User talk:Titus70AD

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Topical index.

-Poli (talk &bull; contribs) 22:59, 2005 July 25 (UTC)

Titus, your user page indicates that you are here for discussion. Please note that wikipedia is not a discussion or debate forum except in the context of editing its entries. Extensive debates without any clear editorial direction is viewed as disruptive. Please make an effort to present constructive suggestions for the purpose of editing entries and to show civility to other wikipedians. Where you want to advocate edits to an entry, please do so with reference to reputable scholarly views rather than personal convictions, however well-reasoned you believe them to be. It would be much appreciated if you would allow things to calm down, tone down your comments to establish your good faith and interest in civility, and take the time to read some of the links above. Buffyg 21:47, 28 July 2005 (UTC)


 * In reply to Talk:Buffyg, I'd like to offer a few remarks. As to your statement: "Moreover, the article should mention that if something said about a Jew is TRUE, it can NEVER be anti-semitic": this isn't true of antisemitism or anything else. Anyone can take a true statement out of context and make it into a false or misleading statement. Misinterpretation by abusive contextualisation and characertisation are frequent elements of prejudicial remarks that are in no way limited to antisemitism; such may not be malicious, but it is always excoriable. As to your requirement that "Further, to characterize something as anti-semitism/anti-semitic, we must establish (a) an objective criteria, (b) an objective adjudicative framework or process and deterimone (c) who the final arbiters of what is and isn't anti-semitism is", I'm not sure whether this works in any case of discrimination. Such criteria may applied in cases where a government decides to legislate against particular forms of discrimination, but I don't believe that any group that feels itself an object of pernicious discrimination will accept such a framework to evaluate all forms of prejudice against it. I would ask whether the same protocols can carried out for other examples of discriminatory behaviour that you cited, including Christophobia and anti-Teutonism (the latter of which would seem to be susceptible in principle if not in fact to same form of argument you've made about antisemitism).
 * I would generally encourage you to read other entries on discriminatory phenomena before you try to contribute. Buffyg 14:16, 31 July 2005 (UTC)


 * In replying again, I would ask that if you have any messages to send, that you use my talk page rather than my user page. I haven't any idea why you presume that I "need to look in the mirror" as a member of a "protected group", or I don't see why you would infer that I am a member of such a group, have sought such protections, or how you can argue its relevance here. Jumping to such a mode of argument absent demonstrable relevance can be taken for personal attacks, which are verboten here as a matter of policy, irrespective of whether the attack is against a "protected group". I am simply suggesting that you demonstrate internal consistency and show that you can apply the same arguments to the other forms of discrimination you have already invoked. I should hope that this would give you some insight into the limitations of the sort of objective criteria which you advocate as regards antisemitism. Buffyg 13:39, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Titus70AD: If you have the time, we could use your help editing the article on Eustace Mullins. Many of the topics you're interested in keep cropping up - anti-semitism, the holocaust, etc. - and we could use an extra person who's knowledgeable and objective to help make the article the best that it can be. Amalekite 16:05, 17 August 2005 (UTC)