User talk:Gabr-el/Archive8

US Military Article

I'm trying to update it and make the article more informative. I'm going to add a new section called "Procurement," which discusses the technology of the military. I'm trying to figure out how to begin a "Current Operations" section, which will take the place of the "War on Terrorism" section. The personnel section seems too long to me, but I won't dare touch it right now. When I get time I will read through the introduction and rewrite it maybe.

Rick Evans 06:20, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXI (September 2008)

The September 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:08, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus

I consider myself a Gnostic. Here is my question: Why is Jesus dying on the cross consider to have washed away our sins? I've always been confused as to why it was necessary for Jesus to die to rid us of our sins, or to have our sins forever forgiven. I believe He died trying to deliver the truth us, is that what is meant by died for our sins. I believe he came to teach us, because we were getting it all wrong. Does that mean before Jesus came everyone went to "hell" even if they asked forgiveness and changed their ways. I guess my question in a nut shell: Jesus died for our sins, how so? (Cinshif (talk) 02:07, 12 October 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Thank you for your reply. I'm not sure how much you want to debate this, so just let me know when you want to call it quits. My motivation is knowledge, not really debate anyway. I know God as all love, all knowledge, the Creator. My knowledge so far is that we all came from God and we will all return to God, with different levels of consciences. Hell to me is having little or no consciences by the end of your life, or lives. I believe it was Jesus' purpose to come and deliver the truth, and perhaps his death was so horrific as to keep Jesus' teachings so much more meaningful. It had to be a big event to captivate us. Many humans have died in horrible unspeakable ways. Children of God suffering terrible ends. But we go back to God, back to peace. I'm not trying to take anything from Jesus as a divine being, but was it such a sacrifice of God, when Jesus simply returned to God safe and sound?

I believe we reincarnate over and over to developed our souls. I believe God experiences the physical through us. We access God from within. I have knowledge of that, I have had experiences while meditating: over powering feelings of Gods presence.

I find it hard to believe we come here once, and when we get here we virtually forget who we are and where we came from; Most of us spend our lives trying to figure out the truth. Our minds try to control us, we must fight our minds all the way through. So I can't believe we are given one chance to get it right (to accept Jesus, and ask for forgiveness) or burn in "hell" for eternity. I believe if we never enlighten spiritually, we are not conscience of our existents in the end, our energy still survives we just are not aware of it. Evil people aren't conscience on the other side.

I have very limited knowledge of the Bible, as I’m sure you can tell. I don’t think the Bible can be taken as the whole truth, because humans have been involved in it’s writing and editing. I have to seek the truth for myself. I think the truth is within all of us, and we know it when we here it. That is why I question. I read from God Calling every morning as part of my prayer and mediation. The things said there do seem to support my general beliefs and knowledge I have gained so far. Jesus says, it is not necessary that we all see him the same.

Thanks for taking the time to discuss this with me. I’m sure it is no accident, you replied to me. 75.138.101.28 (talk) 14:28, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Debate :)

I know I am fallible, that is why I would never claim to be the only one in possession of the truth, as so many religions do. I do believe that God runs through all of us, we are all connected by the same divine thread. Beyond our minds is something much more intelligent, all knowing; when we hear the truth we know it, it speaks to us. I often have a tingling down my leg or arm, which I feel is my the spirit saying yes you can believe that. Is it not true that some of the teachings of Jesus that supported certain ideas, had been left out of the Bible? Some of the scripture had been manipulated to fit certain ideas and religious beliefs? People who have studied the scripture and have no stake either way in its outcome, have come to the conclusion that decisions were made about what would be included in the Bible, or what would need to be reworded, possibly to control and scare people into behaving a certain way? I think we can all have our own opinions, our own path to God. The fundamental truths will always be the same. God: Kindness, tolerance, patience and love; Consciousness and Presence (Peace.) Sin: Selfishness, dishonesty, self seeking, fear,(unconscious/hell). Cinshif (talk) 13:33, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry you won't hurt my feelings. Of course I believe there is much truth in the scriptures, but because things were omitted and changed to suit the religions, we also must seek the truth for ourselves. I have a spirit that is always connected to God, so at times when I hear the truth I have a reaction to it. I do believe we all know the truth. It is so covered by dogma, ego, selfishness. The covering up of the truth within ourselves has gone on for thousands of years. We are not our minds, our minds are useful tools, but not who we are. When I hear or read something that makes no sense to me, how do I take that in and make it the truth. Why can’t it just be simple, we are all of God we will all return to God. I believe we are here to experience; one person is born to a millionaire, one to a crack head, and so on. I think we return over many life times. You quote the scripture, but what have you learned? What actual personal knowledge do you have of God, what speaks to you and tells you what you read is the only truth? Cinshif (talk) 22:02, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


How do you explain the pain and suffering as God's love? How do you see only one life as God's love? Not that I really want another life. I don't believe in reincarnation as a convenient way to not live as I should in this life. I just as soon not come back. I might have a different view in the comfort of the other side though. Going back to the Old Testament; I don’t see God as a figure, demanding sacrifices to show ones love. The stupid humans my have thought they needed to offer sacrifices to the "gods". I see him as a huge energy of all love, moving through everything. God works and moves through us. I think we suffer when we are not conscious of God: Even those who are conscious of God can get in the path of someone who isn’t and suffer. Or maybe we make our choices before we come as to what we want to learn when we are here. There is the possibility that we may not just come to earth, we my incarnate to other places in the universe as well (could explain aliens, except I don‘t think they would look so different from us.)

Jesus had to speak a certain language that people of that time would hear and listen to. There have been others sent with messages, that seem to ultimately teach the same things as Jesus but in more modern language. I loved Eckhart Tolle’s A New Earth and The Power of Now. I think it is actually all very simple. I love to read God Calling every morning. I don’t know if you are familiar but there is a passage for each day. The very next day after you quoted the scripture of Jesus being the only way to God, that was the morning scripture in God calling. I still can’t get the died for our sins to come together for me though, I‘m missing something. I won’t close my mind to anything. Thank you so much for taking the time and patience to correspond with me. I know I went all over the board on this one!Cinshif (talk) 22:31, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don’t you think it is possible to continue getting messages, things we can understand. The scripture is so hard to understand, like I said, worded for a different time. The things I read to grow spiritually usually always include Jesus, I believe they would be considered Gnostic, or Gnostic Christian. Eckhard Tolle for example always makes reference to Jesus’ teachings; he does not say that Jesus is the only way to God, but also doesn’t say that he isn‘t. It’s more a technique to reach our true spiritual natures. He also speaks of Buddha’s teachings as well, which you can hear the wisdom and truth in. I believe Jesus as a savior, in that he came for the purpose of delivering the truth to us, and was sacrificed for that purpose, and for that I owe him my life and worship. I believe that Jesus loves us, I can’t imagine more then a mother, because my love as a mother is my only point of reference. I read this morning that there are other teachers, but they are only pointers leading to God, they are not the truth in themselves. Eckhard Tolle says that very thing, he is only giving pointers towards the truth, we still have get there. I’m only using Eckhard Tolle as an example, I don’t worship him in any way. But, I do believe through despair and a profound experience, he has achieved almost complete clarity, completely present and in the moment. I believe his message is God given and that he is meant to deliver it to us.

When you say eat Jesus’ flesh and drink his blood, what do you mean? I know it isn’t literally? The whole theatrics of all that seems like to much. I agree we suffer to push us towards God. God came knocking on my door. I do believe the suffering is caused by a world that predominantly does not recognize God, doesn’t even acknowledge God, the causes of that have accumulated over thousand of years. We have to connect with God, truly connect, not just religious belief. We need direction for that, daily prayer and meditation, and instruction on how to do that. It takes practice to turn it over every day, all day. Don’t you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cinshif (talk • contribs) 01:24, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]



I don’t think that anything Jesus said is out of date, not the meaning of what he said. I just think the same messages is sent in more modern language. Why would God or Jesus stop sending us messages, and trying to teach us? I think we agree on the suffering, we suffer to move us towards God. I just expanded on the collective suffering from the lack of God consciousness in peoples lives. I questioned the eating of the flesh and drinking of the blood, because obviously Jesus’ body is not laying in front of me, I can’t reach out and cut a piece and put it in my mouth. I was trying to understand the meaning of that. When do you consider that you are eating his flesh or drinking his blood?

I have complete respect for your belief, I don’t think your wrong, depending how you use your religious beliefs. All religions are certain they are in possession of the truth, to the point of murdering each other in God’s name.

I think ultimately our paths will end in the same place.

P.S. I went on a Eastern Catholic website: Looks like the Eastern and the Orthodox have issues with each other, go figure.......couldn't resist that comment, sorry. Cinshif (talk) 23:38, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I would imagine you have been a Catholic your whole life? I didn’t grow up with any religion. We didn’t go to church, except a few times on Easter. I come to my quest for knowledge completely from a spiritual stand point. I know very little about religion, which probably causes me some fear. In the Catholic religion there seems to be a lot of ceremony. Do you use religion in your daily life, to remain peaceful and centered? Would I be considered an enemy? I’m not Catholic or any religion for that matter. Sometimes I think I would like to go to church, but I don’t know were I fit in.

I get up early every morning to spend time in prayer and meditation, and every night I get on my knees and give thanks. I review my day, ask what I could have done differently.

I can’t remember where I heard this, but I really liked it so I‘ll share it; Someone explained our souls as perfect beautiful diamonds that have been covered up with dirt (sin?), and as we grow spiritually we start to polish off little places of the diamond to reveal it’s brilliance

Off the subject: I have a friend who is having an affair with a married minister. She is telling herself that he must really think she is special because he is putting so much at stake to be with her. In my opinion you can’t be spiritually connected and do that sort of thing. How does he face the congregation with a straight face I wonder? I wasn’t trying to make any point with that story.

I’m glad you are compassionate. Some things you have shared are getting through to me. Cinshif (talk) 00:05, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I completely agree with you on the married minister thing, or any married person. It always starts with the lies we tell ourselves. She broke it off with him once and was resentful at him because she felt he should have known better being a minister. The fault she needed to deal with was her own. She could only blame herself. I guess he was trying to tell her it was ok, because it was so special it must be right. I told her if she believed that lie, it was her fault, she had no right to resent him. He has to deal with his own lie. I told her there is no justification that either of them could use to make what they are doing the right thing. I wasn’t trying to be judgmental, but I could hear the lie as if it were sitting on my head. She knows, she is searching. She is desperately trying to find something to fill the void, the one we know only God will fill. Sooner or later I think she will be in enough pain to give up. I pray for her, and I tell her the truth when she asks.

I can’t judge her, I have done things that I am not proud of. I have faced them and I have confessed them before God and another person, I have made amends where I could, and now I have left them in the past. There was a day I may have done something like my friend is doing, telling myself the lies, and with not much thought as to who I was hurting. I think it all comes down to fear, the selfishness, dishonesty, self seeking. The fear which only God has been able to remove.

Are you a priest? Cinshif (talk) 01:50, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to start by saying it has been a pleasure talking with you as well. I will read the Gospel of John, I will ask God to help me understand it before I do. I started reading the Bible once, I started with the Old Testament and didn’t like what I was reading. I decided to read the New Testament first. I don’t know how much truth is to be found before Jesus came. In what I have read of the Old Testament, God wasn’t portrayed as very loving. Of course I didn’t get very far with the Old Testament. And then I worry about what has been left out or changed in order to shape a certain idea.

Do you think God has both male and female components? Do you want to debate the idea of reincarnation? I’m 100% on board with reincarnation. I’m planning on writing a paper about it for English. The paper isn’t due until the end of the semester, so maybe we should wait so I can do my research for the paper at the same time; If you are even interested. I’m just taking a basic English class right now. I’ve been out of school for a long time.

How old do you have to be to become a priest, or is it matter of the teaching you go through? Here is my rule of thumb- if it is God’s will, it will come with the power to carry it out. Cinshif (talk) 12:50, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t think God really even hands out the punishment; It kind of takes care of itself (karma;) For every action there is a reaction. Sometimes karma is instant. To give an example of what I consider instant karma; I started a new position at work, I was given a promotion above someone who has been there a lot longer then I have. My co-worker was not happy about training me and she wasn’t being very helpful. I knew the position she felt herself in, I said to her “I’m sure I’ll make a few mistakes while I’m training”, she replied in a very rude tone, “We are expected to do it right the first time” she said. The very next week I had no errors to correct; she had one every day for three days in a row. For some reason I feel like I’m giving myself some bad karma by telling this story, hum.

Changing the subject. You wrote- And we know how dumb humans are; humans won't be sorry unless they're terrified or have another desire to be sorry, such as love.

It reminded me of a line in a Tom Petty song, ‘There is no one as honest as those in pain’ There is also a song by the Pretenders called ‘I’ll stand by you’ I tear up every time I hear it because it sounds like what God would say to us. Have you ever heard it? I don't know if you listen to that sort of music. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cinshif (talk • contribs) 00:25, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not thinking, ha, ha she got hers for being mean. I was just giving an example of what I think constitutes instant karma, call it what you want. It is an example of what happens when we don't accept that we are exactly where we are suppose to be at this moment. I wouldn't wish ill will to anyone, I know most of the time I’m dealing with an ego, a person not conscious of God, I say a prayer for them, and myself. For all my co-worker knows, God has something much better planned for her, or better suited for her. But, she is making herself miserable because she thinks she knows what’s best and isn’t accepting that things are exactly as they should be for God's plan, or they would be. Yes, I agree we all need to be humbled, and that is what happened to her, she thought she knew what was best,and it ticked her off when her plan wasn’t going the way she intended.

Do you meditate? I know Jesus talks about quiet time, away by ourselves, being still in Gods presence. My mind has to stop, I have to be present in the moment, God doesn’t live in the past or the future, he lives in this moment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cinshif (talk • contribs) 22:36, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I concentrate on my breathing to try and quiet my mind, if my mind wonders I gently come back to my breathing. Sometimes I will let my mind wonder as long as I’m not drifting into worry. I used to recite mantras in my head when I first started doing it, because my mind would be so busy. I couldn’t listen if my mind wouldn’t shut up. One was real simple and meant -I am that- and one meant- I honor the divinity that resides within me. I can see you getting scriptures when you sit quiet, it comes from a place beyond your mind, it makes sense your mind needs to be still to hear it. I mostly get a sense of peace, sometimes afterwards I might suddenly have the answer to a problem I’ve prayed about. I used to wake up with my mind racing, worrying about one thing or another. Now I usually wake up peaceful. God is usually my first thought in the morning. One time I was sitting at the computer, I was concentrating or maybe it was considered meditating, except it wasn’t intentional: I was concentrating on what it meant to really trust and rely upon God; suddenly the light changed, it washed around me and over me, a great sense of peace came over me. It’s hard to describe with words. I believe it is possible to have that type of relationship with God.Cinshif (talk) 01:03, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you, I like what you said. I'm hoping church is in my future. Right now I'm not really able to go to church on Sundays. But, it is in my prayers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cinshif (talk • contribs) 22:09, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My user name

Thanks for the note. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 03:24, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm 45. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 02:11, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Manuel and Killij Arslan

Hi,

What you say is true, when The Seljuq sultan visited Constantinople there seems to have been a cordial relationship between him and Manuel. Indeed, the contemporary records show that there was considerable common ground between Byzantine aristocrats and their Seljuq opposite numbers, despite the differences in language and religion. Movements of people between the two societies were relatively common, John Axukh, commander in chief of the Byzantine army was born a Turk, the Turk Prosuch was a leading Byzantine general in the time of Manuel's early years as emperor. Also Manuel's cousin John 'Chelebi' Komnenos defected to the Seljuqs and married the sultan's daughter. Indeed the envoy sent by Arslan to Manuel after the Battle of Myriokephalon was a Greek of the Gabras family of Trebizond, who was his vizier. However, how far this sort of personal relationship would affect policy, military or political, is difficult to ascertain. It certainly didn't stop Manuel installing Arslan's brother and rival, Shahinashah, as a Byzantine vassal-ruler in Ankara even when there was peace between himself and the Seljuq sultan.Urselius (talk) 08:39, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon me. I just noticed this thread. A very good source on this topic is Charles M. Brand, The Turkish Element in Byzantium, Eleventh-Twelfth Centuries Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 43. (1989), pp. 1-25. I would be happy to send either of you a pdf if you do not have access to JSTOR. Anything for a more neutral article. You might also want to try this link. Regards, Aramgar (talk) 14:10, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry. It seems that Wikipedia email does not support attachments. I would still be happy to send it along if you send me an email address. It is an interesting article. Regards, Aramgar (talk) 03:53, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aramean and Assyrian

Please keep out from editing anythiong connected to Aramean. There is to much vandalizm from both sides now going around. Keep out the assyrian fanatics from aramean-syriac articles otherwise this will never end, the arameans will countinue reverting. very unneccesary. AramaeanSyriac (talk) 10:41, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Civlity warning

Please keep your tone civil...calling people "stupid" does nothing to promote collaboration and harmony. Your user page indicates you're a Christian...would Christ have used the tone you did? AKRadeckiSpeaketh 16:00, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've already received a warning about civility. Your edits at User talk:AramaeanSyriac are very uncivil. Please discuss your disagreements civilly, if that fails, follow the processes at WP:DR. Little Red Riding Hoodtalk 23:21, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My civility warning is not only none of your business, it is also not for you to comment about. Unless you are willing to dwell into the chaotic nonsense that I must face against users who use neither reason nor references to prove their edits, stay out - having a partial idea of what is going on will have you falsely accusing editors who must deal with trolls. Gabr-el 00:47, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Your civility is her business...it's the whole communities business. Edits like this are completely unacceptable. AKRadeckiSpeaketh 18:58, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Its not her business for her to insult me. What is her business is to take a look a the situation and appreciate the whole picture, not just pick out loose evidence. User:AramaenSyriac has been blocked for vandalizing the Assyrian people page, and I demanded that he stop. Were is the incivility in that? I told him that if he would not stop, I would edit the Aramaen page as well. Unless you understand the full picture of what is going on, you will easily misinterpret my edits are uncivil. I suggest that you enlighten yourself here:

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Gabr-el Gabr-el 19:02, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Map source

Hello! The article on the Byzantine navy is currently undergoing the FAC process, and concerns have been brought up by the reviewers on the accuracy of this map, which I have used in the article. I'll wager a guess that your source was this. If you could clearly state the source for the map in its description box, it would help the whole process. Thanks a lot, Constantine ✍ 05:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. If you would also care to participate in the review process, I'd be glad to have a fellow Byzantinophile along. Especially since the only comments so far concern trivialities, and not the article's content itself. Any criticism/comment would be welcome. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 06:24, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article on the First Crusade is now at Wikipedia:Featured article review. I noticed that a map you uploaded (Image:Byzantium+firstcrusade.PNG) is labelled in the top left-hand corner as (c) BigDaddy1204, but you've claimed it as your own work. This makes the file attribution confused. Could you please discuss the situation with BigDaddy and either upload a new version, adjust the licence or mark it for deletion as appropriate? Many thanks, DrKiernan (talk) 15:57, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uncivility (again)

Firstly this was a good faith edit. Secondly how is it Islamic POV? I was merely stating that Ottomans won first then lost it. There is no need for the aggressive tone. (I don't know if you are doing this because I'm Muslim but there was no Islamic POV there, so I must assume you left a message to attempt to offend to me. Tut, tut.)

Secondly don't label me as a vandal. If anything you are a troll (See WP:TROLL - you seem like one) I have been on Wikipedia for a while so I know how to edit. It seemed like a personal attack to be honest (See WP:PERSONAL ATTACK, seeing as you'll need it for future). I only changed a tiny bit in the article -- and that was in the infobox. I see that a user has already commented on your incivility. So unless you want some of your own medicine I'd advise you to stop accusing people for doing minor things. Capice? サラは、私を、私の青覚えている。 Talk Contribs 15:29, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Gabr-el. Little Red Riding Hoodtalk 18:18, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You may be being pushed into responding in an incivil manner, but if you continue doing so in these disputes I or other administrators will block your account for violating WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. Our behavior policies apply all the time, including during heated content debates. If you cannot discuss disagreements in a polite and constructive manner, then you are acting in a manner destructive to Wikipedia and the community here. Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 22:13, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You just made another incivil personal attack on WP:ANI. This is not acceptable.
This is your last warning. Further personal attacks or incivil comments will result in your account being blocked.
This is not acceptable behavior for Wikipedia editors. Regardless of who started the content dispute and what they did during it, you are expected and required to abide by WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. If you break those policies you will be blocked. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 22:20, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That was not a personal attack - where is the element that made it personal? All that has happened so far is that people have accused me of being incivil, I denied it (naturally as a defendent) and am accused again of incivility. Gabr-el 22:22, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You are communicating in a hostile manner and attacking people. Defending yourself by attacking people is not acceptable.
You would not have 6 or 7 separate Wikipedia administrators telling you that you're being incivil and asking you to calm down and stop it if there was not a problem. If you don't understand what you're doing, you are going to have a very serious problem contributing to Wikipedia. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 22:27, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will not apologise for calling you a troll. Your behaviour needs to be sorted out. The fact is that you are trolling (WP:TROLL) and it offending a lot of people (sometimes hurting when you imply a boistrous nature). Looking from the sources below and on WP:ANI you don't listen to other people - especially the admins. If you are not listening to them what does your apology say? Looking a little further you do seem to threaten other editors and then mask this by saying this has all turned into a "snowball that has resulted in misunderstanding". If your apology is empty then I have reason to believe that you do not fully comprehend the full meaning of the situation. We are all volunteers to Wikipedia and this space is not for insulting people (WP:INSULT, WP:PERSONAL ATTACK). Regards. サラは、私を、私の青覚えている。 Talk Contribs 14:09, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For Gods sake (man or woman). All I meant to tell you was that your attitude seems unacceptable sometimes, not that you are a bad editor, a bad person or such. I was giving advice on how you can be a good editor and being civil. I am apologising if I offended you or hurt you, but not for identifying you trolling. And you didn't have to retire. Regards. (I take it you do want this apology?) サラは、私を、私の青覚えている。 Talk Contribs 16:45, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Specific diffs

Specific problem diffs to follow Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 22:27, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]

That's just in the last 50 edits you made. There are more in evidence going back several more days. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 22:31, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

unreferenced attack on the Catholic Church

You left a challenging message on my user talk page but didn't tell me what attack or what page you're referring to. Leadwind (talk) 22:46, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Consensus sought on lead sentence

Please come give us your opinion by voting here [9], Thanks! NancyHeise talk 17:26, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, if I can try your patience a bit more- I am conducting now a new vote here [10] but this is on whether or not you think the sources support the article text in note 1 which follows Catholic Church in the lead sentence. Soidi has challenged that my sources do not support the text. Please come give me your opinion so I can have consensus either one way or the other so we can move forward. NancyHeise talk 03:35, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, what is it you "support". Currently your vote is in nomansland. Str1977 (talk) 09:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again, I have found another solution. If your vote was for "sentence 2" you don't need to do anything. Str1977 (talk) 09:45, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You do know that you seem to have voted for a proposal to breach the long-standing article consensus and to suppress the information that the Church is properly called the Catholic Church and not the Roman Catholic Church? I am rather puzzled by this. Xandar 10:48, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Syriac text

Would you look at Image:-universalsyriacscout.png and see if you can make out what it says? It probably says something like "Be Prepared", or "Always Prepared", and I have need of the text. Thank you! Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 15:34, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

For all your tremendous help. I am amazed at your message and I responded to you here [11]. I will keep you in my prayers, you are a really terrific person, don't let the Wikipedia wild west get you down! :) NancyHeise talk 16:17, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gabrel, I was very discouraged last June after RCC failed FAC and in such an ugly manner. I took a Wiki-break when I went on vacation over the summer. It helped me refocus and get over it. I hope you will come back after a little break and keep in touch. I have enjoyed your online friendship and help. Please let me know what you eventually decide on your vocation. NancyHeise talk 02:13, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One last vote please

Hi, Xandar conducted a new discussion on the use of "official" our original sentence going into FAC that survived Peer Review and several months of mutliple editors. I have agreed not to vote on this one but to agree to whatever consensus of editors decides. Can you please come back for one more vote here: [12]. Thanks for you help in deciding the matter once and for all. NancyHeise talk 15:53, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:War.GIF listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:War.GIF, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:38, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Assyrian_people#most_common_name_in_recent_respectable_English_language_sources - dab is at it again. Iraqi (talk) 11:44, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History of the Assyrians and Assyrian People

Shlama Gabriel, user:dbach is at it again in completely changing this page to meet his negligent views. He has added all of the flags onto the assyrian people page without any conversation wahtsoever. This page is strictly about the assyrians and not a stupid laundry list of villages who claim otherwise. Please get an admin to block this user he is constantly disrupting our project and changing sources and information around. He has significantly changed both the history of the assyrians and the assyrian peoples page, this has got to stop someone needs to block this user from doing this. He has no discussion consensus and when you try to talk to him he dissmisses all claims. He is very narrow minded. All of the hard work that has been put into this project is being severally tampered with and changed to meet a incompetent third party who doesnt know squat about this topic. God Speed! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.225.10.154 (talk) 23:39, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prime numbers

Gabrel, what is a C++ program? Is this something you did on Wikipedia? NancyHeise talk 02:28, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Your Opinion is More Important than You Think Barnstar
Gabrel for all your help on Roman Catholic Church. We failed FAC but will be again at peer review in a few weeks. I hope you will continue to be part of our team, I have personally enjoyed working with you very much. NancyHeise talk 00:46, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Finally

I have finally responded to you on my talk page. And by the way, I've enjoyed our conversation so far. I hope you have too. --Andrew Kelly (talk) 14:43, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

protestant baptism

Thanks for your summary of RCC views on this topic. Leadwind (talk) 03:25, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A follow-up question, if I may? Presumably some Protestants get baptized, at which point they're saved, but then commit a mortal sin and fail to have perfect contrition for it, and then they're lost again. But others either avoid mortal sins or show perfect contrition for them and make it to heaven. If that's the story, then is there any speculation about how many probably make it and how many probably don't? Like might it be 50/50, or is it more like one in a thousand? Leadwind (talk) 23:37, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXII (October 2008)

The October 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:11, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnicity

On my talk page we're discussing if we should mention the ethnicity of a scholar in the opening paragraph, which I believe is against MOS (I linked to the MOS for biographies which has a statement against it). Do you want to join in the argument? I'd appreciate it. --Enzuru 02:14, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother you again, but could you also join me on Template:Islamic Culture? Someone is arguing Bengali literature for some reason should be exempt from the template. --Enzuru 23:01, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Just so you know, if you ever want any image or page that you have created and are the main contributor deleted, you can just put {{db-author}} on it and an admin will delete it. Also, if you are having trouble with some aspect of Wikipedia, you can just ask for help at the help desk or find a random user and ask him/her. Just a friendly comment... Thingg⊕⊗ 04:20, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

I undid one of your edits on the Jesus talk page too hastily. I apologize for doing so. Cheers, T Berg Drop a Line ޗ pls 22:23, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus message for Jews or for everyone?

"If Jesus' message were only for Jews, then why are there so many non-Jewish Christians? A contradiction, don't you think?!!"

The stock scholarly answer for this is that Jesus preached to the Jews, the first Christians were all Jews and they still sacrificed at the Temple (see Acts), but that Paul changed the game by converting large numbers of gentiles. Before Paul, a gentile had to become a Jew to be a Christian, and for a man that meant circumcision, so there weren't many takers. The Christian church as we know it was largely founded by Paul. So no, no contradiction, just history.

You probably don't buy the stock scholarly answer, but you asked, and there it is. Leadwind (talk) 23:34, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, one should never assume one knows another's faith, especially not in times like these where people make up their own religions. Second, the scholars have already come up with a refutation for Acts that they like just fine and put in their textbooks. You see, while the faithful take Acts to be the divine word about the time shortly after Christ, the scholars call it the second half of "Luke-Acts," written after Paul had already established a gentile Christianity, and the Jewish Christian community had been reduced and exiled. This account puts gentile conversions front and center in order to establish Christianity's universal appeal. So you can argue from Acts all you want, but by the secular rules of WP, that's nothing but original research until you can back it up with a scholarly citation. Leadwind (talk) 16:19, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"so for the Scholars to use the Gospels and not Acts because the latter had a greater gentile influence is pretty flawed, would you not agree?" Sure, but which scholars credit the Gospels any more than they credit Acts? Honestly, if you can show that the secular scholars are wrong on their own terms, you'll be able to do something that even G. K. Chesterton and C. S. Lewis could not do. In the big picture, the real point is that secular scholars treat Jesus as just a man and the Bible as just a book. With that as their premise, how are they ever going to get an image of Jesus that matches Scripture? The Pope says that Jesus explodes historical boundaries, so how can an investigation within historical boundaries yield right results? Leadwind (talk) 03:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Assyrians in the United Kingdom

Regarding this edit, I don't see how you can claim that all of that information is sourced. Where is the source for the religion section, for example? Cordless Larry (talk) 11:07, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gabr-el. You have new messages at Cordless Larry's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Proposed deletion of Siege of Antioch (1084)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Siege of Antioch (1084), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

The siege never happened. The article has been unreferenced for months because there are no reliable sources for this event.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent 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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, 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. Aramgar (talk) 16:47, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanksgiving

Happy Thanksgiving to you too. God bless you. NancyHeise talk 22:56, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When were you thinking of applying? NancyHeise talk 23:32, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

religion

I prefer not to discuss my religious views, because I do not believe they are rlevant to Wikipedia. I really try very hard to edit religion related articles by following our core policies, NPOV, NOR, V. If you ever feel i am violating policy or applying policies according to a double standard please challenge me. If you think my edit reflects a bias, say so and I will address it. But people whouldn't come to Wikipedia to talk about their personal beliefs. Slrubenstein | Talk 06:34, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a privacy issue, it is that I strongly blieve one thing we must do to make Wikipedia better, is to make it as unlike a chatroom as possible. I do not come to Wikipedia to discuss my personal views on things with people, I can do that in a chatroom. To the extent that I think other editors need to know my personal views, I have explained them, fully and honestly, on my userpage. Everything that matters to me is on that page. Slrubenstein | Talk 17:15, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIII (November 2008)

The November 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:41, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shlama

I think it is a good idea if we create an article for Dr. Donny George Youkhanna. He is a leading Assyrian World Archaeologist and he was the director of the Iraqi National Museum. Check this link out! Im not sure how to start a page so I would appreciate your assistance. http://oitweb5.csustan.edu/news/news_story_full.aspx?WNTNEWS_ID=1212, heres another http://www.modbee.com/local/v-print/story/522573.html Godspeed Ninevite (talk) 02:53, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Baseema Raba, feel free to edit it if you see any mistakes I have made in adding info. Ninevite (talk) 03:38, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hey

hey moron. Still stupid? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.133.201.14 (talk) 14:29, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That depends. Add more personal attacks and you'll find out how stupid I can be. Gabr-el 17:31, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shlama

I have a question how do you revert a page back to the way it was before it gets massively changed. User: Aramaean Syriac is adding alot of unnecessary information again. I would appreaciate it if you told me how. God Speed Ninevite (talk) 02:23, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Speedy deletion of Larry Shapiro

A tag has been placed on Larry Shapiro 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 important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles 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 {{hangon}} 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. Nuttah (talk) 15:14, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hello Gabr-el, I wanted to ask you a question concerning this ([13]) post by Malik. I'm curious if you also believe that the Syriac Orthodox Church changed name from Assyrian Orthodox Church in the 1950's as Malik seems to do? The TriZ (talk) 21:33, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the picture you are talking about is this [14] and it was discussed in Swedish Wiki ([15]). I find it amusing though that some people, based on this picture, is saying the Syriac Orthodox Church's name was Assyrian Orthodox Church. The truth about the picture is though that the Jerusalem Office named the road "Assyrian Convent Road", but as you can see in Arabic it says "Deir es-siryan", which means "Monastery of the Syriacs", so the monastery has never changed name, it was translated wrongfully and as the picture shows, it obviously wasn't appreciated by the people over there. And I really think the best solution on wikipedia on this whole issue is the current name of the mainarticle, I can't understand why you are so much against it. We should use the double-term Assyrian/Syriac through out the article and foucs on writing about the culture and other, more interesting stuff instead of fighting over ancient history. The TriZ (talk) 23:39, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It could've been an option, though it doesn't seem to be accepted. But I think the current name is the best solution we can reach for now and I'm pretty sure this is the one that would be voted on in a vote by non-partisan users. The TriZ (talk) 18:35, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]