User talk:Nihilum

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)
Here are a few links you might find helpful:


 * Be Bold!
 * Don't let grumpy users scare you off
 * Meet other new users
 * Learn from others
 * Play nicely with others
 * Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
 * Tell us about you

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here!

Your edit to vampire
Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Regarding this edit of yours - could you please explain if the interpretation of the image in question is yours, Morgan's or someone else's? Note that if the intepretation is yours, that would be original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. If it is Morgan's, it should be attributed to him, because it may be disputed by others. In any case, since the statement in its present form seems somewhat questionable/sensational, I have removed it for the time being. Regards, --194.145.161.227 13:33, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Whoa, take it easy! "Original research" is not an accusation of bad faith. Anybody (and especially a user who apparently just made his/her first edit) can happen to do OR or violate another policy without actually realizing that s/he is doing that, so it is customary for people to remind each other of policies and such. As for Montague Summers, he is not an authority on vampires. He actually believed in vampires. His interpretation of some picture on a bowl doesn't even deserve mention. --194.145.161.227 16:28, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

As for there being "plenty of unsourced things" - this is not an argument for the addition of another unsourced thing, and as I mentioned, I suspect that your interpretaton of the picture might be unsourced.

OK, and now I'd like to repeat my question. Who says that the thing depicted on the Persian bowl is indeed a vampire? Is it: A. you, B. Summers, C. Morgan? --194.145.161.227 16:39, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Your answers have been self-contradictory. Since you are refusing to clarfy, I'm assuming you mean that it's Summers' interpretation after all. But he is not an authority, whose interpretation of archeological sources - or anything else for that matter - can be trusted. He is not a folklore scholar. He is somebody hwo believed in the reality of vampires and witches. So I don't agree with your edit. --194.145.161.227 16:52, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Am I correct in interpreting your answers in the following way:

1. your source is Summers; 2. Summers claims that Morgan and another scholar believe the picture to depict a vampire? --194.145.161.227 17:06, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Also, you should explain which book by Summers you are using, and if your immediate source is indeed Sumemrs, that should be made clear in the reference. --194.145.161.227 17:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC)