User talk:Sam Spade/ - archive/Mai 2005 3

Papal war
Unsurprisingly revert war has broken out concerning voting and injunctions as to voting, and historical voting on Theology of Pope Benedict XVI as well as Pius XII. I'm a troublemaker who won't go away and leave the questions from being at least presented. However there is a good whitewashing happening supported by pernickety sea-lawyering. I again ask for protection on requisite page but look forward to greater notice for the censors. They help in a perverse way. Sorry Sam - perhaps I should drop out of this project, after all the real historians have it over the net already. The wikipedia could just be vanity pages where mascara hides the cracks. Flamekeeper 00:05, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Following discussion with Str1977 on Pius XII pages I see nothing further to add to the controversy. I have removed page protection demand from it's page and said I will leave the matter (in the hands of others for now). Whitewashing is still happening even today, but I suppose , again ,that the effort has been worthwhile bacause at least now there is some honesty on Pius XII's page. However perhaps you would drop in there from time to time to see that it remains. This has been a repetition of the Centre Party dispute with John Kenny and I suppose if I went in and expanded Bruning or anyone, I'd find another dragon's tooth right there. Thanks for the b'cells !Flamekeeper 09:02, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

BCE/BC

 * Just thought you may be interested in the vote that is currently in favour or BCE/CE. --Silversmith 12:55, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Voting is anti-wiki, and votes are not binding. Sam Spade 13:04, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

True, it does give people a method by which to push their pov. And it will prove nothing, as it will be flawed beyond repair. --Silversmith 15:58, 11 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Anyhow, I completely agree w your proposed compromise. Sam Spade 16:12, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Mediation
If you're willing to move forward with me as a mediatior, I've created User:Snowspinner/Sam Spade and Cberlet mediation. If you'd start by offering a slightly more detailed explanation of the problem, that would be tremendously helpful. Snowspinner 16:56, May 11, 2005 (UTC)


 * What does he think? He already ruled out at least one mediator based on their politics. Sam Spade 18:26, 11 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, we'll see when he replies. Snowspinner 18:34, May 11, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks
I got your kind welcome. I appreciate it. HKT 01:22, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

About Zzyzx11 --- he says he quit
Sam:

Zzyzx11 and I have for the past week been exchanging a few messages. This was mostly in regards to a "merge war" over the articles PALPATINE and DARTH SIDIUS. He had put the topic up for discussion and notified me of it. He later made the following request --

Thank you for stopping the merge war. In the meantime, could you do me a favor? I recently spotted an anonymous user trying to unilaterally change Template:Swwiki to read "This article should be considered as a candidate to be copied to the Star Wars Wiki and then deleted." I persuaded this user to revert it back until there was a formal discussion on the change. So if you are familar and/or contribute to the Star Wars Wiki, could you please make a comment on that template's talk page. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:11, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

I am currently in upstate New York on business, and replied to him that I would do as he asked when I returned home.

This is all on the talk page you set up for me -- thanks.

However, I found on HIS talk page a note dated later the same day as he posted his request. The note stated that he has quit the project. I take it that he is refering to the encyclopedia. What has happened? Did I anger him that much? Please tell him I apologize. I ment no harm -- I took the other guy's actions to be vandelism and tried to rectify it.

Again -- please tell him I am sorry.

;-(

Robeykr 23:58, 12 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I looked it over, and theres pretty much no chance he left because of you. He does look like a good user tho, have you thought about emailing him? Sam Spade 11:10, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

JC
Speaking of Trolling, did you notice on the Jesus talk page that I got called a TROLL by SLR? | near the bottom of the secion. He's apologised though. Hmphy. :( --Silversmith 14:59, 13 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, to be fair, I think he is sincere, and probably finds A.D. offensive in some sort of high fallutin' intellectual way. The end result however is a tremendous amount of time and energy wasted for the project and the editors involved, not to mention the aggravation and frustration. Sam Spade 15:05, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Woman
Hi Sam: Thank you for the gracious revert at Woman. I am always pleased to see someone revert their own edit. Admitting one's own error is so admirable. I aspire to do it consistently and promptly myself. --Theo (Talk) 22:17, 14 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanx. Sam Spade 22:37, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Did you attend meeting?
Hey Sam... missed that meeting yesterday. Did you attend? Are there any minutes? Do you think we should have an election now, it has been more than a year since the last election? Know anyone who would run for the job? — ©  Alex756  18:59, 15 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I had no clue there even was a meeting. WGfinley might want the job, or maybe wally. Unless your too busy to keep up w things, I'd likely oppose a vote and vote for you if there was one. Sam Spade 20:15, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Centre Party Germany -Entry Structure
I post u this, Sam : Trouble is, a cursory glance at the editing history shows the lack of historical good-faith. This always prejudiced the article and still does. I believe users have to account for anti-social activities and can be hauled-up. This will become a history within the history. We could put up pages devoted to the revisionism in the wikipedia and have us some stars who shine at that activity ..... Ill come back to this and see if any repair is undertaken or whether it is brazen revisionist war (coming from one who is very brazen). Clean up the act !

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Centre_Party_%28Germany%29" Also would you look at an entry I made for Edgar Ansel Mowrer and see if you think it allowable- I have done this to obviate this stupid historian rivalry and rev'nism, on the basis that as I link it Witness POV history should be available -ie memoirs from commentator -historians. I did this because the Germany article protection is symptomatic of a partly revisionist, partly nationist wiki reality .Flamekeeper 09:51, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

That effort is probably the first step out of the Wikipedia for me and towards a mini-parallel Flamekeeper one .Perhaps the real battlegroungd is on the search engines. Faith-based, politically-based and national-based editing here is too irksome. Faith-based editing seems to have debased everything remotely touching upon the Church, and since that touches most anywhere in the final analysis , the damage is serious. The problems of languages I imagine can make that, however, pale in comparison. Babel maybe what the Wikipedia will be. I think really that copyright risk is where I may take myself in preference to direct negotiation with faith-editing or revisionism (right-wing ). I admit to using the wikipedia to do the obvious, to no more than show the contra-diction. It could take forever to find a solution -look at the opus dei discussion. Everything is a mess and the faiths will win over the open-concept. I'm amazed that Pius XII is not sundered, but I was as careful as possible in not extracting the massive apologia , but interposing. Yes the syndication I feared at the first, can be turned , and the contradictions made , but when every assertion of learning is challenged there has to be a better way. Flamekeeper 19:10, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

newbie
Sorry, if I did something silly.

I did read the tutorial a while ago, but haven't edited for a while. Too many deadlines.

Thorsten 21:16, 16 May 2005 (UTC)


 * No worries, your all good, I just wanted to give you some leads in case you had any questions as a nube. Cheers,


 * Sam Spade 22:03, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks - didn't know that!
that 4 tildas in a row are used for signing

Thanks!

Winston Smith 21:55, 16 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know I have been of assistance! Cheers,


 * Sam Spade 22:03, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome
I really enjoy the Wikipedia community, thanks for the links and the welcome. User:Tskaze


 * And I in turn enjoyed the fine article you created on classical fencing! Please keep up the good work. Cheers,


 * Sam Spade 00:25, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Thank you...
Many thanks for welcoming me to Wikipedia! I appreciate your help.

The Anachronism 00:24, 17 May 2005 (UTC)


 * And many thanks to you for being here! The wiki is Mutualism :D Sam Spade 00:30, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Heavy metal template
Heavymetal

I don't mean to be offensive, but next time you rewrite a template, please make sure that it contains no obvious errors - such as a wrong inwiki link to the genre itself. I have reverted the colors to the former ones, since those are part of the wider WikiProject Music genres. Cheers. --Sn0wflake 01:40, 17 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Reply@User talk:Sn0wflake. Sam Spade 10:42, 17 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Quite an answer for a terse comment. If you can't work on a group project, I suggest you create your own Wiki. That template was most certainly not my work, if that wasn't clear enough. --Sn0wflake 19:59, 17 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I've been here since 2003, and have made over 20,000 edits (#43 in total edits), so I'm unconvinced that I can't work on a group project. Cheers, Sam Spade 12:20, 18 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Pardon me if I am not an editcountist, but being part of of group involves much more than that, as I see it. Out of the two discussions I have had with you thus far, in both you didn't bother explaining your reasons or discussing, you merely said people were wrong for not accepting what you thought best. I am convinced enough that you are a good editor, but I am left with the impression that your polivy is 'my way or the highway', which is not the healthy course of action on a project such as the Wikipedia. But that's merely my opinion. --Sn0wflake 20:16, 18 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, our disagreement was about something rather arbitrary (template box color). My reasoning was "I did lots of work redesigning the template, and the thanks I get is a a revert of my color change". Your counterargument seems to be "the last guy did it this way, so nothing should change, ever. Lets vote". Sam Spade 20:22, 18 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I was talking more about Death Metal. But about the color change... that's the way the project works. What do you want me to do? Break standards that work quite well and which were not set by me? --Sn0wflake 20:28, 18 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I presented my POV, you complained, and I immediately presented a successful compromise... isn't that optimal? And of course I don't want you breaking rules, i was hoping instead you'd realise there was no rule that you had to revert my color change. These things are organic, not written in stone like NPOV. You and one other guy agreed on those colors, not Jimbo and the wikimedia board. Sam Spade 20:46, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

German/Nazi occupation of Norway
As you must know, the issue is under vote. Until the vote is complete, no move can be contemplated. You may also want to take note that the person who is pushing for the move is anonymous and keeps accusing me of "Jewish propaganda." --Leifern 15:20, May 17, 2005 (UTC)


 * OK, I understand, but this isn't about personalities. The Nazi's didn't invade Norway any more than the Rebulicans invaded Iraq. Germany did. Unlike the US invasion of Iraq, there was precious little protest from the Germans. You may say they couldn't protest, but seriously... Did China invade Tibet, or did communism? Sam Spade 15:28, 17 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I think honest people can disagree about that, which is why I brought it to a vote. Other than that, it isn't clear to me why one title or another is particularly POV in general, or "Jewish" in particular. --Leifern 15:31, May 17, 2005 (UTC)


 * Since you identified yourself as Jewish on your website, I assumed you had something against Germany since you insist on this POV title. A number of those voting in the VdD process seems to be Jewish too. As you are known from Aftenposten for claiming the coverage of Israel is always biased, you should be more careful about maintaining neutrality, or your actions may turn against you in different issues (like the Israeli-Arab conflict, or Zionist occupation of Palestine, if you like). //83


 * Look, as I said above, stick to the issues. I don't care if he's a jew, or your a nazi, or whatever. the issue is who invaded norway, and whats the right way to title the article. Sam Spade 16:51, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Ad Hominem
Okay Sam, let's see what you wrote:
 * Did you think I was implying that you are megalomaniacal? If so, I wasn't. I was saying that until common usage changes, it would be unencyclopedic to change our usage, and that in order to change common usage you';d have to be megalomaniacal. I didn't mean to suggest you'd actually attempt such a thing..

Yes, it is true that I did think you were implying — no, saying — that I am megalomaniacal. I appreciate your saying that you were not. Yet, the next two sentences make the same ad hominem criticism. Of course I want common usage to change over time. I do not mean I want it to happen all at once. And I do not think I will accomplish it alone. There are already millions of people who use BCE/CE, and I know there will be more, and I want to pitch in. By the way I address your argument, that we should follow common usage, in my proposal. Aside from the fact that encyclopedias are meant to educate (surely, you agree that we should not limit ourselves to writing articles that present only what is common knowledge?), popularity or commonness of use do not trump NPOV, this is clearly stated in our policy. Slrubenstein | Talk 14:20, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

"surely, you agree that we should not limit ourselves to writing articles that present only what is common knowledge?"


 * That depends on what you mean by "common knowledge", and where you draw the line on original research / WP:POINT. Personally, I think trying to force a switch of such things on the wikipedia isn't what we are here to do (What wikipedia is not). Frankly I think contesting such things on the Jesus pages is offensive (to christians) and confrontational. If this was all regarding Jewish or Hindu or whatever pages, I might even be siding with you.


 * Assuming this is as important an issue to you as it would appear to be, I suggest you make that a larger part of your non-wiki life, and a smaller part of what you do here. We are here to collect the sum total of human knowledge, not pass judgment on it. The NPOV policy is here to allow for inclusion of all points of view, not take a stand behind any one of them we imagine to be most neutral. Sam Spade 14:47, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Sam, first, concerning the dating system at Cultural and historical background of Jesus, I provided an explanation for why it should use BCE and CE. I think you will find my explanation reasonable, and if not certainly hope we can discuss it.

But I am very disappointed by your response to Clem McGann on the talk page of the BCE-CE proposal. When he wrote "Then what will happen to the articles which have been changed by User:Slrubenstein from BC/AD to BCE/CE, such as Cultural and historical background of Jesus," this is what I wish you would have replied: Or so you really think that (1) I do not have a right to edit Wikipedia articles and (2) it is against Wikipedia policy to use BCE/CE? Slrubenstein | Talk 16:04, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
 * He wrote the first version of the article, so it is not right to say he "changed" it "from BC/AD."
 * Maybe it should be BC AD rather than BCE CE, but you are wrong to insinuate that his changes are arbitrary, or always imposing an unreasonable POV. After all, he has as much right to edit a page as you or I. Let's see what his reasons are. And finally
 * Well, the vote on this page has nothing to do with whether or not that page should be BC AD or BCE CE. SR's proposal is to make BCE/CE a NPOV issue. Even if most people disagree with him, please remember that our Manual of Syle permits both BC/AD and BCE/CE. Just because this proposal is likely to be defeated doe not mean the BCE and CE are "banned" from Wikipedia, and it would definitely be wrong to start going around and changing every use of BCE/CE to BC/AD."


 * As I said above, I can see compromises being made regarding pages devoted to issues other than Christ himself(!), but certainly not on a page like the one in question. Clearly i don't agree with any of the options you provide for me. Sam Spade 16:49, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

What can I say? The Cultural/Historical article is explicitly written from a non-Christian point of view, and the vast majority is about the Jewish people, their culture, and history. The article does not call him Christ or say that he is or was Christ; drawing on secular scholarship it explains how some people may have come to believe he was a messiah after his execution. Pleae remember, Jesus was Jewish, and there really are many people, perhaps a majority in the world, who do not think he is Christ. This is an article on his cultural and historical background, which is Jewish, and virtually all Jews did not see him as Christ. I do not object to an article that explores the Christian perspective on Jesus, but how can you censor the views of Jews and historians that he was real, that his life reflects something of his times (thus, things going on in Jewish culture), and that he died a Jew? You don't have to agree with this view, but how can you censor it?

Moreover, I know there are reasonable arguments against my proposal, arguments that AD and BC are not always POV. But you really cannot imagine why it is inappropriate, and to many, to date events in Jewish history with "Before Christ" and "Anno Domini?" In any event, for most of that article's existence, it has used BCE and CE; that is the status quo and if you want to change it there needs to be considerable discussion. Slrubenstein | Talk 22:44, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

"Nazi occupation"
The "Nazi occupation" is ready to be moved to the proper title as the duplication is deleted. Courage 19:49, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Heavy Metal genrebox color
For a color change, please discuss a change at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music genres. This is the second time someone wanted to change the color of the heavy metal genrebox. Originally, cyan was used. Then it was suggested for change, and Sn0wflake and I agreed on #BB0022. We shoudn't be changing the color all the time.

Also, your black background with red text is nonstandard for genreboxes. In a genrebox, we use black text for lighter backgrounds and white text for darker backgrounds.

Andros 1337 22:00, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Why? Have you seen the difference in the template from before, and after i edited it? For what possible reason would there need to be uniformity of color amongst music genreboxes? Sam Spade 22:33, 17 May 2005 (UTC)


 * If a text color is assigned to heavy metal, other genres will have to get a text color assignment too. This can make things more complicated. Remeber, with WikiProject Music genres, you must REQUEST A COLOR CHANGE ON THE TALK PAGE. You cannot spontaneously change a color. Andros 1337 22:53, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Zzyzx11 has returned
Sorry, I noticed that Robeykr seemed to panic here on your talk page after I said I was leaving the project. But after reading some of the comments I received by that user and others on my talk page, and some other events, I have decided to return today -- but with a few self-imposed restrictions on myself. See my user page if you are interested. Thanks for your patience and understanding dealing with me and that user in a professional manner. Happy editing and see you around ;-) Zzyzx11 (Talk) 22:18, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

edits to mbti
Please format your links to keep inline with the document structure on MBTI and provide a technical discussion explaining why those tests are not in fact the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, as the article makes it very clear it can only be given by someone who is licensed. Thanks! --Alterego 15:32, May 18, 2005 (UTC)

random compliment
A random compliment perhaps — but one of the finest anyone here could pay me. Thanks, Slrubenstein | Talk 16:15, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Have I entered some Parallel universe here where everyone is being nice to each other? :p --Silversmith 17:13, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

I think so = have a nice day!


 * Blame Kim Bruning, he inspires me. :) Sam Spade 19:23, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Joseph Smith, Jr.
There is an infobox at the top of Joseph Smith, Jr. that frames the photo of Joseph Smith and labels him "LDS Church President". Could you take a look at this in context and offer an opinion if you have any concerns? If it all seems fine to you, feel free to neglect commenting. Tom Haws 18:50, May 18, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you.
Thanks, I joined Wikipedia after reading the article in Wired although I knew about it beforehand. I'm going to work hard to improve the subjects I care about (I just got done overhauling the Adam Jones page, because it was lacking). All in all I think this site is incredible. Thanks for your support. User:Cassius987
 * Right on, and thanks for your fine work! Sam Spade 22:12, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Feedback
Thank you for your interest and comments on my re-work of Hyper-Calvinism. I am new to the Wikipedia and especially the editing process. Your help is appreciated. I look forward to additional contributions and interaction.

Jim


 * Its a fascinating subject, I trust you are not yourself a hypercalvinist? Sam Spade 21:44, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

thank you
I just would like to let you know i recived your message, and am thankful for the links. It's allways nice to be welcomed. Thank you again--- User:Iorek Brynson


 * You warm my heart :)

Sam Spade 21:44, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the Links
I wanted to thank you for the links. I appreciate every bit of help. I had to search a lot for the right pages when creating my first article. I think searching and finding the correct categories took a great amount of the time which I used for creating the article.

Greetings,

Jazhara7


 * I hope I have been of service,

Sam Spade 21:44, 21 May 2005 (UTC) 17:18, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Norway occupied not by Germany but by "Nazism", according to some
Some people, more specifically a person calling himself Jaycg or something, seems to have a serious problem with NPOV, and keeps moving the German occupation to "Nazi occupation". What should I do about this? It is outrageous that someone constantly vandalize articles like that. Courage 20:21, 20 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't know if there will be an answer, despite it being suggested to be a central policy (Foundation issues), NPOV is regularly superceeded by the unhealthy collision of wiki-democracy and POV advocacy cliques. Sad that. Sam Spade 20:55, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your message; I hope to be of help to wikipedia. User:Deke88 (sig added by Sam Spade 21:44, 21 May 2005 (UTC))


 * Perfect! Glad to have you,


 * Sam Spade 21:44, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

hey
thnks for the welcome msg... --Miketwo 00:04, May 22, 2005 (UTC)


 * and thank you for being here! Cheers,


 * Sam Spade 00:06, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Hey
Hey thanks for those links. I definitly need all the help I can get. I had a lot of trouble editing and creating my first article, Anna Louise Strong. Is there anything on here like a forum where people can discuss pages and articles? Thanks again!

Scrib 01:40, 22 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, there is the talk page of the article itself Talk:Anna Louise Strong, there are wikiprojects, there is the Village pump, the Mailing list, #Wikipedia on IRC, and etc... Hope theres at least one good lead in there! Cheers,


 * Sam Spade 09:27, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

thanx for the welcome
thank you, sam, for welcoming me. I hope to be a productive wiki-contributor.

Jcam 02:03, 22 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Wonderful, glad to have ya! Sam Spade 09:27, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

thanks!
Thanks Sam for the welcome... --Avecit 11:59, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Knecht Ruprecht/Zwarte Piet
I dunno anything about Knecht Ruprecht nor about the relationship of him to Zwarte Piet. Sorry. Andries 14:55, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Welcoming
Hi Sam. Corecticus is an old ancestor of mine. I was Flamekeeper until some anti-virus dumped my Flamekeeper cookie. Flamekeeper served his purpose.

Dreadlocks
Want to make yourself useful? ;)

You might want to take a look at Dreadlocks, where a couple of people won't let a pic of a white guy stay. — Chameleon 21:32, 22 May 2005 (UTC)