User talk:Gamaliel/Archive 5: Difference between revisions

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia.

I saw your comment about Nationmaster on Talk:José Martí. They are known to copy our pages, and are listed on copies of Wikipedia content.

Here's some tips:

• If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
• You can sign your name using three tildes, like ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
• If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.
• If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page.

Other useful pages are: how to edit, how to write a great article, naming conventions, manual of style and the Wikipedia policies.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Angela. 02:52, Feb 18, 2004 (UTC)

Please check your edit to Recent deaths - something of your system mutilates certain characters. I suggest you correct that. --Wik 22:19, Mar 18, 2004 (UTC)

It looks fine on my end, can you be more specific? Gamaliel 22:37, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

See the two changes here? You added a death, and you also changed "Tausky´" to "Tausky´". This is probably a problem with your browser, I've seen this with other people before. --Wik 22:40, Mar 18, 2004 (UTC)

I have no idea how I changed the Tausky. Any ideas? I'm using explorer 5.1 for mac Gamaliel 22:44, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

No idea. Maybe you could test it with another browser. Then again, maybe the mac itself is the problem. --Wik 23:37, Mar 18, 2004 (UTC)

Hey, I have a question, which will perhaps be nonsensical to you :) I notice you made the "Hroswitha" redirect the other day - are you by any chance a quiz bowl player? Adam Bishop 01:41, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

Good (but geeky) catch. I came here after I read that argument on yahoo. I play for USF. You? Gamaliel 07:02, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

UWO for me. Adam Bishop 01:24, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

It's nice to see the double play trio of Tinker, Evers and Chance finally finished. Consider yourself wikipaid (if I can call it that, at one wikidollar a biography... at any rate, thanks). -- Matty j 07:30, Jun 11, 2004 (UTC)

USF!

GO bulls! Nice to meet you!Dominick 02:36, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Van Vechten

Thanks for adding all those Van Vechten photographs! --Larrybob 22:38, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

WikiMoney bounty

I saw that Lst27 claimed your bounty for creating a "substantive" article on the Kinshasa Highway, transferring wikimoney from your account to his/hers. Needless to say, the article is not in the least bit "substantive", and I have transferred the money back, as only the person offering the bounty should be the one awarding it. - snoyes 14:18, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Modesto Cartagena

You insist in erasing my link : For more on Famous Puerto Ricans Click here: List Of Puerto Ricans, from my articule. Do you have something against people having access to that link? Do you have something against Puerto Ricans? It seems that you have a problem with me, what's up? Stop vandalizing my page and lets get along O.K? User: Marine 69-71

I have no problem with you, I have no idea who you are nor do I recall reading any of your contributions. I have no problem with Puerto Ricans, as I am Latino myself. I resent the ugly implication that I am racist and I'll thank you not to make that again. It is not "your page", it is an article on wikipedia and I edited it with no ulterior or personal motives. I feel that links that say things like "to learn more about topic x see y" sound juvenile, more like an afterschool special than a professional encylopedia. And I don't see the need to link to "list of puerto ricans" from every article about a Puerto Rican, if people want to learn about them they'll look it up themselves. I also deleted several links to "list of movie directors" from some movie articles. Am I biased against movie directors too? Gamaliel 04:20, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for answering. I respect your opinion but, remember it's your opinion. I wrote the articule for the enjoyment of everyone and I do believe that everybody has a right to learn about what other people of my nationality have done, with my link. This not a school thing, but an opertunity for others to link into another site for educational purposes. Like you said, this is a professional encyclopedia, but one that is a computor encyclopedia where links, internal and external are permitted. So, come on let it go and let's be cool about it, O.K?

User: Marine 69-71

I was being cool about it until you accused me of being a racist and I will be cool about it again when you apologize. Gamaliel 04:47, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Let's understand each other, I did not say you were racist. I know your interest in Modesto Cartagena so, the racist part goes out the window. I just did't understand your editing the link to other Famous Puerto Ricans. According to a Wikipedian Administrator 90% of the their have ==See Also== links. So, do you want to call it a truce? [User:Marine 69-71]]

I have no personal interest the article or you, one way or the other. If you had a question about my changes or did not understand why I made them, all you had to do was ask. But you said "do you have something against Puerto Ricans?" on both my talk page and the edit history, insinuating in a very public way that I was racist or I had racist motivations in making those changes, something I consider an offensive personal attack. I have no interest in prolonging any sort of unpleasantness, but unless you apologize on the talk page of that article for your public insinuation, I do not consider this matter closed. Gamaliel 05:10, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I have nothing to apologize about never have, never will. If you don't want to put an end to the matter well then, that's your problem. I tried.

User: Marine 69-71

You did not try. You don't forge a truce just by announcing one. You find common ground. You made no effort to find common ground or compromise, you simply ignored your hurtful insinuations and declared an end to a disagreement you started with no effort to address why it started. Gamaliel 05:51, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Having a link to List of Puerto Ricans under a ==See also== section near the bottom of an article about a Puerto Rican, makes perfect sense to me. If and when a category called category:Puerto Ricans gets created, then that link will get replaced. --mav 04:56, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

It seems silly to me to go around putting links like that below every article when we have categories for precisely that reason. Maybe I'll go ahead and create that category and get it over with. Gamaliel 05:16, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Behold, the already extant Category:Puerto Rican people! Tregoweth 22:48, Jul 15, 2004 (UTC)

John Kerry: 1971 meeting section

It's NOT an "irrelevancy" and you are PROVING your BIAS by saying that!==

Rex071404 17:17, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

By the way, I am guessing that you are trying to start an EDIT WAR, so as to get the Kerry page "protected" and thereby lock in your obvious pro-Kerry censorship!

Rex071404 17:20, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Here is my post (which YOU keep removing!): {deleted five paragraph section and picture which can be seen on the John Kerry page history}

Please calm down. I have no wish to have a fued over this. I do not "keep removing" this. I removed it once entirely once. Others did the same. It was repeatedly restored. Apparently the consensus is that some version of this incident belongs. This does not mean your version or the original version is holy writ. I edited it with an eye towards condensing it. Five paragraphs is not called for, so I revised it into a one paragraph version. You expanded it to four, I culled that down to two. I figured we were working towards a version we both could live with.

I believe this is an irrelevancy, as I would believe it to be an irrelevancy to the career and biography of any politican of any party. A quickly shouted down suggestion at a meeting he may or may not have attended? A suggestion which no one, pro or anti Kerry, claims he ever had any hand in formulating? Who fucking cares? It doesn't deserve one paragraph, much less five. Rant about my supposed bias all you want, this is irrelevant nonsense. And your anti-Kerry bias, with your rants on Talk:John Kerry Catholic priest abuse and the Weathermen, is plain to see.

Oh I see... in your view it's a "fucking" irrelevancy that Kerry was indeed at a meeting where illegal killings were proposed, yet HE NEVER REPORTED IT TO THE POLICE and LIED ABOUT WHEN HE QUIT THE VVAW so as to HIDE the fact that he continued to be associated with VVAW EVEN AFTER KILLING SUGGESTIONS WERE MADE.

If you are so hot on editing sections from John Kerry, why son't you prune some of the exces details concerning his crappy little 4 month tour of duty as a swift boat commander.

You are obsesseds with removing my NYT and other links because it proves that your champion john kerry is a phoney, a liar and outright dangerous. Hmmmm.... excepting that I am not as "wild" as you claim, I might otherwise really post some stuff you don't like

Rex071404 20:03, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

If I wanted an edit war, I would have reverted all your edits. If you want to rant and make wild accusations, do it somewhere else. Gamaliel 17:29, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Your snide comments prove nothing

I am NOT "ranting" and I am not making "accusations", neither at you, nor at Mr. Kerry. As for what you consider "wild", I will tell you that as a child, I loved the book "where the wild things are", but I am gussing you don;t mean that. So then, precisly what are you refrring to as "wild"?...

Rex071404 19:54, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Also, it is indeed you who, without valid cause (and possible pro-Kerry bias), keeps butchering this:

1971 Meeting of Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW)

File:Kerryrally.jpg

John Kerry speaks at an anti-Vietnam War rally.

From November 12-15, 1971, a VVAW meeting was held in Kansas City, Missouri. At this meeting, one of the VVAW activists reportedly made the suggestion that the VVAW members should assassinate various United States politicians (including US Senators) who were in favor of continuing the Vietnam War. According to reports, that statement was immediately shouted down by a large majority.

Over the years, Kerry has at various times, stated that he does not remember attending the meeting in Kansas City, stating instead that he had already resigned from the organization several months earlier, at the St. Louis meeting in July 1971. Some reports place him at the meeting, but none report him participating in the suggestion in any way.

However, as reported in the New York Sun on Mar 12, 2004; Page:1 Kerry's presence at this meeting has been confirmed by several witnesses, even though Senator Kerry has stated that he does not rememeber attending.

Additionally, as late as January 26th, 1972, the New York Times, was still reporting John Kerry as being "a leader of Vietnam Veterans against the War" (NY Times Jan,26th 1972, pg 17)