User talk:Paul Barlow/Archive 3

Lock

I have requested an unlock on the basis that fan was doing the edit warriong and is an abusive sock. Sayiong an admin locked to the wrong version tends to annoy admins so best nmot to mention this just the fact that with the abusive sock indefinitely blocked there is no reason to keep it locked. I have made sure all his other main space edits were reverted, SqueakBox 22:14, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well you could point out that the edits of banned users should be reverted regardless of content rather than because of the poor quality of the content, SqueakBox 22:41, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done, SqueakBox 01:41, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response to your comment directed at my post on the Rape Talk page

Welcome to the discussion Mr. Barlow! I think you are confused both by what I wrote and American law. The difference between sex and rape in most jurisdictions is a lack of consent; others still require a showing of continual resistance or the use of force. Others require sexual contact, while others require penetration or intercourse. The legal defense would be tailored to the specific jurisdiction. The defense given by the perpetrator on the police report in a date rape case is "yes we had sex but it was sex, it wasn't rape." A police report typically does not give a legal defense such as "Perp stated that sexual penetrative genital contact did occur and he was not mistaken as to belief of informed consent and circumstances from the perspective of a reasonably objective standard were such that he was not recklessly mistaken as to alleged lack of informed consent." But, from your familiarity with American law classes and police reports you already know this. I think you are confused about the legal definition of "carnal knowledge". I refer you to the article, where I give the legal definition and cite the criminal law treatise in which it may be found. I believe that your dictionary or sense of the English language may not coincide exactly with 17th century legal definitions of the word. Such a topic rarely comes up in an American criminal law class, so the confusion is understandable. It would be nigh impossible to find in a google search, so I would not refer you there, and I sincerely doubt you have an interest in researching the usage of "archaic terms" through the centuries. I took the rest of your comment as a little muddled. "Conflating sex as an act with sensuality?" Not sure where you got that one. I took such quotes as "you are the one who is sustaining a dangerous myth" as an attempt at provocation. Regardless, thanks for your sudden contribution to the discussion on interpreting my previous posts. This string of comments is becoming less about rape and more about my previous posts, in which case I believe it is time for a moderator to get involved. Legis Nuntius 20:16, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ägyptisches Museum vs. Altes Museum

Thanks for the edit to the Thutmose (sculptor) article, rightly pointing out that the bust of Nefertiti is currently on display in the Altes Museum. I should know, as I saw it there back in November of last year! However, it and all of the other Egyptian items are part of the Ägyptisches Museum collection, which is destined to go into its own building (I think the Neues Museum when work on it is completed). So while you are right and it all of the other items on that page are currently residing in the Altes Museum, am just wondering whether or not the object should be identified as to where it is located now, or which collection it is a part of. Is there a Wikipedia policy statement on this sort of thing that you know of?

Cheers! Captmondo 19:44, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hitler's beliefs

its very straight forward and simple,the swastika's original source was the hindu-buddhist tradition. which shows hitler's partial adoption of these beliefs(at least). the remaining paragraph is a direct quote from this bbc article.if you personally disagree with it that doesn't mean that it should be removed per your request...thank youGrandia01 16:40, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your clarification.hope you're not exhausting yourself over this.i see your point now,i think that's the main point of disagreement.but you obviously know that not everyone will see things from your perspective.others may still agree about this article's explanation of the source of the swastika and its analysis about the nature of Aryanist religious ideology(contrary to your opinion of it).it's not fair to omit the info from this article just because someone disagrees with it.i will include your view as well to be fair.hope that's ok with you.Grandia01 16:53, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.this section could definitely use some expansions.Grandia01 17:22, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

...for this excellent edit and the fitting edit summary! --Stephan Schulz 22:07, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Smatprt

I have filed a report on the Administrator's page against Smatprt arguing for a ban. You are welcome to contribute testimony. [[1]] (Felsommerfeld 11:29, 12 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Shakespeare authorship page

Thanks for your messages and your views on the alleged sockpuppetry! (Felsommerfeld 09:19, 13 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

New Seven Wonders

TfD nomination of Template:New Seven Wonders

Template:New Seven Wonders has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --Joopercoopers 11:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Paul, would you mind signing? [2] cheers. --Joopercoopers 11:22, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN

Hi. You're mentioned here. Bishonen | talk 22:52, 13 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Troll

Please don't Troll on pages, and vandalizing other user's edit it you won't show any CURRENT SOURCES (last 5-7 years). Sources from 10-20 years ago are consider obsolete in these topics. Cosmos416 18:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Your edit

Goodness, you get around! Your reversion of the cited material,that I added to an article earlier, could conceivably be viewed as vandalism. You did not take part in any discussion that I am aware of, how is it that you came to be interested in improving the article? Fred ☻ 01:39, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide a citation for that. Fred ☻ 07:03, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I feel discussion with you would be unproductive. However, 1. the human race is has a low genetic diversity, compared with other animals. 2. Huxley wrote one paper, it was rejected. He renounced the idea. 3. Despite all the references, gaudy maps and accusations I have waded through in adderessing this article, NO substantial evidence, citation or peer-reviewed material has been provided. This article has become a way-station for racialist bunk rejected at other articles. At best it represents original research, at worst the advancing of, not only a fringe area of research, but an extremely poisonous view. Here is another quote,

standard British colonialist hegemony recast in a "poor downtrodden minority" mold

pretty well sums this sort of thing up for me. Sorry, but all the shocking things that have happened to people because of racism - there was no basis to it. We have been wrong to think so. Please do something productive. Fred ☻ 07:28, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, have we met before. Something indicates we have, not that it matters. Have a good day. Fred ☻ 07:30, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, very amusing. Goodbye. Fred ☻ 07:45, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Agcweb

Hey I am totally unclear about your message. As far as my records show, we had a brief cordial exchange, you provided assistance and we were grateful. Is there something I do not understand here? Brad Hoffstetter, Communications Division, Assembly of good Christians, www.cathar.net--AGCWeb 20:20, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Agcweb

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why are you repeating the same phrase all over my talk page? I have been reading the Talk page of Catharism, and will respond in more detail later. Paul B 23:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Nordic theory

While no single style of formatting is either encouraged nor discouraged, [[WP:WIAGA#_note-1|Good article criteria Note 2 makes notice that "Unambiguous citation is best done through footnotes or Harvard references..." It also states that "It is highly recommended that the article have a consistent style of footnoting." You can debate this with me and anyone else, if you so feel the need (you wouldn't be the first), but I'm letting you know now—seriously—articles don't make it through GA/R with a favorable outcome when this issue is not addressed. You can check the archives. It's not a very time consuming task and, once it's done, the article will not only look so much better, it will be easier for readers to see exactly where the information came from. The latter being the most important reason for doing it. LaraLove 13:54, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pick a format from WP:CITE and run with it. Or take a look at some current GAs, find a format you like, and use that. Gwen Stefani uses cite web, for example. That's what I would recommend, as it's what I use and find to be the easiest. LaraLove 05:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Wikipedia article on Priory of Sion

Re: Wikipedia article on Priory of Sion again, why can't the opening paragraphs, which contain a serious error, be altered? When did Pierre Plantard or anyone associated with the Priory of Sion ever mention the name of Julius Evola? This link is made by Robert Richardson - did Richardson ever know Plantard? Has Richardson ever read all the Priory Documents? Has Richardson got any archives on Pierre Plantard? The fact is that Richardson only made educated guesses about Plantard and the Priory of Sion - and most of his guesswork was wrong. Being in contact with sources who personally knew Plantard, and who possess extensive archives on Plantard, the guesswork relating to Julius Evola is categorically wrong, can the reference to Julius Evola on the Priory of Sion Wikipedia article therefore be removed in the interest and cause of historical accuracy. Of cours, the reference can always be put back should any evidence crop up.

wfgh66

Les Pontils Tomb

And if you require a reliable link about the Les Pontils Tomb here it is: http://priory-of- sion.com/psp/id33.html

I do not know what the link to the Mark Naples website is doing on the Priory of Sion article since he's mostly guilty of repeating the myths and legends as if they were facts. One example here: http://www.maknap.com/MysteryTV/places/rennes_le_chateau/articles/ssre_06a_the_stones.htm

Mark Naples refers to the "testinony" of Antoine Verdier relating to the "discovery" of Berenger Sauniere - this "Verdier testimony" has been discredited since 1990 since his gravestone was discovered and published showing that he was only born in 1886 when Sauniere replaced his Main Altar!

wfgh66

Sonnet 115

A tag has been placed on Sonnet 115, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Corvus cornix 23:30, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tag

Please don't remove the tag for your original research. I have adequately disposed of your so-called references and facile argument. I have no wish to read the potty ideas af unreviewed backwater professors, uncited news filler, and other selective data. I am not required to counter it, you are required to support it. You need a reliable source for this ... stuff. Find the reliable source that says the named woman was an Australoid, bloody prove it! I suspect that improving the document is not your intention. I am an inch away from accusing you of it.

• I'm ask[ing] you, by what method would you determine if I was an Australoid? Fred ☻ 14:39, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have been warned about edit warring in relation to this very topic. The consensus was that Coon only be used as reference to his obsolete ideas. You are presenting it as a substantial fact and running with it for all it it worth. Fred ☻ 14:55, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vedas

You've made three reverts at Vedas. Please avoid edit warring. Discuss the issue civilly with the other editors to reach a consensus. Thanks. Vassyana 15:15, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you need an extra revert in connection with the 5th Veda issue, just let me know. This is clearly a fringe stuff which has no place in an encyclopaedia. --Ghirla^-трёп- 20:43, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Swastika FAR listing

Swastika has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. -- Kicking222 16:43, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Hart_aryan.gif

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Hart_aryan.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast 15:28, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Heartfield_salute.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Heartfield_salute.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 12:14, 5 August 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MER-C 12:14, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Rigveda#Study_more_and_Cite_accurately

this guy is really something special. I'm running out of time and nerves: if you have ten minutes to spend, I would be glad if you could chime in with a down-to-earth call to reason. dab (𒁳) 15:04, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus myth hypothesis

Please see new developments at Talk:Jesus_myth_hypothesis#A_technical_problem, which IMO are in danger of running in circles again with the title. ... Kenosis 15:14, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NOR

Hi Paul. There has been a big debate over this policy. I think you have valuable experience that makes you an important interlocutor on this matter. I suggest you forst go here for a very concise account, and then depending on how much time you have read over the WP:NOR policy and the edit conflicts that led to its being protected, or the last talk to be archived ... or just go straight to the talk page. Slrubenstein | Talk 16:09, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well then.

Actually it was misspelled and very difficult to decipher. Even if true, it would have to be rewritten. You are referring to Aubin's theory that Tarquha intervened to raise Sennacherib's siege of Jerusalem, but this theory is supported by no historian - only by a journalist writing a book to appeal to the US market for Afrocentrist history. Paul B 00:12, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

That's a fairly one-sided statement to make, and makes me ask what on earth qualifies as a historian in your eyes.

As you clearly aren't happy, feel free to come up with something that you think we can both agree on.

Your views on the "race" of the Egyptians are as racially biased as the Afrocentrics. Your facts are just as selective as theirs too. But, you are white and full of self importance. So, you will believe what you want to believe and pass it off as simple, scientific fact. Your kind believe that (almost) every great, ancient civilization was "white"- no matter what continent they were on or who occuppied the plots of dirt next to them. Good science and basic common sense would say otherwise, but neither are used by Afrocentrics OR you Eurocentrics. 68.32.169.216 00:52, 7 September 2007 (UTC)Pat[reply]

I've never said anywhere that Egyptians were white. What article are you referring to? Paul B 03:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

dharmic religions

I had been aware that the the phrase dharmic religions was recently redirected to dharma, but the correct replacement link in Swastika is Indian religions. As per dharmic religion. See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dharmic_religion and Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Dharmic_religion. Andries 13:02, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I copied the contents from dharmic religion to dharmic religions, so the latter no longer somewhat erroneously re-directs to dharma. Andries 13:09, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And how are we supposed to write an article on dharmic religions? Reliable sources have not been found. Andries 13:18, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't foillow your question. The concept of "dharmic religions" is clear. There are numerous reliable sources on the relevant faiths. It's not necessary to have a book with the exact phrase in the title. There have been numerous phrases used over the history of comparative religion: just as there have for the "abrahamic" faiths. "Abrahamic" is also a relatively new phrase, but the distinction between what usec to be called "Semitic" and "Aryan" faith-traditions has been recognised in comparative religion since the 1850s. Paul B 13:29, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But we have not found any reliable source on the phrase "dharmic religions", not a book, not a book chapter, not even a paragraph, except a passing mentioning, in contrast to Abrahamic religions. Andries 13:34, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot find the term "dharmic religion" in the book that you listed. Where is it? It should be mentioned in the index on page 1415 but it is not there. Andries 15:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that the term is not listed in the index but only on page 116 which I cannot see with google books. The fact that the term is not listed in the index suggests that this a passing mentioning. I may be mistaken and I would be interested to know how the book uses the term. Andries 16:08, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I still cannot find it in the book. May be u can improve the draft User:Andries/Dharma_in_religions that I wrote with the book. Andries 18:29, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFC for Holocaust Talk

Hi Paul, would you consider certivying this RFC? You certainly have tried to resolve the conflict/be a peacemaker. here Slrubenstein | Talk 16:18, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jean-Marie Perrot

Thank you, terrific work turning this article into a proper English text. And it's invigorating seeing people with interests as varied as yours. Cheers ! Rama 15:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello...

That's a fairly one-sided statement to make, and makes me ask what on earth qualifies as a historian in your eyes.

As you clearly aren't happy, feel free to come up with something that you think we can both agree on.

I sent this earlier, and noticed it was merged with some rant i don't write...anyway, I'd like to come up with something we'd both be happy with that expresses the theory while keeping it balanced. So, please re-write the paragraph and info and lets see if we can settle on something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vra379971 (talk • contribs) 02:55, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Australoid

I removed the picture from the article, the term is not used in the example. Cygnis insignis 10:42, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Search me!? But they don't use the term, so what can we do? Cygnis insignis 10:44, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Debate? That is not while we are here. Please show a little courtesy, your characterization of my actions is without foundation. The image represents Australian types very poorly, I can get a more modern version if you need such a thing. Cygnis insignis 10:58, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

None of my pictures of Merseyside have that city in them. You know there is a big River between them, don't you? Cygnis insignis 11:10, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...between them!? Cygnis insignis 11:26, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stop making personal attacks, pull your head in. The people of Merseyside have a river between them. The things you are not stating are not made absolute by your repetition, they are far from it. The reference does not contain the term, inclusion is OR. Cygnis insignis 11:48, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is merely a difference of perspective. Your assertions are given as absolute, they are far from it. It is a marginal and highly contested term, so shall we find another forum for this discussion. I am finding your approach offensive. Cygnis insignis 12:17, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great edit

[3] is very nice. Thank you for doing it. —ScouterSig 18:30, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your reversion of Cunt

Thanks for your note to this- made me laugh out loud & much needed on this difficult day!! --Rodhullandemu 19:19, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shugborough Hall photo

Hello - the picture which you uploaded to Wikipedia here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Shugborough_arcadia.jpg

has been taken, without permission, from here:

http://www.connectotel.com/rennes/shug4big.jpg

Can you please remove it from Wikipedia?

Thanks

91.171.218.80 14:10, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Crossan

I reverted your edit removing the ^[who?] on Jesus-myth hypothesis, because I'm familiar with a fair bit of Crossan's work, and he is not a proponent of the Jesus-Myth theory. If you were referring to someone else who is mentioned there, please let me know and revert! (It'd probably have to be made clearer who though in the text, as I'm no idiot and didn't get it.) TJ 13:08, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I would agree if it were justified to include the statement at all without JM-er quotage. As it is, I don't see the point of including any random argument in favour of something different by someone who is unconnected to the theory. It looks a lot like OR to me, actually. If JMers use that argument, we should quote them - hence I left the tag in to allow someone to demonstrate that. If they don't use it, we should delete the whole paragraph. TJ 13:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Harold Sherwood Spencer

Nice work on the stub! --Ludvikus 10:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reg my theory

Hi Paul,

it has already been published in conferences. A review is confirmed.. it is in final stages of peer review in two other journals.

So i feel there is nothing wrong in keeping it on wikipaedia. Are you a specialist on the subject ?

if so, i can send you a copy

Sujay —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sujayrao2007 (talk • contribs) 11:31, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Grey lady.JPG

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Grey lady.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:23, 8 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 19:23, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hitler article

Hi Paul

I truly read a lot about the third Reich at my youth (not because I'm Jewish, but because it was a very interesting period) and I do think that you are wrong about the Celtic origin attributed to Jesus by Hitler, I mean, Hitler didn't truly belief it- can you source your claim please (or refute mine which is that he objected Rosenberg's suggestion).--Gilisa 08:19, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, both of the claims could be correct- Hitler had a lot of crazy ideas when it comes to the racial origins of different nations, cultures or famous figures. As far as I know, at least in the beginning, Hitler considered Jesus as a Jew-may be that there is a gap between what he actually think and his formal statements- he did such things many times, from the very beginning when he also was a hiring speaker for other movements than the national socialist movement (Shirer's book is also widely based upon Hitler's table talks).--Gilisa 11:05, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm still waiting for a reference to the article about S-G book, there are many articles about World War 2 submitted under his name- and an exact reference would make it easier. More, I must tell you that I came over "Mein Kampf", I made a word search and it does not yield any result-the word Jesus or Bible is not found a single time in a book of 694 pages...--Gilisa 07:12, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copy-edits

Thanks for recent copy-edits! Indeed style is not always an easy thing for me... Tazmaniacs 18:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About your welcomed copy-edit to Nordic theory, I'll point out that although this started by a craniometric study, Virchow later rejected measure of skulls as legitimate means of taxinomy. Paul Kretschmer quoted a 1892 discussion with him concerning this criticisms, also citing Aurel von Törok's 1895 work, who basically proclaimed the failure of craniometry (same source). Tazmaniacs 19:08, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard about Virchow through rather unrelated themes concerning history of biology. Most of my (few) sources on these themes are, lamentably, in non-English language. Concerning Müller, I'll translate (approximatively) for you the quote from the Italian article:

Max Müller, for example, was the first to talk, in 1861, of an "Aryan race", contributing to the diffusion of the perillous confusion between linguistics and anthropology. But in 1888, this author, wanting to heroically expie - as would write an American anthropologist [the author of the article is in fact quoting William Ripley's The Races of Europe] - his sin of youth, and decided to take party against the ambiguity of the common scientific language: "In my opinion, the ethnologist who speaks of an Aryan race, of an Aryan blood (...) is a sinner not less than the linguisth who speaks of a dolicocephal dictionnary or of a brachicephal grammar. [quoting M. Müller, Biographies of words and the home of the Aryans, London, Longmans, 1898 (prima edizione 1888), pp. 89-90 e 120-21]"

"Max Müller, ad esempio, discorre per primo, nel 1861, di "razza ariana" [13], contribuendo al diffondersi di pericolose confusioni tra linguistica ed antropologia. Ma nel 1888 lo stesso autore, volendo espiare eroicamente — come scriverà poi un antropologo americano [14] — i peccati di gioventù, decide di prender partito contro le ambiguità del linguaggio scientifico corrente: "A mio avviso, l’etnologo che parli di una razza ariana, di un sangue ariano [...], è un peccatore non meno grande del linguista che parli di un dizionario dolicocefalo o di una grammatica brachicefala"

This seems to warrant other sources for cross-checking, to see what Müller meant by "Aryan race" in 1861 and afterwards (your quote, similar to the quote from his 1888 book, is from 1872). Tazmaniacs 19:24, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, concerning William Z. Ripley's The Races of Europe, this author quotes p.37-57 to make the claim that he rejected the link between the shape and size of skulls and intellectual capacities. As this completely contradicts the entry on The Races of Europe, it might be good cross-checking this if you have access to this book (I'll try to do so this week, but I'm not sure I will be able to find it). Tazmaniacs 19:35, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your query...

I suppose it might be pointed out to the reader that the "ye" in the "Wiccan Rede" poem is everywhere used to indicate the second person plural nominative pronoun except in these two phrases: "Elder be ye Lady's tree-..." and "Eight words ye Wiccan Rede fulfill-...", where it is used as the definite article. Oddly, "ye" is used as a pronoun rather than as an article later in the same line after both phrases! What should be made more clear is that only these two examples of "ye" serve as "smoking guns" to demonstrate that the poem is faux-archaic rather than genuinely archaic; the other instances are perfectly correct. No 19th Century Englishman would have written "Eight words ye Wiccan Rede fulfill-An' it harm none, Do what ye will" except in satiric verse: the incongruity between the first "ye" ("the") and the second "ye" ("ye") would have been read as deliberately comical.

It should perhaps also be pointed out in the article that there is one more grammatical slip which proves the poem faux-archaic: "-Let the spell be spake in rhyme." The "spake" here is completely bogus. Shakespeare or Keats would have written, "-Let the spell be spoke in rhyme", because when following the verb "to be" in this construction, the past participle is indicated, not the imperfect. Consider the following parallel examples:"-Let the deed be did with lime", "-Let the seed be sowed in time", both of which make the same mistake. This is the handiwork either of someone quite unfamiliar with the forms of early modern English - or of someone who knows them only too well. It's as fake as Piltdown Man. I begin to suspect it to be one of those delightful hoaxes the English are so fond of perpetrating on one another to show off their expensive public school educations. Writtenright 13:21, 14 October 2007 (UTC)Writtenright[reply]

something about the article of "Nordic Theory"

Dear mister Paul Barlow, I would like to ask you something about the article of "Nordic Theory". A little time ago I was browsing the particular article and there was picture of a blond nordic man that was wearing the uniform of the waffen ss. I believe that in was something like a poster of the waffen ss. It was similar to this one http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cd/Nordic_race.jpg but not the same. Unfortunately today I noticed that the particular particular picture was missing, probably because someone removed it while editing the article. Since you are the uploader of the picture that I mentioned above I thought that maybe you have the one I'm looking for also. I would be really grateful if you could help me with this. Thanks a lot in advance. Tobbie —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tobbie10 (talk • contribs) 15:52, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tobbie, the image you are referring to was uploaded by user:wikidudeman and was added in June. It was later deleted from Wikipedia due, I think, to copyright problems. I think you will have to ask Wikidudeman where he got it. I'm afraid I don't know. Best Wishes. Paul B 16:30, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Ashvacoin.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ashvacoin.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 01:15, 15 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 01:15, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright

That text is NOT copyright protected, contrary is authorized to be zdded as THE SUBSTANTIAL REFERENCE to this specific work.! And what would you do if you would find that I am the author of that text? Do not judge the work of others by the chip you have on your shoulder!

http://niniwa2.cba.pl/BIKONT.HTM

The foreign language text should be added as it contains very important informations for all Polish people and great majority of jews who survived Holocoust and do speak Polish!

Let the freedom of speech to be protected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.190.122.184 (talk) 13:00, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop talking nonsense. Recent interviews are copyrighted. We do not post articles or interviews on Talk pages. It is against policy. A link to the article is quite sufficiant - though almost entirely useless since very few users speak Polish. If you think the interview is significant for the article, then the talk page is the place to say why it is significant. 16:32, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Postmodernism in science

Your revert summary argued that there is no such thing, and I started a discussion on the talk page. Postmodernism#Postmodernism in science. I'd welcome your comments there. Cheers! Professor marginalia 23:43, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Charlatan and hoaxer promoted on Wikipedia

Fringe author and fringe publisher Filip Coppens

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Coppens

is promoting recognised French charlatan and hoaxer Andre Douzet here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andr%C3%A9_Douzet

Isn't it the central tenet of Wikipedia that all claims need to be verified? And all sources provided? To date, Andre Douzet has not provided any evidence to substantiate any of his allegations - and all that Filip Coppens does in response is to state "Wrong, Andre Douzet has supplied evidence" - and it goes round and round in this same loop.

I keep trying to balance Filip Coppens' biased claims on the Wikipedia article - and he keeps deleting my comments.

Here is an english translation of: http://www.octonovo.org/RlC/Fr/ctrb/ctrb07.htm

Having acquired an indepth knowledge of the books of correspondence of Abbé Saunière, many people often ask me (Octonovo) if there exists amongst these documents anything which would confirm or deny the thesis of the so-called “Saunière’s Model”, on which a large part of Mr André Douzet’s research about Rennes le Château [1] relies.

REVIEW OF THE FACTS

It was at the conference which he gave in the grounds of Saunière’s house at Rennes le Château in August 1995, that Mr Douzet presented this model and his first work on it. He claimed to have found the object at the home of a metal-founder, together with several letters in Saunière’s own hand. Although the model clearly illustrates holy sites such as they were shown at the beginning of our [Christian] era, he presented this model more or less as a “Treasure map of Rennes le Chateau” which would have been left behind by the priest at the end of his life.

There were numerous speakers, of whom Mr Boumendil, Mr Tappa and Mr Feral launched a real scandal, accusing the author of being a forger and, in short, of producing convincing elements to prop up his statements. A meeting was arranged for the presentation of certain items but Mr Douzet did not appear at this meeting and did not find it convenient to arrange a new meeting to clear the serious accusations brought against him [2].

The matter seemed therefore to be agreed for the followers of Rennes le Chateau, all the more so when Patrick Mensior succeeded in proving that the so-called model, if it really did date from the 1900’s, had nothing to do with Rennes le Château and that it could not have been ordered by Abbé Saunière (see the section of the conclusion in his article published by the “Amis de l’Insolite”). To come to this conclusion he relied on elements of correspondence known at the time, namely the correpondence of 1915-1917, published by Pierre Jarnac [3].

In comparison, through a completely personal interpretation, Mr Douzet recognised, in the reversed relief of a mould of the so-called model, a region closer to his home [Durban-Corbières] and continued his work in the area of Périllos (in the Pyrénées Orientales). He recently created an association [according to the French law of 1901] in order to promote this research, amongst other activities.

To this day Mr Douzet has never produced the documents requested which would be able to clear the serious doubts which overshadow the sincerity of his research.

ABBE SAUNIERE’S FILES

Since the annoucement of the discovery of the files of correspondence and financial accounts of Abbé Saunière, many people have asked if there was any mention of the famous letters which were supposed to have been exchanged between Abbé Saunière and the designer of the Model

From the beginning, Mr Douzet has stated that he preferred not to make these letters available because they contained information which he wanted to keep to himself; I therefore asked him to inform me of the dates of the letters, to see whether they were recorded in the priest’s files.

This solution would be advantageous because it would not require him to produce the documents, just for him to provide the details of their dates, and if the information was confirmed, he would no longer be the target of the accusations which had followed him for more than 10 years.

Therefore, with methods which to me have seemed to be delaying tactics (in particular his tendancy to respond with incredibly convoluted answers to simple questions which would normally only require a Yes or a No), and in spite of the formal promise which he had made to me in public, Mr Douzet did not finally wish to provide me with these dates.

Since then I have completed my study of Abbé Saunière’s files and I can state that I have not found a trace of any element which would be able to confirm Mr Douzet’s statements.

In relation to the accounts books:

• There exists no invoice relating to the supposed model.

• There exists no invoice for the measuring tools or optical tools such as those described by Mr Douzet, which Abbé Saunière would have needed in order to create the topographic model.

• There exists no invoice for the hire of a carriage or for a property rental in Lyon, in particular in the Rue de Macchabées.

• There exists no trace of an invoice for a voyage to Lyon, Durban-Corbières or Périllos.

In relation to the files of correspondence:

• There exists no trace of the letters cited by Mr Douzet relating to a supposed topographic model.

• There exists no trace of the journeys to Lyon which Abbé Saunière is alleged to have made, although his journeys to other destinations are often very clear.

• There exists no trace of his supposed journeys to Durban-Corbières or to Périllos, nor the maintenance of a continued connection of any kind with this place.

• There exists no trace of an order for optical or measuring equipment which Abbé Saunière would have needed for the creation of his topographic model.

• There exists no trace of an order for a carriage or for accomodation rental in Lyon, especially on the Rue de Macchabées.

Additionally, I have not found any link between Bérenger Saunière and the real people who ordered this model, which had originally an educational purpose and which had been created in reality in many tens of examples at that time.

To the anticipated objection that, as these matters were secret, Abbé Saunière would not have mentioned them in his notebooks, I reply that from his trial, Abbé Saunière denied having kept such notebooks and that this had worked against him during his sentencing. As a result, that which the priest wanted to hide from the inquisitors of the time is more than likely written in his notebooks.

CONCLUSION

Mr Douzet has been for very many years the target of criticisms and of accusations which seriously endanger the credibility of the works which he has carried out based on the study of the so-called “Saunière’s Model”.

He has not wanted to do what was required to try to eliminate these doubts and has even excused himself from the various offers which have been made to him to support his thesis after having publicly given his agreement to do so.

The work carried out in a documented and reasoned way by M. Patrick Mensior seem to me completely conclusive. They invalidate the theories of Mr Douzet.

My own research has not at any time allowed me to eliminate the doubts which weigh upon the credibility of the works of Mr Douzet.

My advice is therefore, that in the current state of the justifications, it is necessary to consider these creations as a work of the imagination.

[1] As the theories of Mr Douzet have occupied a sizeable book, this article only relates to the so-called model and its supposed implications. I state again that the elements on which I have relied are essentially taken from the close study of the notebooks of Abbé Saunière.

[2] On the subject of the events of 1995, read Rennes le château, le secret de SAUNIERE (Editions Sud Ouset - 2005), by Jean-Luc ROBIN, - page 102 onwards.

[3] Editions Couleur Ocre [publisher]

Copyright © April 2005 by Octonovo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wfgh66 (talk • contribs) 00:40, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

me and discussion pages

Do you have something against me and/or discussion pages?Skele 01:14, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vulva O'Reighan

"Vulva O'Reighan" is rather obviously an anagram of "Vaughan Oliver". What reason is there to believe that Catherine McDermott is the author not Oliver himself? Paul B 09:45, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was at an editorial meeting where McDermott commissioned writers, and all contributions were passed under McDermott's editorial eye. As a compromise, you could say that McDermott was effectively ghost editor, I guess. --Buch 12:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are saying. Are you implying that she heavily rewrote Oliver's prose? Paul B 23:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First question: have you seen the publication? It is an edited publication that served as an exhibition catalogue. The publication presents images of Oliver's work with text contributions from numerous people that have collaborated with him or written about his work previously. Oliver produced the publication, but for the text-based contributions (which were at the heart of that particular publication) he invited McDermott to deal with the writers (in the capacity of the book's editor). As the publication in question is an exhbition catalogue with scholarly essays as well as less formal text-based contributions, McDermott's role was as a scholarly editor (see entry on scholarly books and journals under Editing), in-keeping with her role as an academic. To clarify, Oliver wrote no prose for the publication. --Buch 12:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I saw a copy of it at Vaughan Oliver's Is Minty a Man? exhibition some years ago. You really don't need to tell me what editing is. I am the editor and author of several academic books and a member of the editorial board of an academic journal. The exact details of who actually edited a book is often complex. The issue here is whether Oliver himself is intended to be presented under the name; whether McDermott is; or whether the imaginary "female" editorial persona (if someone named 'Vulva' may be envisaged as female) is intended to cover the joint input of McDermott and Oliver. Paul B 13:02, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your comment; "The issue here is whether Oliver himself is intended to be presented under the name." Indeed. Why don't you ask him? However, though it may be 'the issue', it is not exactly a pressing one now. That said, I would guess that the work is seen as a collaborative venture now (perhaps it always was) but you are right to view the matter with some scepticism. That, in my view, was the point of the game (i.e. the cultivation of an enigma for the amusement and fascination of V23's loyal following).--Buch 02:02, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Black German in Wehrmacht

On the Axis History Forum there is a photo of a dark skinned German in the Wehrmacht. The link to the site is blocked. There is quite a bit of interesting material posted at this site. In any case Italy did have African soldiers, 15,000 were killed in the 1941 Ethiopian campaign--Woogie10w 00:28, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History is full of Quirks

A few Germans of Jewish descent served in the Nazis's forces too. The actual figure is 150,000., 90,000 Half Jews and 60,000 1/4 Jews. Read Hitler's Jewish Soldiers by Rigg. There were 1,500,000 ethnic Poles who were German citizens, the young men got drafted like other Germans. In Poland itself 400,000 Polish citizens served in the German Armed forces. History is full of Quirks --Woogie10w 03:47, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Me

So your one of those people who goes around wikipedia deleting random stuff. Let me enlighten you, Im the narcissistic gibberish writer on the jesus discussion page.Skele 22:00, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then tell me how my writings were gibberish.Skele 10:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read any of the discussions on that discussion page and have you seen any of them written on the page. I know I haven't. Tell me if you have.Skele 22:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well have you or have you not seen them written on the article?Skele 22:19, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am asking you a simple question. Have you or have you not seen any of the discussions that you have read, written on the article itself?Skele 22:24, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did NOT ask you have you read the discussions I asked you have you seen any of them written on the ARTICLE PAGE ITSELF?Skele 22:31, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What country are you from? Just answer the question.Skele 22:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes this is relevant. Is your family tree fully english? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skele (talk • contribs) 22:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What was your last test number in English?Skele 22:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm being perfectly clear. Please, check your IQ.Skele 23:04, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Vandalism here from 72.66.71.69

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dossiers_Secrets

Unable to do anything about it because I am not a Wikipedia Administrator Wfgh66 19:05, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Woolner14.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Woolner14.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --OrphanBot 19:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus was black

File:Large photo of christ.jpg This is a painting fron the catacombs of Rome dated 300 a.d. As it clearly shows he is black. And if the historical jesus (Yeshu) was not black. The mythical side of Christ was. This story came from the nile valley civilization in Africa over 3000 years ago. Look up the story of Horus (Heru). You will find similarities between the two. Melvin Terrell of Rochester

Branagh Hamlet

I have the video, too. I'll have a look this evening. There are one or two other sources I could look at, too, to see what they say. AndyJones 08:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, although I see someone on the film's talk page saying his DVD timer says over four hours. I hate having to do this original research, but I'm now intrigued and will be checking it out for myself! AndyJones 13:21, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stay away from Indian History related articles

What are your academic qualifications related to History, particularly India,? If you dont have an academic degree in Indic studies, Please do not edit articles based on India's History. A polite request. Please stick with your victorian stuff.

Please be polite

Mr. Paul, kindly be polite with your responses. Calling me 'ignorant moron' is not a good way to respond. The fact remains that you dont have any academic qualifications in History neither are you an Indian, to talk about Indian History. I once again request you to stay away from topic/subjects in which you have no competence. I respect your skills in your area of expertise. But dont meddle with stuff you have no clue about. Thanks for your patience. Please be polite. Peace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xyzisequation (talk • contribs) 02:16, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again,please dont call names

Mr. Paul, Wikipedia is not about ideas but facts. If you really have good ideas, try fashion designing or someother art work. There is no place for ideas here, except stating facts. So my comment is based on your activity regarding Indian history in which you are not qualified, and hence any edits you make are not credible. Also, please stop calling names like 'hypocritical'. Do not attempt to read my mind or theorize my feelings/reactions. Be professional and state any arguments objectively. Xyzisequation 12:30, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I was away. What you are saying is NONSENSE. By "just saying I know a lot about this topic", doesn't make you credible. Thats the whole reason why universities give degrees, for proof. So, come out of your delusion that you know so much about Indian History and dont push your POV. If you still dont get it, I can elaborate. Stick to your Victorian! Xyzisequation (talk) 18:00, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now you are getting to the actual point. See, I dont know for sure if you have published something. But the point is, when the admin is as novice as a non-admin user in a topic, any stand the admin takes is hazardous. The admin may get disturbed by the new-user's edit and he starts to wield his powers. Even worse, the admin forms a POV and pushes it through. He has the powers. And the total purpose is defeated. Instead of being objective, he may take it personal and very often quotes WIKI rules, blocks as trolls, reports as vandalism etc. to win. Becoming a WIKIPEDIA ADMIN doesn't make anyone an automatic authority on any topic. Its highly unfortunate that, people are becoming admins by doing minor edits and staying for longer periods on wikipedia. Once they get the adminship, the power corrupts these people. Particularly, people who still suffer from Eurocentrism , cause even more damage. This is the case that is being argued. Other admins that should be checked, as I notice, are DBACHMAN & RUDRASHARMAN. There may be many more. Unless the rules for adminship are amended to prevent this hazard, Sensitive articles continue to remain in the stranglehold of eurocentric admins. But sooner or later, that will hopefully happen. Anyway, now that the admin mechanics is quite publicized, you and other admins may expect more protests Xyzisequation (talk) 22:14, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A protest by itself has so much constructive purpose. Admin POV pushing must stop.Prevention is better than cure. Xyzisequation (talk) 22:54, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maurice

I didn't realise I had overwritten a previous image; as for the duplication, I couldn't get the first upload to work in the article, so I tried a different format (turned out I'd forgotten to place 'Image:' before the title of the image in the article...). What did I mess up, and can it be fixed?

Ah <light dawns> I think I understand now. I'm confusing the above with Image:Zeno.JPG, which I uploaded as a png (see above reasons); the Maurice thing happened because I didn't realise there was another file of the same name as you say...it did load up the original picture when the upload was done and the image appeared on my screen (startled me, because I was expecting a coin, not looming men), so I realised I'd used an already existing image name, hence my reupload... but clearly I had messed it up...glad you've fixed it. Michael Sanders 14:33, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Cunt splice

A tag has been placed on Cunt splice, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Samtheboy ^(t/c) 14:24, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Renanplayer.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Renanplayer.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --OrphanBot (talk) 17:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Mr. Bot, I've been expecting you. If any human comes along - read what I put on the image page. Paul B (talk) 17:25, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfC

I don't know if you were around during the recent blocking of the page due to edit waring, but those events and events at other articles have resulted in an RfC for Dbachmann. This isn't about content as much as it is about conduct. You've always been fairly respectful and neutral even when we have not agreed so you opinion would be valuable, I think. Thought you might want to know. futurebird (talk) 18:18, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nordic

i did realy like your piscture about the Nordic race.

soory my bad english. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.167.97.39 (talk) 19:54, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most welcome

All credit to you, thanx for you deep research, you have enlightened many peoples out there with your knowledge, btw you mentioned Arya foods or Persepolis foods as it is now called, check this out, "Marcellosboston.com" to bad you wern't in town ;-P Cyrus111 (talk) 11:41, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cites. Always. Please.

Hi! You recently edited Rennes-le-Château. Please cite all edits you make to Wikipedia articles.
"Material challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, must be attributed to a reliable, published source. ... Any edit lacking a reliable source may be removed..."
(From WP:VERIFY; see also WP:CITE.) Thanks. -- 201.37.229.117 (talk) 19:47, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I beg your pardon? My edit consisted entirely of removing fringecruft. How am I supposed to "cite" removals. Please take care to make meaningful comments. Paul B (talk) 22:26, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I was mistaken. I was referencing this version http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rennes-le-Ch%C3%A2teau&oldid=173727139 , "This is the current revision of Rennes-le-Château as edited by Paul Barlow (Talk | contribs) at 19:20, 25 November 2007." This addition was commented as "rm fringecruft", however, as far as I can see, it contains several "additions" to the article indicated in red (new), such as

(re Septimania) "Its importance as a Visigothic site has been exaggerated - indeed, at one point it was claimed that Rennes-le-Château was the capital of the Visigoths, but it is inarguably known that Narbonne held that position, not the remote hillside village of Rennes-le-Château. This claim can be traced back to an anonymous document - actually written by Noël Corbu - entitled L’histoire de Rennes-le-Château, which was deposited at the Departmental Archives at Carcassonne, on 14th June 1962."

"The connection Monsieur Fédié drew between Rennes-le-Château and "Rhedae" is without authority, although it is oft-quoted - and in fact Monsieur Fédié's assertions concerning the population and importance of Rennes-le-Château have been contradicted by archaeology and the work of genuine historians."

"Of course, the decorations chosen by Saunière were simply selected from a catalogue published by Giscard, sculptor and painter in Toulouse who - among other things - offered statues and sculptural features for church refurbishment."

-- Such assertions would obviously need to be cited by whoever added them to the article.

Sorry if I am wrongly viewing you as the author of these bits - but that's what I see in the revision history, and I don't think that I'm misunderstanding how it works that badly. (If I am, then I'm eager to understand how it really works!)

-- 201.37.229.117 (talk) 11:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aha! I see. You were restoring material that had previously been in the article. Thanks for clarification! -- 201.37.229.117 (talk) 11:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice

Whatever. OrangeMarlin ^Talk• Contributions 08:46, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

aryan race article

Hey Paul, You might want to revert to some of your older edits. This kid senses is gradually ruining the article using kidsforums as sources with no academic or scientific basis what - so - ever. take care Cyrus111 (talk) 12:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shugborough Inscription

Hi, Here is the latest up-to-date information on the Shugborough Inscription:

The Shepherds Monument by Andrew Baker

http://priory-of- sion.com/psp/monument.html

Wfgh66 (talk) 16:11, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rennes-le-Chateau Revised Again

Hi, I have revised some paragraphs to

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rennes-le-Ch%C3%A2teau

which I hope meet with your approval (see also Talk Page). If you want a scan of the photocopy of the Common Dedication of a Church let me know and I will e-mail it to you.

Here is how I have changed the article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rennes-le-Ch%C3%A2teau

Church of Mary Magdalene

The earliest church of which there is any evidence on the site of the present church may be as old as the eighth century. However, this original church was almost certainly in ruins during the 10th or 11th century when another church was built upon the site - remnants of which can be seen in Romanesque pillared arcades on the north side of the apse. It is this 10th or 11th century church which had survived in poor repair (an architectural report of 1845 reporting that it required extensive repairs). This second church was renovated in the late 1800s by the local priest, Bérenger Saunière, though the source of his funds at the time was controversial (see below) and some of the additions to the church appear unusual to modern eyes. One of the new features added to the church was an inscription above the front door, which said, Teribilis es locus iste. Inside the church, one of the added figures was of a devil holding-up the holy water stoup (rare, but other examples exist in other churches around France). Of course, the decorations chosen by Saunière were simply selected from a catalogue published by Giscard, sculptor and painter in Toulouse who - among other things - offered statues and sculptural features for church refurbishment. The figures and statues chosen by Saunière were in no way specially made.

Saunière also funded the construction of another structure dedicated to Mary Magdalene, named after his church, a tower on the side of a nearby mountain which he used as his Library, with a promenade linking it to the Villa Bethanie, which was not actually used by the priest - who stated during his trial that it was intended for retired priests.

The church's Latin inscription above the entrance reads Terribilis est locus iste which is taken from the Common Dedication of a Church, which in full reads [Entrance Antiphon Cf. Gen 28:17] - "This is a place of awe; this is God's house, the gate of heaven, and it shall be called the royal court of God." Everyone knows the first part of the passage and where it is situated in the entrance of the church - the rest of the passage is actually inscribed over the arches on the two doors of the church - demonstrating that it is the Entrance Antiphon from the Common Dedication of a Church - and indeed Sauniere's church was re-dedicated in 1897 by his Bishop, Monsigor Billard following Sauniere's renovations and redecorations - this is all very well documented with material relating to the event found in several French books and magazines dating from the 1980s.

Wfgh66 (talk) 17:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was Abbe Bruno de Monts during the mid-1980s for the French journal "Les Cahiers de Rennes-le-Chateau" who dug deep into Sauniere's Roman Catholic activities and retrieved a lot of useful and crucial material from the Carcassonne Archives and Bishopric. He sadly died a few years ago. Wfgh66 (talk) 17:50, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flash

Do you know how to code flash or recommend anyone that does? Alatari (talk) 14:17, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Francois Debeauvais

Please could you take a look at my query at Talk:François_Debeauvais? Merkinsmum 23:44, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Egypt/race

hey whats up paul my name is michael im still relatively new to wiki still lerning the rules and how it works .i was noticing your into some of the subject matter as i am race,ancient egypt e.t.c .and i been noticeing some of your devastating critiques on the loony afrocentrist in some of the discussion topics who have this ignorant stance of that the ancient egyptians if not white so they got to be black,i see you are as sick and tired as i am of this forceing ancient egypt into an either black or white camp among other things.if i could get some feed back from you on the subject that be cool ,thanks man--Mikmik2953 (talk) 05:19, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Input request

Hi Paul! I noticed your post on Commons:Deletion_requests/Image:WW2-Holocaust-Europe.png, and I remember having stumbled upon you concerning the Holocaust before. I have a feel that you are serious and knowledgeable, so I ask you for input considering the Holocaust map, since I'm willing to change it or make another version or whatever. Simply: how would you have done it? (Go hogwild if you like) And why do you think 1938 borders are better (than 1942 or 45 or whatever)? If you feel like it, please respond on my talk page. My regards, --Dna-Dennis (talk) 14:34, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Query about your entry on Psalm 103

Hi, I was hoping to use the A. Motyer quote you provided in the entry on Psalm 103 so I was wondering where you got it from. Was it from The New Bible Commentary? Any information would be appreciated Thanks! Sasha Tuzel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.124.115.50 (talk) 20:26, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sasha, I'm afraid I didn't add the quotation to the psalm 103 article. I just made a minor correction. Sorry. Paul B (talk) 02:48, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rennes-le-Château Church Inscriptions

Hello,

Rennes-le-Château Church Inscriptions http://priory-of- sion.com/psp/inscriptions.html

Wfgh66 (talk) 22:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

William James

I agree with you about the "Bubbles" pic, but until something better ... and it is relevant to the man (parents can cause embarrassment!). Re the "better" pic that you have: as the uploader, I'd say that you should have the knowledge of its source. There's criteria somewhere for the acceptability of pics that you can use. They may be linked from the upload page - have a look, while you're there. If I can help, I will, and there are others who would have better knowledge. However, you are still the one who knows where you got it. Folks at 137 (talk) 22:51, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Holocaust article

Hallo, I see that you took out the sentence regarding Himmler out of the opening paragraph of the Holocaust article. Himmler's name being mentioned in the article numerous times doesn't mean anything. I think it is very important that Himmler (being the mastermind of the Holocaust) be included in the opening paragraph. Heinrich was, after Hitler, the most powerful man in Nazi Germany. He was the founder and officer-in-charge of all the Nazi concentration and extermination camps, he was the one that formed the Einsatzgruppen death squads, he was the Supreme Commander of the SS (Reichsführer-SS), Reichsleiter, and he held final command responsibility for annihilating all those that were deemed "subhumans". Since the article is about the Holocaust (which Himmler was the mastermind of), he must definitely be in the opening paragraph. His role in perpetrating the extermination of those thought to be "subhumans" is at least equal to Hitler's, or perhaps even more. I will put it back since Heinrich Himmler was the main perpetrator of the Holocaust (at least equal to Hitler). TheGoodSon 17:24, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Paul, you have any reliable sources associating Himmler or Hitler's ideas on Final Solution coming from their understanding of Indian removal policies of the U.S.? Alatari (talk) 17:54, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Celts

Hi Paul,

Our discussion about the edits on the Celt page seem to have degenerated into a personal dispute between you and I. Sometimes this happens due to misunderstandings due to the nature of online communication. That may be the case here or it may not. You seem to be making some assumptions about me which may be off, if it's not necessary for us to clash over this then I'd like to avoid it if at all possible. I want to open a channel of communication in case you are interested in clarifying anything, either privately or here.

Drifter bob (talk) 20:42, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Phineas.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Phineas.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We requires this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:07, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Eros Killing Thanatos.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Eros Killing Thanatos.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 (talk) 06:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Nordic race.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Nordic race.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 (talk) 17:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Konpara.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Konpara.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 (talk) 22:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Dear Paul Barlow, do you know the present address of Mr.Koenraad Elst? Jon Ascton (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 17:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bérenger Saunière and the ‘Jesu medela vulnerum’ inscription

• sion.com/psp/bas-relief.html/ Bérenger Saunière and the ‘Jesu medela vulnerum’ inscription —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wfgh66 (talk • contribs) 17:56, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Mr.Paul

My apologies, after further research it seems the "haplotypes" of different European and Asian peoples might be relevant in the AR article, The r1a1 seems to have been in connection with the PIE:s although this is not 100 % accurate at the moment, the Sorbs and Tajiks have the highest "frequencies" are they then the "purest" "closest" descendants of the original PIE:s? Do you have any good sources? We should expand art. Cheers Cyrus111 (talk) 14:00, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

but rather to relate modern evidence to specific claims that have been made. You`re right, this is what we need to do, put historical claims with modern "evidence". For example Hitler considered poles to be non-Aryan, even though today they display much higher frequencies of r1a1. The PIE:s being a Eur-asian clan, might have resembled this singer from Iceland, Bjork. Spencer Wells has done some research but in NG human journey the migratory paths of the lineages constantly change . The project is not finished for another few years or so, so the "migratory paths and frequencies of r1a1" might not be fully certain for now. But we need to start updating the article " modernize it" while past "stories" of Aryan related to Theo, Nazi and so on can be shortened. Maybe we should discuss this in the disc page, to get other views? Cyrus111 (talk) 14:49, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm lazy

Therefore, I prefer to do with the limitations of edit summaries rather than opening a discussion topic. I didn't quite have enough space to explain that the picture shouldn't be utilized unless it can be properly represented as a mere general idea of how Jesus' features may have appeared. Personally, I found that section of the program to be irrelevant; a single skull is not useful enough to determine common traits and features in appearance, and it just seemed like a technology exhibition. I'm always concerned to see this image being cited as an estimation of Jesus' appearance (that is extreme overstatement); I can see a justifiable argument for the image being un-encyclopedic, although I find it to be notable.--C.Logan (talk) 12:52, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tempest

Hi Paul,

I have not published on the Tempest, but I do not believe that my claims are any more opinion than those of the previous writer on this section. I am only an actor, but I have worked in this play three times as Stephano, Caliban and as Prospero and I can say that the following statement may be true when it comes to postmodern feminist critics, but is patently false in regards to dramaturgs, directors, actors and (most importantly) audience members i.e. the general public that wikipedia should serve:

"Miranda is typically viewed as being completely deprived of freedom by her father. Her only duty in his eyes is to remain chaste."

I feel that even if this had a shred of truth in it it is totally unverifiable in any objective sense and should be removed without question. The claim that Miranda sees herself as subordinate to her father as a result of colonialsim is also just plain silly. She's 14 year old teenage girl. Any parent/child relationship of this sort has a degree of authority.

I understand you try to discourage original research, but there is a warning at the top of the page, and my statements are supported with direct evidence from the text wheareas the current section is a generalized paraphrase of extremely shoddy scholarship. Prospero saying "Thy mother was a piece of virtue and she said thou was't my daughter" is not an ambiguous statement that throws into question Prospero's view of his wife's fidelity, but is a gentle fatherly quip that draws a laugh after Miranda's exclamation of "Are not you my father?" Anyone who has actually seen this play would be puzzled by the current state of this section.

I will go find something in Harbage or Greenblatt my points, but untill then I would like to dispute the neutrality of this section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuchman-jerome (talk • contribs) 21:53, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Sturmer Nordic Jesus.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Sturmer Nordic Jesus.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 (talk) 06:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Chemical Wedding

I will not stop what I am doing. First of all, you should not introduce a page in Wikipedia that is not ready to be criticized or edited. Secondly, you should not remove tags that someone else has placed on a page. Thirdly, I am not interfering, I am assisting and giving my opinion. Thanks, and Happy Editing!! Dustihowe  Talk  18:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First of All I did not add a 'wikify' tag. You attempted to add one, but it failed. Second of all, most articles are in a most pure form, and little needs to be done to improve them. That is why I added the tags to improve and cleanup. NEVER did I add a Wikify tag. Get your facts right. Dustihowe  Talk  17:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop the personal attacks. The discussion is over, gone, nada, does not exist anymore. Grow up. Ok? Thanks and happy editing. Dustihowe  Talk  18:39, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]