User talk:Dualldual

Kingdom of Aksum
Even if Aksum was not founded by Sabaeans (which modern scholars no longer think), I still think it should be in some way included in the article since it was formerly so prevalent. Nevertheless, the existence of a Sabaean presence, though in no way dominant, is pretty certain from archaelogical evidence (it's possible that it's simply due to a closeness of cultures, but that is not the common view; I don't know the exact evidence being pointed to). Unless you provide further reasoning for your change, I will revert the text in about 24 hours. Regards

Yom 05:03, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Remember to always sign all of your posts on talk pages. Typing four tildes after your comment ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) will insert a signature showing your username and a date/time stamp, which is very helpful. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 01:20, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Please sign your comments on talk pages! Thanks. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 04:55, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I do not present it as fact. While I think it is incorrect, it was a widely prevalent view in the past, so it should be noted (though not promoted on the page). I don't like the wording of the opposing view ("some scholars contend), as it implies that it is incorrect, but if I were to say that "most scholars reject this view" or something to that effect, everyone else would just revert it because it's not NPOV. If you can find the evidence that most (I have shown just some apparently, and a lot of the links online today are just copies of older works which still hold the old, and, in my opinion, incorrect view) scholars today reject the notion of a Sabaean origin for Aksum, then I will certainly change the text (with pleasure).

With regards to the Sabaean artifacts, they point to a Sabaean presence in Aksum. Not a "presence" meaning "occupation" or any sort of control, but merely that there were some Sabaean "citizens" there. Moreover, the evidence indicates a short stay of these Sabaeans, and it also indicates that they were not dominant (i.e., they were under Aksum's domain or existed in some sort of symbiosis perhaps due to a treaty with Saba). Aksum did indeed take over the Sabaeans in the 2nd century AD, but I believe that the Sabaean "presence" that's being tlaked about dates earlier to BC times; we don't know if D’mt or the Aksumite state controlled Yemen then, although a closeness of cultures and civilizations is evident.

And, as Gyrofrog said, please sign your comments on talk pages. It really makes things easier for everyone.

Yom 21:36, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Tolerance
Hi. I reverted your deletion. First, the sentence relates John Rawls's argument on tolerating the intolerant. Second, the point of the sentence was not that the intolerant don't have the right to complain, but rather even if they give up that right, others can still complain on their behalf. In other words, they do have a right to complain. Vincent 15:07, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Jimi Hendrix
I reverted your deletion. Read my post on the talk page, and stop deleting material that you feel is "superstitious" - if you feel it needs to be cited, say so in the talk page and add a "needs citation" tag to the article. Often you'll find that it's either common knowledge or information that can be found with a very simple google search. DrIdiot 03:52, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

First of all, editing someone's user page is technically vandalism (which you did) - if you want to talk, there's something called the "talk" page, which is self explanatory. If you edit my user page again I'll report it. Secondly, if something isn't cited, deleting chunks of articles is NOT the first step. "Common knowledge" is a very loosely defined term, and to a Jimi Hendrix fan, that may very well be common knowledge. Don't define "common knowledge" as what YOU know. What you should've done is posted in the talk page, asking for a citation (as I said above) or perhaps done a simple google search on "jimi hendrix ancestry" and you would have found your desired results. Your grounds on removing material isn't enough - you could remove half the material on wikipedia on your grounds. DrIdiot 22:10, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

By the way, the broad consensus (everyone except you) is that the material is OK, and you've continued to remove it, and if you don't stop, you're going to get a vandalism warning. We've already established that it was said in a reputable biography. DrIdiot 22:16, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I wanted to let u know that i disagree with Yom's beliefs about the Sabeans pple and how they didnt create Axum, because they did. However, pple only believ in Yom. So please keep on trying to make it a fact that Sabean people.... Since i am also trying —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.197.230.14 (talk • contribs) 22:36, Jul 11, 2006 (UTC).

April 2007
Please do not add content without citing reliable sources, as you did to Dominican Republic. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Jebba 02:57, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Please do not delete content from articles on Wikipedia, as you did to Dominican Republic. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. OK, why don't you add the new info that you think is important without deleting the additional info others have previously added. Thanks. (I'm not surprised your talk page looks like this...) Jebba 03:13, 3 April 2007 (UTC)