCK You YOU STUPID LITTLE FLUFFY NIGGER

VON NIGGERTEIN NIGGITE NIGGITYNIGNIGNFYUKCK!!!! Srry my English.

" == Thank You! == {| style=""border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"" |rowspan=""2"" valign=""middle"" | |rowspan=""2"" | |style=""font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;"" | The Featured Sound Main Page Proposal Voter Barnstar |- |style=""vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;"" | I was truly humbled by the overwhelming community support for the recent proposal to place featured sounds on the main page. The proposal closed on Tuesday with 57 people in support and only 2 in opposition. It should take a few weeks for everything to get coded and tested, and once that is done the community will

be presented with a mock up to assess on aesthetic appeal. Finally, I invite all of you to participate in the featured sounds process itself. Whether you're a performer, an uploader, or just come across a sound file you find top quality, and that meets the featured sound criteria, you can nominate it at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. Featured sounds is also looking for people to help assess candidates (also at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates.) Thanks again for such a strong showing of support, and I hope to see you at featured sounds in the future. '''''' ( · |}"

::Those 4 volumes do indeed cover all that Heim published in his lifetime, warts and all - i.e. volume 1 is still not totally error-free, though better than before. And yes, it is the famous 2000 page write-up. Note, though, that Heim left behind lots of notes that were never published - Haeuser has thes and is sifting through them, so may eventually add to the body of work. In principle one could glean a quite thorough understanding of Heim Theory by reading the already existing 4 volumes. If you have the money to spend on these then you could do worse than getting the set - Resch also offers some

volumes on the late John Paul II`s list of saints: they are probably more popular at the moment!. However, there is a caveat - physicists who have gone through them took on average over 1 year of intense study before they came to grips with the concepts there. If you have the time to invest, then by all means try that. Alternatively, or in addition to that, you could also follow what appears on www.heim-theory.com - apparently in May Droescher will post a rigourous derivation of the eigen-value equations that are the basis of the mass formula. And on that web site they try to keep to normal mathematical notation.

" If it wasn't written very well, why didn't you just fix it apposed to deleting the whole thing? What exactly was unrelated and/or biased? Correct me if I am wrong, but nothing. And SPAM, no wtf? Am I talking to a php program here or something? What is so bad about saying ""you""? Should I have said someone? ""was not all relevant to the subject of the article"" EXCUSE ME!? I happen to know exactly what I am talking about, why else would I contribute to the wiki if I didn't know what I was saying?! ""duplicated content in other articles"" – So you are saying I copy and pasted information from other articles? What are you NUTS? ""could be seen as part in

advertising"" - For who, and what? I didn't post anything with my name on it, and FYI nothing I posted was mine. ...""vandalism tag on it"". You have *got* to be kidding me? I have contributed quite a fair bit to the hl2dm community, and now for some reason you decide to delete it? Not like it's that hard to correct the grammar yourself, but no... You just go and deleted it? ""but I'm afraid after you've removed all the stuff in your edit that was against policy"" What? I didn’t remove anything? What are you going on about? The thing which really pisses me off is that you go so far to even remove an external link from the EXTERNAL LINKS SECTION!? !?"

" ==Speedy deletion of The New Great Thing I Made Up In School Today== A tag has been placed on The New Great Thing I Made Up In School Today, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may

contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or ""db"" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. — "

==Picture== Is that picture on your user page

really of you? You are one ugly SOB!-

" : , I doubt the title is appended because of any need for disambiguation. I note that the vast majority of the entries in Category:Barons in the Peerage of the United Kingdom have the title appended to the name, the main exception being former Archbishops of Canterbury, but there are also a few others, who seem to be covered by: :Wikipedia:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility)#British nobility, according to which: *There are several exceptions to these rules. :*Peers who are almost exclusively known by their personal names: e.g. Bertrand Russell (not ""Bertrand Russell, 3rd Earl Russell""). :*Peers who are

very well known by their personal names and who only received a title after they retired, e.g. Anthony Eden (not ""Anthony Eden, 1st Earl of Avon""), Margaret Thatcher (not ""Margaret Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher""). ::* An exception to the above exceptions is where the peerage title is useful for disambiguation, e.g. Chris Smith, Baron Smith of Finsbury. :*When one holder of a title is overwhelmingly the best known: e.g. Alfred, Lord Tennyson and Lord Byron. :So it looks to me as if the name should stay as it is. You could also ask at Wikipedia:WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage. "

==Truth== THeSE GUY ARE A BUNCH OF RETARDS

AND SHOULD ALL JUMP OFF A BRIDGe!

" ::::::::::::You said ""roof of heaven"", now you say ""floor"". Which is it? And why don't you just tell me where you think that is? You keep dodging that, which makes me think you have no idea what you're talking about in that matter. First ""roof""...now ""floor""...and still no scripture or verse at all presented for that. (But it's already known that miracles and divine intervention was asserted in the Book of Exodus.) Also, again, the Cahill thing was NOT presented ""as if it was a mainstream view"". You keep repeating the same falsehood. It was NOT presented that way at all!!! When exactly was it presented like

that, in the edit? It was made clear that it was explanation offered by some, and later in the same paragraph was mentioned that most scholars do NOT believe that to be the explanation. Although it's been conceded in general that ancient world powers were not always forthright in reporting defeats or embarrassing details. Human nature. But where do you get this idea that ""Cahill isn't aware of what biblical scholars are saying""?? He's very aware. That's the point. Cahill is not some guy down the street who runs a pizza place, who is posting blogs or something. But a reputable scholar, etc... Why wouldn't he know? "

" Knock off the retarded posts. ""Huhhuh this game

sucks evey game company says so."" Grow up."

== Pink Floyd == Thanks for the assessment on the Pink Floyd talk page. I didn't know about the featured music project or I would have taken it to you guys before listing it on the Featured Articles candidates list. Most of the issues I can easily address. The pictures are a larger problem (only one is left which has been tagged for lack of copyright information; the rest are album covers (as I understand it, covered under fair use) and a promo picture from Live 8 which has full information. I'm wondering if you (or someone from the project) can provide some guidance on the issue of pictures. My knowledge of copyright law is nil, and last night, the latest

in a series of 4 or 5 pictures was removed from the top right of the article. The most recent was an excellent picture from the era where both Barrett and Gilmour were in the band. While the source was available, copyright information was not. I've seen this picture in many print and online magazines (Rollingstone.com, AMG), yet have no idea how to go about finding out who actually owns the copyright on these images. If you know of a source for usable promotional pictures (I'd take any picture of the band for use in the top right at this point), or there's an editor on the WP who is especially knowledgeable in this issue, could you let me know? -

== Photo == Are they admirers of his penis specifically, or

should the photo be in the main article? KD Tries Again

fuck you bitches i use a proxy and i can do

whatever i want without getting in trouble so kiss my ass

==Urban== Sprawa tkwi w czymś innym. Dwa lata temu był mały spór dotyczący zagłębia węglowego (m.in. Upper Silesian Coal Basin, ale też GOP i ROW). Spór toczył się zarówno na Wikipedii jak i poza nią. Ogólnie przyjęto, że Górnośląskie Zagłębie Węglowe to obszar metropolitalny i artykuł o zagłębiu (czyli o gospodarce) dotyczył obszaru metropolitalnego i stąd spór. Ktoś wpadł na bardzo interesujący pomysł, aby utworzyć osobne artykuły o zabłębiu i aglomeracjach. Tak też zrobiłem. Hasło Upper Silesian Coal Basin które już dawniej poprawiono jest o polsko-czeskim zagłębiu węglowym i istnieje osobny artykuł

(utworzony wczoraj) o polsko-czeskim obszarze metropolitalnym (obejmującym obszar głównie zagłębia), ale o urbanistycznym tworze a nie przemysłowym. I byłoby wszystko dobrze jakby Polaron się nie mieszał w sprawy o których nie ma pojęcia. Jego małą wiedzę na temat tego obszaru metropolitalnego widać choćby w tej edycji gdzie np. część województwa małopolskiego (Lesser Poland Voivodeship) czyli np. Chrzanów czy Oświęcim podpiął pod szerszą definicję (ta 5 milionową) a nie konurbacji katowickiej (2,7 do 3 mln) oraz pisze że Racibórz tworzy 100,000 obszar metropolitalny. To tak jak napisać, że 10,000 miasteczko to metropolia ;p

dicks dicks dicks dicks dicks dicks dicks dicks

dicks dicks dicks dicks dicks dicks dicks dicks

" == Let's get this article featured on the main page =) == Get to work folks, =) :I mentioned above that featuring this on the main page would be inappropriate until the election cycle has finished. It may be possible to promote the article once disagreements are resolved, but probably for the same reason you want it on the main page (more attention for his campaign), I think that would be the wrong thing to do since WP is supposed to be neutral. I agree that it probably shouldn't be featured on the main page, but there's still no reason it can't be taken to featured article quality. A few sections need rewriting, but it's come a long

way in a relatively short period of time (the past six months or so). Good work, editors. ::Chances are with the amount of time it takes to improve an article, go through WP:FAC, and get on the list for the main page FA, the election would be over. Good luck though, its always tough to improve an article on a person in the public spotlight. It is not stable and in dispute because Gloriamarie, who proudly proclaims her support for Paul on her userpage, thinks we should include what he says about himself but not the conflicting legislation he has introduced. Clearly this is headed to mediation, so I doubt it would make a good FAC. ← "

Why is it worded in wikipedia in a way

that seems to dispute it? Typical wikipedia misogynist crap.

2006 (UTC) :Well-written & footnoted preposterous garbage

is still preposterous garbage. 14:31, 20 December

" ::I don't see why you'd find such a thing amusing, nor why you think my question might've been rhetorical (or even ""retorical"", as you put it). Such decisions should be based on policy, and not contradictory ""precedents"" that are not evidently documented, nor the subjective judgments of button-pushers who don't seem to take the discussion into account. Can you point me to these precedents? :Hi Nightscream, please forgive my tone in the last message - I had assumed (as you have been here longer than me) that you were aware there is no such criteria page and were obliquely questioning my Ffd closure. The one used in these cases is the WP:NFCC list. What I mean by amusing is that, if we had a

dot-point criteria, then the subsequent interpretative arguments would (I think) descend into the normal Wikidrama which you can either be amused by or angry at...I chose amused. As a fellow button pusher you know that all policies are descriptive of practice rather firm dictates and usually judgment is required. I took into account the arguments—the precedents I refer to are those from a great many Ffd/Ifd closures; there is no single page that I can point to. I am aware with these Ffd closures, as for all of them, that the non-free criteria are intended to exclude most non-free criteria and good reasons are needed to keep them. I'll discuss the closure of these two at to keep this all in one place - "

" :::Infoboxes are not obligatory, in biographical or other articles here. In this case, ""those editors working on the article"", per Scott, consist of Hoary. Please consider his opinion, Nihonjoe. I see to my surprise that you tell him on your talkpage that removing the infobox is ""considered vandalism"". That passive form ""is considered"" presumably means you consider it vandalism; I'm sure you're aware, being a 'crat, that WP:Vandalism doesn't. Note especially the sentence ""If an editor treats situations which are not clearly vandalism as such, then that editor may harm the encyclopedia by alienating or driving away potential editors."" It's hardly ever proper to call good-faith actions of good users,

such as Hoary, ""Vandalism"", nor to try to bully them like this (I quote from your talkpage again): ""You know, I have no idea why you're so hung up on this""... ""Edit warring on this article isn't going to help your case as removing the infobox is considered vandalism. Please stop this stupidity now."" Is there any reason why it would not make just as much sense, no more and no less, to express surprise that you are so hung up on it, point out that edit warring isn't going to help you, and ask you to stop your stupidity? I'm removing the infobox. Please don't edit war. | ."

Di Stefano has NO convictions and that was made clear and conceded by the CPS at the Van Hoogstraten hearings in 2002. He is a man of good character according to the transcripts. The Crown did not challenge that at all because once a conviction is quashed one becomes again of good character and in any court of law one is not permitted to mention a conviction that was subsequently quashed. We have seen his certificate in Italy that he is of no previous conviction and not under investigation. We have been in touch, under the Freedom of Information, with the Department of Justice in Washington and Di Stefano has never been charged, tried or convicted of either a felony or misdemenour in the US. In fact in

Iraq he is protected more than any other person by the US Military. He is permitted incredible access to documents and detainees including so called 'high risk terrorist' which if he was anything other than what he states he is would simply not be possible. We have not quite understood actually who or what Di Stefano does but he has been involved in a number of 'situations' which people end up either dead, jailed, and he continues his work. There will be a book on his life published in Italy (unauthorised) which may shed light on many aspects. But to say he is anything other than of good character and a lawyer will only detract from the real object of discovering who or what he actually does.

. Cross referencing or lack therof will be a royal bitch,

so it will take time to get everything checked and cited

and then had sex with so hard that he broke her pelvis

and she was left to die with blood oozing from her vagina

" :It is in Turkish and says

""This user is stupid"". salak, kullanıcı, bu."

JEWS WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR EVERY THING THAT HAPPENS TO

ANY ONE THAT IS BAD SAID BY THE LORD

External search engines should, but do not always send readers straight to the right page. They send readers to the pages with the highest ranking according to the algorithm used. However that can give the wrong thing certain circumstances - such as if a webpage is moved, without the old title continuing to point at it. That's because the incoming links which are a major contributor to page ranking will continue to point to the old title (we can only fix internal links). :::The Durham move was such a case, as UK readers no longer find the article about the city, they find the dab instead. Meanwhile US users are unaffected as

the NC city still dominates their searches. If Worcester is moved, the same negative impact will hit UK users after this article, with no positive benefit to US users after info on the MA city. :::To be honest, I think WP:PRIMARYTOPIC itself is wrong - if guidance advocates breaking of stable URLs then its bad guidance. We are not constructing a brand new resource, but maintaining an existing one. In the abstract, we would choose the most significant to be at the basename. However, once that choice has been made and the article locations are settled, no one really cares. If we consistently used wikidata codes you could still find the article.anion

^hey dumb ass moron whoever said she can not act should jsut

die cause HIliary is great actress and you are just hating

== pfffffftttt! == You think your vandal proof will stop

a troll? you just made yourself a new friend fag.

" Mr. Silvers Midori was 14 when I wrote the first feature about her. I consider your suggestion that I wrote negative reviews about many young artists vandalism of its own sort may I remind you that you called me a ""thoughtless, nasty person"" and many other things on the Evancho page? I have deliberately not said anything about Evancho's parents, although no child could be paraded in public without getting somebody's permission, no? You have taken a difference of opinion about one single, deeply controversial young artist and turned it into a crusade, in the pretense of objectivity. The Barry mention suggests that my departure from the Post had something to do with my angry

response to the harassment I had been receiving from his minions, who then publicized the letter everywhere they could. Is paid publicity the criterion for importance in your mind, whether Barry or Evancho? Are Marion Barry and Jackie Evancho that much more important to my career than oh, say, my work with Glenn Gould, Virgil Thomson, Dawn Powell, Sigrid Undset, Robert Green Ingersoll, the record company I founded, the thousands of people I've reviewed and interviewed? Certainly, the article as it stands right now would suggest that. I'm only replying to this because I respect and admire Wikipedia, even though it includes people who seem to think that calling people ""nasty,"" ""thoughtless"" liars is acceptable behavior."

" == Trask is the only source to mention size == Trask stands alone in describing this in terms of size: *P.H. Matthews, Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics (2007, Oxford) uses ""macrofamily"" solely for a proposed unit that combines widely accepted language families with no reference to size. *Lyle Campbell & Mauricio J. Mixco, A Glossary of Historical Linguistics (2007, Utah) uses ""macrofamily"" solely for proposed and controversial units with no reference to size. *David Crystal, A Dictionary of Linguistics & Phonetics (2003, Blackwell) does not use ""macrofamily"", but uses ""phylum"" and ""macrophylum"" in the same senseproposed units with deep time depth above the

level of established families with no reference to size. *Terry Crowley, An Introduction to Historical Linguistics (1997, Oxford) does not use ""macrofamily"", but uses ""stock"" and ""phylum"" in the same senseproposed units with deep time depth above the level of established families with no reference to size. Indeed, he follows Stephen A. Wurm in using ""stock"" for grouping language isolates as well as for grouping families. So if you look at actual linguistic dictionaries, you find Trask is the only source that uses ""macrofamily"" for size and all the others use it only for ""proposed controversial grouping above the level of family"". "

" I think you may be starting to learn some physics, POM. That introduction may be an improvement. I am not sure why we were both looking at the same page in Messiah at the same time. I agree that we should end up with a different title, but I started with this one to balance ""Interpretation of quantum mechanics"", because a poor fit between a theory and its approximation belongs to the approximation and not to the theory. As I said, somewhere, we should talk about the history of when physicists still thought classically and talk about physics from a contemporary point of view. I want this article to permanently do the latter but also at present to lead people away from

seeing viewpoints as contemporary, when they are not. Of course there must be current philosophical discussion of physics, but I can't see how that can be interesting until we already know enough physics to understand entanglement and quantum computing. From what I am reading in Physics Today, that will not reach an encyclopedia soon. If I find some historical evidence, I would like to include that Einstein's failure to ""understand"" quantum mechanics was caused by people putting things too conservatively for him to see the leap. I don't remember much talk about the ""interpretation of curved space"". He simply said that was how it is and the experiments confirmed it. There was no putting it softly to keep from disturbing people. "

:Hello, Adraen. By new title, do you mean a new section? Or a completely new article? :We can certainly add more material on former glaciation of the Himalaya. Right now, the article is not very detailed. If we add a lot of detail about former glaciation, then the article would become unbalanced. We can possibly create a new article out of the new material. :It is important that new material be supported by multiple reliable sources, especially if a new article is created. Relying on a single source has a very real risk of violating the Neutral point of view rule - we need to make sure that the material about paleoglaciation reflects scientific consensus, and gives

due weight to minority views and reports on controversy. :Concretely, I summarized the previous material, only removing the long list of ancient glaciers, and the excessive citations to Matthias Kuhle. I removed the long list, because the out-of-context list was not helpful to our readers. See the guideline about indiscriminate information. I removed the excessive citations to Kuhle, because Wikipedia is not a collection of links, and the addition of 17 references by seemed like a conflict of interest. :Please feel free to expand on the current article, understanding the guidelines that I used to remove and summarize the old material. I would suggest not simply reverting, but adding material that offers insight to our readers. —

" == Hate rant (uh oh!) == I hate you RGTraynor, and I'm

just too damn lazy to go to a gym. That is all. "

" ==Speedy deletion of Whoopscoops== A tag has been placed on Whoopscoops, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top

of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or ""db"" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. "

Just please take the damn list of bands that are considered

emo, it's causing more trouble than it is and is stupid.

::::::::::What you disagree he's an idiot, or that

it is wrong to call him that?

" ::I tried to give a shit, I tried to salvage you as

an editor. It is clear you are not going to allow that. "

josh bell 11ft size zero in need of sex... sexually

fustrated, seen one naked girl and needs a little life!

== fuck you == your a cock why don't

you suck big fat floppy cock like tiderolls?

::::::That's what I've been saying. Half of your edits are great, so long as they don't go too far. Each of those changes (financial repercussions, terrorist/death penalty, etc. are good additions). The problem is that it started from a polemical approach and is now being incorporated into encyclopedic processes. I'm sure you're not done with your work, but I'd still recommend targeted improvements over a great crusade or correction. ::::::Excluding concerns of Europeans, hmm... I can't comment on that with credibility. I'm an American and could be unaware of my bias. We do use primarily English sources which are UK/US heavy. It's possible we're missing

some of the reactions from Germany and France, Scandinavia... but I still don't think our article has a particular slant. (That doesn't mean it's complete yet either). I mean, everything you've wanted to describe, we've added, just maybe not with the exhaustive detail or exposure-agenda you embarked on. If you're looking at the article and still thinking, where's the outrage?, I think that's probably because the outrage is in you and not the sources. Bring some sources that describe an outpouring of backlash against the calls for Assange's death, for example, and we'll incorporate some of that. It hasn't happened extensively yet, to my knowledge.

"==Notability of The Confederation of Jeremy== A tag has been placed on The Confederation of Jeremy, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If you feel that you can assert

the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or ""db"" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines. For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. "

: this moron thinks he speaks latin, he does not any, i speak

a lot of hebrew, latin, he can only dream of, pretener loser

Can you not delete shit just because you don't see it

or you're unfamiliar with it? There are plenty of sources:

" I find extremely insulting to myself, my children, my parents, my family and my heritage. I have not heard teachings of how the government moved members of my blood, the Cherokee People, from their homes, took our land and caused many of our elders, women and children to die. I doubt any of this fake wannabe ""tribe"" have ever seen, let alone experienced, any of the poverty or hardships that have been put on true indians. I don't believe they would be laughing or havng a great time witnessing this disgraceful act of insult, mocking and misinformation if they were being given the real story of

the indian people. If you want to show ""Indian"" dancers then use REAL INDIANS and stop supporting fake impostors that are doing nothing more than not teaching what they should about the REAL Indian people. I see no difference in what the Mic-o-fake-indians have done compared to that of a pure white anglo saxon teacher putting on black makeup and giving a lecture on how hard slaves made it on plantation owners! The event at this evenings dinner did nothing more than mock Native American people. I in no way agree with teaching young impressionable children what good values are through a program that mocks another culture."

" == Manual of Style Issues == I came across this article browsing through the GA nominations page. This is not a review, but just general observations. Personally, I believe this article needs some work before it can pass a GA review. In particular, I noticed that the article uses the abbreviation ""GK"" pretty excessively. The manual of style says ""Always consider whether it is better to simply write a word or phrase out in full, thus avoiding potential confusion for those not familiar with its abbreviation. Remember that Wikipedia does not have the same space constraints as paper."" Additionally, the article isn't very clear, concise,

and accessible. I believe that this is an excellent start, and meets most of the GA criteria, however, because the article is not very accessible, I believe that the article, as it stands right now, is probably C-class material (since ""accessibility"" is a specific criterion in B-class). My recommendation is for the nominator of this article to withdraw the nomination for now, and perhaps seek a peer review instead. The backlog on Peer Review is generally shorter than the backlog on GAN. Please let me know on my talk page if you have further questions, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. E-mail "

Iqbal was forced to do blowjobs to his owner

for money he was raped and made babaies

" == A tool for you! == Hi ! I've just come across one of your edits (or that you have been patrolling new pages), and noticed that you might appreciate some help with references. I case you're not aware, you might consider using this tool – it makes your life a whole heap easier, by filling in complete citation templates for your links. All you do is install the script: // Add [[WP:Reflinks]] launcher in the toolbox on left addOnloadHook(function () { addPortletLink( ""p-tb"", // toolbox portlet ""http://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/webreflinks.py/"" + wgPageName + ""?client=script&citeweb;=on&overwrite;=&limit;=30〈="" + wgContentLanguage,

""Reflinks"" // link label )}); onto Special:MyPage/skin.js, then paste the bare URL (without [...] brackets) between your tabs, and you'll find a clickable link called Reflinks in your toolbox section of the page (probably in the left hand column). Then click that tool. It does all the rest of the work (provided that you remember to save the page! It doesn't work for everything (particularly often not for PDF documents), but for pretty much anything ending in ""htm"" or ""html"" (and with a title) it will do really, really well. So long! • "

" == Genre warring == I am having a dispute with some IP (figures) over their erroneous, OR-filled changes to the infobox's genre parameter (figures). I explained their error in length at their , but the editor does not seem to notice that they have a talk page and insist on me giving them ""contact info"" in their edit summaries (). They seem to have fished for any website that mentions ""trap"" and the album title in the same context to support their genre warring, and has come up with garbage like this, citing either insignificant hip hop group blogs or indirect mentions of ""trap music"". To my knowledge, there is

only one professional music source that refers to this album in the context of: this is ""a [genre] album"". And that is the PopMatters review, whose sentence calling this a ""crunk album"" is directly cited, but the IP has continued removing it. This is another in a long line of IPs who have been vandalizing the infobox genre in the past month. The editor who denied my request for page protection overlooked that and instead focused on this guy's verbose edit summaries to conclude that it is a content dispute. Since this now has to be done the long and hard way, please help establish ""consensus"" and offer comments. "

HAHA!! i agree. plus any jew knows that

those silly kids are not typical jews!!

you are always shit...why don'you pieces of shit let

me make whetever I want?? are you mentally retarded??

" ::""Not all pain is conscious."" WTF? How do you

define ""pain"" then? This is a bunch of bullshit. "

BARNEY RAPED CHILDERN IN THE BACKSTAGE......DONT LET YOUR

KIDS WATCH THIS SHOW!!!!!!!!!! HE ALSO DID DRUGS!!!!

" ::Calling somebody a ""f-g ahole"" is different to giving somebody the impression that you're referring to them as a Nazi. See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jmfangio-Chrisjnelson/Workshop#Extreme incivility by Chrisjnelson. Jmfangio said ""link #2 in this section is particularly troubling for me"" and Seraphimblade said ""Chrisjnelson's behavior during this incident was highly uncivil and unacceptable, especially the ""Nazi"" reference."" The issue for them isn't as much a fact that they think you called me one, but rather because you decided to use that word as your word choice. ::And as far as being called a ""f-g ahole,"" I'm in high school. Everybody calls everybody else stuff like that, so if somebody were to call me that, I

wouldn't think too much of it. It's normal for high schoolers. But when you used the word ""Nazi"" you made me think that you were comparing my behavior to that of one. You say you didn't, but you also said you were lying in that edit summary, which makes me still think you were, and that hurts. ::You are responsible for your actions, and for everything you say. If you say something offensive, then you should prepare to deal with the consequences. You can never say things like and not have anybody take offense to it. And let me ask you something: do you think that I took offense to that comment? '''''' "

== WP:NOT, blocking, and evasion, oh my! == Forgive the title, feeling a little playful. Anyway, I would like to inquire what an editor should od if they beleive they have found a user who has been blocked (using this edit as an example), and then seemingly returns. The edits do match, as they are revertions. At this point, I am beginning to beleive the user is using the account to evade the block and reinsert the edit he apparently desperately wants included. I have tried to explain to the IP user (and most likely the registered user) that the information in the form they are submitting it is not in line with WP:NOT, an official policy. It still had no effect, and the person continued their

actions The person's account / appears to be a single purpose account used solely for this purpose. At the moment my tension in this matter is getting a little too high, and I am not sure why. Therefore, I wish to inquire what the proper course of action in this situation is. I am going to guess a WP:RFCU might be needed to link the user to the IP and therefore the block evasion if that is the case, but I don't want to jump to any conclusions. As of now, I have left the Alpental article alone for the moment with his edit on top, and I am going to take a day off from editing to cool off. I wish you a pleasant day, Titoxd.

" == Pelican Shit == I'm curious, what is

the Australian slang usage for ""pelican shit""? "

I want an accurate wikipedia that has a strong inclusionist policy. Since this was deleted on your talk page, I will ask here. I provided 3 sources which stated her name. [https://books.google.com/books?id=z5qmplifVDIC&pg;=PA858&lpg;=PA858&dq;=keisha+karlie+lewis&source;=bl&ots;=j-A-Lto-yY&sig;=-thzdejnnbyjXCc8zNlc0jNprGk&hl;=en&sa;=X&ved;=0CCMQ6AEwATgUahUKEwi71v-fpIvJAhWMPz4KHbrcDa8#v=onepage&q;=keisha%20karlie%20lewis&f;=false] , http://www.vh1.com/news/12205/karlie-redds-age-is-one-of-the-great-american-mysteries/ http://straightfromthea.com/2012/08/29/karlie-redd-age-baby-daddy-daughter/ According to WP:BLPPRIVACY. You used her IMDB, which states on the page the name Karlie Lewis in 2005. . Although many people have provided links that her name is Keisha Lewis who is also on IMDB. I fail to understand why you deleted information that might age her not long after I put up a reliable source concerning this. . How is it ok to

sue IMDB in one case but not the other? The use of her name is fine. We have people who use stage names all the time. Such as Carlos Irwin Estévez or Eric Marlon Bishop or even Reginald Kenneth Dwight. Lying or not disclosing age is common among celebrities such as Rebel Wilson and Jennifer Lopez with a dob of 1970 but also a date of birth of 1969 . I don't see the big deal about putting up a year or birth. She does have an adult daughter. . Let me chime in an admin for an opinion

" :: What I'm about to say is by no means a personal attack. I don't believe you personally engage in the behavior I am about to discuss. ::Deadbeat itself is a slur. It's why it's not used in the article on Bankruptcy, even though it is synonymous with someone who is bankrupt. It is not benign. ::Moreover, other than being scurrilous in its own right, ""deadbeat dad"" and the construct ""deadbeat parent"" are right up there with ""welfare queen"" as code words for racial, ethnic and class based bigotry. You will notice that my tone has been strident to the point of indignation. This is why. The term is very often used to make certain underhanded and vile racist

and classist allegations without actively stating the inherent racism and classism. ::All I want is to find an intellectually honest way to achieve consensus and move on. I found a precise legal term that may be more pointed, but is certainly less inflammatory, more precise, and less racially fraught. I am making every effort to come up with a solution to an ugly problem in the best faith I can muster. ::I ask that you forgive my stridency, but I have no tolerance for bigotry. Certainly not when it is codified in an encyclopedia. ::I ask that you show some good faith, and instead of defending what I consider indefensible, give me some suggestion for what possibilities you would entertain."

==Re: Re: Auto GP == As you can see on the

site, unlikely the only uncovered nation is italy, Shit! (CET)

Still won't remove you fake review will you

Legolas? You are such a lying scum.

" :The OED gives this quote: ""1970 Cycle World Oct. 34 Suzuki's entry in the ‘*Superbike’ field just happens to be an excellent touring bike."" Over at google books the term pops up all over the place after between 69 and 71. Here and here are examples of sources saying the era of the superbike began with the CB750 four. It would be nice to find out exactly which magazine first use the term applied to a motorcycle; it seems to have been commonplace by 1970.The Kawasaki Mach III was introduced a month earlier than the CB750, and could have (but wasn't, apparently, for whatever reason) called ""the first superbike."" The Triumph Trident and BSA

Rocket III also went on sale before the CB750. Yet the British machines, for all their performance and good sales, are seen now as the last gasp of a dying industry, seeming to be a 1937-era Triumph twin with another cylinder grafted on, while the Honda was at the vanguard of a new era that has remained with us to this day.It wasn't that the CB750 was the fastest ever, or the first four, or even the first transverse four, but that it was practical, reliable, cheap and could be delivered to the public on a massive scale. The disc brakes were a production bike first. (See Classic Japanese Motorcycle Guide pages 76-79). "

"""FUCK YOU ANGRY SHOPLIFTER!!! FUCK WIKIPEDIA!!!""

""Love is for suckers"" hard cock"

" == Full Rewrite == Cluebot just reverted an IP editor's ""full rewrite"" as possible vandalism. While, I think ClueBot was probably wrong to call that vandalism, it was definitely not an acceptable edit. I just wrote the following on the IP's talk page, but figured I should post it here to so that others can see and we can have centralized discussion if needed. ::First, before completely rewriting an article, I strongly recommend discussing it on the talk page. Second, your new article was highly POV, which is not allowed per WP:NPOV. Third, it didn't even fit the meaning of the page. That is, while the attacks against women (the sexual violence) may be an example of some Hindus being violent

against non-Hindus, that definitely was not terrorism, because it was not an intentional act by an organized group to cause terror to another group. I strongly suspect you are one of the people involved in the now deleted article Hindu jihad, as I recognize a number of the claims. That article was deleted for clear reasons; unless you can fix the fundamental defects in that information, please do not attempt to re-add it elsewhere. It is possible that one or two of your sources and sentences could be incorporated into Saffron terror, but not the whole article. Please discuss any further comments on that article's talk page. So, if anyone wants to discuss those edits, feel free to do so here. "

" If we quote Bronner's piece (the NYT article that states ""all official translations"") then we have to quote Cole's response to Bronner. Also, if we want to include Hitchens' non-notable charge that Cole is an ""apologist"" for Ahmadenijad that is fine but we then must include Cole's actual statements about the man - that he is a ""crank"" and a ""fascist,"" and let's be sure to cite Cole's ""scorecard"" on the issue right here. It turns out Hitchens is far more of an ""apologist"" if we must observe such things; but, as I said, it's really not notable. Oh yes and we should be

sure to include this Cole passage from the source Armon cites above: ""I personally despise everything Ahmadinejad stands for, not to mention the odious Khomeini, who had personal friends of mine killed so thoroughly that we have never recovered their bodies."" If we're going to give any credence whatsoever to Hitchens' embarrassingly pathetic attempt to paint Cole as an ""apologist"" for Ahmadenijad or Khomeini, let's be sure to quote what Cole actually said about the issues. :There are differences of opinion on the relative merits of their arguments. Don't remove cites, don't argue Cole's case, and please stick to the matter at hand. "

" ==what do make of this?== There is a valid article somewhere in there. The problem, as so often, is that the article makes a half-assed attempt to , but after a couple of paragraph kind of throws up its hand and goes on talking about the United States exclusively. This need not be a problem, you can write a valid article all about the United States, just make this explicit in the title and lead. ""Family farm (United States)"" would seem like a good title. I see at least three pages waiting to be pulled from the wall of text I found here

*A ""global"" article, family farming, written based on whatever the UN has to say about ""family farming"" with a global and contemporary scope *A historical article focussing on landed estate (Hof (estate)) in Germanic Europe, and the development vs. manoralism in the medieval period, vs. industrialisation in the modern period, and its influence in colonialism, emigration to the New World, the Russian Empire and African colonies *Family farm (United States), which can go into glorious detail about all historical, political and economic detail it likes Of course there can always be other regional spin-off pages from the ""global"" page, e.g. on Brazil. "

HEY , FUCK YOU!!!!! YOU ARE A FUCKING BITCH, WHORE,

SLUT AND CUNT, . AM I BEING PUNISH, ?

OMG A GIRL!!!11111111!!!1 Oh noes this faggy admin bloked mi,

ibe t he likes gurls HAahaAahaHAaAhAha (im so alone ()

==Illiterate rubbish== This article is so poorly

written, parts of it make no sense.

" :Hello, talk page stalker here. ::Stating that someone is lying is absolutely not a personal attack. All that such a statement means is that what they are saying is contradicted by reality. It makes no comment whatever about their character. If I say the sun is purple, anyone is free to say that such a statement is a lie, and that's not an attack against me, it's a contradiction of my statement. :First, start by deciding whether you're talking about (A) the characterization of somebody as lying, or (B) the characterization of a statement as a lie. Secondly, note that in most societies and at most times (though with very many exceptions), anyone is free

to say that anything is anything. (I'm free to call Tide rolls a hamster. Tide rolls is free to call me a stick of asparagus.) ¶ Your seeming interpretation of ""lie"" as merely ""false statement"" seems extraordinary. Here's Harry Frankfurt on lies (via a prefatory examination of humbug, on his way to the investigation of bullshit): ::In this respect, the property of being humbug is similar to that of being a lie, which is identical neither with the falsity nor with any of the other properties of the statement the liar makes, but which requires that the liar makes his statement in a certain state of mind — namely, with an intention to deceive. : "

" A tag has been placed on Racó Català requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding to the

top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or ""db"" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines. For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. | "

":::You are arguing over the removal of a stupid

""/""! Don't you have better things to do?! "

:You jerk. I may oppose just to spite you an' yer

nefarious candidate-stealin' ways! I will have my vengeance! — ''''

" ==Speedy deletion of Vanessa Romanelli== A tag has been placed on Vanessa Romanelli requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable,

as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or ""db"" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. "

==The article was locked!== I've got an account, but it is

annoying how some silly dimwit caused this to get locked!

== ! == Learn something from the

pedia and stop sporting your ignorance, boy.

"==GA Review== :This review is transcluded from Talk:Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review. Reviewer: · ===Status = ON REVIEW=== On review... ====GA table==== {| class=""wikitable"" style=""text-align:left"" |- valign=""top"" ! width=""30"" | Rate ! width=""300""| Attribute ! | Review Comment |- valign=""top"" | colspan=""3"" | 1. |- valign=""top"" | colspan=""3"" | 2. |- valign=""top"" | colspan=""3"" | 3. |- valign=""top""

| colspan=""3"" | 6. |} ====General==== * ====MOS compliance==== * ====Lead==== * ====Signs and symptoms==== * =====Associated disorders===== * ====Cause==== * =====Genetics===== * =====Executive function===== * =====Evolution===== * =====Environmental===== * =====Social===== * ====Pathophysiology==== * ====Diagnosis==== * =====Classification===== * =====DSM-IV===== * =====ICD-10===== * =====Other guidelines===== * =====Differential===== * ====Management==== * =====Psychosocial===== * =====Medication===== * ====Prognosis==== * ====Epidemiology==== * ====History==== * ====Society and culture==== * =====Legal status of medications===== * =====Controversies===== * ====S

== Suggesting One Correction == This is basically a good article on a difficult subject. But explaining the war as an uprising of local Serbs is and letting Milošević off the hook is simply not accurate. This was an military invasion with some local support. Extremists from Serbia took part in the rebellion and they had weapons supplied by the Yugoslav National Army. The Army's immediate exploitation of these conflicts shows they were largely coordinated with the Army. Being there at the time and being an anti-fascist gives me some objectivity on this issue. I suggest the authors change that one sentence. I was back in Croatia this summer when there was a lot of news about

Gotovina, and I found an interesting dynamic from friends I talked to. Most of them could not care less about Gotovina since it is common knowledge that there were crimes committed. But many people are very reticent about joining the EU (the reason Croatia is cooperating on war crimes trials) due to the bad effect the EU has had on the economies of member countries. This is a change in public in opinion from the 1990s. When I was in a doctor's waiting room in Zagreb, a very angry discussion about EU membership broke out. And this in a country of extremely polite and reserved people. I never heard any remark about Gotovina showing a strong opinion.

:: H'okie then. There are a lot of stupid people

in this world. I thought you were one of them.

# This isn't related, Herpes is one of countless things that

might happen to a penis. Where do you stop? - ''''''

" Welcome! Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for . I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see: * The five pillars of Wikipedia * Help pages * Tutorial * How to edit a page and How to develop articles * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish) * Manual of Style You are welcome to continue editing without logging in, but many editors recommend that you [ create an account]. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits such as the ability to create articles. For

a full outline and explanation of the benefits that come with creating an account, please see this page. If you edit without a username, your IP address (173.46.99.74) is used to identify you instead. In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask for help at the Teahouse, ask me on , or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page. Again, welcome! "

:The Boy Who Cried Wolf - logging onto en.wiki to

call Marine Le Pen an ugly bitch destroys all credibility.

Strapping young lad IS NOT FROM USA, the

idiot who made this is ignorant retard.

" == Re: Conflict of Interest == Hi Peaceray, I wasn't sure how to respond to your message so I hope I am doing this right. You messaged me about my edits to the Greg Gianforte page. I am his son so I understand your concern and appreciate your message. I was aware of my biases and tried to be careful with my edits. My father is a controversial figure so there was already some charged language and misinformation on the page. I intentionally left in any information that casts my father in a negative light as long as it was true. I merely eliminated untrue, uncited statements

(e.g. that his nickname is ""Baldy"") and added balancing information to certain topics. For example, the only previous information about his charitable foundation was a single gift to a creationist museum; so I added general info about the foundation's scope and aim of benefiting education, protecting the vulnerable, etc. I did not remove the mention of the museum gift. I'm sure you will find that the article is more balanced and unbiased than before. If there are specific edits that you are concerned about, please let me know. Thank you for all your contributions to Wikipedia and your efforts to make it a better place. -adamwg333 "

piece of shit lick my 10 inch poopoo and then suck

a urethra off a penis hole fuck boy looking shit head

::Well look, you don't have to preach to me about any of this... to be quite honest I'm actually on the fence with many of these changes, and there some I just flat out oppose. But that doesn't mean that this arguement shouldn't get a fair, impartial reckoning. It is clear that there are many predatory, greedy trial lawyers in the world. It's equally clear that there are many predatory, greedy corporations in the world. And caught in the middle are industrial workers, white collar workers, doctors, patients and about a million lobbies on either side that deal their cards from the sleeve. ::And the debate is not worthless, because we do live

in a democracy. Our laws aren't static, and are constantly up for reevaluation. As you know, many of these kinds of changes have already been passed at the state level, which means that there are large groups of people who agree with their content. My brother is both a Democrat and an Emergency MD, and recently had cause to rethink some of his positions on this when he saw his hospital being destaffed of specialists due to several colleagues being unable to pay their premiums. It is a complex, multifaceted debate, and there are legitimate players on each side of it who want the same thing... better laws and better justice. My $0.02

==Dogs and food== Well, I've gone over to the food-related area from time to time and tried to make sense out of the dishware/kitchenware/utensils/etc. stuff. I think this it the third time I've really hacked around in it in the last year or so, and I think it's all starting to come together. But of course in the process one lands on related categories, looking for missing articles, and one starts to see things that shouldn't be in THAT category, but should be in THIS one, and then when one starts looking at THIS category, then one sees... but there ya go, that's what WP does to one. I've seen your name all over my watchlist recently with, hmm, I

think list of fictional dogs?, so it's kind of funny that all of a sudden I'm showing up on yours. -) Losing a dog early to cancer sucks, and that's just that. OK, losing any dog just sucks. I'm on dogs #4, 5, and 6 now, so I've gone through losing 3 over the last dozen years, and it doesn't matter whether they die of old age at 17 or at 9 of cancer. Bleah. ANYWAY, to create your own sandbox, you can also do something like type in your user page (or talk page) like this: and then preview or save the page where you typed it and then just click on that link, edit, and go. Ta-da! |

" ::Again, I'm not saying that this subject isn't inherently interesting, or that it's not notable and should be deleted. I'm saying the way the article is written isn't very interesting. As it is, it can be broken down into ""Woodbridge was born to this family. [Family details] Woodbridge went to these schools, joined these clubs, and earned these degrees. Woodbridge became a pastor. Woodbridge became a professor and taught these subjects. Woodbridge became a dean and then a president. Woodbridge retired. Woodbridge married and raised a family. Woodbridge died and was buried. [One quote on his personality] [A list of works]"" This is fine for an ordinary article, but doesn't have anything else to pull the reader in. I'm pretty sure an ordinary reader

would be left wondering why this particular figure is notable. As a basic example, he wrote a lot, but what did he write about? I don't think a list of titles suffices. Essentially, I think for biographical articles, some sense of how the subjects were influential is needed at least. ::I didn't mean to make a personal attack of any kind; if Wikipedia were to get rid of its articles on obscure or dry subjects it wouldn't be the same (or as useful). But if FAs are supposed to be ""the best work"" of Wikipedia... I have a hard time seeing how something this bare-bones can compare with the sort of stuff I mentioned (in terms of writing quality and depth of research). "

" == Disruptive information == That is an article that was empty, and I added content. I did not change anything cause it was almost empty. Surprisingly, you and your friend the ""Athenian"" pretend to know the history of Albania better than the others. If the content does not fit to Greek nationalistic interest, that is not of my concern. The history of Leskovik is that, and the references show the not very ""civilized"" comportment of Greeks during 1913-1914. Don't think you can alternate history by denying the other to write on Wikipedia what happened at their own place. If the crimes of the andarts bother your conscience, nobody blamed you, but does not mean it is disruptive to the article. If you see

the Ioannina, Arta, Paramithia, Konitsa, etc all have no name if Albanian version, though they have been and are part of Albanian history too. If you goo to Paramithia, the Cham expulsion is not mentioned. And the Souliotes are mentioned as Greeks who somehow learned Albanian on the way. (!!??!!)etc, etc. Wikipedia is not the only source of truth, and if it is constructed in a way that Greek editors should be in charge, it is fine for me, I am not scared. There is no rule in Wikipedia that says that Greeks are angels, and everything in their disfavor should be deleted. So, go and add the section you removed. I don't care how you rephrase it, but you cannot delete it. "

== we found a Luna Moth! == We found a Luna Moth! it is

so so big and gay I mean its just like your faggot mom

== Obama Sucks == So does McCain, And

Wikipedia is Gay Thank You for your time

". If it is such a waste of ""precious dick

space"" then how did you come to find it. Jackass"

In response to Fernando Rodriguez, the only ignorant Spanish person who denies all I say. Whatever text books or crap you copied from is the most BULL-SHIT I have ever read, you can't even explain yourself in English properly. All of the above is lies, lies, lies, doesn't make sense at all- you know it, your parents, grandparents and people who feed you these lies knows it. Don't be angry with Spain's history just because the Arabs and Moroccans were stronger than the Spainish people before. Why is it that white, European people always feel bitter and cannot admit defeat? Just live with it. Let me tell all some home truths, ignorance and racism is still very present

in Spain today so I am not surprised with all you say. I would suggest that you go get a D.N.A test to confirm your ancestry because the truth is running in your veins. Trust me, I know enough about Spain and it's history, good and bad without you having to tell me. I suggest you need to go out there and do more research on Spain - travel to Andulacia, speak and converse with people and while you're there you might as well take a short ferry trip to Morocco and see how close to home you'll feel, it might be an eye opener for you without you having to continue spitting out your lies.(J Manuel)

":whose ""nationalists""? Moscovitian? Agreed. Their miserable attemts ""to declare"" russians in Haličina indeed are something maniacal. At least for those who aren't introduced with russian imperialism. Ukrainophiles were for halichian ""peasants"", thus for their own people, their language, culture; moscvophiles were for russian tsars, their seminatural late adopted by ugrofinns oldchurch language from Macedonia Slavs in kyiv redaction, they just wanted to be a part of russia. They absolutely ignored who their people lived with them actually were. They don't speak to them in language which those understood. This artificial movement was due to heavily denationalization

of ukraine. It was ugly and antinatural and imevitably and absolutely naturally failed. It have nothing to the geneologic investigations dont say the lye. But you with yours antiukrainian feelings and maybe ukrainian origin you of course free to call yours ancestors the russians. For this such an odd movement isn't needed even. But if your ancestor are from halichina, such the view doesn't make this something better than brainwashed idiotism, despite how much times you recall the ""nationalists"" with negative connotations. Ukrainians survived thank to the ""nationalists"". So you can now hate them. UkrainianNationalist "

" == Star Trek canon vs. Star Trek canon == OK, this is getting silly. It's an incredibly trivial edit to get into an edit war over, so let's be civilized. Here's what the Wikipedia guide to writing better articles has to say about the principle of least astonishment: :===Principle of least astonishment=== :Using the principle of least astonishment, you should plan your pages and links so that everything appears reasonable and makes sense. If a link takes readers to somewhere other than where they thought it would, it should at least take them someplace that makes sense. :====Example==== :A user wants to know about the nuclear power plant that exploded in Chernobyl. The page on ""Chernobyl""

redirects to ""Chornobyl"", an alternative spelling for that town. However, the user sees that a link to the desired page, Chernobyl accident, is placed prominently near the top of the Chornobyl page, and happily clicks on that. It's true that an editor who saw a link saying Star Trek canon might subsequently type a link as [[''Star Trek'' canon]]. However, such an editor would quickly realize their mistake, just as E. Pluribus Anthony did within two minutes. It's Wikipedia style to italicize titles of television series, so the link should say Star Trek canon, even though the article is (rightly) at Star Trek canon. I don't see what's wrong with using the piped link here. — "