User talk:Naaman Brown

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place   on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Dr Debug (Talk) 20:47, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Ed Gein article
I left a new comment at the Ed Gein article in relation to last name pronunciation. Cyberman (talk) 13:10, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Question re: other accounts
Hello. There are quite a few related accounts being used improperly at the John Lott article and a handful of others. Could I ask you to clarify whether you have any relationship to any of the following accounts which would violate our sockpuppetry and proxy-editing policies: If you prefer to discuss this more privately, feel free to email me. If you're not connected, then I apologize for bothering you with the question, but I'm just working on matching up our technical evidence with the articles' editing histories. Thanks. MastCell Talk 18:40, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I do realize that sockpuppetry and accusations of sockpuppetry have plagued the Lott article. My full name is Carl Naaman Brown. I am a retired computer typesetter in Kingsport, Tennessee.

At Wikipedia, I have used only the user name Naaman Brown (there may be a few minor edits under the IP number I am using now. I have not discussed or consulted with anyone on my WP edits or my research leading up to any edits.

I personally know no one using user names Serenity, Serinity, Researcher33, ProudOneX, LuckyBowler, Oldlawprof, BobH63, TomSH81, ThomasWinter, or Youngturk2. My WP edits on John Lott have been based on my own research from both published sources and my personal knowledge about guns and crime.

I have posted on hobby interests that I have read and researched about: WWII, battleships, movies, and of course gun control, among others.

My interest in the controversy around John Lott was stimulated when TimLambert challenged me on TheHighRoad internet forum in Mar 2006. My previous reading on gun politics had peaked during the era of Don Kates Restricting Handguns: The Liberal Skeptics Speak Out 1979 and James Wright, Peter Rossi and Kathleen Daly Under the Gun 1983. Starting 2006 I downloaded much of the later discussions of guns and crime (Kleck & Gertz 1995, Lott & Mustard 1997, etc). I did e-mail Jim Lindgren, Julian Sanchez and the editor of an economics journal in 2006-2007 on issues related to the Lott controversy.

Any edits I have made to the WP Lott article have been based on my studies over the past few years and the edits have not been discussed with anyone. I will take full credit or full blame for anything I have posted. From 1981 to 1994 I was disignated by the editor as the staff Scriptomaniac of the Upper East Tennessee Mensa newsletter Nexus and am no stranger to controversies. Naaman Brown (talk) 01:23, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that detailed response. I apologize for being so nosy, and I appreciate your forthrightness. I hope you understand why I asked the direct question. Happy editing. MastCell Talk 05:48, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Quotes that influenced me as a teenager

 * "`He that is born to be a man,' says Wieland in his Peregrinus Proteus, `should nor can be anything nobler, greater, or better than a man.' The fact is, that in efforts to soar above our nature, we invariably fall below it. Your reformist demigods are merely devils turned inside out."--Edgar Allan Poe in Marginalia


 * "Once an argument has been classed as `positional,' it is regarded as having been demolished, since the `position' attributed to it is always selected with a perjorative intent. The choice of the position selected is an expression of the personal antipathies of the individual critic, and the same arguments can therefore be attributed to any one of a variety of `positions,' according to what comes most readily to the critic's hand. The wealth of variations afforded by such tactics is well exemplified by the variety of classifications to which I have myself been subjected. On my religious `position' I have been classified as a Protestant, a Catholic, an anti-Semite and as a typical Jew; politically, as a Liberal, a Fascist, a (Nazi) and a Conservative; and on my theoretical `position,' as a Platonist, a Neo-Augustinian, a Thomist, a disciple of Hegel, an existentialist, a historical relativist and an empirical skeptick; in recent years the suspicion has frequently been voiced that I am a Christian. All these classifications have been made by university professors and people with academic degrees." --Eric Voegelin in Freedom and Serfdom: An Anthology of Western Thought, edited by Alber Humold. (D. Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland, 1961), p. 280.


 * "... men have to find their own way, to make their own mistakes. There can't be any gift of perfection from outside ourselves. And when men seek such perfection... they find only death... fire... loss... disillusionment... the end of everything that's gone forward. Men have always sought an end to the toil and misery, but it can't be given, it has to be achieved. There is hope, but it has to come from inside, from Man himself."" --Peter Graves in It Conquered the World (Roger Corman film, 1956)


 * Do they influence you now?  I suspect you are no longer a teenager.   Suggest a title change at a minimum.--74.107.74.39 (talk) 02:03, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes. :( Confirmed. No. Naaman Brown (talk) 07:30, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

M4 Survival Rifle
Hey there! Do you have sources for those numbers? I found similar ones on various forums, but I'm looking for a copy of the old Army Ordinance manual for verification. – PranksterTurtle (talk) 13:38, 6 April 2009 (UTC) I have hand written notes re M4 from when I researched the AR7 and M6 Scout years ago, but my references are in chaos: I have moved twice and not completely unpacked both times. At hand right now Numrich Gun Parts catalog #27, page 1027 M4 Survival Rifle, has a list of parts and a short history confirming my notes, for what that is worth. (Numrich appeared to have most M4 parts except the barrels.) Although USAF was US Army Air at the time the M4 was developed, I suspect any ref manuals will be US Air Force. Naaman Brown (talk) 14:01, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Just replied to your comment at
Gun politics in the United Kingdom. ChrisPer (talk) 11:37, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Response to reply to comment at Talk:Gun_politics_in_the_United_Kingdom left 26 May 2009.

Talkback
—Ed (Talk • Say no to drama) 07:13, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
—Ed (Talk • Contribs) 17:44, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Carcano '91
Thanks for your appreciation of the Carcano '91, and I apologize for my delay in reply, delay because I only occasionally log into the .en 'pedia. I guess you have noticed that I'm enrolled in the wikimilitary project, so I can say about the FMJ bullet of the '91/38 whose was perhaps the mainstay of the well-known lack of preparadness of Italian army in WWII, whose I'm sure you understand fully (I have talked also with the few conscripts whose have the '91/38 as service rifles, mainly post-war, and they always are/was of the opinion that things in North africa and elsewhere will be much more dignified if the switch between the two marks was at least partially done); also, You say you do bear hunt, so I guess that you hunt in wooded or semi-wooded areas, perhaps hilly (that is, like the 90% or so of Italy's non-urban areas) so you can guess the how's and why's of Italians preferring precise, medium-range weapons. Again, thanks for your comment, and Buona Caccia ! (this is "good hunt ! in Italian :) ) dott.Piergiorgio (talk) 15:18, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Trivial, but
Note to self mostly: I post from the US EST timezone, and timestamps in history are universal GMT four hours "later".

Speedy deletion nomination of Spontaneous Combustion (bluerock band)
A tag has been placed on Spontaneous Combustion (bluerock band) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. noq (talk) 20:30, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

06:12, 15 September 2009 Cunard (removed speedy, the sources added by Malcolmxl5 prove that  this band passes WP:BAND)

Original Research and Verifiable Reliable Sources (OR, V, RS) also SPA, URL cite needed, etc.
Talk:Springfield Armory M6 Scout == Barrel length == Barrel length on my factory Springfield M6 Scout is very close to 18 inches exact: less than 1/16 inch over 18 inches. It is certainly shorter than 18.25 inch. User:Naaman Brown 15:09, 6 April 2009 (UTC) :Actually, my Blue Book of Gun Values lists it as 18 1/2 inches. Most measurements provided by manufacturers are approximate, but what matters here is what's verifiable. Your measurement is a single sample, which might be shorter than typical, or your means of measurement might be flawed. At any rate, it's considered original research, and not usable as a reference. User: Fluzwup 15:25, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I know it is the rules and Fluzwup is following protocol but with all due respect, I find this amusing. Am I to believe that the Springfield Armory brand M6 Scout barrel is 18.25 inch (or is it 18 1/2 inch) because citable published sources say so even though direct measurement shows far less than 18 1/16 inch? Factory tolerances do not vary by more than a few thousandths, and commercial yardsticks are certainly not off by one quarter to one half inch out of eighteen. It's not just my M6 Scout: measurement of a Springfield Armory M6 Scout at my local dealer matches my factory original, just a hair over 18 inches. Not 18.25 inches, not 18 1/2 inches but closer to 18 1/32 inches using the official ATF guidelines for measuring barrel length. I consider the two actual guns more verifiable and reliable than published sources which contradict physical evidence.

Heaven forbid that someone take the Blue Book of Gun Values barrel length seriously, recrown a damaged M6 muzzle, remove more than 1/32 inch and get caught by ATF, because ATF goes by physical measurements, not by published sources, and ATF takes their original research seriously. (added 03:46, 18 September 2009 Naaman Brown) Actually, the reaction of ATF would depend on circumstances: if you contacted an ATF compliance inspector over a short barrel shotgun, he or she would recommend immediately giving the barrel to a gunsmith to add a permanent extension to legal length (OR: I know this from an individual who bought a surplus shotgun at a police auction and discovered it was described as 18" but actually shorter); if an ATF enforcement agent got an allegation you had a SBS, it could justify breaking your backdoor down with a battering ram between sundown and 10:00pm at night (ATF's idea of "knock service, daytime search").Naaman Brown (talk) 13:08, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Why are SPAs semi-automatically challenged on controversial subjects?
An edit was made to the Ken Ballew Raid article started by me: (cur | prev) 00:28, 21 March 2010 67.224.67.222 (talk) (17,670 bytes) (Incorrect place name - it is    "Silver Spring, Maryland", not "Silver Springs".) (undo) It is amazing how an editor (me) can cut-and-paste a quote from a court document naming Silver Spring, Maryland and still type Silver Springs in the lede. Or maybe not: Revision history of Silver Springs, Maryland (redirect) (cur | prev) 12:22, 23 August 2004 Tcr25 (talk | contribs) m (set up redirect to Silver Spring, Maryland) The repetition of common errors like "Silver Springs" for "Silver Spring" undermines the credibility of WP as a source (even if x numbers of newspapers and magazine articles out of a total of y make the same mistake, the goal of Wikipedia is to be a reliable resource even tho' relying on fallible editors). I wanted to offer a belated thanks for correcting my brain fart, but IP 67.224.67.222 turns out to be a Single Purpose Account (SPA) with one (correct) edit to a controversial subject. Isn't that an automatic red flag? Dread SPA on a controversy? Naaman Brown (talk) 13:08, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Cite Needed (URL please)
Back in the 1950s and 1960s, I did library research on various subjects (telescopy, astronomy, microscopy, Poe, Bradbury, gun control, etc.) by using the public library's copy of Readers Guide to Periodical Literature and its extensive collection of periodical literature--loose current issues boxed, and bound volumes by year going back to the 1920s. Many WP editors like to challenge anything that cannot be found through Google and cited with a URL. There are research resources beyond the Internet, a galaxy of knowledge without a citable URL, and facts that cannot be found through Goggle. Naaman Brown (talk) 13:08, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

National Firearms Act and the Hughes Amendment
I have been editing NFA articles to bring the terminology in line with that officially used by the ATF. "NFA firearm" not Title II weapon, "Class 2 license" not Class-II, attempting to clarify a cloudy issue.

I felt like making this comment in Talk, but felt it was too much like editorializing, so I have made it here instead:

Between 1934 and 1986 there were approx. 128,000 machine guns entered in the NFA Registry as eligible for transfer to civilian owners. By all accounts, criminal involvement of registered NFA machine guns has been practically non-existant; perhaps five or six deaths, only one criminal homicide (murder) and that by a police officer with a private registered MG. Machine guns recovered from crime in the 1980s were illegal: smuggled in with drugs, stolen or bribed from military or police, or illegally manufactured. The response of the 1986 Hughes Amendment to the problem of illegal machine guns, to outlaw future legal registrations, did not solve the problem of illegal machineguns but has entrenched opposition to future gun control measures. It is like banning legal drugs because you cannot control illegal drugs, or trying to control prostitution by putting a freeze on marriage licenses. Some gun control advocates have pointed to the NFA as a successful gun control law: a lawabiding citizen could legally register a machinegun and there was no criminal use of the registered guns. What could a gun owner object to, besides the inconvenience and expense of the NFA registration process? Well, the Hughes Amendment demonstrates that acceptance of registration leads eventually to bans. Laws like the Hughes Amendment do little to address the illicit traffic in small arms by gun runners, but they do trigger knee-jerk reaction by gun owners against gun control proposals in general.

All this could be cited with verifiable sources (Kates, Kleck, Wright, etc.) but I don't see how it could be done without being editorializing anyway. Naaman Brown (talk) 12:59, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

edit wars over UK specific word use
In many parts of the world, "petrol" is applied to petroleum products in general while "gasoline" is a specific product. UK uses "parafin" to name what is known in the US as "kerosene"; in the US "parafin" is a solid wax used for candles. The Haynes automotive manuals contain a glossary to disambiguate terms: the instructions to clean and degrease car parts with parafin can be puzzling if you skip reading the glossary. "Petrol bombs" are often made with used motor oil with a kerosene or fuel oil igniter to stick to armored vehicles and burn generating lingering smoke, not always with gasoline which can be in short supply in wartime. Where German war records indicate corpses were cremated with "petrol", the "petrol" used was waste oil retained when vehicle motor oil was changed. This is an English language encyclopedia not a UK/British specific encyclopedia and we do have visitors who read English who are not British. Or should we do like the Haynes manual and include a glossary. Naaman Brown (talk) 13:07, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

ASCII chart
Plugging my veascii.com chart in here to test the screen font. ┌───┤ANSI ASCII and PC Screen Char├─┐ │  0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F │ │32  ! " # $ % & '  * +, - . / 2 │48 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 : ; < = > ? 3 │64 @ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O 4 │80 P Q R S T U V W X Y Z [ \ ] ^ _ 5 │96 ` a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o 6 112 p q r s t u v w x y z { | } ~ ⌂ 7 128 Ç ü é â ä à å ç ê ë è ï î ì Ä Å 8 144 É æ Æ ô ö ò û ù ÿ Ö Ü ¢ £ ¥ ₧ ƒ 9 160 á í ó ú ñ Ñ ª º ¿ ⌐ ¬ ½ ¼ ¡ « » A 176 ░ ▒ ▓ │ ┤ ╡ ╢ ╖ ╕ ╣ ║ ╗ ╝ ╜ ╛ ┐ B 192 └ ┴ ┬ ├ ─ ┼ ╞ ╟ ╚ ╔ ╩ ╦ ╠ ═ ╬ ╧ C 208 ╨ ╤ ╥ ╙ ╘ ╒ ╓ ╫ ╪ ┘ ┌ █ ▄ ▌ ▐ ▀ D 224 α ß Γ π Σ σ µ τ Φ Θ Ω δ ∞ φ ε ∩ E 240 ≡ ± ≥ ≤ ⌠ ⌡ ÷ ≈ ° ∙ · √ ⁿ ² ■   F └───0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5─┘  ┌───┤ANSI ASCII and PC Screen Char├─┐ │   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F │ │32   ! " # $ % & '  * + , -. / 2 │48 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 : ; < = > ? 3 │64 @ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O 4 │80 P Q R S T U V W X Y Z [ \ ] ^ _ 5 │96 ` a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o 6 112 p q r s t u v w x y z { | } ~ ⌂ 7 128 Ç ü é â ä à å ç ê ë è ï î ì Ä Å 8 144 É æ Æ ô ö ò û ù ÿ Ö Ü ¢ £ ¥ ₧ ƒ 9 160 á í ó ú ñ Ñ ª º ¿ ⌐ ¬ ½ ¼ ¡ « » A 176 ░ ▒ ▓ │ ┤ ╡ ╢ ╖ ╕ ╣ ║ ╗ ╝ ╜ ╛ ┐ B 192 └ ┴ ┬ ├ ─ ┼ ╞ ╟ ╚ ╔ ╩ ╦ ╠ ═ ╬ ╧ C 208 ╨ ╤ ╥ ╙ ╘ ╒ ╓ ╫ ╪ ┘ ┌ █ ▄ ▌ ▐ ▀ D 224 α ß Γ π Σ σ µ τ Φ Θ Ω δ ∞ φ ε ∩ E 240 ≡ ± ≥ ≤ ⌠ ⌡ ÷ ≈ ° ∙ · √ ⁿ ² ■  F └───0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5─┘ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.232.95.125 (talk) 12:24, 26 October 2009 (UTC) oops that was me, talking to myself. again. my grandson accuses me of having old timer's disease.

Ed Gein
Thanks for your contributions from the Gollmar book! The article really needs some sound sources. -- Sift &amp;  Winnow  15:49, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

PCX format
Hello Naaman, I was the last person to do a major edit to the PCX page and I've been responding to your questions. Just wanted to say I agree with most of what you say. I'd like to suggest that you change the page as your questions have indicated, I feel that you would produce a better balanced version of the page than me. 83.216.149.7 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:48, 14 December 2009 (UTC).

Killian documents authenticity issues
(When I was staff scriptomaniac for the local Mensa group newspaper, the staff curmudgeon John K. Evans of the San Diego group labelled me a "bleeding heart liberal"; is getting labelled a "right wing vandal" a promotion or demotion?)

I noted these two responses on other subjects at User_talk:Hipocrite to BC aka CallmeBC aka IP 209.6.39.87 (the editor who answered me with insults and insinuations): Er, I'm getting a bit uncomfortable with the obviously banned user talking at me on my talk page.... Hipocrite (talk) 19:10, 10 December 2009 (UTC) ....as an indefinitely blocked user you are restricted to your own talk page. Guy (Help!) 21:53, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Edit summary
Re: this edit summary. HA! Right on both parts... :) --Midnightdreary (talk) 23:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Ruby Ridge

 * Thanks for posting that information on my page. I checked it out and decided to move on: I place several templates whenever I'm reading through wikipedia, and that's bound to make a few people hot under the collar. No sense in begrudging a fellow for his recalcitrance. bwmcmaste (talk) 00:24, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

testing, testing ((formatnum:((Inflation|US|xxxx|year|r=0))))
The first thousand I earned in 1969 would buy what $0 would buy in today's money. I don't know whether to thank or curse the author of that template.

For the sale of his short story "The Colour Out of Space" to Amazing Stories magazine in 1927, H.P. Lovecraft received $25.00 ($0 adjusted for inflation). For his novel At the Mountains of Madness published by Astounding Stories in 1936, Lovecraft had the services of an agent for the first time in his career and was paid $550.00 ($0 adjusted for inflation).

Monthly income for an Old West cowboy was $25 to $40 a month ($0 to $0 adjusted for inflation) and a Colt revolver or Winchester rifle ordered from Sears would cost $12 ($0 adjusted for inflation) in the 1890s. (A cheap .38 pocket revolver in the same catalog could be had for less than $3 ($0 adjusted for inflation).)

Neat template. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Inflation

Snip plain text:  Anslinger stayed in his $18,500 a year ($125,535 in 2007 dollars) position  Using Inflation tool: Anslinger stayed in his $18,500 a year ($0 in 2007) position Anslinger stayed in his $18,500 a year ($0 today) position

(sorry, kid's found a new toy)

Waco Siege Edit
You eliminated the following information, citing undue emphasis for the lede:


 * The siege was directed by William S. Sessions, Director of the FBI, and his two top subordinates, Larry Potts and Floyd Clarke. Sessions was later fired by President Bill Clinton on July 19, 1993 after Sessions refused to resign in the wake of a scathing investigation report by the Justice Department on several ethics violations, which were unrelated to the Waco siege.

I tend to agree with this assessment, however I feel the information needs to be included somewhere in the article. Will you be finding a new place for it? Apostle12 (talk) 17:56, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Mark Fowler and the Fairness Doctrine
Hi Naaman,

I was looking at the article on the Fairness Doctrine and saw a statement that I believe is wrong:

If I read the history correctly, this language was added to the article by you 23:15, 26 January 2010. Mark Fowler opposed the Fairness Doctrine. Did you really mean to use the word: introduced? Thanks, Rosattin (talk) 23:10, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

From the history on Fairness Doctrine, the statement This doctrine was officially introduced in 1981 under the FCC chairman, Mark Fowler. was introduced 17:30, 15 March 2010 by Jacquelinereneelewis without comment.

My edit was 23:15, 26 January 2010 Naaman Brown (See also: Canadian equivalent) adding *Accurate News and Information Act Canadian equivalent

You might want to check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jacquelinereneelewis Naaman Brown (talk) 05:06, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Obviously the procedure I used was wrong. I'll contact Jacquelinereneelewis and also try to determine where I went wrong. Thanks. Rosattin (talk) 08:14, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Waco deletions
Hi

Just to let you know that I have undone the deleted paragraph and moved it

You could of perhaps done this yourself and I wondered if there was a reason that you felt you should not have ?

If you are unwilling to undo other editors edits I fully understand but remember that the wiki policy includes "Be Bold



Chaosdruid (talk) 17:29, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Sometimes I have been brazen in editing; other times, I prefer to discuss changes in Talk before editing. I read WP:Consensus policy as edit with summary in comment, then if there is a conflict, take it to Talk; however, some articles are so radioactive, I feel better to discuss changes in Talk to avoid conflict in the first place. Naaman Brown (talk) 10:44, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

this was in respect to Talk:Waco Siege edits (note here because they get autoarchived) 11:35, 27 May 2010 Naaman Brown (→Weapons section: shudda been moved not removed) 02:55, 27 May 2010 Cappadocian330 (weapons)

waco
Hi

To avoid any possible edit wars, over style for a start, as it is not normal to allow lists such as the list of dead. To try and at least cut down on one problem can you list them in two, or better still three, colums so they do not make the article so long?

thanks Chaosdruid (talk) 20:38, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

table
The table in question was initially inserted by another user, then removed. I feel it does add important information to the article (a) questions constantly come up about the number of dead from the Waco Siege (74, 76, 82, 86, gave all been quoted in the media, (b) putting names on the dead is important, (c) the ethnic origin of each BD is important in a way because those who question the necessity of the deaths are accused of being "Aryan militia" supporting a "white supremacist group" and the diverse ethnicity of the BD certainly is not consustent with a white supremacist group. Ages are important too because many of Vernon Howell's "children" were obviously conceived betfore their mothers met VH. Whether that is too much data for a general encyclopedia article is another issue: perhaps the original editor should have included a link, but then linkable files are not permanent on the internet. 404.

A single column list of 76 lines is a lot of space to take up, mostly right aligned whitespace in the article. On the other hand, tables are not easy to format in any markup language. You have given me an excuse to learn some more Wiki Markup.

Fatalities April 19
In the April 19, 1993 final assault, the Davidian dead included:

(No government agents were wounded or killed.)
 * 1) Katherine Andrade, 24, white, American
 * 2) Chanel Andrade, 1, white, American
 * 3) Jennifer Andrade, 19, white, American
 * 4) George Bennett, 35, black, British
 * 5) Susan Benta, 31, black, British
 * 6) Mary Jean Borst, 49, white, American
 * 7) Pablo Cohen, 38, white, Israeli
 * 8) Abedowalo Davies, 30, black, British
 * 9) Shari Doyle, 18, white, American
 * 10) Beverly Elliot, 30, black, British
 * 11) Yvette Fagan, 32, black, British
 * 12) Doris Fagan, 51, black, British
 * 13) Lisa Marie Farris, 24, white, American
 * 14) Raymond Friesen, 76, white, Canadian
 * 15) Sandra Hardial, 27, black, British
 * 16) Zilla Henry, 55, black, British
 * 17) Vanessa Henry, 19, black, British
 * 18) Phillip Henry, 22, black, British
 * 19) Paulina Henry, 24, black, British
 * 20) Stephen Henry, 26, black, British
 * 21) Diana Henry, 28, black, British
 * 22) Novellette Hipsman, 36, black, Canadian
 * 23) Floyd Houtman, 61, black, American
 * 24) Sherri Jewell, 43, Asian, American
 * 25) David M. Jones, 38, white, American
 * 26) David Koresh, 33, white, American
 * 27) Rachel Koresh, 24, white, American
 * 28) Cyrus Koresh, 8, white, American
 * 29) Star Koresh, 6, white, American
 * 30) Bobbie Lane Koresh, 2, white, American
 * 31) Jeffery Little, 32, white, American
 * 32) Nicole Gent Little, 24, white, Australian, pregnant
 * 33) Dayland Gent, 3, white, American
 * 34) Page Gent, 1, white, American
 * 35) Livingston Malcolm, 26, black, British
 * 36) Diane Martin, 41, black, British
 * 37) Wayne Martin, Sr., 42, black, American
 * 38) Lisa Martin, 13, black, American
 * 39) Sheila Martin, Jr., 15, black, American
 * 40) Anita Martin, 18, black, American
 * 41) Wayne Martin, Jr., 20, black, American
 * 42) Julliete Martinez, 30, Mexican American
 * 43) Crystal Martinez, 3, Mexican American
 * 44) Isaiah Martinez, 4, Mexican American
 * 45) Joseph Martinez, 8, Mexican American
 * 46) Abigail Martinez, 11, Mexican American
 * 47) Audrey Martinez, 13, Mexican American
 * 48) John-Mark McBean, 27, black, British
 * 49) Bernadette Monbelly, 31, black, British
 * 50) Rosemary Morrison, 29, black, British
 * 51) Melissa Morrison, 6, black, British
 * 52) Sonia Murray, 29, black, American
 * 53) Theresa Nobrega, 48, black, British
 * 54) James Riddle, 32, white, American
 * 55) Rebecca Saipaia, 24, Asian, Filipino
 * 56) Steve Schneider, 43, white, American
 * 57) Judy Schneider, 41, white, American
 * 58) Mayanah Schneider, 2, white, American
 * 59) Clifford Sellors, 33, white, British
 * 60) Scott Kojiro Sonobe, 35, Asian, American
 * 61) Floracita Sonobe, 34, Asian, Filipino
 * 62) Gregory Summers, 28, white, American
 * 63) Aisha Gyrfas Summers, 17, white, Australian, pregnant
 * 64) Startle Summers, 1, white, American
 * 65) Lorraine Sylvia, 40, white, American
 * 66) Rachel Sylvia, 12, white, American
 * 67) Hollywood Sylvia, 1, white, American
 * 68) Michelle Jones Thibodeau, 18, white, American
 * 69) Serenity Jones, 4, white, American
 * 70) Chica Jones, 2, white, American
 * 71) Little One Jones, 2, white, American
 * 72) Neal Vaega, 38, Somoan, New Zealander
 * 73) Margarida Vaega, 47, Asian, New Zealander
 * 74) Mark H. Wendell, 40, Asian, American

alternative
or you can use this format


 * Katherine Andrade, 24, white, American
 * Chanel Andrade, 1, white, American
 * Jennifer Andrade, 19, white, American
 * George Bennett, 35, black, British
 * Susan Benta, 31, black, British
 * Mary Jean Borst, 49, white, American
 * Pablo Cohen, 38, white, Israeli
 * Abedowalo Davies, 30, black, British


 * Shari Doyle, 18, white, American
 * Beverly Elliot, 30, black, British
 * Yvette Fagan, 32, black, British
 * Doris Fagan, 51, black, British
 * Lisa Marie Farris, 24, white, American
 * Raymond Friesen, 76, white, Canadian
 * Sandra Hardial, 27, black, British
 * Zilla Henry, 55, black, British


 * Vanessa Henry, 19, black, British
 * Phillip Henry, 22, black, British
 * Paulina Henry, 24, black, British
 * Stephen Henry, 26, black, British
 * Diana Henry, 28, black, British
 * Novellette Hipsman, 36, black, Canadian
 * Floyd Houtman, 61, black, American
 * Sherri Jewell, 43, Asian, American

I prefer that as it doesnt detract from the feel of the article and is quite inobtrusive :¬)

Chaosdruid (talk) 11:28, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Waco list of dead
Hi

Good job m8 - looks much better now

Chaosdruid (talk) 07:41, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Bellesiles
I agree with your edit here. Usually people only notify one when they disagree. You did well. Naaman Brown (talk) 20:28, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I appreciate that kind word.--John Foxe (talk) 20:44, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

New edits on Race and intelligence
Hi, I see you are plunging in with edits on the Race and intelligence article, which was the subject of an Arbitration Committee case (along with related articles) and is still subject to active arbitration sanctions. I look forward to your participation in the clean-up of the article, as I see you are a much more experienced Wikipedian than I am, used to working on articles on controversial subjects. I'll be working on updating source lists for that article and related articles this weekend, and I encourage you to suggest other sources (through comment page on each individual source list) that you are aware of so that I'm up to speed with the best literature on the subject. See you on the articles. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 19:15, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Primarily, my meager contribution on this subject is from my encounter with the 1995 JEL book review of The Bell Curve. I think the problems with that book are: first, it was not submitted to peer review; second, the primary author Herrnstein died leaving the coauthor Murray responsible for explaining problems that would have been caught by a good prepublication vetting; and third, most commentaries were commenting on reactions to the book based on what had been said or written about it. The JEL review was qualified authors who actually read the book, rather than the usual commentators who have read commentary or editorials about it and are reacting to what was said about the book, rather than what was said in the book.

Secondarily and not specific to subject, if I am browsing and encounter footnotes with bracketed number links (no text) that look like this: 11.^ See: [4] PDF. which I see as useless, I often follow the links and edit the footnote to link with blue bibliographic cite style text that looks like this: 11.^ See: Ulric Neisser (Chair) et al. (1996) "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns", American Psychologist, 51(2), pages 77-101. PDF. I do this because (a) links change, such as when a website gets rearranged or the document gets retitled: you can search on author, title, publication and often find a moved article, but a dead link alone is often useless; and (b) it is a PITA to click a link to start a long download then at the end discover you have that document already.


 * Thanks for the tip about footnote editing. What you suggest is indeed more user-friendly. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 03:44, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Domo, Roboto-sama
For your reply to my Haruna comment here, thx.  TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 02:36, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Norternmost terminus of Bays Mountain ridge at Kingsport 2Feb111.JPG
offending photo (taken my me) replaced with one clearly marked Public Domain. Naaman Brown (talk) 20:39, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Your note re: Waco
Hello... thanks for the note. Rest assured, no offence was taken; you made a valid point. Nevertheless, I appreciate that you took the time to follow up. Cheers. --Ckatz chat spy  17:59, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Spontaneous Combustion (bluerock band)


The article Spontaneous Combustion (bluerock band) has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fumitol &#124;talk &#124;cont 03:38, 24 January 2012 (UTC)


 * It looks like the wrong notification template has been used here. The articles has been nominated for deletion at a deletion discussion here. Please make any comments you have about this on that page. Please be aware of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and refrain from arguing about the existence of other articles justifying this one. noq (talk) 15:44, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions notice
Doug Weller talk 14:14, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Naaman Brown!


Happy New Year! Naaman Brown, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Abishe (talk) 14:01, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 14:01, 1 January 2024 (UTC)