User talk:Zerida/Archive 02

Question on Ancient Egyptian agriculture
Hi there Zerida, I'm one of the editors involved with the influenza page. We are looking for some academic references or discussion of ancient Egyptian animal agriculture. In particular, any information on if they had pigs and waterfowl/fishfarms. If you have information on this, please drop a note on my talk page. Thank you. TimVickers 22:10, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Egypt
Hey Zerida,

I noted with interest your amendments to my own changes on the "Egypt", "Egyptian pound", and "1952 Revolution" pages. I wish to explain the reasons for the changes I made.

A) Egypt

1)Removal of the Ancient Egyptian and Coptic Egyptian names for the country (please note that I have not undone your re-insertion of these names) - this was because those terms are indeed anachronistic as I stated, and are more appropriately placed in the "Etymology" section alone. This is not to cause offense (I myself am Egyptian), but to avoid confusion as these terms are not in use today.

2)Inclusion of the term "Arab World", in addition to already present terms "Africa" and "Middle East" - a common sense addition, given that the Arab World is a distinct geo-linguistic/geo-cultural region in its own right.

3)Re-wording of the section relating to the Yom Kippur War - as you will know, in Egypt this war is referred to as the "October War", so adding this term next to "Yom Kippur War" is both accurate and informative. Furthermore, the pre-existing wording stated that Egypt and Syria attacked Israel, when the more neutral and accurate terminology would reflect that Egyptian and Syrian forces operated solely within their own sovereign territory, and no area of Israel was attacked. Hence, it was an attack against Israeli forces occupying the Sinai Peninsula and the Golan Heights, not an attack on Israel.

B) Egyptian pound

1)Adding focus to the Egyptian/Arabic term for the currency - this is an accurate and common sense edit to inform the reader of the local term for the currency. To omit this explicit reference can cause confusion as to what the currency is actually called by the Egyptian people themselves, whereas its inclusion provides the reader with the full picture.

C) 1952 Revolution

1)This is a most curious term to use for it misstates the nature of the event. In the interests of accuracy, the reader should be made aware that the revolution was an ongoing political event, not merely a coup d'etat, which brought about profound changes in Egypt and the region. Moreover, the term "Egyptian Revolution" is specific, accurate, and accepted, whereas the term "1952 Revolution" is not. Neutrality is not compromised at all by use of this term.

I hope you will not interpret any of my edits, or indeed this message, as arrogance on my part. I merely wish to provide a fuller, more accurate, and neutral body of information for the reader. I am sure this is also your desire. I would be extremely happy to further explore this issue with you so that we can both seek means of achieving this shared goal.

Thanks Louse 07:51, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Shu'ubiyya
Can you give an example of a Non-Persian Shu'ubi.In fact Shu'ubiyya is a movement happened mostly among Iraqi Persians (where there was a connection or perhaps conflict between Arabs and Persians). I never heard of Coptic, Berber or Aramean ;also Arameans or to be more accurate Syriac did not convert to Islam .NOTE:Shu'ubiyya refers to a movement during the medieval period Not modern. Thank you--Aziz1005 02:37, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You seem to have skipped over the present-day Muslim Aramean communities of Syria. The villages of Bakh'a and Jubb'adin are entirely Muslim and Aramaic-speaking. And of course, many Aramean natives of Syria-Palestine and Iraq eventually converted to Islam and today speak the local varieties of Arabic; that's a matter of historical record (setting aside Arab nationalist sentiment). As to Shu'ubiyya, the article stated that the movement was primarily Persian but that records of Egyptians, Berbers and Arameans staging similar protests are attested. Egyptians, for example, regularly revolted against the Arab invaders in the first 2 centuries following the Arab occupation of Egypt. This is briefly explained in the Egyptians article. The battles between Berbers and Arabs are quite well-known. Zerida 08:27, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I lived in Syria most of my life, and I do not need some one to tell me that I was Aramean. This could be right but as long as I consider my self an Arab and I can not speak Aramic that's it; now I am an Arab. By the way this is the first time I know that people of Bakh'a and Jubb'adin speak Aramic. The only Two towns that still speak Aramic in modern Syria are Maloula and Saidnaya which are Syriac Christian Towns. Nowadays most Christians in Syria Don not consider their selves as Aramean because they only speak Syriac at churches. Also you should bear in mind that not all Christian in Syria are originally Aramic; some are Arab like Ghassanied and malakia church (الكنيسة الملكية).


 * You did not give me an example of an Aramean or Berber poet or writer who was Shuo'obi where as you can find Shu'ubies Persian poets easily such as بشار بن برد.


 * What are the names of that battles between Berbers and Arabs? I think you should read Islamic history because those battles happened everywhere in the Early Islam even in the Arabia; so is that mean Arabia was not Arabic land.


 * Shu'ubiya is a movement happened after the early Islamic period (mostly Abbasid era). So we are not talking about early Islamic battles--Aziz1005 16:46, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I really don't have the time or the inclination to have debates of that nature. As far as Bakh'a and Jubb'adin are concerned, much linguistic fieldwork research has been conducted on modern Western Aramaic spoken by the indigenous Muslim communities of those regions. That you are unaware of their existence is a separate issue--this much is actually not open to debate. The article already states in another section that Berbers were the main ethnic group behind the Shu'ubiya movement in Spain after it ended in the east, so I don't know what's here to debate either. Hafs ben Maymun is an example (who was also murdered because of his views). Zerida 19:09, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Me too, I don’t want to start a new debate with you. Because simply I fed up with all these kind of debates. As I told you before about Ma`loula and Saydnaya, and also Bakh'ka all these villages are in the same area which is called Qalamon (Northern Damascus) also for your own knowledge I have been to these villages many times .In fact people of these villages are Mostly Christians Not Muslims especially Ma'loula, and I think this is the reason why Aramaic survived in that part of Syria; Arabic also considered somehow a developed Aramic. Any way, you did not give an example of Shuwbiya among Arameans. And about Hafs ben Maymun his mureder was a political issue.Wish you the best in your studies--Aziz1005 13:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Re
Hmmm. Have you tried WP:RFCU? Khoikhoi 03:18, 17 March 2007 (UTC)


 * If he's broken 3RR under one account, feel free to just give me the diffs. If they were with multiple accounts, give links to four diffs showing the 3RRvio at the checkuser page. Khoikhoi 09:01, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Boutros Boutros-Ghali.jpg
The image above is missing essential source information. It will be deleted on 2007-03-20. — Jeff G. (talk&#124;contribs) 02:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

good job on the Egyptian Identity section
Good job on the Egyptian Identity section. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.12.208.216 (talk) 02:14, 20 March 2007 (UTC).


 * Thanks, whoever you are. Peace — Zerida 08:32, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Kurów on Coptic language
Could you please write a stub abot Kurów here - just a few sentences based on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kur%C3%B3w ? Only 3-5 sentences enough. Please.

PS. Article about Kurów is already on 156 languages. If your village/town/city hasn't on PL wiki, I can do article about it. Pietras1988  TALK  16:07, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Film
Hello Zerida- My name is Nic Hill and I'm making a documentary film on Wikipedia. My film crew is going to be in Cairo from april 25th till the 29th. I was wondering if you would be interested in participating in the film. Are you in Cairo now? If not, do you know any wikipedians who might be interested in working with us? Please let us know. Thank you very much.

For more information about the film, check out our site.



You can contact us by.

p. 0823701245 e. Nic@underdogpictures.com Brishen@underdogpictures.com


 * Hello Nic! Thanks for the invite, it sounds very interesting. Unforunately, I can't participate because I'm not in Egypt at the moment and won't be back for quite a while. Best of luck with the project. Cheers, — Zerida 03:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Egyptians
I wasn't experimenting with the page Egyptian, I added Nefertiti's picture to the picture of the Egyptians and changed the caption accordingly. I reverted the change back. --> — KingTut1982
 * -- Hi Zerida, there must be a misunderstanding, I have already changed the collage and I am just changing the caption to reflect the collage.
 * --I agree, but I think Nefertiti is important to have to represent women in Ancient Egypt. I was also thinking about replacing that unknown mummy picture with Ahmed Zewil, but may be we should add a third row to the collage. KingTut1982 00:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Test
Sorry, I was just messing around and trying to learn how to edit, and didn't mean to save it. I will use the sandbox for further training. I did fix a few grammatical errors. Zerepsj 16:03, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

arbitration needed
Zerida: it'd be appreciated if you can take a look at the Egypt talk page under the religion section to see if the other user/myself are being unreasonable.

Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Citadelite (talk • contribs) 18:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC).

Image:Boutros Boutros-Ghali.jpg
Hello, Zerida. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Boutros Boutros-Ghali.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Zerida/gallery. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or    media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 07:04, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Question
Hello Zerida; please see the recent changes made on Copt by User:Egyegy, and advice on how to report it as vandalism. I had initially provied 6 references and the user deleted all of them along with the referenced statement and graphics. Thanks in advance! --Lanternix 14:27, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:MohamedNagib2.gif
Hello, Zerida. An automated process has found and will an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that is in your userspace. The image (Image:MohamedNagib2.gif) was found at the following location: User:Zerida/Egyptians. This image or media will be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. This does not necessarily mean that the image is being deleted, or that the image is being removed from other pages. It is only being removed from the page mentioned above. All mainspace instances of this image will not be affected Please find a free image or    media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 22:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Ruby leih.jpg
Hello Zerida, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Ruby leih.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Zerida/gallery. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 07:53, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Coptic flag
Hi Zerida, I left a message about the flag at the Copt article talk page. Would appreciate your views.

Thanks Egyegy 08:39, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Arabs
Hi Zerida. Can you please back me up here? Thanks! --Lanternix 23:21, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for making a report on Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize even after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) (Talk) 05:04, 19 May 2007 (UTC)


 * You might also consider reporting at the suspected sockpuppets page WP:SSP -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) (Talk) 05:17, 19 May 2007 (UTC)


 * This is looking more like an edit war than true vandalism. Even if I blocked the one editor, another account would be used to continue the changes.  And since the edits aren't clearly vandalism, it is hard to justify a block.  The edits might be controversial, but they aren't clearly vandalism, especially to anyone who isn't familiar with the topic.


 * You should certainly try to sockpuppet route. You might also request the page be protected, but you won't know what version will be frozen.  You will most likely end up in mediation / arbitration.  I don't see any evidence of a serious attempt to reach a compromise / consensus.  Perhaps you can open a discussion on the talk page for the article and define the differences and look for a way to resolve the situation.  Sometimes both sides are assuming the other side is being unreasonable, but when a dialog starts, they realize it is just two different points of view. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle)  (Talk) 06:02, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Your recent RFCU
You recently compiled and listed a case at requests for checkuser. A checkuser or clerk has requested you supply one or more diffs to justify the use of the checkuser procedure in the case, in accordance with the procedures listed in the table at the top of the requests for checkuser page. For an outcome to be achieved, we require that you provide these diffs as soon as possible. This has been implemented to reduce difficulties for checkusers, and is essential for your case to be processed. A link to your recently-created case which has this information missing is here. Thanks for your co-operation.  Cbrown1023   talk   18:46, 19 May 2007 (UTC), checkuser clerk.

Fayum mummy portraits
I've rewritten the section to attribute contradicting claims to their respective sources. &mdash; ዮም  |  (Yom)  |  Talk  • contribs • Ethiopia 22:19, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Zerida, please do not accuse me of edit-warring. I have only restored sourced information (with reliable sources) that should not have been removed. If you look at the edit history of the article, you can also see that no one edited that citation from when you added it. I have restored the information from Britannica and moved the Irish study up to the same paragraph. When two reliable soruces conflict, both should be included and the dispute made clear. It's not appropriate to remove one source and favor another when both are reliable and neither is a refutation of the other (even in the latter case, both should be included and the dispute described, especially since a refutation may not be complete or accepted by the academic community). &mdash; ዮም  |  (Yom)  |  Talk  • contribs • Ethiopia 20:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Coptic font
Thank you so much. The font works! I'm kinda embarrassed now that you saw my adoption page, I forget nothing is private and I think nobody notices me and I'm a total idiot on that page. okay, not only on that page I also write crazy summaries, but it's so I don't get too serious, as Wikipedia is fun for me, and I want to keep it that way. I'm too serious in my job, and this is a nice outlet for me. Although, it does "get" to me now and again. Not that I'm not serious about Wikipedia's articles. I am very serious about them. But, use the summaries and user talk pages to be less, um...formal. Thanks again. I can see the font; now, if I only understood it. :) Thank you for being so kind. :) - Jeeny Talk 05:21, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, there, woman. I can't tell who's who, or what's what, most of the time; so I mostly assume everyone is male, between the ages of 15 to 21, and gets on my nerves on purpose just to piss me off. ;p It's good to "see" you around too. I think my "Old Fish" won't tell me anything about "it" because "it" knows what I'm thinking. lol. I think it's a genius, though, no matter what. :) - Jeeny Talk 06:20, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

checkuser FYI
Your checkuser request is non-compliant because of improper use of the F code. I have left comments on possible codes to use (E or G). A regular block is done by an administrator. A community based ban or block is done after the conclusion of an Arbitration Committee case, Community Sanction case, or by Jimbo Wales.VK35 16:35, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Faiyum
Hi Zerida! I need your help and opinion in Talk:Faiyum. I spent hours refurbishing the articles about Faiyum and Faiyum Governorate, to find everything reverted later. I believe we should keep Faiyum for the city itself, and Faiyum Governorate for the surrounding region and whatever information pertains to it, including history, geography, archeology etc. Thanks. --Lanternix 17:09, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Lake Moeris

 * Thanks for the hieroglyphs in Faiyum. Could you possibly also provide hieroglyphs in Lake Moeris? Anthony Appleyard 05:29, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

suspected sockpuppet taharqa
This may interest you, please provide evidence and comments at Suspected sock puppets/Taharqa.--Urthogie 20:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Arab world
Hi Zerida,

Thanks for the comment re my reinserting the Egypt marker. I didn't realise a non-member had put it there, so have self reverted. Peace, Drmaik 07:59, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Ancient Egyptian
Dear Zerida, how are you? Can you write and skeak ancient Egyptian? If so, what book you recommend for starters? Ldingley 19:50, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Egyptian articles
I guess, in this case, I'll accept it. :-) Thank you so much, Zerida. It's been a long time; how have you been? Yes, Abdel Quddous is, indeed, an interesting personality, and a very influential writer. I was pretty surprised he didn't have an article. Also the sight of the red color over the name of other influential people, both Arab and Egyptian, shocks and saddens me. It's sad how very, very few Arab editors edit Wikipedia; usually the ones I find are either living in the States or elsewhere, or, sadly, POV pushers; it's a shame, really.  Anyway, thank you so much for the message, and thanks for noticing that mistake. See you around, Zerida. :-) — An as  talk? 09:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Flag again
Hi Zerida; I don't quite understand why that bogus flag keeps appearing. I removed it and I'll keep an eye on that. Thanks :) --Lanternix 13:37, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Invitation
Would like to join us on Arabic wikipedia. We have a lack of very important articles and of serious contributors and I think that your experience on wp:en can help us a lot to make wp:ar better. Sorry for my English and if you can pass this message to any interested contributors i would be very grateful .ar:user:Omar86

Notability of Egyptian Association of Canterbury, Inc. (EAC)
I'm not convinced that the links you've added to this article are sufficient to meet the requirements of WP:ORG (The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability). The NZ government Office link merely acknowledges that the organisation exists. Are there any more substantial websites you can cite? – Tivedshambo (talk) 06:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Reverts?
Zerida, considering the various different findings and the vastness of the region, I think it best to leave details about the "particular" studies cited. I personally believe it is inaccurate and misleading to include sundry different groups of people known in the Western literature as "Berbers" in one article. This tends to generalize and simplify reality, which is rather complex and detailed. Also, the removal of the word "debatable" is right, indeed, necessary, as it merely betrays personal preferences. The second study may be debatable to the author, as it contradicts the first study, which he might find "preferable" but if one looks into these studies, the ambiguity will at once dissipate, as the first study uses donors of the Western Sahara and parts of Morocco, a country whose demographics have been astly affected by the influx of sub-saharan illegals, while the second study uses donors from Algeria, Tunisia and Egypt. Again, the vastness of the region must not be overlooked. Would one use a study based on donors from England and apply it to Russians? I hope not. Mariam83 17:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:EgyptianRuby.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:EgyptianRuby.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add , without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast 21:18, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello
Hello Zerida; I have a suspicion that many users editing articles about Copts or the Coptic Flag are none but the socketpuppets of the same user. Any idea whom in Wikipedia to contact about this? I would also like to semi-protect these two articles, Copt and Coptic flag, so that newly registered users can no longer vandalize them. Thanks a lot in advance for the help :) --Lanternix 20:04, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much Zerida for the help. Please read my reply to that vandal on the talk page of Coptic flag, as some of it involves you personally. Thanks again! --Lanternix 00:10, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I know! This is such exciting news! I need to read more about it though. For instance, how did they know she had diabetes? If you ever find some nice and useful links, please do let me know. Thanks again for all the help :) --Lanternix 15:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Copt
Yeah, I saw an earlier report on WP:AN/I a few weeks ago when I was having a problem with my own little matching set of socks. So I put the article on my watchlist just to help out. While I know a little bit about the topic, I don't have much to add to the article, but figured more eyes not actively involved in editing the article could help keep the sock population down. ;-) IPSOS (talk) 21:49, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Banned user & socks
Hi, if you suspect that one single banned user is using sockpuppets to edit WP please report him/her and his/her socks as such. If you provide with diffs linking the suspected sockpuppet accounts to the banned user, I am able to take administrative action. Please understand, however, that I cannot base any action on the unsupported claim that a certain account is used as a malicious sock. Thank you. Best Regards,  Signature brendel  22:36, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, I have looked into the matter, using the links you have provided I was able to block 3 sockpuppet accounts and have protected both article for 2 days to deter the creation of new socks. Regards,  Signature brendel  23:03, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi there
The acrimony seems to have died down at WP:V and people are now co-operating on a single compromise version that should be able to accommodate all views. Please feel free to edit this draft. here or add specific comments on how to improve it, either for clarity or including more of the relevant viewpoints. Tim Vickers 20:31, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Greetings
Hi, Zerida. I miss you, too. We haven't talked for months. I hope you're OK. Salam. --Meno25 13:58, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

23 July Revolution
Hi, Zerida. I did not want to do anything hasty just in case there were specific objections to a renaming of this page. The 'Egyptian Revolution of 1952' is certainly better than the 'Revolution of 1952', which is hopelessly ambigious. I agree that for those who have any understanding at all of Egyptian history that the 'July Revolution' or '23 July Revolution' is best, though for the ordinary run of humanity this may still make the event hard to find, without the appropriate cues. I think you did well to ensure that there was a clear separation between the events of 1919 and 1952. All the very best Clio the Muse 22:47, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Demographics of Egypt vs Demography of Egypt
I moved it without discussion because it wasn't a raw list of statistics from the CIA World Factbook. As well, there was a discussion recently on when to move to 'demography' from 'demographics'. Generally, when there's a study of the changes of demographics, it should be entitled 'demography'. Since Egypt's demographics article was a study of trends and in-depth information, I moved it to a more appropriate title.  Oc t  ane  [ improve me ] 05.07.07 2237 (UTC)
 * //shrug There's currently a lot of disconjointedness within Wikipedia on this subject, so perhaps we should bring it up with WikiProject Countries? I think those articles would fall under their scope.  Oc t  ane  [ improve me ] 05.07.07 2250 (UTC)

Thank you, but...
Thank you for reverting the test edit in the reference desk, but you left your note on the wrong IP-address user page. 203.215.111.226 was the anonymous user who made that edit.

(Don't bother writing back; I know you meant well, and it's no big deal.) 208.76.104.133 08:51, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for not assuming good faith
Hi Zerida, sorry for not assuming good faith on the Jewish slave trade debate, because of what Serenesoulnyc wrote, I accidentally thought I was stepping into a debate related to coptic nationality which I didn't want to be involved in... even though what he wrote seemed suspeciously bizarre. Anyway sorry to bother you. Dan Gluck 18:43, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Verifiability#Age of unreferenced
I made a post to Wikipedia talk:Verifiability that you might be interested in. Jeepday (talk) 03:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

DRV for "Truth in Numbers: The Wikipedia Story"
Dear Zerida, this upcoming Wikidocmentary film article is currently under discussion at Deletion review on today, because a recent decision to retain it on Wikipedia has been appealed and it is in progress in reaching an ultimate consensus. You may wish to support for restoration by contributing it to the review. Since you had involved into it in regards to this upcoming Wikidocumentary film by Nic Hill, so please do help out and try not to hesitate to voice out your advocated opinion! Otherwise without you commenting about it, this article would never had existed. Pole Heinz Tower 14:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Beja Language
A brief response to your deletion of my edit. Agree that 'mixed language' as a concept is not fashionable, not least because it is impossible to define. I've spent 10 years working on the Beja and other Cushitic verbal systems, and nobody has improved much on Reinisch's work. Rather like your remarks, I'm afraid, subsequent work has generally been superficial - Hetzron's opinion for example is simply wrong. Zaborski, to take another example, has facile views on the history of the Cushitic verbal system, especially that of Beja. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 91.109.100.180 (talk • contribs) 20:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Egyptian ethnicity
Could you please take it to the talk page before reverting my edits? Thanks. Funkynusayri 17:38, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Afrocentric guy
Hello Zerida; Would you please keep an eye on the following articles: That afroocentric person, Taharqa, continues to mess up with them. Thanks :) --Lanternix 07:47, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Saint Maurice
 * Appearance of the ancient Egyptians
 * Population history of ancient Egypt

Afrocentrism
Hi zerida. I am an Afrocentrist. What about Afrocentrism do you or most modern day Egyptian find offensive? Are most modern day Egyptians aware of Afrocentrism? Do most modern day Egyptian consider themselves caucasian? Do they see themselves in any way related to Africa? I hope you are not offended that I entered your user site like this but it was the only way i could communicate. I am searching for info. I am not looking to debate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.113.100.73 (talk • contribs).


 * I don't mind, but I moved your comments to my talk page instead. No, most Egyptians are not aware of Afrocentrism; it would probably never occur to them. However, most Egyptian Americans are aware because of its popularity in the African American community. Egyptians in general who encounter it often react with disbelief, dismissal, annoyance or they just don't care. With regard to being regarded as Caucasian, yes and no, it varies. Personally, I take issue with Egyptians being described as either white or Caucasian, even though this is how the US government classifies them. I know that many Egyptians, especially Egyptian Americans, would also take issue with this classification. And, yes, they consider themselves African basically; it's just not as important for them as it may be to other African communities or African Americans.


 * Why are Egyptians offended by Afrocentrism? Mostly because Afrocentrism to them is a form of cultural appropriation. Since most Egyptians are not black, Afrocentrists expend much energy to explain that in ways that distance Egyptians from their history. Most Egyptians take pride in their heritage, and Afrocentrism is often perceived as an attempt to "disinherit" them in a way. Egyptians are sensitive both about their present and their past. There is also a perceived racism toward modern Egyptians inherent in Afrocentric thought; in particular, the spurious claim that ancient Egyptian civilization collapsed when the Egyptians supposedly became biologically or "racially" "diluted" by foreign invasion (an idea to which Eurocentrists/White supramicists also hold dearly). I should probably add that over the years there has been occasional tension between the Egyptian American and African American communities in general, e.g. during cultural exhibits and similar events -- a relationship that is otherwise quite amicable and will hopefully continue as such. — Zerida 09:03, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Ali_Mubarak.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Ali_Mubarak.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:43, 15 August 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. OsamaK 22:43, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Naguib_Mahfouz.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Naguib_Mahfouz.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 00:05, 17 August 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. OsamaK 00:05, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Ancient Egypt and race
Actually Zerida, I cannot say that you are totally wrong. But I don't agree with your method. You are making changes in a very sensitive subject without discussing them first in the talk page. Please, come there and we will see. The article is not about Herodotus. We cannot discuss the authors. Otherwise, we will loose the scope of the article. Image if we have to bring all that is written on Herodotus and the ancient Egyptians! There is an article on Herodotus where one can contextualize. One can send readers there. I am sorry if I did make you suffer. I did not mean it. I see that you know many things, but we have to work together peacefully, on common grounds.--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka 20:38, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


 * You are making changes in a very sensitive subject without discussing them first in the talk page.  Lusala, this is inaccurate. I discussed my changes three weeks ago when the page was protected, and again after the unprotection. Please be aware that other editors have a right to edit the article and make additions that may not necessarily agree with your point of view. I am very disappointed that you continued to blindly revert my edits and the references I added, instead of simply working with them, which would have been the easier and courteous thing to do. — Zerida 20:47, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I am sorry Zerida, but two weeks ago, there were two articles! OK, don't loose your control. We can make everything fine. Let's start again as we have now a united article. We can arrive quickly if we want to an agreed version. Sorry for the trouble!--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka 20:52, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, perhaps you could self-revert to the version that includes my additions and simply change the areas you have a problem with? All I have asked all along is to work with my additions rather than eliminate them altogether. Aside from the Herodotus point and the section title change to "Afrocentric writers", you haven't actually raised other objections. These points can be dealt with without compromising the integrity of either point of view in the article. — Zerida 21:07, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I think we better begin with the version before your changes. It is a version which involveld a lot of discussions. We can integrate your elements bit by bit discussing. The other way round will not be fair for those who worked before you. Don't worry. I will try to be neutral. Even if I have my own opinions, I believe in science and in neutrality. The talk page you created, will be helpful only to you for remembering you about your contributions. We have to discuss in the talk page of the article itself, section after section. When we agree, we integrate or we reject the elements and we move to another one. Please, be wise, and let's begin. Besides, as the article is a common work, we have to avoid insults and personnal attacks. Taharqa like you can contribute positively if you cool down.--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka 22:12, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Besides, as the article is a common work, we have to avoid insults and personnal attacks. Taharqa like you can contribute positively Well, it may be worth adding that I have never resorted to either, which is more than I can say for Taharqa. BTW, I didn't create the draft for me, but for everyone to look at and let me know how the changes can be incorporated in the article. You still haven't told me what other objections you have with this material besides the two points raised above. These are rather minor points I believe. — Zerida 22:35, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Zerida, please, visit the talk page of the article for the discussions.--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka 07:41, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Zerida, please, visit the talk page of the disputed article. We are already moving on. I don't want you to be left out. Come, please!--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka 22:57, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Coptic
Is this about the Fanous website? I think the permission given there is ok. I I'll look & see what I can do. Johnbod 11:50, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Copyright
"Troy, I just noticed some copyright infringement on Saint Mary Church (Harat Zewila) as well from the Jimmy Dunn article. Unless we have written permission from Tour Egypt, we can't really incorporate the text as the note you left under references indicates. Would you mind fixing that also? Great work otherwise by the way. Thanks, — Zerida 06:25, 1 September 2007 (UTC)"

About the copyright infringement, can't I just paraphrase it so that it doesn't break the rules? Also, could you help me out in doing that? Lastly, Which section(s) have done that? Thanks, ~ Troy 17:07, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Also, I said "similar text" (as in the same meaning using different words). I have tried to paraphrase a lot, but if it still isn't good enough, I could use some help from other Copts also.

"we can't really incorporate the text as you the note you left under references indicates"

I wrote that note to say that I couldn't have done it without the article written by Jimmy Dunn, not to say that I copied the text directly. If I have in some areas, help is greatly appreciated. Thanks again, ~ Troy 17:15, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

...I have copied the original text directly, placing it in similar sections, and have put it into the sandbox history (it can't infringe copyright since I reverted it back myself). You can copy it from the edit page, paste it on Saint Mary Church (Harat Zewila), and press "show changes". It will show you the exact differences including the unrelated pictures. The Sandbox historic page is located here. My apologies for the long posts, I'm not the kind that likes to infringe copyright laws. ~ Troy 17:42, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Church of the Holy Virgin in Babylon Al-Darag
I require help for developing the article for this Church (located in Coptic Cairo). You can do so by editing my sandbox at User:Troy 07/Sandbox (the page which currently holds my little project). I have contacted all of the other Coptic Wikipedians I know of for help. Please remember that copyright infringement will have to be reduced, as I have got the information from an article. I have typed a hidden message mentioning that and other things worth mentioning.

This is a list of all the Coptic Wikipedians that I know of (including myself):


 * User:Afanous
 * User:Danielsamwel
 * User:Ghaly
 * User:Lanternix
 * User:MikeSMorgan
 * User:Moheb
 * User:Ms408
 * User:Orthopraxia
 * User:Troy 07
 * User:Zerida

Thank-you for your participation.
 * ~ Troy 19:01, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Monastery of Saint Anthony
Copyright issues here (touregypt), I see, now that Ghali has provided the link. I think just rewording should be enough to sort it. Johnbod 00:15, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Other monasteries too, I'm afraid - both the white and red (not so bad) ones have it. I'm rather reaching the end of my knowledge/sources, so I'm not sure how much I will be able to add. Johnbod 03:05, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

My Sandbox
...anyway, I think we still might be able to use some of the info on my sandbox (by paraphrasing it, that is). Thanks for letting me know, although you should be aware that I'll be far more busy for the next little while. In fact, that's the reason why I have contacted several others for help.

Thank-you for your contributions, they are greatly needed. ~ Troy 03:54, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Race and ancient Egypt (controversies)
Please, Zerida, give your reaction to my proposal of creating a new section in the article as a peaceful way of resolving the actual conflit. I think we have to trust each other in order to do a good work. Hotep!--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka 09:08, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Proto-Arabic
Hi Zerida. izzayyik? I'll reply to your comments on Maltese there. But I'm afraid I know very little about proto stuff, and can't find citations. It seems to me that proposing a palatal stop or a palatalised velar without dialectal evidence (there's probably something in a Yemeni village somwhere to support anything!) or a quote is not what the article should be doing. I've not heard this theory, and frankly a shift from straight /g/ seems more credible: it corresponds to proto-Semitic, this form is found in Egypt, Yemen and even in some Moroccan words like 'iglis', where the g -> j was blocked by the presence of a sibilant in the word. But I can't find a quote for that either, and I've not heard this as 'accpeted wisdom'. I think I'd ask for a citation and delete after a month if none appears... at least it doesn't look crazy. Drmaik 09:19, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Copts are not Arab Christians!!!
I need your input. It seems that the fact that I (and Lanternix) can't convince some people who are possibly more lacking on the details of how Copts view their ethnicity. I have said it time and time again: Copts are not to be labelled as Arabs!!!

...I know that this all seems silly, but your input will be greatly appreciated (as you could help in finding sources, pointing things out; etc...).

You can post edits on this issue at the following link: Talk:Arab_Christians.

Thank-you, ~ Troy 01:09, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


 * ...on my talk page, you said that the "flaming arguments" is not what is important, what's important is the actual articles. To me, that sounds like it's 99% right, but keep in mind that these "flaming arguments" (which are in fact over-rated) have an influence ON THE ARTICLES themselves. Don't mind me, I'm just merely pointing this out. Thanks for your response. ~ Troy 16:55, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

MATTA EL-MESKEEN
This article (Matta El Meskeen) wrongfully states that he was not at any point excommunicated by His Holiness Pope Cyril VI. HOW CAN YOU DENY WHAT HH Pope Shenouda III wrote??? It says it all on P. 6 of this link (English El-Keraza). He (Papa Shenouda) has severely warned anyone of what Matta el-Meskeen taught — Pope Shenouda even wrote 6 BOOKS countering Matta el-Meskeen's opinion on the church beliefs.

I'm not going against you, but you CANNOT DENY what HH Pope Shenouda wrote.

I believe that this is one of the most important sources you'll when it comes to the opinion of Pope Shenouda on Matta's teachings.

I am contacting others on the issue. BTW, I have read your message, and I will try not to canvass users that I don't even know the way I did before.

It would be nice to have some help on this article, I'm not very fond of it as it is.

Thanks, ~ Troy 17:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

barnstar
Ooh - thanks very much! Johnbod 21:45, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Catalan dialect examples
Hi - I've moved the page on Catalan dialect examples into your userspace. You can take a look: it's at User:Zerida/Catalan dialect examples - and see if there's anything you'd like to use. If you don't want it in your userspace anymore, just add a db-userreq tag at the top of the page, and an admin will come along and delete it for you. Please let me know if you have any questions. MastCell Talk 03:51, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Edits to Wikipedia:Verifiability
If all my constructive work hadn't been destroyed by malintentioned folks marking decent articles as Uninteresting - delete (using whatever term of choice they had pulled out of a non-applicable hat (notability, spam, etc.)), I may not have been driven to commenting in actual article text the way I do. But since I see how much my efforts rate around here, and the real truth behind the new class society created by Wikipedia, I have no strong impetus to continuing in meaningful edits until the culture has changed to benefit humanity as a whole by the expansion, and not the elimination, of knowledge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.169.151.18 (talk) 20:47, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Hey:)
hey Zerida, I have seen your edits towards the Egyptian people, I hope you could help editing, thanks in advance :) Nick10000 07:58, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Black people
Hello! As you may know I had protected Black people for a maximum of 2 weeks but since the protection, I have seen no further discussion. Was there a consensus reach or simply it was a brief dispute? If there is no continuation of the debate, I will unprotect the article tomorrow night as it has been protected for another issue just last week. Thanks!--JForget 22:30, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Compromise
You may feel differently, but I want to state right off that I do not enjoy edit warring. It is overtly obvious that me and you have different point of views, but I honestly do not want it to impede on the progression of this or any other article. Nor do I want to compromise its integrity. I think by you removing "all" disputed content was a good move. We need time to discuss and I'm replying right now on the discussion page; respond when you will. Be patient, I'm willing to compromise.Taharqa 07:01, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I think that we should discuss the Keita article in question first, honestly. I think it necessary to get a fair summary of the entire article, what his conclusions were, and what were the implications. It is also important to clarify.. 2 very brief examples.

He describes "European", Maghreb, and coastal phenotypes, but directly below he groups them all into the same "northern coastal pattern". He says it is intermediate between Northern Europeans and tropical africans. He says southerners predominate in the 1rst dynasty tombs at upper Egypt, but change from the predynastic to then did occur. All of this in addition to what you quoted. He also never says the "africoid" type went anywhere, which is why I cited Keita 1993, where he elaborates. This should be discussed, but I'd really like to end that dispute aswell, the easiest way possible.

Btw Zerida, you shouldn't get so riled up that you violate 3rr next time. I wasn't worried about it though because I do see that a lot of your edits are in good faith, but try and tone down the edit warring. I'll try to do my best in that department aswell..Taharqa 07:39, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem is that Egyegy has suppressed entire sections before any discussions. References are provided in those sections. Besides, they are old sections! We need to respect each other.--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka 09:46, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

No, I do not deny that it was me. It's my ip address. But I appreciate your spirit and I'm glad that you've talked to Egyegy. I sent a message to Jeeny aswell, if you weren't aware already. I'm trying to enjoy the fact that we are indeed making progress and I don't want that to be messed up by people just blindly edit warring without joining the compromise or discussion. Thanx again.. I'm going to try and get some sleep and we can finish discussing tomorrow. peace..Taharqa 09:51, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok Zerida I won't revert it anymore, it's just that Jeeny was obviously doing it for disruption and spite. Thanks for the message, I hope it can work out.. Egyegy 10:06, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Of course we're past it. I wasn't worried about your inclusion of Keita at all, only the removal of davidson and accurate reporting.. The fact that Keita reported a predominance of the southern modal pattern was omitted.. I merely made that addition and didn't change anything of yours. Yurco also lists Saharan influence (in that source) in relationship to their being a part of the afro-asiatic group, so I simply added that aswell and that's it. I have no disputes and like you, I hope we're past that now. cheers..Taharqa 07:10, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough.. I also agree with you and it felt kind of funny reading that myself ("black or Africoid").. Keita uses that term "Africoid" for lack of a better one in many of his studies, but not "black", even if that may be the social implication. So be it.. And I appreciate the cooperation aswell.. I just noticed something though.. It says "until first dynasty times", yet what would reflect more accurately, grammar-wise is "by first dynasty times".. Merely because Keita reports continuity and states that "southerners predominate".. "Until" gives a false implication.

''Previous concepts about the origin of the First Dynasty Egyptians as being somehow external to the Nile Valley or less “native” are not supported by archeology. In summary, the Abydos First Dynasty royal tomb contents reveal a notable craniometric heterogeneity. Southerners predominate. The suggestion of previous work, namely that crania with southern and coastal northern patterns might be present in these tombs, has been demonstrated and explained by historical and archaeological data.” - Keita.'' - Keita 1992, in the summary/conclusion

That seems fair enough to me..Taharqa 07:29, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Ancient Egypt and Race
Zerida, let's respect the plan of the article. If there is a problem we can discuss it. But to remove entire sections is not good at all.--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka 10:39, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Zerida, I am not very happy with the way you are conducting the discussion. You are removing entire sections! The section Alleged Eurocentrism in Egytology is relevant. It seems that you are a student in Egyptology. How don't you know that at the beginning of Egyptology Egyptians were just considered as Blacks? Did you read Précis du système hiéroglyphique des anciens Egyptiens of Jean-Francois Champollion, the father of Egyptology? If not, please, read the conclusion of that book. Egyptians were whitened later for hegemonic reasons of the West. I quoted Damiano Maurizio-Appia who is a respected Egyptologist. Lam and Diop had also studied the history of Egyptology very well. Davidson on the other hand is a good historian. It is amazing to see people talking about Caucasian Africans. Is Caucasous in Africa? But it is sure that all the world was peopled by Blacks. Blacks became Whites out of Africa. When these Whites entered massively Africa, the Egyptian civilisation was already in place. Can you show an Egyptian model of civilisation out of Africa to justify any foreign influence? Making divisions between Egyptians and Sub-Saharan Africans is another nonsense. This Bantu and West Africans are from Egyptian origin! These things are written and can be found in any good libray. Why don't you read them? The whitening of the ancient Egyptians is still continuing despite the fact that there is no evidence of a "massive" White presence in Africa at this early time. All the facts and traditions tend to show that Egyptians are Nubians. You will notice that many books in Egyptology deal on Nubia and Egypt. It is not by chance. Is not TA Seti the first Egyptian nome? Where is tA Seti? In the north or the south of Egypt? --Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka 19:27, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, Lusala, I have never been particularly happy myself with the way the editors on that article handled disagreements before. As far as the actual discussion goes, as I have explained numerous times, I have deleted the questionable material after Taharqa agreed to it and after my additions were repeatedly reverted. That didn't seem to bother you very much though. What's important now is that we have pretty much come to an agreement, so no more diatribes like these on my talk page again please. Thanks. — Zerida 01:18, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

C'mon Zerida, how can you be disappointed when I've stuck by what I've agreed to. I've never agreed to such an out-of-context addition, nor has anyone else. That inclusion comes from a disputed section which we were supposed to be discussing.. I've never agreed to an entire version either, again, I thought that we were in the process of discussion, and before hand we were merely omitting disputed material, but not addressing NEW inclusions specificallyTaharqa 05:11, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism
please take alook at this page and the editing done by the user 69.66.130.203, he is feeling too much free in the project page. I tried to Undo but I think it didnot work.

 Haytham Abulela  22:15, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I took the liberty to undo all of the edits. I hope I got them all. Jeeny (talk) 22:47, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Egyptian people
Please note the complaint I registered http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR&diff=prev&oldid=173211648 about the problem user. I hope this is the correct way. Hamada2 (talk) 03:03, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Egyptians...
Liked the article. Have you considered doing something with the image heading up the article ala Template:PRC_provinces_big_imagemap? Not unnecessarily a template as such, but if you've got a range of notable Egyptians they might as well be linked directly. John Nevard (talk) 10:07, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Naguib/Nagib/Najib
I am going for what the Arabic spells out literally. The Egyptian pronunciation of jim is another issue. This is analogous to the transliteration of Russian or any other Slavic Cyrillic language where you put down what the letters are, and ignore what the precise pronunciation is. That is the current style. So you have "Khrushchev" even when you know that that "e" is the letter "yo" and that terminal "v" changes to its voiceless equivalent when pronounced. Frankly, with Mahfouz, I am more interested in why his name uses French spelling. Varlaam (talk) 13:34, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Egyptians
An article that you have been involved in editing, Egyptians, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Egyptians. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 10:15, 29 December 2007 (UTC)