User talk:Odinia

Germanic neopaganism edit
The below (edited slightly for typos not content) was considered a "legal threat" by the biased anti--hetrosexual editor.Kim Dent-Brown (He needs to be removed from this position immediately. Clearly this is an attempt to misrepresent the fact that I believe that Wikipedia had better be prepared for multiple legal threats if this sort of thing continues as a "threat".(-; He wants to obscure my argument and have me thrown off because I am a European Odinist hetrosexual woman, who does not hate my own race or believe in the promotion of outright lies about history.

Apparently the views of those who believe in honest scholarhsip and facts rather than Zionist lies are not allowed on wikipedia (?)and only those who are willing to accept such things as homosexuality as "normal" are welcome. Look at this offensive, utterly nonsensical entry he "edited". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation_and_WiccaI am a highly educated person who did her graduate work at the University of Oxford, which still accepts students on academic merit rather than on race (i.e. one is not discriminated against because one is European and it is a real university rather than a Marxist racist joke). We Odnists do not appreciate being assoiciated with this nonsense, which is in direct opposition to our religion in every way and also to any sort of rationality, reality or European self-identification.

Here is what I wrote: (typos fixed) Second Response: The material in question was not only clearly cited but I personally told the author that I was using it and he certainly did not object to it so I do not see how this is a copyright violation. Considering the fact that a professor has attempted to steal my work once unsuccessfully, plagiarism is not something I approve of. In fact, the author of the material (who I named in my citation) said that he himself has tried to edit wikipedia and add information about the large numbers of Odinists in Russia and that this is ripped off, whether by an editor or by a regular user, I do not know. . I did not demand your recall based on this, but on your other edits which clearly show a highly liberal biased, pro-homosexual view which is something which, quite frankly, the majority of us who are not homosexual are sick of having forced upon us. You do not have a balanced point of view. For example the very concept of "homophobia" (that non-homosexuals are somehow afraid of homosexuality and that this is pathological or unnatural rather than homosexuality itself) is a biased one and highly offensive and insulting to those of us who are not homosexual. Trying to force the homophobia concept on 6 year old children and make them read books like "Heather has two Mommmies" thereby sexualizing NORMAL children in opposition to the wishes of their parents is just more ZOG government European hate based destruction and people are not going to put up with it anymore. The fact is that homosexuality is a physical abnormality often caused by an expectant mother drinking, which can interfere with a hormone rush during gestation- one which normally masculinizes genetically male children..and that these children would otherwise would be fully male. You are not entitled to push the idea that homosexuality is normal and that those who do not embrace it as such are just "afraid" of it here, and to use your editorial position to do so. Science itself shows a physical brain difference in those who are affected. It is not normal. From a spiritual and European tribal point of view we Odinists find the practice of homosexuality highly offensive and, in fact, a perversion, and so do most Christians who are a majority in this country. I am not "disappointed" (-;, I am furious at the outright historical lies and disgusting anti-European bias being promulgated on Wikipedia. You even have it written on wikipedia that the Holodomor Holocaust- in which at the very least ten million Europeans were killed by a Marxist Jew named Lazar Kaganovitch and were starved to death purposely to steal their land- was a "natural" famine. The Jewish controlled press tried that decades ago but the truth came out anyway. By contrast, wikipedia has outright historically provable anti-European lies "protected". Wikipedia had better be ready for not only for the possibility of legal action from many people, but for being taken offline as an arm of Israel government propaganda if issues like this anti European bias and hate are not addressed and resolved properly. The truth is coming out. It is inevitable. Personally, I cannot wait to see it.

(below am leaving uncorrected for typpos version)

Second Response: The material in question was not only clearly cited but I personally told the author of that I was using it and he certainly did not object to it so I do not see how this is a copyright violation. Considering the fact that a professor has attempted to steal my work once unsuccessfully, plagiarism is not something I approve of. In fact, the author of the material (who I named in my citation) said that he himself has tried to edit wikipedia and add the information about the large numbers of Odinists in Russia and that this is ripped off, whether by an editor or by a regular user, I do not know. . I did not demand your recall based on this but on your other edits which clearly show a highly liberal biased, pro-homosexual view which is something which, quite frankly, the majority of us who are not homosexual are sick of having forced on us. You do not have a balanced point of view. For example the very concept of "homophobia" (that non-homosexuals are somehow afraid of homosexuality and that this is pathological or unnatural rather than homosexuality itself) is a biased one and highly offensive and insulting to those of us who are not homosexual. Trying to force the homophobia concept on 6 year old children and make them read books like "heather has two mommmies" thereby sexualizing NORMAL children in opposition to the wishes of their parents is just more ZOG government European hate based destruction and people are not going to put up with it anymore. The fact is that homosexuality is a physical abnormality often caused by an expectant mother drinking which can interfere with a hormone rush during gestation which normally masculinizes genetically male children..and that these children would otherwise would be fully male. You are not entitled to push the idea that homosexuality is normal and that those who do not embrace it as such are just "afraid" of it here, and to use your editorial position to do so. Science itself shows a physical brain difference in those who are affected. It is not normal. From a spiritual and European tribal point of view we Odinists find the practice of homosexuality highly offensive and, in fact, a perversion, and so do most Christians who are a majority in this country. I am not "disappointed" (-;, I am furious at the outright historical lies and disgusting anti-European bias being promulgated on Wikipedia. You even have it written on wikipedia that the Holodomor Holocaust- in which at the very least ten million Europeans were killed by a Marxist Jew named Lazar Kaganovitch and were starved to death purposely to steal their land- was a "natural" famine. The Jewish controlled press tried that decades ago but the truth came out anyway. By contrast, wikipedia has outright historically provable anti-European lies "protected". Wikipedia had better be ready for not only for the possibility of legal action from many people, but for being taken offline as an arm of Israel government propaganda if issues like this anti European bias and hate are not addressed and resolved properly. The truth is coming out. It is inevitable. Personally, I cannot wait to see it.

Second Response: The material in question was not only clearly cited but I personally told the author of it who certainly that I was usuing it and he certainly did not object to it so I do not see how this is a copyright violation. Considering the fact that a professor has attempted to steal my work once unsucessfully, plagiarsm is not something I approve of. In fact, the author of the material (who I named in my citation) said that he himself has tried to edit wikipedia and add the information about the large numners of Odinists in Russia and that this is ripped off, whether by an eidtor or by a regular user, I do not know. .

I did not demand your recall based on this but on your other edits which clearly show a highly liberal biased, pro-homosexual view which is something which, quite frankly, the majority of us who are not homosexual are sick of having forced on us. You do not have a balanced point of view. For example the very concept of "homophobia" (that non-homosexuals are somehow afraid of homosexuality and that this is pathological or unnatural rather than homosexuality itself) is a biased one and highly offensive and insulting to those of us who are not homosexual. Trying to force the homophobia concept on 6 year old children and make them read books like "heather has two mommmies" thereby sexualizing NORMAL children in opposition to the wishes of their parents is just more ZOG government European hate based destruction and people are not going to put up with it anymore.

The fact is that homosexuality is a physical abonormaility often caused by an expectant mother drinking which can interfere with a hormone rush during gestation which normally masculinizes genetically male children..and that these children would otherwise would be fully male. You are not entitled to push the idea that homosexuality is normal and that those who do not embrace it as such are just "afriad" of it here, and to use you editorial position to do so. Science itself shows a physical brain difference in those who are affected. It is not normal. From a spiritual and European tribal point of view we Odinists find the practice of homosexuality highly offensive and, in fact, a perversion, and so do most Christians who are a majority in this country.

I am not "disapointed" (-;, I am furious and the outright historical lies and disgusting anti-European bias being promulgated on Wikipedia. You even have it written on wikipedia that the Holodomor Holocaust- in which at the very least ten million Europeans were killed by a Marxist Jew named Lazar Kaganovitch and were starved to death purposely to steal their land- was a "natural" famine. The Jewish controlled press tried that decades ago but the truth came out anyway. By contrast, wikipedia has outright historically provable anti-European lies "protected". Wikipedia had better be ready for not only for the possibility of legal action from many people, but for being taken offline as an arm of Israel government propaganda if issues like this anti European bias and hate are not addressed and resolved properly. The truth is coming out. It is inevitable. Personally, I cannot wait to see it.

response to the below: I happen to know the author in question and I did cite his work and his name clearly so I fail to see why my revision was reverted by you. The article in question was so anti- European and antii-hetrosexual and biased that I believe it to be legally actionable. I think it is pretty clear from your other edits that you are so biased in favor of homosexuality that you are willing to ignore facts. Processing a gay rights agenda is not what an online encyclopedia is about.

Hello there, I'm afraid I have reverted your edit to this article and wanted to explain why. One reason is that it was in fact a copyright violation - this text appears on a number of websites, such as the one you cited and I presume you have copied and pasted it here. That's not allowed I'm afraid; we can't simply copy sections of material and paste them in unacknowledged. Secondly, most of the material was not actually about Germanic neopaganism; there are other articles on Wikipedia where it might be more appropriate (if it were rewritten and referenced) but not here, I think - apart from one or two sections. Finally, although you indicated a couple of references the main one was not a reliable one (the website linked to) - have a look here: WP:RS to see what a reliable source looks like. Please post here if you want to get some advice on editing here in Wikiped Kim Dent-Brown  (Talk)  23:41, 4 February 2012 (UTC)ia, and I'm sorry to have had to revert your first effort!


 * Hello Odinia, I'm sorry that your first (quite considerable) contribution was deleted by me; I do understand how disappointing it is when work is rejected, apparently offhand, like this. I did try to explain just above here why I did this. First, it was a straight copyright violation. Second, much of it was not relevant to the topic. Third, you did name one book but this was quite insufficient to back up the lengthy text you inserted.


 * I reverted your addition and I see that you have launched a request for recall of my admin privileges. I have denied the request because when I reverted your edit I was not using any admin privileges; just the tools available to any editor. A further point on your request - you made this statement: "The artcile in question was so anti European and biased that I believe it to be legally actionable." While I assume that was not a precise legal threat, it comes close to one and falls foul of our policy on legal threats on Wikipedia.


 * OK, so much for reading the Riot Act. Now perhaps I can be helpful, as it seems clear you are new around here? Can I help you make an edit that will stick, perhaps by discussing some material here? Do you have a specific fact or assertion that you have found in the literature, that you'd like to appear here? Why not reply below, and we can shape something up that has a chance of sticking. By the way, the talk page convention is that replies are added below so that the page can be read from top to bottom. Also, if you hit ~ at the end of your contribution your signature and date will appear, like this: Kim Dent-Brown   (Talk)  10:18, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Thor Lives,

Thank you. I do not know how to use this yet and if it were run only by balanced editors and not by ZOG central, wikipedia would, I think, be an amazing resource. I am not yet sure if my editing here would be of more benefit or if my exposing what is going on might be more so. Anyway, thank you for your kind encouragement. Yours, "Odinia"

No legal threats, please
Hello again. I'm not going to respond in detail to the latest of your edits here which I am guessing, but not certain, was aimed at me. If you can find any of my contributions which fall foul of the principles of Wikpedia then please go ahead and amend them.

There is one thing that needs to be removed though: for a second time you have made a legal threat with this edit. Please remove it at once, otherwise it is likely that you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia further.

I think it is unlikely this user is going to take my advice, so if any friendly neutrals could add theirs, this might be helpful. Kim Dent-Brown  (Talk)  20:20, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Kim's right. You'll need to specifically state that you do not intend to take any legal action or encourage others to do so if you wish to continue editing. You also need to read WP:RS as not only was there a real copyright issue and the removal of the text was correct, the website in question almost certainly doesn't meet our criteria for sources. I wouldn't waste your time thinking you can get Wikipedia taken off line or expose "what is going on" as the audience for that will only be those who already agree with you, fortunately a tiny minority. But it does appear to me that you are not going to be happy here as most of us don't share what I can only call your bigotry. Dougweller (talk) 21:55, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Discussion at Administrators' Noticeboard/Incidents
Hello there, as you have not yet replied to my post just above, and your recent contributions contain (apart from the legal threats) some material which I think is unsuitable for a user page, I have opened a discussion here about your contributions. Please feel free to post there if you wish. Kim Dent-Brown  (Talk)  20:43, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Welcome!
Welcome!

Hello, Odinia, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one of your contributions does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, 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. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Hi Odinia - I am another heathen Wikipedia editor and another Oxonian. I think it's time someone gave you a fuller run-down on site policies, because we do very much need diverse educated editors (and heathens in particular). Please have a look at the 5 pillars link above, in particular. You've been running into trouble not just because Wikipedia is a massive and sometimes fractious project - although it is - but also because neutral presentation and reliable sources are key policies here. It's not an academic environment, where points are argued and positions presented; it's a general-purpose encyclopedia, summarising information. This is not to say we don't need information about the atrocities heathens have been subject to; one place you might look for coverage is Christianization of Scandinavia, and all the events you listed in your edit are covered in articles. It's to say that essay-type presentation is not appropriate; and that it's the academic book itself, not the author's blog, that you need to cite. I hope that helps; even though we are on opposite sides of many divides within heathenry (for example I have no objection to homosexuality), I welcome your effort to help expand Wikipedia's coverage of the Old Way. Please stick around and do good work :-) Frith, Yngvadottir (talk) 19:04, 6 February 2012 (UTC)