en User talk:Zazaban archive2

Editing of Civilisation

Dear Zaraban. Thank you for your editing of Fictitious Civilisations. While it is true that some people do consider Atlantis, Mu and Lemria as actual pre-historic civilisations, there is no evidence apart from those listed in the article that they ever existed. They are considered by the majority archaological and anthropological opinion as fictitious, and to report this is not a POV. To call tem Prehistoric, however, is definitely a POV statement. As a result I have reverted your edit and put an explanation into the discussion talk page on civilisation. I would be willing to engage further on this should you wish, in the interest of improving the article. John D. Croft 08:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Repeated Vandalism of you User Page

You're getting creamed. What nonsense. I opened a Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism report for you. MARussellPESE 16:59, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) I was only planning to do that if If it turned into more than just irritating. Zazaban 00:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

public transportation user box jpeg

has an illegal jpeg structure - I don't know if it's malicious or just broken but the OSX system log reports "/Applications/Safari.app/Contents/MacOS/Safari: Corrupt JPEG data: 1 extraneous bytes before marker 0xd9\n /Applications/Safari.app/Contents/MacOS/Safari: JPEG datastream contains no image\n" whenever Safari sees it - and the picture actually fails to load too.--Smkolins 15:07, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be some kind of redirect from the actual picture to the page it is from and there if you load the high quality form it then shows, then you can back up all the way to your user page you can then reload and it'll see the graphic. Weird. I've seen this kind of behavior - where you can't see the picture until you load the high quality form - on other pages. Like the Bahá'í Faith page under history which is a picture of the Shrine of the Báb - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Shrine_Bab_North_West.jpg -.--Smkolins 15:16, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More interesting - I *can* see this image without extre hoops on Bahá'í World Centre buildings. Now what does that mean? Could it be something about dimensions of the box vs the picture??--Smkolins 15:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[1]

lol. Great edit summary. I look forward to Buddha's time travel adventures. Just H 03:27, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Manifestations of God

Just to let you know, I have nominated the category Category:Manifestations of God for deletion. It seems to me that this category has inherent WP:POV issues. Please feel free to contribution to the debate on this. Thanks, Gwernol 02:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

in response to [2]: au contraire, please stop inserting this POV cat into articles until the CfD has ended. thank you. ITAQALLAH 02:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Statistics

Look Zazaban, your editing is not constructive. We are trying to have a neutral portrayal of the Baha'i Faith, not promoting it, or putting it down, and your edits go against that. The discussion of the Baha'i population is stated in the section of demographics, going over both low and high estimates. A further discussion is even in Baha'i statistics. We can't take the largest estimate and put that at the top, because that would be just as if someone goes as takes the lowest estimate (2 million) and puts that in the lead. The middle of the pack number which is the most common number is placed at the lead, and a further discussion is expanded. -- Jeff3000 02:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In no part of my statement did I state that you were popular or not popular; I'm only commenting on your edit, which in my mind, is not constructive. The recent statistic by Britannica, if not already included, can be placed as one of many sources in the demographics section, but signalling it out among many, for a controversial statistic (see all the talk page discussions in the archive pages), will look upon those people who think the number is inflated as a POV. By using a more conservative estimate in the lead, and then being able to go into more detail is the better route. -- Jeff3000 03:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zazaban. I agree with Jeff3000 in this case. We have been around a long time and have experienced a lot of hateful editors that have come trying to defame the religion by any means possible. We have fought them off by making the articles very neutral, and that's why we sometimes insist on certain edits. In particular, the total number of Baha'is was an issue that was debated extensively by a non-Baha'i who insisted that the article say that the higher numbers are inflated, and the probable accurate number is 2 million. In response to his edits I greatly expanded the Baha'i statistics page to include all the academic references that are now there, while his sources were just blogs and unprofessional commentators. The current wording, and numbers, were carefully chosen and debated for awhile.

When I first arrived at Wikipedia I was given some good advice: to edit in a way that doesn't attract attacks and vandalism. We have been lucky that the hundreds of Baha'i articles have been relatively quiet over the past 6 months. There are several editors that continue to improve them, but if the pages become promotional of the Baha'i Faith, then people who hate Baha'is will become more deeply involved in the pages to counter that bias. I have already seen it happen with one individual who still edits frequently. He began editing Baha'i articles because he rightfully noticed a bias, and now he will eternally be a thorn in our side. Cuñado

- Talk 07:39, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RS name?

Mine is kirbyteam, all the way f2per! =D Add me if you'd like, we can go pking sometime or something lol. --Ķĩřβȳ ♥Ťįɱé Ø 08:39, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My name is Marth66, But i'm a member. Zazaban 20:11, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sabians

Thanks, Z, for the link correction. Oddly, I hadn't even noticed that there was a section on the Baha'i writings' references to this religion. Good catch. --Christian Edward Gruber 21:15, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism & Archiving

I've reverted some vandalism [3]. For archiving, have you considered using a automatic archiver such Werdnabot? If you'd like me to configure Werdnabot to archive your talk page, just leave me a line on my talk page. Don't forget to tell me how much inactivity of the section you would like to archive it. Happy Editing by Snowolf^(talk) on 21:56, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Place names

No sweat. I think the current version is a good compromise. MARussellPESE 20:41, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

I've noticed you don't use edit summaries. I think it might be useful to start using them. Regards, -- Jeff3000 15:56, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do use edit summaries. I have a large watchlist so I don't always use them. Zazaban 15:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, edits are not supposed to speak for themselves. If you read the Help:Edit summary article, you will notice that edit summaries are used for:

"An edit summary should strive to answer the question, "Why did you make this edit?". Providing an edit summary, even if the edit is minor, makes Wikipedia work better by quickly explaining to other users what your change was about."

and

"Always fill in the summary field. This is considered an important guideline."

So, regardless of what the edit is, you should put a summary. -- Jeff3000 18:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zaz, take a look at http://www.math.ucla.edu/~aoleg/wp/rfa/edit_summary.html. Here's some counts:

Yours: "Edit summary usage for Zazaban: 49% for major edits and 33% for minor edits."

Mine: "Edit summary usage for MARussellPESE: 99% for major edits and 98% for minor edits."

Jeff3000's: "Edit summary usage for Jeff3000: 99% for major edits and 100% for minor edits." (Over-achiever!)

Cuñdo19's: "Edit summary usage for Cunado19: 95% for major edits and 76% for minor edits."

Before I started paying attention, I was at about 75% and 50% respectively. These are helpful for other editors. Cheers, MARussellPESE 19:48, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have a huge watchlist and often very little time. Zazaban 20:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then, please take the time. Edit summaries are not there as an inconvenience for you, but as an aid and courtesy to the rest of us. MARussellPESE 17:11, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, User:Zazaban. Please contribute towards making Wikipedia a better place for all of us. :) 216.99.58.101 03:36, 6 February 2007 (UTC) (The Vandalizer of this page) lol[reply]

Vandalism getting out of control

Seriously, I'm even getting vandals comment on my userpage. Can userpages be protected? Zazaban 04:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you so upset User:Zazaban? Vandals are free to do whatever they want....so, relax.

>>>>> Vandalizer <<<<<<<

216.99.61.168 00:53, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No actually, you're not. Just on a hunch, are you from Runevillage? Zazaban 00:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. Are you?

Best regards,

Vandalizer (216.99.61.30 02:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC)) Yes, I just had hunch that vandals were following a link on my forum profile. But alas :( Zazaban 02:39, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really? What is the link? 216.99.61.238 00:53, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It just leads right here to my userpage. Zazaban 04:54, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Section stub

Thank you for trying to mark sections as a stub at Bahá'í teachings. You nearly did it but the correct tag is {{sectstub}}. {{stub|anything}} is interpreted as {{stub}}. For subject specific stubs for whole articles there is a list at WP:WSS/ST. Thank you. Ksbrown^talk 10:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Map

Hey Zazaban, the maps looks good. I would put the legend also in the article; what does yellow mean? Also maybe dots where the Houses of Worship actually are. Regards, -- Jeff3000 04:02, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

His opinion

Yes, an opinion which is also a personal attack, from a user who, among other things, has vandalized a number of user pages, including mine and, on several occasions, your own. It never ceases to amaze me how many editors are willing to stick their necks out for the very most disruptive trolls.Proabivouac 04:00, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen worse go by, too. That's why that talk page is a useless mess. Several admins said they intended to enforce some modicum of sanity and civil discussion, but there's been no follow-up at all.Proabivouac 16:40, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Geeta Saar

I've removed the speedy tag from the above article because I think at this point it would be best to send it to AfD. That way, if consensus holds that it should be deleted, it can be better protected from re-creation. Kafziel ^Talk 16:32, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I know (it's also been deleted twice under a slightly different name). But speedy deletions aren't as binding as AfDs are; if it goes through AfD, it can't get put up again. I'll salt the page and everything. Kafziel ^Talk 00:05, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your comment on the deletion for Geeta Saar about things not being "notable outside India". Do you really mean to say that wikipedia (or en.wikipedia) is some kind of globally relevant repository with some arbitrary and undefined threshold for inclusion? I must have missed that while I was reading about some little detail about something that otherwise would never be considerd notable. Savyasaachi 18:19, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for not cutting the insert on the Christ from the Christian Science perspective. I'm working on making it shorter. But I think it offers valuable insights into the nature of the Christ.Simplywater 06:28, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Cat (Founders)

Hi. Thanks for jumping in with both feet in my new cat. I left a note on the cat talk page re fixing the sort order if you care to. Also, please take a look, if you have not already, at my summary of the cat. There are a couple of yours that I am not sure of but that is not really a problem for now, we can talk about that later. I just wanted to be sure that you had read my intro blurb in the cat. Thanks again. Really. --Justanother 20:09, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Besm ِِAlRa7man

Hi Zazaban,

We can use yahoo for this discussion, spare space for the Islam page and maybe u would like to cut the second redundant question and paste it on yahoo messenger for me. I'm wessamabraham@yahoo —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wessam Abraham (talk • contribs) 20:17, 19 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Such a noob, get ready for some spam ...216.99.59.188 03:02, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on Jainism Edit

Legalese 18:12, 20 March 2007 (UTC)CC from the Jainism Discussion page, Can we please discuss on this. thanks "Diwali is celebrated by a lot of jains in a spiritual way by observing fasts or having celebrations in temples because it happens to be the "nirvana day" of the 24th Tirthankar Shree Mahavir" User zazaban found this strange? Views, and comments from others please...and Zazaban, please explain what did you find "strange" here?[reply]

Talk:Muhammad

Removal of other user's Talk page comments, except in certain rare and specific instances is vandalism. Please refrain from doing so, unless you can cite the specific policy which you are using. Wjhonson 06:59, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Invader Zim

Welcome to the Invader Zim WikiProject. Thanks for joining up ●BillPP ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:BHW.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:BHW.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 21:24, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IQ

Hi Zazaban, why did you remove the Arthur Jensen quotes from the IQ article? Aelffin 12:00, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Zephead999

He's violated 3RR on My Chemical Romance (as you've seen) and soon-will (if he hasn't by the time I finish this) violate it on Led Zeppelin, so I was wondering if you've already reported him or not or if you don't intend on doing it. Bsroiaadn^Talk 19:13, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks. Bsroiaadn^Talk 19:27, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hip hop music

I don't disagree that there are probably mistakes in the article -- and it's definitely not my speciality -- but it would be much more helpful if you could list some of your issues on the Talk:Hip hop music page. Otherwise, it really doesn't help us know what needs to be fixed. I'd appreciate it if you can give us some detail -- thanks! bikeable (talk) 02:45, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great -- thanks. Feel free to fix 'em, too -- that article needs all the help it can get. (Note that there is a discussion about a possible article merger on Talk:Hip hop.) bikeable (talk) 02:50, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Smile!

WarthogDemon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

-WarthogDemon 06:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About your revision to Invader Zim

Dib stated that a long time ago, cards and candy were passed out on Valentine's Day in episode 20, called "Tak, the Hideous New Girl". And if you really thought I had no proof, you didn't have to get so snappish-- and why exactly did you ask who I am? I also find it inconsiderate that instead of merely putting "citation needed", you reverted my edit and told me I had no proof.

Well, here's proof: http://www.buzzyworld.com/zim/archives/foodlist.html

Look for the word "candy" and you'll see that quote. If you don't trust this source, then I don't know what else to say, but even if you don't agree with this source, let's just end this, and I resolve not to put up any more revisions that don't have immediately accessible proof.

68.164.59.136 14:59, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nepal

I got rid of the anon IP additions of nightstalking midgets, but it looks like I missed some of the unicorn references - thanks for the catch. Acroterion _(talk) 20:51, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Putting Holes in Happiness

I'll see what I can do, preferably ASAP after the article is deleted. If you don't know how to request protection, or semi-protection, you can check out guidelines here. Elenseel 21:24, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nine Inch Nails, man

As a oft contributor to many music-related articles, I thought you might be interested to know that Nine Inch Nails page is up for Featured Article nomination. So, I'd appreciated it if you'd take a gander at the article and post your comments at the article's nom page. And maybe a Pass/Support vote if you feel strongly one way or the other. Thanks! Drewcifer 00:02, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed that you put the album covers back onto the NIN page. Please take a look at the NIN FAC nom page (towards the bottom). The album covers have to go, since they are merely decorative. Thanks! Drewcifer 00:41, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MCR: Emo?

I realise that my edit may have been out of hand and although I think my post was perfectly fair and articulate, I suppose it could be considered something that should be deleted. I don't want to flame or anything, as I hope you saw in my post in the MCR talk page, but for some reason it really frustrates me that MCR is not defined as emo. I feel like this is entirely fueled by weasel words in an attempt by people who like MCR to feel better about it. I think that a band that has "Alternative Rock" and "Disputed Subgenres" as its genres is screaming weasel words. Credit where credit is due, it is mentioned that they are described as being emo in the article. One thing that I don't understand is that if Gerard Way Himself said that they are in fact emo, why MCR fans still refuse to admit it. It frustrates me to no end! I feel like the article is biased toward one side, without regard to reason. I anticipate that you will probably simply spit back out something like $Apollwasdone.Averdictwasreached.Haha.$ This is regrettable, but I am starting to see the squeaky wheel is getting the grease, so to speak, and that I am not in a position to oppose that at this point. So I hope that you will consider what I've said and reply with something that's not brusque or unintelligeable, but that addresses my concerns.

Ultimately I see MCR as something that is piggybacking on other genres and bands too look cooler. I mean I even saw someone in the talk page say they were influenced by Pink Floyd. That's just a disgrace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.54.28.201 (talk) 23:22, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: Zephead999

I've turfed some of Zephead's trolling under his new name. I've been editing Wikipedia (both logged and unlogged) for 2 years and he is undoubtably one of the worst parasites to ever hit the edit button. I will credit him one thing... he never changes his modus operandi and therefore makes it easy to tag, easy to report and easy to get blocked. I rejected my username a long time ago because I prefer the "purity" of anonymous editing. The negative of that is that any reports to WP:ANI, WP:AiV, WP:3RR... etc sometimes get ignored by anti-anon admins(there are a few... unfortunately) If you want you can compile a report to WP:RCU to link 'Zephead' to 'Shutup' who are all, ultimately User:Dragong4/User:Zabrak + a few more blocked accounts. It's come to the point where a Community Sanction is going to be needed to permanently remove him forever. Fingers crossed that it happens soon. Good luck and have a nice day! 156.34.230.90 21:43, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS In case you hadn't noticed... Duff man2007 (talk · contribs) is also Zephead999. 156.34.230.90 21:45, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Panic! at the Disco

First of all, you should not remove vandalism warnings from your talk page. That could get you blocked. And it is vandalism because you are removing valid sourced statements. That is definitely considered vandalism and will get you blocked. Tim Y (talk) 23:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how you are trying to improve the article in question. You are removing sourced content which should never be removed unless its sourced to sites like MySpace or some kind of forum with original research. I am not threatening to get you blocked. I'm just warning you that you will be blocked if you don't stop removing sourced content. It is not doubtful and not harmful to the page or to anything at all. It is vandalism and if it doesn't stop, you will be blocked. Tim Y (talk) 23:24, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Scarecrow Society

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

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Blowdart | ^talk 20:47, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Iranian Woman/Model

Greetings, Zazaban. In the talk page for, you and someone who didn't sign their post stated that the woman depicted is swedish, or half-swedish. I was thinking--Could it be Nadia Björlin? She's half swedish, half Iranian. I searched through her gallery looking for that image, and I searched the site that the user who uploaded it cited, but I could not find the image. However, she's the only model I could come up with that is partly swedish who also might be dressed up in traditional iranian dress. And there is a resemblance, although it's hard to tell. Tell me what you think. Basilides 21:35, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa, that was at least a year ago... Zazaban 22:37, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose so. I just noticed it, sorry. Doesn't mean it might need to be dealt with, right? Doesn't the image need a URL or something? Sorry, I'm new here. Basilides 23:10, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Punk (movement) vs. Punk Rock (genre/style)

Thank you for articulating that on your last Sex Pistols edit, that was my next response and you saved me the trouble. Cheers, Ian Rose 05:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NIN WikiProject

I'd like to invite you to join the newly-formed Nine Inch Nails WikiProject. There's alot of NIN-related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help me get this project of the ground and a few Nine Inch Nails pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks! Drewcifer 10:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

slightly POV

1. do they not predict greatly expanded powers?

2. can Wikipedia claim as a fact that "scientific imperialism" was a flaw of Enlightment Humanism?

Please tell me what exactly you find objectionable, or revert yourself. You may not have liked my edit summaries but that's nothing to do with the merits of my edits. Regards, --Bernard Marx (talk) 23:33, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vampirefreaks.com

If you're not great at writing articles, then I suggest the following: (a) leave it alone unless and until you can find sources that make it possible to write a proper article; (b) when you have found sources, take your time, and write a full version of the article in a draft page such as User:Zazaban/draft before moving it to the mainspace; (c) get others to help you. Writing poor-quality versions of already-deleted articles is just going to result in them being speedily deleted, which helps nobody and just wastes your time. Regards, Bencherlite ^Talk 01:50, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invader ZIM

Hi! I just wanted to comment on you reverting the see also section on the page. The problem is, only the "vehicles in Invader ZIM" section was really in that section, as the other links have already been used. I thought that article should be either integrated into this one. Also, I wanted to ask you if you wanted to help get a consensus vote on whether or not to move the whole thing over to [Invader ZIM], as an admin. has said he'll approve if there's a consensus that that would be appropriate and not breaking Mos. :)Leslie Granger (talk) 03:00, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, but the admin. said he'd ignore MoS if we reached a consensus.Leslie Granger (talk) 21:29, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing of My Chem page

Hi Zaraban. I added a link to the MCR community on Buzznet, which contains content that the band contributed to and thousands of photos and fan discussion. Why did you take it down? They point to their Buzznet page on their website/MySpace. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smogqueen (talk • contribs) 04:01, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

my article

hey dude why the hell did you move my article dude. I didnt tell you to that dude. Thats my property you dumbass —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phoenix X91 (talk • contribs) 00:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stop!

Please stop redirecting The ultimate badass‎ as you are removing the speedy deletion tag, and that is an act of vandalism. If you do not stop you may be blocked. Thank you. Tiptoety (talk) 01:12, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you for your apology. It was just making it very hard to get things done when you and other users were in a revert war, and users were continually removing the speedy deletion tag. Cheers! Tiptoety (talk) 01:23, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchist task force

Anarchism taskforce has started to collaborate on anarchism-related articles; get a few up to GA status, create needed articles a la Dyer Lum, save worthy articles from deletion, and hopefully to have it serve as a central point to discuss what to do with all the splits from Anarchism over the years, to keep the clusterfuck of pov-warring in check, and to keep Talk:Anarchism free from all the usual meta-argumentation. Look forward to seeing you around, regards. Lord Metroid (talk) 03:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, didn't notice you has already taken the oppertunity to become a member. Lord Metroid (talk) 03:59, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About time that she is banned from the forum. Lord Metroid (talk) 10:49, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing talk pages

I understand your desire to remove the rambling nonsense from Talk:Übermensch, but it is just a talk page, and it is someone else's contribution to the talk page. I have found that there are a lot of crazy people interested in Nietzsche, and I wonder how much is really lost by ignoring them. The alternative is to engage them. Why not save your energy for the actual article? Also, I find it rather unseemly to delete other people's posts: they've got a right to their crazy. RJC ^Talk 04:00, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Holocaust and creation of Israel

I know i put in talk page about the holocaust you will give me another warning but if u can tell me where is the relation between holocaust and creation the state of Israel is mentioned. the expulsion of Arabs from there land such things. Thanks --Faraz Ahmad (talk) 09:31, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re Image:Moe Rich Baq+035-1.jpg

Let's do a run through. Starting at the image description page, one assumes that the photographer has a copyright. Just to double-check, I look at the terms of service linked at the bottom of the page and find the expected "By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive licence to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services", which basically means Google has the same rights as the photographer. A glance at the bottom of the image description page shows a "©2007 Google", so Google isn't giving the image a free license and the only chance is if the photographer does so. There's nothing on the image description page about a free license, so I check the photographer's page, and see nothing relevant. If there is no explicit statement relicensing an image, one must assume the photographer retains full rights. The image is not under a free license, though you can claim fair use if you want. If no license is specified, the image will be deleted. Hopefully that helps in the process of evaluating images on third-party sites. Banyan Tree 16:00, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming islands in Severnaya Zemlya

Zazaban, it was true that there was a request to rename certain islands in Severnaya Zemlya. Links in English are hard to come by. But there are many in Russian. The last motion was rejected. But the question may be be raised again and again in the future. here is an official Russian link in English: [4] So I think that the items mentioning the requests (and the probable future names) should be restored.Mohonu (talk) 03:19, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are right that it was highly POV. Note that at your suggestion I also removed the "in honor of" and replaced it by "after". At any rate all this has been helpful to find the true date of the renaming as "Severnaya Zemlya" by the Soviet Presidium, which is 1926 and not 1928.Mohonu (talk) 06:08, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Jerry Beck Nicktoons book

Hey, I haven't looked at the Zim section, but I bet it at least has some stuff about the development of the series and the main character. If you want you can get the book and use it as a source! WhisperToMe (talk) 01:23, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

is Republic of Lakotah a micronation?

If not, why not? I don't understand the criteria, but as I understand it there's only reliable documentation of there being a few citizens (the eight in the delegation; Russell Means' claim of 77 elders and 13,000 Lakota, while intriguing, are entirely unverified) --Stlemur (talk) 01:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

muhammad

I am just curious, do you think the article as it stands is wrong then? It says "Aisha was six or seven years old when betrothed to Muhammad. She stayed in her parents' home until the age of nine, when the marriage was consummated." and gives the sources:-

   * Francis E. Peters, Islam, a Guide for Jews and Christians, p.83
   * Barlas(2002), p.125-126
   * Watt, Aisha, Encyclopedia of Islam Online

could you possibly enable email?

Hi Zazaban, I would like to email you about an article. Could you possibly go into your 'preferences' at the top right of the screen and specify an email address that people can use for wikipedia mails? Merkinsmum 00:36, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit dispute on Kardashev scale

In the last month or so there's been a edit dispute on the article, about what it is, who it was meant for, where the article needs to go, whether it needs to be split. Not of lot of people work on it, so there's very few people deciding these issues. I was wondering if you could take a look at the article, it's history, and talk page and put your two cents in at the bottom of the Talk:Kardashev scale page. If you could, it'd be really helpful. THX--Sparkygravity (talk) 22:48, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

God...

Man, Muhammad is just getting nuts. Is it just me, or is that guy seriously not making any damn sense? Jmlk 1 7 04:02, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now it's your fault! [5] :) Jmlk 1 7 04:28, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Muhammad#NOTICE_about_image_discussion

I've created this initiative (and notice new banner at top of talk page) so that we will remove any sections below the one I just linked and add them to Talk:Muhammad/images to begin to clear up that page and maybe stop some of this madness. I did this boldly since nothing else was really being done and I hope you will support it. Feel free to keep up your work on /images but I think it is a problem that Talk:Muhammad was becoming more of a political discussion forum than an article talk page. Thank you. gren グレン 22:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

VampireFreaks link

Please stop adding the link. There is nothing "official" about it, and it does not qualify as a reliable source. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:44, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you add the link again, you will be blocked. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:00, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not make WP:POINT edits like this one. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:29, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Zazaban/archive2