User talk:Nigholith/Archive 1

Flying Spaghetti Monster Reversion
WHY ARE YOU CALLING MY BELIEFS A PARODY

listen, any such saying is your opinion! He may have seemed to invent a religion, but it is my beliefs and he found them. Your opinion on a religion must stay out of the fact-containing wikipedia. It may seem popular opinion to you infidels that my practices and beliefs are ludicrous, but they are my beliefs. I will not have wikipedia calling my religion a parody publically on a site that's supposed to conatin factual unbiased evidence. I will continue to change it along with every pastafarian brother I tell this of until your site gives in to allowing the reader to say its a parody rather than being forced your opinions.

I WILL BRING LEGAL ACTION INTO THIS IF YOU DO NOT STOP!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Speshuldusty (talk • contribs) 16:55, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm a devout Pastafarian myself, Speshuldusty :-) And as such, I deal only in facts; Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and as such, many people use it as the foundation of much common knowledge, and Wikipedians must also only deal in fact. Bobby Henderson has publicly said many times the religion is a parody; and I think Justfred said it best in the FSM Article Talk Page Because FSM is an _intentional_ parody. Perhaps that's the word that's missing from the first sentence of this article. As opposed the other religions that are unintentional parodies of themselves.
 * Pastafarianism is a religion of Fact, not a factual religion. Nigholith 17:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

But the founder only made a hidden religion public. We allowed him to expose our secret religion in outrage of the Christians thinking their religion could get sole dominance on the creationism market. The fact that we tell people its a parody is a test of faith. We disuade people from joining our religion so that only those who seek its knowledge out of going against the common opinion are blessed with eternal grace of infinite beer and hookers. We need to put that it is popular opinion that its a parody religion instead. And I will, or I'll IM a fellow pastafarian to do it if you blocked my IP


 * I quote the reply I just added to your post on the FSM Article Talk Page If you really want the article changing, the best way would be to intelligently prove your point on its talk page. Nigholith 17:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Cuban Communist Party Collaborates with Machado in 1933
Massón Sena, Caridad 2004 (accessed 6-9-07) Dos visiones sobre el nacionalismo y las alianzas: Mella y Villena. Centro de Investigación y Desarrollo de la Cultura Cubana “Juan Marinello”. La Habana, Cuba. http://168.96.200.17/ar/libros/cuba/marin/nacion.rtf. “   Según explicara Fabio Grobart a posteriori: “ Esta miopía política se reflejó también en una errónea conclusión que los dirigentes del Partido sacaron, de la justa apreciación de que sustituir a Machado por un gobierno de la oposición burgués-terrateniente significaba dejar a Cuba en su estado de  semicolonia y a las masas populares en la misma miseria y esclavitud y que únicamente un gobierno de trabajadores podía producir los cambios radicales que el país necesitaba /.../Dicha a conclusión fue profundamente falsa por ser mecánica, por no basarse en un análisis correcto del desarrollo dialéctico de la situación y, esencialmente, por no tener en cuenta que las masas revolucionarias, enardecidas por la victoria sobre Machado y orientadas en su acción por una justa política de su vanguardia marxista-leninista, sí podría asegurar los cambios profundos, es decir, la realización del  programa agrario-antimperialista, por el cual abogaba y luchaba desde su fundación el Partido Comunista.(22)” Reference 22 is Fabio Grobart, 1985, p. 93,  This author also refers in this regard to Leonel Soto, 1977, vol. II, p. 8.

El Jigue208.65.188.149 01:24, 3 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Debate resolved on the Cuban Talk page . Retracted warnings and user improved content for addition. Nigholith 16:16, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Reverting vandalism
Please be careful when reverting vandalism, as you did to Intelligent Design. In doing so, you accidentally cut out 1/3 of the article. Your edit summary said you were using WP:TWINKLE, so this might just be a bug in it. If you believe this is the case, you might want to report it at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_User_scripts/Scripts/Twinkle. --Infophile (Talk) (Contribs) 21:31, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks Infophile for pointing that out, but it's not the first time over the past few days TW has messed up like that, see TW Bug 13 for more information regarding it. Sadly AzaToth hasn't managed to track down the fault yet. Nigholith 21:35, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Aha, I see. Well, let's hope it's fixed soon. --Infophile (Talk) (Contribs) 21:38, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Bill Proctor
Very soon after I came to Wikipedia, another editor said this to me: "With so many janitors, it's not surprising when you knock brooms every now and then." Sorry to have beat you to it! LOL Accounting4Taste 04:55, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Hehe, no problem :-) Nigholith 04:56, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

AWB
I've approved you to use AWB, per your request. SQL(Query Me!) 08:07, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks you muchly SQL :-) Nigholith 21:41, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Please be careful with AWB, and watch what it/you're editing: . Thanks.   --Dynaflow   babble  04:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * My mistake Nigholith 04:35, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Wups
It happens a lot, as you can see by looking at the edit history for chess. There's an HTML comment before the quote explaining that it is a quote, but it frequently gets missed by editors who are correcting typos. Quale 14:53, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Aye, spotted that upon review. Strangely its easily missable, even in an article as well laid out as that, and with several pointers to its nature in and around it. Ah well, you learn something new every day :-) Nigholith 22:11, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Please stop.
If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia as you did to MapleStory you will be banned. And also add a source when you make any further edits.Bye.Darano 16:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hehe, funny Darano ;-P You know full well you've not given any reason for your removal of The Text, several times I might add. In future please explain your reasoning when removing text. Nigholith 03:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup
Hello. This exit of yours had to be partially reverted. A superscript "2" in mathematical notation must not look the same as the superscript 2 in other contexts. Please be careful about this. Michael Hardy 20:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


 * ... and I see you did the same thing in partial derivative yesterday. I've reverted. Michael Hardy 20:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Excuse my ignorance Michael Hardy, but I can find no Wiki documentation regarding the preference of HTML/Unicode characters. Please clarify your meaning of "Other contexts", so I may better understand the problem. Nigholith 01:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I meant "other contexts" as a catch-all: everything except mathematical notation. Look at


 * 1 + x + x2 + x3 + x4 + x5 + ...

Obviously all the subscripts should be the same size; to use the miniature that you used would be bizarre. Michael Hardy 02:11, 26 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Ah, now I understand your concern. I was under the mistaken impression AWB replaces with its exact unicode usage. My mistake. Nigholith 02:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and there's this: Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(mathematics)#Superscripts_and_subscripts]]. Michael Hardy 03:52, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't know how to talk on your talk page
so I added something here... anyways.. You recently sent me a message saying I vandalized drake bell's page when it was the truth. If I show you the proof which was printed in many places are you going to allow it back in? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.100.1.244 (talk) 16:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I apologize for the generic vandalism notice, I often don't have the time to go into a great deal of detail regarding post reversions; A more accurate description of the problem is that the contribution is uncited, needlessly out of paragraph, uses un-encyclopedic words like "weird" when dicribing, and doesn't really add anything constuctive to an already trivial piece. If you think this information is really needed in the article, feel free to add it again with the above problems in mind. However, since your contribution was made the sub-section has been removed by another user, and I can't really disagree with his actions either. Nigholith 02:51, 7 November 2007 (UTC)