User talk:Stan En/Archive Nov 2007

Scientology
Hi Stan En, about halfway down the page in the article it says "But that countervailing pressure will continue to increase for the near future. The federal domestic intelligence agency, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution, and its sister agencies at the state level, are alarmed by Scientology's propaganda offensive and want to increase surveillance of the organization. "Across-the-board and systematic surveillance by intelligence means" wherever Scientology is active is a "basic prerequisite" for preventing the dangers associated with the organization, most federal and regional authorities agreed at a meeting in February." (http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,473896,00.html) I think that was the part they were refering to. (RookZERO 14:21, 19 June 2007 (UTC))
 * I still think there is relevance missing and the Scientology article ist way to long. And there where actually no new actions taken against Scientology due to this. But its allright for me to keep it in the article.-- Stan talk 17:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Stan En, Looks like you are meeting the cofsers. Many think that they come across as bigoted, but that is totally impossible because they are doing the greatest good for the greatest number. That's in-ethics and 100% standard tech. --Fahrenheit451 18:20, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Links in arbitration evidence
Hi, Stan En. I noticed on the Evidence page of the COFS arbitration that you've been having a little trouble with links going dead as talkpages are archived. For future reference, I've written a simple tutorial page about how to create the kind of permanent links you need in arbitration: that remain functional and clickable no matter what happens with the talkpage later. It's easy when you know how, like most things... :-) See Diff and link tutorial, the section "How to harvest a link to a page section". P. S. I don't mean that there's any need for you to change the archive links you have now put in. Those are fine, since archives aren't supposed to change. Best wishes,  Bishonen | talk 10:19, 26 July 2007 (UTC).


 * Thanks for the advise. I was looking already in the past for this solution but didn't find out. -- Stan talk 16:07, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Stop. It.
Please stop. If you continue to blank out (or delete portions of) page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. Misou 05:25, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Again, stop it. Considering our local time you should go to bed. You deleted the contributions of two editors for no reason. Misou 05:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't think so. And I only deleted your edit and not other contributions! Your edit was not a contribution but rather an attemt to hinder a proceeding process with the aim of finding consensus. By the way, "considering our local time" I should not go to bed but wake up now ((: -- Stan talk 05:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * No, you deleted one of Foobaz' lines as well. Misou 05:10, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * ok, your new sub-section is fine with me ! -- Stan talk 05:49, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * oh, thank you. Misou 05:10, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

mit Respekt
Hallo. Verzeihen Sie bitte meinem Deutschen. Gewesen eine lange Zeit. Fourdee ist auf Wikipedia, zum eines Gesichtspunkts zu drücken. Ich kann nicht stark oben gehen, weil ich vorher versuchte. Ich war der, der 48 Stunden lang blockiert wurde. Er ist nicht für Wikipedia gut. Ich bedeute wirklich den gut. Passen Sie ihn auf. Fourdee versucht jetzt, mich zu haben wieder blockiert aus dem Grund, den ich Aufmerksamkeit zu ihm geholt habe. Und er folgt vermutlich. Es ist kein gutes, ihn zu warnen. Es verursacht mir Mühe. Danke und gutes Glück. Geben Sie acht. - Jeeny Talk 07:24, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I already have some conflicts with other "problematic editors" and experienced that it is time-consuming and stressful to deal with it. I am quite new to en.wikipedia.org and not too familiar with admin,mediation,sanction etc boards. I will probably just leave him alone now and hope someone else takes care of him. I just don't have the time and nerves to deal with to many controversial issues at one time. If he continues with his tactic consistently like he does now it will become too obvious anyway soon. (1.provocating with an extreme position and editwar;2. negotiating; 3.show his willingness to compromise 4.blaming editors for "harassment" wich doubt WP:AGF due to point 1 and the fact that he does it yet again) However, I keep both articles in my watchlist. BTW. Your German is amousing but good enough to understand. (((: -- Stan talk 09:52, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Your summary in Scientology
Your edits don't make sense to me and may have multiple typos, e.g. "Critics also highlight the fact that Scientology only allows a formal membership in a second religion." I think you meant "Critics also highlight the fact that Scientology only allows an informal membership in a second religion." I know that I can do the edits but I have homework and I didn't read that section in detail. Jeffrey.Kleykamp 01:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice. Thats why I published it first on discussion in the hope that someone may make corrections. Noticed also some typos.... will correct them. -- Stan talk 01:21, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Stop edit warring
You automatically reverted Scientology and other religions again without using the talk page and answering the questions put to you. Stop it or you will be reported to an admin in a few minutes. wikipediatrix 18:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * you deleted reliable source ! Why should I stop ? -- Stan talk 18:52, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Question
Sorry the question was for someone else i hit your name by mistake. What are IADS and FASE?

Also I saw you question about how can radiation acumulate in body tissue. The awnswer is I don't know. Radiation is not an electromatic wave. Radiation are particles bouncing around due to a nuclear reaction or anything that can displace particles from a atom. Why would this particles acomulate in the body? Toxins do accomulate in the body but radiation?

I really don't know why. I only know that during the purif sun burns get restimulated and you can see sun burns in the shape of swin suits and T-shirts in the skin of people. I have seen this phenomena with my own eyes. Why I don't know.

In scientology "why" is less important than "does it work".

Scientology is about thought over matter. The believe that the mind can make the body sick and even create physical conditions. The word engram came actually from biology from cell memory.

I think (and this is only my opinion), that the restimulation of sun burns and radiation is purely mental.

So this area of the purif is un-scientific. I won't try to prove any science for this there isn't, I can only say that the technique has been effective and that's all. Only my POV.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I just wanna be friendly. Bravehartbear 06:54, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

3RR
you will be in violation of 3RR if you revert Church of Scientology Moscow versus Russia again, and if you do, it will be reported to admins. wikipediatrix 02:44, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I thought I did violate 3RR already. I usually don't revert something more than 3 times when everyone seems to disagree with me but this is too ridiculious. I understand that Shutterbug reverted me but not why you did ? Maybe I missed the new WP policy wich says that it should now be mentioned each time when GO's are cited that they didn't publish the authors nor their qualification. -- Stan talk 16:50, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Barb
One thing you and I do agree on is that the Barbara Schwarz article should be deleted.... Suggest you investigate the arguments used to finally bring down the Daniel Brandt article after it passed many AfD attempts. wikipediatrix 02:59, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

MedCab on David Miscavige
I didn't see you list in the article history as an editor, but thought you may like to participate anyhow. Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2007-08-31_David_Miscavige--Fahrenheit451 21:12, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for informing me about this. I have too strong feelings toward David Miscavige and consider him as a ruthless fascist. For this reaseon I can't and don't want to make any edits or comments on him unless the article becomes too ridiculous. I am afraid that I can't make any wikified comment about him now but only make attacks. For the same reaseon I won't make any edits on my "heroes" like Salvador Allende even if I consider the articles about them as bias. However, I hope you will succeed in this case! How couldn't I, wish you good luck :)) ! -- Stan <tt>talk</tt> 00:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

International Security Assistance Force - Norway
Hi Stan. Thanks for helping out with the references in the International Security Assistance Force article. It really was needed. One thing though: When you made the external links in the "Norway" section of the Contributing nations part of the article you created quite a lot of work for me when I cleared up the references there. Two of the refs you wrote (Norwegian) after (btw: one should rather use the icon for such cases) where actually in English. Aftenposten is a Norwegian newspaper but it has an online English version as well, and it was this I linked to when creating the links. Open the links before labelling them with one language or another. Also, I don't feel "aftenposten" says a lot about the source of the reference and I like for people to see what the reference source is about without having to actually open the link. Anyway, that's fixed now. Just a few pointers, nothing serious. Keep up the good work. Manxruler 01:21, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Another Medcap Church of Scientology Moscow versus Russia
Stan. I would appreciate your input here:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2007-09-14_Church_of_Scientology_Moscow_versus_Russia. Best regards --Fahrenheit451 03:17, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for informing me. Hope its not to late, but I gave my input now. -- Stan <tt>talk</tt> 11:24, 17 September 2007 (UTC)