User talk:Alastair Haines/Archive 3

Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

Generic antecedents

On 13 April, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Generic antecedents, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 20:18, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha, congrats. Gets addictive after a while. I have a few DYKs. When you're please with things you can nominate them to be a GA or FA. That's always fun. I really like group editing when you watch something unfold before your eyes. The dino ones where/are like that.cheers, Casliber | talk | contribs 21:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your Edits to Time Manner Place

Do you think you could reprise most of that material into "Place Manner Time"? I've been fairly busy over time and don't think I'll be able to get to it soon, but if you don't get to it, I suppose it could be done by me, also.  :) --Puellanivis 06:54, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Civility barnstar

The Barnstar of Civility I award this Barnstar to Alistair Haines for the successful resolution of a transient hypothetical conflict. cheers, Cas Liber 23:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Papyri

I have noticed your bout of work on papyri related articles. Good job so far! I hope you don't mind, I have done some house cleaning. You had created a P1 article when we already had an article on Papyrus 1, so I just redirected the new article to the existing article. I also did some cleaning up of the infobox, some of the article names, and the categories. I have proposed that the papyrus category be renamed to plural because "Biblical manuscripts" the parent cat is plural as well (and the general convention in categories is to use plural). All of these changes seem minor, but I'm mentioning them to you in case there is something that I missed. Thanks.-Andrew c 17:54, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind reply. As for the title of the Library, I had seen a redlink to "Bibliotheca Bodmeriana" and that was the title in NA27 and your title had a capitalization error, so I decided to be bold and change the title. Sorry if I was too bold. Doing a google test, "Bibliotheca Bodmeriana" is the most common of the two (14,300 to 775) when searching all of google, and the most common term when limiting the search to English results (529 to 99). So the question is which is more recognizable to English speaker (per WP:NAME)? I obviously have a preference, but I'm not set and wouldn't mind moving the article to Bodmer Library. -Andrew c 00:36, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Papyrus 1

You sir are a fantastic man. THANK YOU! Ha at least Andrew c did not delete your articles. Your article was what I hoped to create but I was effectively frustrated in my efforts. God Bless you.

		The Editor's Barnstar
		message LoveMonkey 23:45, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

U RULE. LoveMonkey 23:45, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey just for reference here is my list of articles I was going to write that Andrew c deleted or atleast help delete twice. [1]. LoveMonkey 19:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Uncials

Great work! You're right, there isn't enough in English. It seems that to follow a good standard Greek reference one must also master German and Latin first. Best, Tim 13:07, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of theological journals

Hey, I love this page you've created, and I'd love to help you work on some of the articles. Like you, I'm studying the Old Testament having had a background in mathematics. StAnselm 08:23, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't get around to specialising in maths - I did a double major as part of a BSc degree. Now I'm doing honours at the Presbyterian Theological College in Melbourne. My topic is the theological status of the Transjordan in the OT.

Anyway, back to the List, I think the info-boxes are a good place to start. I believe we're allowed to use the magazine images for those articles only. StAnselm 12:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Calvinism

You are cordially invited to participate in WikiProject Calvinism The goal of WikiProject Calvinism is to improve the quality and quantity of information about Calvinism available on Wikipedia. WP:WikiProject Calvinism as a group does not prefer any particular tradition or denominination of Calvinism, but prefers that all Calvinist traditions are fairly and accurately represented.

Hi Alistair. Fancy meeting you here. We met at Grace Presbyterian in Wodonga when you were speaking about the Biblefest. With you, StAnselm, and occasional contributions from Rowlandw, Australian Presbyterians seems to be better represented than when I first joined. Keep up the good work. (Stephen M.) Blarneytherinosaur talk 02:46, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 22 May, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of Oxyrhynchus papyri, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Smee 10:45, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits on the List of New Testament papyri

I just wanted to comment on how awesome this article List of New Testament papyri is. Your contributions are incredible and I as an editor am most grateful. It is absolutely fantastic what you have done and I just could not have created an article this professional and concise (though that's probably not sayin much comin from me). Man I tell ya your cruising toward Sainthood. Just brilliant! Absolutely brilliant. God Bless LoveMonkey 17:31, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chester Beatty Papyri

First of all, thanks for your comment. Next, ,I was wondering if you could take a look at my most ambitious article to date, Chester Beatty Papyri. So far, I am the only editor, and I would like to have the input and contributions from other editors. So I couldn't think of a better editor to ask when it comes to ancient papyri like these.-Andrew c 00:50, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for giving this article a look. I also wanted to tell you that I have merged the papyri and codex infoboxes into a single infobox: Template:New Testament manuscript infobox. The user can write in if its a papyrus, uncial, minuscule, lectionary, or whatever. And all of the parameters are optional, so something like "sign" that only is found in the lower uncials doesn't display if left blank. I have gone through and also converted all of the existing uses of the old templates to this new one. This was discussed on the old templates talk pages a while ago. Hope you don't mind. Keep up the good work yourself!-Andrew c 02:11, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the future

I like working on collabs so I've made a bit of a standing list here as a subpage of my userpage, just in case one comes up to collaborate on in the future if you think I'll like it too. I may be up for something along the lines of games or mythological or mid-eastern geography at some point.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:02, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like fun. I'll have a look around - I'll let you know if I see a page I want to develop in the area and vice versa - Sumerian mythology and mid-eastern games etc. as well as hominids all sounds promising.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:34, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers

Thanks Alastair. Great template, by the way!--Gnfgb2 20:48, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

After not seeing you for a few weeks, I have crossed your path twice in the past few days. So I figured I'd drop you a note saying hi, and to ask you to take a look at my major additions to Biblical manuscript. Two eyes are always better than one, and you helped me with minor edits to the Chester Beatty Papyri article, so I figured it wouldn't hurt to see what you think of what I did to this other article. Thanks for your consideration.-Andrew c 22:03, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Erechtheus

Yes, I did choose this identity based on the historical and/or mythological founder of Athens. I didn't do so here for the first time -- it has been a pseudonym I have used in many places where my more traditional identities have been taken. It does tend to express something special about both my occupation and my outlook on life. I know there is a move toward real names afoot here, and I may need to eventually reconsider my identity of choice based on those (still to be determined?) policies. For now, I like it this way. By the way, you didn't disturb the holiday at all -- I left virtually all of my online life behind. It was quite refreshing. Erechtheus 01:53, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

4QMMT

Hi there, I'd already seen your Tanakh article and I like it. A lot of work has clearly gone into it. Isn't it great when stuff links? That's what WP is all about. Cheers Jack1956 10:45, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi again, Have taken your advice and am busily working away on 4Q107 and 4Q175! Any improvements you can make to them would be gratefully received. Cheers Jack1956 09:47, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for that. Actually, Emanuel offered but I wasn't interested! It was actually Martine, [thank goodness] who is a friend of the family. Jack1956 11:38, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for your kind words about my humble articles and your help and support in 'getting them up to scratch'. Jack1956 22:14, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of New Testament uncials

Is the item noted as #090=074=064 correct? Is this a single entry for three manuscripts (#90,, 74, 64) or a single multiply numbered manuscript? Or just uniquely number? Rmhermen 13:24, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Saint Catherine's Monastery, Mount Sinai

Hi, If it's easy for you to do so, could you very kindly translate the following, or in particular the bit in the middle about relations with the Ρωμαιοκαθολική:

Από τους ελληνορωμαϊκούς χρόνους έως σήμερα διατηρείται εδώ αναλλοίωτος ο οικουμενικός ελληνορθόδοξος χαρακτήρας της Μονής, καθώς δεν έχει γνωρίσει ποτέ σοβαρή καταστροφή ή βίαιη αλλαγή στην ταυτότητα του έμψυχου δυναμικού της, γεγονός το οποίο αποδεικνύει το λάθος πού έχουν οι έστω και σπάνιες αναφορές σύμφωνα με τις οποίες Μονή έχει αποκλειστική σχέση με τη Ρουμανική, τη Ρωμαιοκαθολική, τη Ρωσική ή και με την Κοπτική παράδοση. Αν και η επίσημη ονομασία της είναι «Ιερά Μονή του Θεοβαδίστου Όρους Σινά», ανά τους αιώνες αναφέρεται και ως «Μονή του Αγίου Όρους Σινά», «Μονή της Παναγίας της Βάτου», «Μονή του Σωτήρος Χριστού», μεταγενέστερα δε και κατά κανόνα σήμερα: «Μονή της Αγίας Αικατερίνης».

It's from the monastery website. I'm having a bit of a tussle with your mate Love Monkey & others there. Thanks if you can, Johnbod 01:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I think the passage may actually deny being in communion, which would settle the matter, although one does wonder when this became the case.... That's based on babelfish, so who knows. The first passage did not appear to be relevant when I ran it through babelfish; just a reference to pre-schism days. De Hamel is a big shot in mondo illuminati, though unusual in having been at Sotheby's for most of his career - I think he's still a consultant, but now based at Cambridge. Johnbod 14:27, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Biblical canon

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Biblical_canon#Discriminatory_edits.3F

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Java7837 (talk • contribs) 13:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Underground Cities

These are fascinating! Thanks for pointing them out to me. I have just read about Derinkuyu. It's a great article and I'd love for it to grow. Thoughts for exansion:

more information from the Bishop of Caesarea Mazaca, and St. Basil the Great (perhaps google Mazaca and Derinkuyu)

Cappadocia Link Another Link perhaps some connections with the Cappadocian Fathers would be relevant images (I know that it is hard to find free pictures, so don't worry too much, unless you have friends who have photographs from visits) Things I think need improvement:

the Turkish ministry of culture doesn't seem to want to admit the earlier Christian presence in the location

Correct because of the history of repression and civil rights abuses which are religious in nature. Periodic, often extensive.LoveMonkey 16:00, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

something needs to be said to reconcile 6th-7th century date and 3rd-4th century date ... there were no Romans by 6th-7th AD someone is likely to challenge Paul being in Cappadocia, it might be wise to quote someone who says this there is some repetition across the first three paragraphs ... hiding from persecution from Romans or Arabs

Well I can say that Julian the Apostate told either St Basil or St Gregory of Nyssa that he was going to kill them and demolish the place. But he did not get the option because he was by the grace of God killed in battle. Also focus alittle bit on Sümela Monastery and or the history of Trabzon, that is the one that can unravel the whole thing for you. And yes by church tradition, icons/frescoes church structure and the Cappocian Fathers and the church before 300AD all have every bit to do with the underground cities this is why some believe (like me) that they have not be escavated. Cause they would validate allot of history for Eastern Christianity. Tradition that would then have validation from the cities then the father of the area and the doctrines that they taught. This would of course put the Antiochian and Greek father in a place of primacy, say again the Egyptian tradition (though the differences would be outside of Orthodoxy).LoveMonkey 16:00, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get to the other articles soon. I must remember it is a lot more work to write articles than to read them. Please forgive me for being slow. Also, my comments are just comments, feel free to ignore them unless you think they are helpful. Xapis kai eipene, adelfos mou,

Khristos voskrese! LoveMonkey 16:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Liturgical

Gregory of Nyssa at the Monastery in Pontus or Trabzon. Man I am glad I pay attention at liturgy! [2] LoveMonkey 17:15, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew c's RfA

Thank you for your kind co-nomination and support in my recent RfA, which, as you may know, was successful at 61/1/0. If you ever need assistance, I'd be glad to try and help to the best of my abilities. If you want to comment on my progress as a wikipedian, I welcome comments and criticism. I look forward to continuing to work with you in the future. BTW, did you see my comment and addition of the NT apocrypha to Oxyrhynchus Papyri? Thanks again.-Andrew c 13:54, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Idea for collaboration

I finally had an idea where an FA collaboration may our interests intersect; I've juts started working on lion and it has a relatively well-developed biological section but only tiny pop' culture section. I just started expanding it from Lascaux onwards (and the main bit would be in Lions in popular culture with summary on lion page) - but if you could hunt biblical/Sumerian/babylonian etc. representations/symbolism etc. with cited refs that may augment the article very nicely. Might be fun. Trying to get a bunch of editors involved. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:37, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Hebrew Bible

Please see my comment. Dovi 13:08, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Song of Solomon

Dude, raising petty technicalistic wiki-lawyering objections to things (and only those things) which are part of the mainstream consensus of interpretation (as you are in fact already very well aware), but which you for some reason have taken a personal dislike to, hardly creates an atmosphere conducive to cooperative collaboration, since it's hard to see it as anything but a rather transparent attempt to impose your personal views on the article in the name of alleged sourcing concerns... AnonMoos 14:23, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I actually don't place excessive reliance on the Catholic Encyclopedia article in particular (for example, the more commonly used current rendering of Hebrew šūnammīt into English is "Shunammite woman" or "Shulammite", not "Sulamitess" -- and of course what you added to the article, "Shulamite", is different from any of those). And the "many wives" reference would appear to be your interpolation, since it's not mentioned in the Catholic Encylopedia article, and is only fleetingly and rather ambiguously alluded to in the text of the Song of Solomon itself.

The reason why I linked to the Catholic Encyclopedia is actually because it's a convenient accessible source whose very detailed account of perceived traditional marital matrimonial nuptial conjugal connubial hymeneal epithalamial symbolism is a very appropriate counterweight to your somewhat strange determination to purge the article of all mention of marital matrimonial nuptial conjugal connubial hymeneal epithalamial symbolism -- even though you're fully aware that marital matrimonial nuptial conjugal connubial hymeneal epithalamial symbolism is the consensus interpretation... AnonMoos 14:42, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oxyrhynchus Papyri and Libellus

Hi,

Oxyrhynchus Papyri is a great article and Libellus is pretty good as well.

POxy 658, POxy 1464, POxy 3929 and POxy 3035 do not seem to me to be good candidates to be appropriate articles for Wikipedia. I cannot see how any of these can ever be expanded to be encyclopedic in nature. At best, they belong in Wikisource.

Now, I could go through the proposed deletion or AFD route but that would be a lot of work and involve more people in the discussion when I don't think a lot of discussion is needed here.

I would really appreciate it if you could save us both a lot of time by just moving the contents of these articles to Wikisource and then slapping a {{db-author}} tag on them. That will allow an admin to speedy delete them with a minimum of fuss.

--Richard 17:42, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Early Christianity

I've reverted this edit.[3] Please provide a reliable secondary source for this. The claims regarding the theological conflict between Peter and Paul must be sourced to a secondary source in order to avoid original research. I have also reverted this edit.[4] Primary sources cannot be used to support broad claims without engaging in original research. "See also" style references in parentheses are discouraged by the Manual of Style. Terms should be wikilinked in the article prose, at the beginning of the appropriate section using the {{seealso}} or {{main}} templates or at the end of the article in a separate see also section. Cheers! Vassyana 13:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am both confused and insulted by your message on my talk page. You've made two reverts of my edits within 3 hours. I made a single revert (which you reverted with your second edit), contrary to your claims of two. I find your lecturing about edit wars and consensus to be terribly insulting considering you are engaging in the behaviour you are lecturing against. As you admit in your message, the primary source is supporting a definitive claim. That is original research, quite plainly. Please remember you cannot make "interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims" based on primary sources without explicitly violating our policy prohibiting original research. Additionally, in the rare circumstances primary sources are allowed, it is due to a dearth of available secondary references. That is not the case with the article in question, so there is no excuse for reliance on primary sources. Vassyana 14:06, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, you hit the nail on the head! As you mention, if you're familiar with the sources, it's a widely discussed issue. There's really no reason to use primary sources. As a peace offering, I've found a reference that discusses it in the context of Marcion and the church fathers, which makes for an interesting commentary. :) This way it's sourced and there's no conflict between us. {{sofixit}} and all that. ;o) Cheers! Vassyana 14:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I even found a source discussing Baur as well. :) Vassyana 14:59, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BrainGender.jpg)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 18:18, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More lionizing

I thought we'd try and get the whole capitalization issue sorted before we lionized further so I wanted to get everyone's feelings on it - can you please input into the capitalization debate on lion talk page.

PS: Any biblical/middle eastern refs would be great to elaborate on the Cultural depictions of lions. This page was pretty messy and is up for deletion so I am scrambling to improve it cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:18, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello Alastair Haines/Archive 3! Welcome to Wikiproject Christianity! Thank you for joining. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Getting Started General • Task for You Wikiproject Talk Page • Templates Useful Links Project Category List of Christian Topics Christianity Portal Sign up for the Newsletter Miscellaneous Featured Articles • Good Articles Did You Know? • Forums Work Groups Anabaptist Work Group • Core Topics Work Group Iglesia ni Cristo Work Group • Jesus Work Group Outreach Work Group Projects Article Requests • Destubbing Campaign Assessment • Articles Needing Clean-up Peer Review • Adopted Topics Similar WikiProjects Anglicanism • Bible • Calvinism Catholicism • Lutheranism

~ Wikihermit 02:11, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Supercessionism

I am not the one who knows, but I know where to look. Please read http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html and http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/relations-jews-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_20051027_rabbi-rosen_en.html On the webpage of the Holy See, you can find everything, you want to know about official Catholic doctrine. I hope I could help you. --Thw1309 18:53, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History of poison

Alastair - any references to anyone being poisoned in the bible? Anonymous_Dissident was musing on improving this for a crack at FA one day and I was helping him out (expanded Medea a bit) but thought of ancient middle eastern and biblical and you may be able to input something. Not too familiar with the bible meself 'n'all :) cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:33, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey - I really would appreciate it Alastair if you could help out in any way possible. I think I need all the help I can get! Cheers -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:38, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For both of you. There is not much in the Bible. The use there is generally metaphorical, either to poisoned water or wine, usually indicating "bitterness of heart" -- salting the water of wells, or the difference between wine and vinegar are probably behind most poetic uses in the Bible. However, even in Genesis, Pharaoh has a "cup-bearer", who Joseph (of the technicolour dreamcoat) interacts with. The "cup-bearer", is probably a euphemism for "wine taster", due to the real danger of political assassination (a Middle Eastern word from which we get "hashish" also).

I will do a bit of looking for Ancient Near East literature on poisoning. Despite the Bible not being much use on this one, there is an interesting poetic verse in the Book of Job, where Job says of God -- "The arrows of the Almighty are in me, my spirit drinks in their poison; God's terrors are marshaled against me." (NIV) Also, James has a neat proverb, though it's the metaphor, not the real deal -- "no man can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison." (NIV)

I'll have a poke around. It'd be way cool to find a poison reference in the Sumerian language, being the oldest recorded language and all. Translations of a lot of what we have dug up are available online. :) Alastair Haines 22:09, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool stuff - will keep my fingers crossed. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:18, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One last leontine favour..

Dear Alastair, as I have no copy of the bible in my house I was wondering if you could pop the ref for Daniel and said lions within the Lion article -also any book refs for babylon would be groovy.... I'm shaping it up for a tilt at FA sometime soon...More pop cult articles are up for deletion. I must say Manatees in popular culture was a meatier article than I expected.....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:38, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for Facts are Facts

I wrote the original version of the article on the Book 'The Female Brain.' I essentially described the book as one could read it. I soon found this article attacked for being POV for supporting the author's point of view. If I had done otherwise, it would have been attacked for being POV against the author's point of view. This experience caused me to give up on writting articles at Wikipedia and essentially giving up on my Wikipeding activities that I found increasingly quixotic. I thought your Facts are Facts comments right on the money. This comment gives me renewed hope that there is collective sanity within the Wikipedian community. Sympa 03:59, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a small clarification

Ammonius of Alexandria Eusebian Canons These two tiny articles really need a more modern Western working. I will not if I can help it touch the Saccas article. Because I really amy trying to stay away from Wikipedia and would be POVing/ORing to fill in the holes. As for the indexing could we source this alittle better? Please since you never got back to the underground city articles hint hint nug nug. LoveMonkey 05:53, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More leontofrolicking

Dear Alastair, welcome back..am readying up lion for FAC very soon...the latest thing is the referencing (as in just about everything has to be..)...as I have no bible in my house was hoping you could slot in the ref of Daniel with said lion, as well..do yuo have book refs for Babylonian lion stuff? I also got something about Assyrians keeping and breeding lions c. 850 BC but onyl havea very general ref on it. If you have any books on the neo-assyrians which shed light on this all input much apprecated. We're nearly there on this one but I need some stuff on lion-taming and circuses and tidy up the man-eating bit. what a journey! Has been great as loads of folk have chipped in...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:05, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Do you have a book on egypt which references Maahes and Dedun? cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:43, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing me in the direction of a 2006 ref for Maahes, must have overlooked that one. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:47, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pointers (again) -the thing with FAC is thoroughness and reliability of references - thus the personal website, though fascinating, would not be a good one, but the others are better. I wasn't obsessed by Maahes but just making my way through the (thoroughly but not completely) reffed article thus far...I noted the Leontopolis name and was musing on how to go about wirting and inserting...the other landmark fable thus omitted are those of Aesop (!!) - which are really key iconic lion refs from 6th C BC, though I have not read the original reanslations so am not sure to what extent Aesop had the lion as 'king of the beasts'.....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:02, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use disputed for Image:BrainSex.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BrainSex.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:15, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Israel Exploration Journal

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Israel Exploration Journal, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Into The Fray ^T/C 03:11, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the {{prod}} on this article; the editor should take it to Articles for Deletion if necessary. I noticed your defence of the article on the talk page -- do you know that if you contest a Prod, you can simply delete it? The matter then has to go to AfD to get a proper community consensus, if the deleting editor disagrees.

On a more general note, as you're interested in creating articles on academic journals, I also wondered if you might care to join the new WikiProject Academic Journals? It's just been set up, and all those with an interest in improving the coverage of journals are most welcome! Regards, Espresso Addict 03:12, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikignome Award

I hereby award this Wikipedia:wikignome award to Alastair Haines for help in chiselling away at the mighty lion, which is now featured. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:23, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Inevitability.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Inevitability.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:47, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 bible subjects are in jeopardy of being deleted

I see in your user page that u take great interest in bible subjects, perhaps you can enlighten us in these 2 issues Jericho massacre and Cherem (genocide). Please note that this is in no way a request for a vote one way or the other please refrain from the discussion page, or do indeed vote the other way from me. Thanks--יודל 00:25, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your opinion you have persuaded me to change my vote but it bothers me that those votes are now being turned into proof that that user is disruptive, so i cannot literately edit those pages anymore, because i see blood thisty group here at work and i cannot do anything about it, and i was already blocked by them so it is for me personal a conflict of interest to say anything there. So from now on i am silent there, not be seen as a bigger picture in disrupting wikipedia--יודל 17:18, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

javdbg

javdbg returns only one hit . ? . I am lost. John Vandenberg 23:57, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doing individual species of Fraxinus

Yep, good idea - you can see by the genus page that quite a few individual species are done and there are all those inviting redlinks just waiting to be turned blue. I'd just start editing and see who turns up. Starting is easy to cut-and-paste. Have a look in a minute...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:03, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There. Stub done now here. I am curious....why this tree? cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:18, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure on Japanese plants - can find oz plants and many birds but not looked in this category before. If you can get a sufficient word count nominate for a dyk too...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:34, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Yidisher is incorrect

The Chareidi article uses hassidic as an alternative. I am familiar with the term hassidic from Chaim Potok's The Chosen, which I read and enjoyed many years ago. Could you help me understand the difference between to the two words? Alastair Haines 00:10, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry i answer you 4 days later we had a holiday and a Saturday for consecutive 3 days which access to electronics are prohibited in my culture. Yes Hasidim are the most extreme most original form and subgroup of Chareidim, therefore you can see these 2 words allot inter used.--יודל 14:29, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I believe that is incorrect. Hareidi is a term used in place of "Ultra-Orthodox." Orthodox Judaism is the subset of Jews that adhere to the traditions as passed down through the millenia. It has two main subsections, those which have taken more lenient views regarding certain twentieth/tenty-first century-specific issues, of course remaining within the bounds of Orthodoxy, and they are called "Modern Orthodox" and then those that have retained the stricter interpretations of those modern societal issues. These used to be called "Ultra-Orthodox" but are more recently termed "Hareidi". In the Hareidi world there are two main subgroups: those that follow the primarily emotionally-spiritual framework of Hasidism, as first espoused by the Baal Shem Tov and then somewhat variegated and disseminated throughout many sub-branches, often based on locales in Europe, and those who followed a less emotionally more intellectually-spiritual framework espoused by the centers of learning, the yeshivos of Europe. While this is a gross oversimplification, it is factually inaccurate to say as did Yidisher, that Hasidism is more "original" and more "extreme". They have differences in the direction of the approach to the emotional/intellectual aspects of divine service, but outside of dress and accent and some minor minhag differences, they are almost identical. The outer trappings seem very different; the actual service to G-d is near identical. -- Avi 14:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Avi is incorrect, but i am not impartial here so i will let him have the last word at east he wont bock me for this i hope and pray--יודל 15:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks to both you gentlemen. It was thoughtless of me to ask close to the Sabbath. I did not realize there was a holiday also. Yom Kippur was September this year? Alastair Haines 15:19, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was the last days of the high holy days Simchas torah.--יודל 15:25, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the High Holy days are only from Rosh HaShanah to Yom Kippur. The end of Succos is Shemini Atzeres and the Simchas Torah. I am not sure why Yidisher seems to be confused about these basic premises. -- Avi 20:20, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, while we're at it, anyone kind enough to pop in a few yiddish characters here after a yiddish phrase on Apotrope? I'm actually working on vampire at the moment which led me ot this as well as all the plants mentioned previously...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:45, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

haha - if you look at Apotrope there's a few yiddish words at the bottom. I just like littering WP articles with unusual characters :) cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 15:23, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Apology:

I don't know why you're apologising for. You've done nothing wrong and I don't blame you for anything. enough with the platitudes - I'm not that brilliant an editor and you should give your praise to someone more deserving. Keep helping out with the Vampire article though; I'm through with it. Cas and Xuchilbara need you now with their renovations. You're a nice guy. Cheers, Spawn Man 05:20, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wo tan or Wotan

Please see: Talk:Battle of Berlin#Wo tan or Wotan --Philip Baird Shearer 20:55, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]